The largest Arab-American newspaper published in the US since 1986
P.O.Box 1130 , Montgomery TX 77356
Tel(281)799-0345 & (713)594-3061 Fax(832)201-0957
arabtimesnewspaper@yahoo.com
arabtimes@aol.com

ADC Shame on you

Arab Times recently published an editorial questioning the ADC's decision to honor Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum, ruler of Dubai, with a global leadership award.  At the same time as Sheikh Al Maktoum was so honored, two cases are pending against him in U.S. federal courts for child slavery, stemming from the kidnapping of children and their forced labor as camel jockeys in the camel races popular in the United Arab Emirates

By MATT SEDENSKY
Associated Press Writer

MIAMI (AP) -- The wealthy rulers of the United Arab Emirates are being accused in a lawsuit of enslaving tens of thousands of young boys over the past three decades and forcing them to work under brutal conditions as camel jockeys.

The civil lawsuit seeks class-action status and was filed last week by unnamed parents of boys as young as 2 years old who were allegedly abducted, enslaved and sold to serve as a backbone in the popular Arab sport of camel racing. More than 30,000 boys could have been victimized in what the suit calls "one of the greatest humanitarian crimes of the last 50 years."

Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al Maktoum, the crown prince of Dubai, and Sheikh Hamdan bin Rashid al Maktoum, the deputy ruler, were the most active perpetrators of the crimes, the lawsuit said.

The lawsuit was filed in Miami because the members of the royal family maintain hundreds of horses at farms in Ocala -- among their billions of dollars in U.S. assets -- and because "there is no venue outside the United States in which the plaintiffs can possibly get redress for being trafficked internationally and enslaved." It seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.

"The defendants robbed parents of their children and boys of their childhoods, their futures and sometimes their lives, for the craven purposes of entertainment and financial gain," the lawsuit said.

Calls to the United Arab Emirates embassy in Washington, D.C., were not answered and there was no way to leave a telephone message after hours. A telephone message left at a Kentucky farm owned by Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al Maktoum was not returned. John Andres Thornton, the Miami Beach-based co-counsel for the children, said the crown prince had been served with the lawsuit on Monday while buying horses in Kentucky.

The lawsuit claims the boys were taken largely from Bangladesh, Pakistan and elsewhere, held at desert camps in the United Arab Emirates and other Perisan Gulf nations, and forced to work. It claims some boys were sexually abused, given limited food and sleep and injected with hormones to prevent their growth.

"Sheikh Mohammed and Sheikh Hamdan treated their camels better than they treated their slave boys for the simple reason that the camels were far more valuable," the lawsuit said.

Camel races are immensely popular in the Persian Gulf. The United Arab Emirates banned the use of children as camel jockeys -- long favored because of their light weight -- in 1993, but young boys could still be seen riding in televised races for years afterward. The problem was highlighted in the U.S. State Department's June 2005 "Trafficking in Persons Report."

The sheikhs are heavily invested in U.S. horse racing and the crown prince owns Bernardini, the winner of the 2006 Preakness Stakes. They also own Dubai Ports World, whose involvement in port operations in Miami and elsewhere sparked Congressional concern, and the Dubai Holding Co. and its subsidiaries, which own hotels, apartment buildings and health care facilities

www.arabtimes.com monitored and blocked in QATAR
The government  of  Qatar restricted the peaceful expression of views via the Internet and censored the Internet for political, religious, and pornographic content through a proxy server, which monitored and blocked Web sites, e-mail, and chat rooms through the state-owned Internet Service Provider (ISP). For example, the Arab Times, an Arab-American online newspaper, which at times published articles critical of the government, was not available to users in the country. A user who believed that a site was censored mistakenly could submit the web address to have the site reviewed for suitability. In some cases the ISP responded by unblocking the site after an internal investigation. Statistics, however, were not available.

U.S. Department of state
Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006
Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
March 6, 2007
To read the full report click this link
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2006/78861.htm

***

www.arabtimes.com monitored and blocked in UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

The government of UNITED ARAB EMIRATES  restricted access to some Web sites on the Internet. Internet chat rooms, instant messaging services, and blogs were monitored. Individuals and groups engaged in peaceful expression of views via the Internet, including by email, without reports of government prosecution or punishment, although there was self-censorship apparent in many chat rooms and blogs.

According to the NGO The Initiative for an Open Arab Internet, Internet access was widely available. According to January 2005 press reports, 37 percent of the country's population was connected to the Internet provided through the state‑owned monopoly Etisalat. A proxy server blocked material deemed inconsistent with the religious, cultural, political and moral values of the country; information on how to circumvent the proxy server; dating and matrimonial sites; and gay and lesbian sites, as well as those concerning the Baha'i Faith and those originating in Israel. The proxy server occasionally blocked broad categories of sites including many that did not meet the intended criteria. Etisalat populated its proxy server list of blocked sites primarily from lists of Web sites purchased from commercial companies; though individuals could also report offensive sites. In July 2005 Etisalat blocked a blog from within the country for the first time, briefly blocking http://secretdubai.blogspot.com due to a compliant that it contained "nudity"-though the site contains no images. Etisalat removed the block after the site's owner requested that the block be reviewed. There were no other reports of local blogs, being blocked. The politically oriented - and often critical -sites Arabtimes.com and UAEprison.com remain blocked without explanation.

U.S. Department of state
Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006
Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
March 6, 2007
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2006/78865.htm

***

 The Peace Process on Life Support
by James Zogby
(Monday, December 3, 2007)

"...it is hard to see a breakthrough, or be optimistic. The Conference is over, the delegates have gone home, preparing to meet "to make every effort" to complete an agreement."


The Annapolis Conference turned out to be much less than the "historic breakthrough" hyped by official briefers and dutifully (or naively) echoed in mainstream media.

In fact, Annapolis was only historic if one ignores the Madrid Conference of 1992. Or if one discounts the significance of the Israeli-Palestinian Accords signed in Oslo, Cairo, Paris, Washington, and Wye. Or the major post-Oslo economic summits in Casablanca and Amman. Or even George Bush's own multi-nation gathering at Sharm el-Sheikh. In other words, Annapolis was only historic if one either disregards history or discounts its importance.

Seen in this larger context, Annapolis, at best, represented a rather sad and pale reminder of what was, what might have been, what was lost, and several steps back from where the peace process was seven years ago.

One wants to be hopeful and supportive of every effort to end this horrible conflict, securing for Palestinians their long-denied rights. Given what transpired in the lead-up to Annapolis and at the Conference itself, however, it's hard to be optimistic.

In the six months since the Bush Administration announced the Conference, too little preparation left the meeting, its agenda and goals, in limbo until the final day. And despite U.S. assurances to Arab participants that Israel would make significant confidence building gestures toward the Palestinians before the Conference, these did not occur.

Scrutinizing the joint statement issued by the parties at Annapolis, and examining in close detail statements issued by President Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Olmert, there was little indication of any real movement toward a positive outcome. The goals set in the joint statement were too vague and limited, and the rhetoric used by the two leaders reflected old and failed hard-line policies that have brought stalemate for the last seven years.

The joint Israeli-Palestinian statement reflected, in itself, the fundamental dilemma plaguing this entire process. Both parties are politically weak. The Israelis, however, are by far the dominant force, able to dictate terms to their liking. Under these circumstances, the best Palestinians can do is say "no." In this situation, for real substantive negotiations to take place, a third party (presumably the U.S.) must be willing and able to offer support to strengthen both the Israeli and Palestinian leaders, and to balance the scale between them by protecting the interests of the less powerful Palestinian negotiators. With the refusal of the U.S. to play this role, the result is an ambiguous statement like the one that was issued at Annapolis. In it, the best to which the Israelis and Palestinians could agree was to negotiate "core issues" (which they could not agree to define except to indicate that "core issues" referred to those "specified in prior agreements" - which they also could not agree to define); and to "make every effort to conclude an agreement before the end of 2008." In other words, they could not agree to implement, but only to try to agree.

For his part, Bush in his opening statement continued to espouse the same neoconservative vision that has infected his entire approach to the Middle East since 2002. In Bush's view, democracy, like a magical elixir, trumps justice, and therefore makes all things right. Given this, Palestinians, he argued, should focus less on their borders and more on the character of their state. In Bush's view, then, the challenges facing Palestinians are not to secure their rights and gain sovereignty, but to root out terror, establish a working democracy, operate with transparency, and form the institutions of a free society - all this before having a state of their own!

Bush added requirements for the Israelis in this process, but they were limited and far less onerous than even those he previously outlined. All the Israelis were asked to do is to remove unauthorized outposts, end settlement expansion, and "find other ways for the Palestinian Authority to exercise its responsibilities without compromising Israeli security" - whatever that means.

Israel's Prime Minister, aside from some statements indicating his support for a Palestinian state and his commitment to make "painful compromises" to attain that goal, said little that would commit his government to steps that would put at risk his already fragile government coalition. For example, in one stroke, he defined away the refugee issue, proposing only to assist Palestinian refugees to find their place in a future Palestinian state. In another passage, Olmert describes his insistence that "previous agreements" would serve as the "point of departure" for future negotiations. One of the agreements he cited was President Bush's letter to Ariel Sharon in June of 2004. This, of course, was no agreement at all, but a unilateral give-away by the U.S. President to the Israeli Prime Minister.

In that letter, Bush commits to Israel:
support for actions Israel takes to defend itself against terrorism (presumably including extrajudicial assassinations, the construction of a separation wall and acts of collective punishment, etc.);
that in any future Israeli withdrawal, the U.S. understands that "existing arrangements regarding control of airspace, territorial waters and land passages.... will continue;"
that the refugee issue will be resolved by the settling of Palestinian refugees in a future Palestinians state and not in Israel; and finally
that "in light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli population centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations" will result in Israel surrendering these population centers, which include primarily the settlements ringing Jerusalem.

Given all of this, it is hard to see a breakthrough, or be optimistic. The Conference is over, the delegates have gone home, preparing to meet "to make every effort" to complete an agreement. In a few days, major international donors will gather in Paris to provide needed financial support to the Palestinian Authority. That is a good thing.

The process is not dead; but absent a significant change in the U.S. approach, it's barely on life support.


Dr. James Zogby is president of Arab American Institute in Washington .DC

***

June 1, 2007

Shame in King Abdullah II House

By Dr. Abdul Salam Al-Muala

In his recent book, Lee Iacacco cites a quote from Winston Churchill, "The longer you look back, the farther you can look forward." The Hashemite regime in Jordan ignores historical precedence. A few days ago, the absolute monarchy in Jordan has marked 61 years of undemocratic monopoly of power, during which its main concern has been to centralize politics and pave the way to strengthen the executive power (the king), so that a tiny technocratic elite, working hand-in-hand with a political segment of the draconian security forces, would impose an authoritarian vision on the whole of Jordan society. They have achieved success at a heavy price!

With the repression of the press and judiciary growing day after day, with the absence of any effective political parties, with a bribed Parliament, and with the added monopoly of the press, radio and television stations at the behest of King Abdullah II, the morphology of the civil society, of which all the above institutions are crucial pillars, has a disturbing meaning in the country.

For a desperately poor country, Jordan’s current leadership has proved weak and untrustworthy. King Abdullah II’s local and foreign policies have had a deeply damaging structural impact on Jordanians. The royal family in Jordan has lost its moorings. The royal family rings hollow. The royal family is self-serving. Leaders restore moorings. And King Abdullah II, a man deeply unmoored, is precisely not the man to introduce genuine democracy in Jordan or revitalize peace and lead Jordan and its citizens in the Middle East and on the world stage.

In a significant sense, what we are seeing and observing in Jordan these days is the history of massive corruption and lax management, a travesty of justice, press-monarchy conflict, ghastly threats toward opponents of the absolute monarchical regime, a tangled and defunct economy, endless abuse of people’s basic rights, such as freedom of expression, and abject poverty inflicted on the diminishing middle class and urban and rural working people. The outcome: A countless number of evil terrorists like Abu Musab Zarqawi and his associates (e.g., Al-Maqdsi, Abu Trab, Al-Bana, Al-Jarrar, Saqallah and Al-Smmadi) has been planted in Jordan and exported to the world via the daily actions of the corrupt Hashemite regime in Amman. The solution: Constitutional changes so that Jordanians can govern themselves by electing their own government, Senate and Supreme Court judges. Freedom, proactive and elected leadership, peaceful coexistence and a sustained economy represent major parts of the solution to fight evil terrorism in the Middle East and beyond!

One of the many weaknesses of King Abdullah II is his lack of effective communication, a key leadership skill in the 21^st century. Commanding the native language of a country is a very important skill for the proactive and successful leaders of that country. In fact, it is a key tool for those leaders to communicate with their followers and the people in the street. King Abdullah II lacks this important communication skill and tool. This embarrassing shortcoming has been evident at key Arabic events as well. In the recent Arab Summit held in Sudan, the king delegated Faisal Al-Fayez, the former appointed and corrupt Prime Minister, to deliver his Arabic speech. In Saudi Arabia, a few days ago, King Abdullah II did not give a speech. Instead, his staff circulated the excerpt of his speech to the press. In his visits to Jordanian cities and villages, King Abdullah II does not speak much in Arabic, but relies very heavily on his staff to jot down what people say to him so his wife Queen Rania can translate these notes to Arabic for the king, later in the evening or the next day, according to reliable sources at the royal court. And when he speaks in Arabic, people laugh at him! A few months ago, King Abdullah II said in a very funny Arabic accent, on national TV, “Kel wahid be saker tmoh” (everyone must shut up). People across Jordan laughed and have been very upset and shaking their heads that their unaccountable and unelected king cannot speak their own language! Also, King Abdullah II has never shown up before local and regional Arabic speaking press conferences in order to avoid embarrassment due to his heavy Arabic accent and any situation where he might run out of Arabic vocabulary and not understand the questions voiced in Arabic. The same reliable sources informed JNM that when an Arabic-based newspaper asks to interview King Abdullah II, the royal court staff asks for the questions in advance, prepares the text of answers and insists that the interview is set up as a photo opportunity that is focused on very informal, unrecorded conversation. Yes, in our own country, Jordan, we have an Arabic as a Second Language (ASL) King!

The domestic audience and international community are watching! Note the following salient statements: http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/05/22/jordan15973.htm issued by Human Rights Watch in New York on May 22, 2007, the important chapter in the U.S. State Department’s 2006 human rights report: http://www.jordannationalmovement.org/State of Human Rights in Jordan--Report 1.doc, the stunning report: http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/cp76_choucair_final.pdf) contemplated by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, DC, in December, 2006, the comprehensive reports: http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=2442&l=1 issued on November 23, 2005 and February 19, 2003 respectively, by the International Crisis Group’s (Crisis Group), several scientific polls and surveys: http://www.css-jordan.org/polls/index.html conducted by the Center for Strategic Studies (CSS) at the University of Jordan, the stunning 38-page report: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/arabic/middle_east_news/newsid_6313000/6313195.stm) (Arabic news story) published by Manfred Novak, the United Nations Human Rights Commission's Special Rapporteur on Torture, on Tuesday, January   30, 2007, and the recent statement: http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=22118 released by Reporters Without Borders (RWB), condemning the arrest of Dr. Ahmed Oweidi Al-Abbadi, former Member of Parliament and the author of 57 books. All point to one key fact that King Abdullah of Jordan has done nothing less than silence all public dissent. Most of this was done, no doubt, to keep control of his absolute monarchy in choppy political waters and to show American and European critics that he does not shrink from sticking a finger in his own eyes.

In a speech, delivered on Thursday, May 24, 2007, King Abdullah II stated, “For our democratic march, we are very much concerned that it must take deep roots…we must reactivate the role of civil society, respect the principal of pluralism, in the frame of national unity that must become intact, above all differences…pluralism and diversity are the streams that foster this march and allow the citizens the freedom to choose and express themselves…”

When asked about the current Parliamentarian elections law, a very unfair and controversial piece of legislation, criticized by many domestic and international observers and experts on national elections, King Abdullah II reported in Al-Arab Al-Yawm Newspaper, on Tuesday, May 15, 2007, that “the government decided not to change the current Parliamentarian elections law,” which is a fabricated response designed to mislead the public and international community since the government in Jordan is appointed directly by the king.

On Thursday, May 31, 2007, King Abdullah II visited the Abbad tribe in the city of Eira. According to independent dignitaries and educated leaders in this tribe, the visit was arranged by King’s Adviser for Tribal Affairs, Sharif Fawaz Zaben Abdullah, and dozens of loyalists to the absolute monarchy in this tribe. Hundreds of intellectuals and representatives in the Abbad tribe declined to attend, stressing that this absurd visit was arranged to show the people and foreign diplomats in Amman that King Abdullah II still enjoys the support of Abbad tribe despite his decision to imprison one of their leaders, Dr. Ahmed Oweidi Al-Abbadi, former Member of Parliament and Chairman of the Jordan National Movement (JNM). Dr. Al-Abbadi has been in jail since Wednesday, May 2, 2007 for speaking up against corruption and human rights abuses in the country.  

Now, who is the bluffer? Who is behind of all of the massive corruption, lawlessness, human rights abuses, abject poverty, and bribery and force of members of parliament to enact laws that support the ailing monarchy in Amman and curbing people’s freedom of expression and association? Who is appointing these consecutive corrupt governments, cruel senior intelligence officers, self-promoting senators and bribed judges? Who is conducting the people’s business and managing the ruined infrastructure of health, education and transportation sectors? Who is calling for the charges and arrest warrants against peace and human rights activists who are being targeted solely for exercising their rights to speak up and speak out against failures of the judiciary system and human rights abuses, thereby challenging the dominant power structures of the Hashemite regime? And, who is the unelected and unaccountable monarch who does not pay tax and refuses to open his books and unfold the annual budget of his corrupt house, the royal court, and members of the Hashemite royal family?

The answer is very obvious: our illustrious King Abdullah II. No single change in the political, economic, legislative and/or social arenas takes place and shapes in the country without the blessing and direct involvement of King Abdullah II and his intelligence community!

Americans must be true to themselves. For any action on King Abdullah II’s cruelties that the U.S. authorities describe as unwarranted interference, it would be foolish of Americans not to expect to pay a price. Tyranny breeds terrorism and violence. We have all been witnessing the massacres and daily killings of innocent people on the streets of Baghdad and other parts of new Iraq. Where are most of these evil terrorists coming from? Certainly, based on news and intelligence reports, most of these suicide bombers and killers are made in Iraq and neighboring countries, such as Jordan. We must recall and never forget what the dead rat, Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab Zarqawi, did in the cities and villages of new Iraq. Zarqawi was made in Jordan!

On the other hand, the Jordan National Movement (JNM) calls for national unity against the corrupt regime of King Abdullah II. JNM is for all Jordanians, including our brothers and sisters, the large Palestinian-Jordanian community in Jordan. We stand for their rights in Jordan as much as we do for the rest of the population. We fully understand that they are misrepresented in the unelected government, security forces and army, and oppressed politically and economically. And this is one of the reasons that we, ALL Jordanians, regardless of origin and nationality, must work side by side and shoulder to shoulder against the corrupt cliques and henchmen of the Hashemite regime in Amman. This regime has not been elected nor selected via legitimate channels to govern the people of Jordan. As long as this absolute monarchical refuses to share power and listen to the legitimate demands of the Jordanian people (http://www.css-jordan.org/polls/index.html), we must work relentlessly and peacefully with the other concerned countries and organizations to impart genuine, democratic and peaceful change in Amman.

The Hashemite regime in Amman must be confronted by a reasonable choice between suffering penalties for its absolute authoritarian ways and opening up political space for internal challenge. The democratic deficit in Jordan will not be overcome without the help of the United States and those democratic countries that have short and long-term interests in its stability and security. Constitutional amendments are vital to introduce viable political changes to our homeland. The current absolute monarchical regime in Jordan must be replaced by a constitutional monarchical system of governance. The outcome of making these necessary changes could be a beacon of hope in creating lasting peace, economic prosperity, justice, local and regional security, not only in Jordan, but also in the entire Arab and Muslim worlds.

A new constitution, a popular government, and an independent justice system in Jordan would be the hallmark of constructive change in Amman. The present constitution is very ancient and extremely ineffective. The current and previous unelected governments have proved to be totalitarian, despotic, impartial and corrupt.  The will of the people of Jordan must prevail. The people’s loyalty and allegiance must be directed toward Jordan and its people. In the new world order, full freedom goes hand-in-hand with economic and political reforms, information technology, peace and security. Thus, these important issues must be planned for in the form of short and long-term strategies to bring ongoing prosperity to our homeland and its citizenry.

The Jordan National Movement (JNM) will proceed to assist in accomplishing this visionary plan with full responsibility and vigor. These political reforms, of course, will not take place without direct support from the people of Jordan and their friends in the United States. We must march together toward fairness and the rule of law in our homeland. Again, the dividends of this plan will be reaped and shared by all citizens in the Middle East region.

From :baatheeb@hotmail.com
Sent : Wednesday, September 20, 2006 2:24 AM
To : arabtimesnewspaper@hotmail.com
Subject : Thank you for Exposing these evil sheiks

I would like to thank the arabtimes for informing us about the recent development with class action law suit filed against the "evil doers" from the oil states. I cannot express my excitement in words , but readig the article on BBC news web site I was very happy that someone will be held accountable for their inhumane and uncivilized practices of enslavement , abuse and exploitation of childern. Watching the documentary that aired on HBO Real sports program brought me to tears feeling sympathy for these innocent childern and it the same time i felt shame and anger that I share the same race and religion with these evil sheiks who entertain themselves on the pain and suffering of those childern .I hope all major news organization and media in the usa will give this developing story the proper attention and coverage it deserves. I also hope more high profile lawyers will join the team represeting these exploited childern.

Againg thank you arabtimes

I wish you more success

regards Adam

From : ikram omar <ikramomar@hotmail.co.uk>
Sent : Tuesday, September 12, 2006 8:51 PM
To : arabtimesnewspaper@hotmail.com
Subject : Read this motherfuker

DR>OSAMA FAWZI

After reading the what you wrote in this article, I know why you created this website. I used to think you are the only Arab person who write what he thinks is right but clearly you are sucking America's ass simply because you live their. So my thoughts that you are righting with no control over your fucking hand, was wrong you idiot. So my advice would be your motherfucker to go back to your country Plantain and fight the Jews instead of you seating in that fucking office and writing bullshits.
For now fuck off you fucking Arab bastard

From : hamudisayel@yahoo.com
Sent : Wednesday, September 13, 2006 5:44 PM
To : ikramomar@hotmail.co.uk
CC : arabtimesnewspaper@hotmail.com
Subject : Double-read this asshole

Ikram,

I don’t know where the hell you come from, but I am sure you are not British. You're English language sucks and you can't spell worth of shit.

To make this short and to the point:

If you don't like Dr. Fawzi, you can stop reading his paper or never visit his website. But to ask him to go back to his country because "he sucks america's ass" is stupid on your behalf. Why the hell are you in Britain then since the U.K is the biggest supporter of America?

At Least Dr. Fawzi criticizes the American government when it does wrong. Your stupid ass lives in Britain and "hates" the hand that feeds it. You are the type of person who lives in the West and hates everything about it. If you hate America that much, you should get out of Britain since it's America's puppet. Go back to Pakistan or wherever your mother shit you and try to open your mouth there and let's see for how long you would be alive.

And before you badmouth the Arab nation, make sure you come from a better background. Half of your country is probably CIA agents.

From :asad_2006_79@yahoo.com
Sent : Wednesday, September 13, 2006 4:06 PM
To : arabtimesnewspaper@hotmail.com
Subject : ikram omar letter

dear arab times :
i know that you always say the readers have the right for there opinion, but please please please, can you correct the spelling for that guy ikram omar from U.K before you publish it? very bad english sounds like a taco bell employee in his english ,and he is an arab but calling the arabs names like you fucking arab bastard, i bet money he is not even legal in U.K they will catch him soon and ship him back to amman to sell viggies there and cry

yours
asad
indianapolis,indiana



From : Yaser Kailani <yaserkailani@hotmail.com>
Sent : Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:10 AM
To : arabtimesnewspaper@hotmail.com
CC : ikramomar@hotmail.co.uk
Subject : Tributs to Arabtime and MR.Fawzy


It is not surprising me to hear that kind of insults for some one really I pay him all my respects and tributes.
MR. Fawzy.
I knew that in this darkness time of our Arabs nation wich is the slaying for this nation is currently occurred, and imminent every things will be done because such people like our governments and Ikram Omar, wich I believe that he is even doesn’t deserve to be carry those integrity, honesty, and dignity names.
But before I go I want to say final words that the Arabs nations if it doesn’t saved by Allah and some persons have been chosen by Allah to defence this nation such you MR. Fawzy, really it is will be the end.

From : CIVICRACER1188@aol.com
Sent : Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:07 AM
To : arabtimesnewspaper@hotmail.com
Subject : your newspaper


Hi,

I just want to say that I am one of your daily readers, and I really like the way you write, especially the words you use. Briefly I want to say it in my arabic language:

"tadaouna al nokat ala al horouf", always. Keep it this way and God bless you.

Finally I want to apologize for writing in English, as I don't have arabic keyboard.

Thank you.

Mona - Boston

From : walking_hormone@hotmail.com
Sent : Thursday, September 14, 2006 8:07 AM
To : arabtimesnewspaper@hotmail.com
CC : ikramomar@hotmail.co.uk
Subject : In response to the email by Ikram Omar


As-salaamu alaykum wa rahmat-Allaahi wa barakaatuhu

I just wanted to express my deepest sorrow about the comments by Mr. Ikram Omar. I don't know about his origin but his verbal belligerence has brought shame to his country, his religion (if applicable) and to his parents. Surely, Mr. Omar will jest on this gesture, but your parents have totally wasted their energy and hard earned money on your education, since your control of the language is akin to a blind man driving a car.

Secondly, I want to make this absolutely clear that I am not siding Dr. Osama Fawzi or the Arab nation at all. Infact, the Arab nation is responsible for the differences it has with the rest of the Muslim nation. It hurts to hear this, but this not only an accepted fact, it is also a personal observation.

Coming back to the topic, freedom of speech is a powerful tool, but Mr. Omar, there are many ways to deliver your opinion with decency and due respect that a fellow human being irrespective of his/her caste or creed deserves. Attitude and behaviour of others is reciprocal to your own. If you will sow hatred and abuse, you will get the same, unless it tickles your fancy.

ZJ
Pakistan

From :almala@att.net
Sent : Thursday, August 31, 2006 7:16 PM
To : arabtimesnewspaper@hotmail.com
Subject : State of Human Rights in Jordan: Report (1)
 

Jordan National Movement
Amman, Jordan
http://www.jnm.jeeran.com (Under Construction)

Mission Statement: An authentic, independent Jordanian organization seeks to promote democracy, human rights, and political, economic and social reforms, and national strategic issues in Jordan, and constructive and peaceful dialogue to settle current and future conflicts in the Middle East region

Human Rights Report (1)

August 31, 2006


For Further Info. Contact:

Dr. Ahmad Oweidi Al-Abbadi (Chairman), Former Member of Parliament (Two Terms) Amman-Jordan, at 00962 777 419 545, oweidi2005@yahoo.com, &

Dr. Abdul Salam Al-Mualla (Secretary of Foreign Affairs), Dean & College Professor, in the U.S. at (703) 629-5427, almala@att.net.

State of Human Rights in Jordan: Report (1)

New York-based Human Rights Watch reported on June 17, 2006 that the Jordanian regime “must not roll back on its commitment to fully respect freedom of expression…rather than implement the reforms it promised…the [unelected] government of Prime Minister Ma’ruf al-Bakhit is giving the intelligence agencies, the police and prosecutors free rein to clamp down on legitimate speech.” For instance, the leadership and countless members of Jordan National Movement (JNM) are being threatened and harassed on a daily basis by the omni-present officers of the General Intelligence Directorate (GID). According to a recent major report, Jordan's 9/11: Dealing With Jihadi Islamism, prepared and delivered by the independent International Crisis Group (ICG), the (GID) has “carved out a critical role (since 1999) and, according to one analyst, "regional developments over the past few years have only helped entrench the Mukhabarat's (GID) role in politics and society." Further, the same report emphasized that “the [Jordanian] media, while free in theory, consistently exercises a degree of self censorship that reflects keen awareness of its limits, encouraged by occasional arrests or threatening phone calls.”

On March 8, 2006, the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor of the U.S. State Department, issued a report stating that “although the [Jordanian] government respected human rights in some areas, its overall record continued to reflect problems.” Among these major human rights problems: “restrictions on the right of citizens to change their government, allegations of torture, continued police abuse and reported mistreatment of detainees, arbitrary arrest and prolonged detention, instances of impunity, denial of due process of law, limited judicial independence, infringement on citizens' privacy rights, harassment of members of opposition political parties, restrictions on freedom of speech, press, assembly, association, movement, and on some religious practices, legal and societal discrimination against women, ‘honor’ crimes, child abuse, discrimination against (Jordanians of all origins), restrictions on labor rights and abuse of foreign domestic workers.”

Torturing prisoners to death continues to occur in Jordan. For instance, a gruesome crime took place at Al-Jafer prison on Saturday, August 12, 2006. The Arab Organization for Human Rights (AOHR), Jordan Branch, reported on Monday, August 14, 2006 that the inmate, Mr. Mwafq Abdul Aziz Odeh Taha, was beaten to death by prison security guards and found dead at Al-Jafer’s horrible prison. He was serving an unknown sentence for non-criminal charges. Al-Jafer is located 270 km in the isolated and extremely hot southern desert, very far away from prisoners’ families and close relatives. [The prison was built in 1935 and ordered to be reopened by the appointed government in 1998 after the late King Hussein decided to close it down several years ago.] After a recent visit to Al-Jafer, the AOHR noted deep bruises on Taha’s left shoulder and emphasized that he was starved to death. The AOHR described the prison conditions as “absolute and extreme misery” and “over crowded.” The chairwoman of the Complaints Department at the AOHR, Ms. Basma Al-Hassan, stated that prisoners at Al-Jafer have “no access to bathrooms, medical assistance, drinking water and provided with only one piece of rotten cover to sleep on the bear floor.” The AOHR issued a press release stating that 80 percent of the 264 current prisoners at Al-Jafer prison are incarcerated due to traffic (speeding) violations, administrative fractions (violating a city ordinance) and other non-criminal charges. Political prisoners in Al-Jafer, such as Mustafa Arabiat, Fouad Mohammad Zamzam and Ahmed Ibrahim, were imprisoned for speaking up in public against the king and the royal family.

Recently, the GID has been very active in preventing and disallowing political and human rights activists (living inside and outside of the country) from renewing their Jordanian passports, a repugnant practice that is inconsistent with the current constitution and very basic human rights. For instance, an avid writer, Mr. Salah Al-Moomni, living in the U.S., was told by the Jordanian authorities in Amman that he could not renew his passport because of his critical articles of the government. For further information on the most recent violations conducted by the GID, please read this report: http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE160052006, prepared by Amnesty International (AI).

Abuses of human rights, travesties of justice, unequal distribution of national resources, political oppression and abject poverty breed indefinite cycles of violence and vicious acts of terrorism. These dimensions of daily hardship are widespread and growing rapidly in Jordan. The current condition in Jordan is unbearable and heading towards a situation worse than what was happening in Iraq during Saddam Hussein’s era. The current regime has absolute executive power of a ppointing and dismissing governments, creating illegitimate and rubber stamp parliaments by picking and firing senior judges, senators and high-ranking advisers. These ongoing circumstances are creating potential junior and senior terrorists who would have nothing but hate towards those countries that support absolute monarchical regimes in the Arab world.

The U.S., Europe and the civil world have to face this reality: either ease the pressure and discontinue supporting absolute monarchical regimes in the Middle East region, or face a countless number of angry people. Those oppressed and freedom-loving people will turn to violence and terrorism and do everything at their disposal to vent out their immense anger at the U.S. and other countries that support these cruel r ogue regimes.

Hence, the Jordan National Movement (JNM) urges all democratic countries, worldwide free societies and international civil institutions to take bold, practical and courageous measures against the current corrupt absolute monarchical system in Jordan. We need to work together to curb this regime’s double-faced local and foreign policies that have deceived the global civilized community regarding its daily dictatorial activities against the people of Jordan. We must work hand-in-hand to defeat growing terrorism in the Arab world: peacefully and democratically!

Cc:

President George W. Bush, U.S.A.
President Vladimir Putin, Russia
President Hu Jintao, the People's Republic of China
President Jacques Chirac, France
Chancellor Angela Merkel, Germany
Prime Minister José Luis Rodrيguez Zapatero, Spain
Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, Japan
Senator Hilary Clinton, U.S. Senate
Kofi Annan, UN Secretary General
Dr. Condoleeza Rice, U.S. Secretary of State
Steve Hadley, US National Security Adviser
Klaus Schwab, President of the World Economic Forum (WEF)
Members of U.S. Congress
European Union, Delegation of the European Commission to the United States
The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)
Transparency International
U.S. and Worldwide Human Rights Organizations and Political Institutions
U.S. and Jordanian Press and Media

As human rights group Amnesty International launches a global campaign to try to halt censorship of the internet by governments, BBC correspondents report from some countries where web users face difficulties.

CHINA: RUPERT WINGFIELD-HAYES, BEIJING
Officially China does not censor the internet. According to the Chinese government, its internet regulation is no different from that in America, Britain, or anywhere else in the world.


In its quest to control the internet China has sought overseas help

China says it only blocks internet sites that are damaging, such as pornographic sites, or ones promoting things like terrorism.

The reality of China's internet is very different.

Just try logging on to the BBC News website from an internet cafe in China. You can't. The same goes for websites for The New York Times, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and a host of others which could hardly be described as pornographic or "dangerous".

China probably has the most sophisticated internet monitoring and censorship system in the world. In the last few years it has spent tens of millions of dollars building what has come to be known as the "Great Firewall of China". In the past, whole websites were blocked. Today the system can block out individual parts of websites.

In its quest to control the internet China has sought help from overseas. Some large, US-based computer software companies are believed to have sold Beijing the sophisticated software needed to run its filtering system. Companies like Google and Yahoo! have also been accused of co-operating in China's internet censorship.

Google, for example, has modified its Chinese language search engine so that it does not show results for sites the Chinese government deems "harmful".

Inside China there is an even larger effort to control the country's own internet.

Internet service providers (ISPs) are required by law to monitor their own websites and chat-rooms for "dangerous content". Every ISP in China has its own staff of "web police". On top of that government employs thousands more who constantly scan the Chinese web, closing down any site or blog that is considered subversive.

For those Chinese who persist in using the internet to criticize Communist party rule, the end result can be a prison cell. Three young men were recently sentenced to prison terms of eight to ten years for using the internet to send "sensitive" information to foreign based websites.


CUBA: STEPHEN GIBBS, HAVANA
Cuba has vowed to be a force to be reckoned with in the digital era.

Thousands of Cubans are being trained in a new school for computer technology on the outskirts of Havana. Free computer clubs have been set up across the country. Even the smallest rural schools are being provided with their own terminals.


Cuba's licensed internet terminals are meant only for tourists

But at the same time the government is working hard to prevent its citizens from surfing the net without restraint. Shops in Havana might appear to sell high-quality computers, but actually making a purchase is impossible for Cubans without special approval, which is rarely granted.

Similar restrictions are in place for anyone who might want to open up an account with the state internet service provider. Exceptions include senior government officials, academic researchers, and foreigners.

The authorities say these regulations are in place in order to ensure the internet in Cuba is used for "social and collective use."

'Prioritising'

Although all Cuban media is rigorously state controlled, the government rejects accusations that it is censoring the net.

It concedes that some sites are blocked, but say these are "terrorist, xenophobic, or pornographic". Websites based in the US which publish articles by dissidents from within Cuba are generally inaccessible.

The government says that what it is doing is "prioritising" the internet, for use by sectors such as education and health. Essential, it says, given Cuba's limited resources, and limited bandwidth.

The bandwidth problem is blamed on the United States. As a result of the US trade embargo, Cuba cannot link up to the web via a direct fibre optic line. Instead it has to use more expensive satellite links.

Thousands of Cubans get around their governments restrictions and access the internet via the black market. User IDs and passwords are sold by state employees whose jobs give them legal access. Some log on via home made computers built from smuggled parts.

A legal alternative is to go to one of the cyber cafes that are being set up across the country. But these have another barrier - cost. Half an hour surfing the web costs around $3. That might be comparable to the price in other parts of the world, but in Cuba, where the average salary is $15 a month, it is substantial.

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: JULIA WHEELER, DUBAI
In the United Arab Emirates, internet censorship centres on two distinct areas; pornography and the criticism of Gulf governments. While the majority of the multi-national population welcomes the blocking of pornography sites, the same cannot be said for the more politically motivated cases.

The UAE is one of the fastest developing countries in the world

From the UAE, attempting to access sites like www.uaeprison.com or www.arabtimes.com (published in the United States) brings up an apology for the site being blocked and an explanation; it is "due to its content being inconsistent with the religious, cultural, political and moral values of the United Arab Emirates."

It is not clear how the monopoly internet provider, Etisilat, determines what contravenes the country's values. There is a right of reply on any blocked site message though, allowing surfers to suggest it be made accessible.

For many, the censorship of sites which question, discuss or oppose the ruling families of the Gulf states and their absolute power, is anachronistic. The UAE is one of the fastest developing countries in the world, but this development is far more economic than political.

Satirical blogs, parodying the city and its residents, such as secretdubai.blogspot.com, www.dubaienquirer.com and onebigconstructionsite.blogspot.com can be found.

Internet users in Dubai's commercial free zones - like Dubai Internet City, Dubai Media City and Knowledge Village - are able to sidestep the strict state censorship by using a different proxy. The more technically savvy users in other parts of the country are also finding ways to access the banned sites they want to view.

In March, there were reports internet cafe users could have their personal details recorded and kept on file. The explanation from the authorities was that this was to curb "cyber crime" including hacking and sending spam emails, but it has brought into focus questions of personal privacy.

The opening-up of the telecoms sector which is due to allow another state-run company, Du, to operate from later this year is unlikely to change the position on blocked sites.

Perhaps one of the biggest annoyances for the mostly expatriate population in the Emirates is the inaccessibility of internet telephony sites like www.skype.com. This is widely seen as economic censorship; the state wanting to ensure continuing large profits through migrant workers making international telephone calls.

E-mail this to a friend Printable version

SEE ALSO:
Amnesty to target net repression
28 May 06 | Technology
Iranians strive to beat media controls
04 May 06 | Middle East
Net censorship spreads worldwide
04 May 06 | Technology
Telecoms thriving in lawless Somalia
19 Nov 04 | Africa
China tightens web control
27 Jan 04 | Asia-Pacific
Cuba cracks down on internet use
11 Jan 04 | Americas
Vietnam cyber dissident released
15 Jun 04 | Asia-Pacific
Dubai launches Internet City
29 Oct 00 | Middle East

RELATED INTERNET LINKS:
Irrepressible.info
Amnesty International
Internet Governance Forum
Cuban government
Dubai Enquirer
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/middle_east/default.stm

***

From :lh225@georgetown.edu
Sent : Sunday, May 7, 2006 6:07 AM
To : arabtimesnewspaper@hotmail.com
Subject : Leila(Georgetown University student)-article

My name is Leila Hanafi and I am a Moroccan student at Georgetown University in Washington DC. We organized an event last Friday at Georgetown University on Women and Development in Morocco at Georgetown University. Please let me know if you could post my article?

The distinguished panel included His Excellency Moroccan Ambassador Mekouar, William Jordan, Maghreb Affairs Director at the State Department, and Melissa Rugiero from the United Nations Developmen Fund for Women (UNIFEM) .

The event also featured an art exhibition by renowned artist Helen Zughaib who provided an extraordinary overview of the work Arab women artists are producing.

Please find attached my article.

Many thanks and regards,

Leila Hanafi

Women and Development in the Middle East and North Africa:
Achievements and Challenges
A Case Study of Morocco

By

Leila Hanafi
Georgetown University
Washington, D.C.

In the United Nations Arab Human Development Reports, gender inequality was identified as one of the main obstacles to development in the Arab Region. Gender inequality is a root cause of Arab underdevelopment; it is essential for improving economic growth, and reducing poverty. Tackling this deficit is a pre-requisite for moving forward. A stimulating discussion focused on this issue at Georgetown University in Washington DC. Themed Women and Development, “Their Challenges and Achievements - A Case Study of Morocco,” the discussion focused on women’s development in the Middle East and North Africa and featured a distinguished panel of experts that included: His Excellency the Moroccan Ambassador Mr. Mekouar, State Department Director of Maghreb Affairs - Mr. William Jordan, UN Development Fund For Women representative - Mrs Melissa Rugiero, and Dr. Loubna Hanna – Moroccan professor at American University, School of International Service.

The event was organized by several Georgetown student groups lead by Leila Hanafi – “whose opening remarks raised the issue of the importance of having women themselves play a role in regional Arab development.” In conjunction, she explained why gender equality is relatively important towards achieving nearly all of the Millennium Development Goals – (the global development framework adopted by the United Nations in 2000 for improving world standards of living through poverty reduction).


The discussion focused on Morocco, a case-model country that could be used to inspire other nations in the Arab world to embark on women’s development and achievement through the Millennium Goals framework.

Opening the presentation, Morrocan Ambassador Aziz Mekouar outlined Morocco’s ever-present character as the known liberal and non-confrontational face of Islam. Describing Morocco’s King Mohamed VI’s reforms, the ambassador showed how such reforms were major breakthroughs in the long struggle for equal rights of Moroccan women. The impact of these reforms in Morocco had far-reaching implications – “and could have major effects in the Muslim and Arab world as a whole.”
Following the Ambassador’s presentation, UNIFEM representative - Melissa Rugierio, described that organization’s activities to promote gender equality and achievement through the MDGs in Morocco. Ms. Rugiero noted the importance of gender issues as central to UNIFEM’s goals of creating a world where women live free from poverty, violence, and inequality.
In succession, William Jordan – “Director of Maghreb Affairs” at the US State Department, highlighted Morocco’s reforms, and stressed that “these reforms can help unleash the full potential of all citizens and add to the prosperity and stability of Morocco and the region.” He then described three focus areas of US government activities in Morocco and the Arab world: supporting local NGOs and women’s rights groups in their effort to achieve full participation for women in civil and political society; providing women with the skills and tools required to help build strong judicial institutions, and provide access to opportunities for women in efforts to gain economic independence – “increasing their power in the private sector towards building democratic societies.”

Presiding after Mr. William Jordan, Dr. Loubna Hanna, a distinguished professor at American University School of International Service, reiterated the importance of gender issues to development by pointing out that gender equality is not only for the sake of women - it is really a by-gender issue: “the welfare of society relies increasingly on a country's quality of human resources, and women remain a largely untapped resource.” Dr. Hanna crystallized this and the fact that women in general have a strong potential to bring about change. In her analysis, she stated that promoting gender equality is a smart economic decision, and a realistic response to the challenges of globalization. Dr. Hanna went on to say that “excluding women is to exclude serious human capital.” Therefore, gender issues need to be viewed as central in policy design and implementation: “we need to focus our efforts towards promoting gender equality and empowering women with the firm understanding that these issues are principal elements of the developmental process,” she stated. Dr. Hanna concluded by emphasizing the role of civil society and building partnerships to promote gender equality.
Such ideals were in the mind of Georgetown student organizer Leila Hanafi: “we wanted to bring together this panel for just such a reason,” stated Leila. “Discussions of these kinds begin the dialogue that is essential to bringing about change as women in Morocco and the Arab world redefine their roles, and forge new pathways of participation and leadership,” she went on to say.
Morocco has made steady and significant progress in elaborating and implementing democratization and good governance reforms due in great part to the civil society that has developed and matured rapidly in Morocco – “especially with respect to women’s associations.” The quick pace of reforms and the emergence of new actors at various levels have resulted in strong opportunities to strengthen and broaden women’s rights. With these reforms, Morocco has set itself on a path to become a modern democratic society, and has become the leading model for both women’s development and progressive reforms in the Arab world.

The event also featured sights and sounds of Morocco, a nourishing taste of Moroccan cuisine, and art exhibition by renowned artist Helen Zughaib who provided an extraordinary overview of the work Arab women artists are producing.

###

Special Note:
This remarkable and unprecedented event was presented by the United Nations Association of the National Capital Area-Human Rights and International Law Committee, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service Academic Council, and the Embassy of Morocco.

Anti-Muslim Cartoon
By Ali Alarabi
3/7/06
ALIALARABI@SUNTIMESMAIL.COM
 

The issue of offensive cartoons published recentlyآ underscored the deep misunderstanding between Muslims and non-Muslims here at home and around the world.

The controversy started when a Danish paper published cartoons offending Muslims by depicting Islam's Prophet Muhammad offensively. This issue has since taken a worldwide dimension when several other European papers republished the cartoons. They were claiming solidarity with their Danish colleagues in the name of freedom of the press, and this created as a result a ripple effect of protest and violence in many countries.

In the United States, civic-minded mainstream newspapers remained true to their ethical standards by choosing instead the moral high ground by refraining from publishing the offensive cartoons.

This choice in no way caused the freedom of press to suffer; quite to the contrary, it has strengthened this freedom through making moral choices in line with the mores and values of the mainstream of the society.

It has been argued that publishing the cartoons, albeit offensive, is an exercise in freedom of the press. That is not entirely untrue, and such freedom in my opinion must be preserved and cherished at all times. This is something I call good.

However, newspapers do not operate in a vacuum; they have a duty to the community, which is to reflect its mainstream mores and moral values through civility and decency in its public debate.

When choosing not to publish such offensive cartoons means preserving human life and keeping and promoting peace between religious and ethnic groups, it overrides other considerations, and it is a greater good.

Those papers that have published the offending anti-Muslim cartoon have erred in publishing something they knew will incite violence, and eventually the loss of life and property.

Muslims have the right to be outraged and to feel insulted by what they felt was a very offending depiction of their prophet, but they too have erred in taking their protest too far into torching down embassies and expressing their displeasure in violent means.

This issue has brought to the fore deep-seated mistrust and for the most part miscommunication between the West and the Muslim world.

For many Muslims, this latest controversy has shown yet another example of the West's hypocrisy, disrespect and assault on Islamic beliefs and values. Furthermore, it is not just in the popular culture and Hollywood movies that we oftentimes see Muslims or Arabs being portrayed in contemptuous, negative and prejudiced imagery.

Medieval literature and authors such as Dante Alighieri's work, for example, contain demeaning and monstrous anti-Islamic images that reflect a prejudiced view of Islam and its adherents, and show that modern stereotypes, suspicion and mistrust between the Western societies and Muslim ones have medieval roots.

This controversial issue has made many in Western societies wonder why Muslims feel very offended because a newspaper drew a cartoon about their prophet, when Christian values and beliefs oftentimes are assaulted and ridiculed in the public square without sparking this type of worldwide protest and in many instances are met with an apathetic stare.

An answer could be found in the political and social development of Western societies since the Reformation of 1517 and the religious and political horrific warfare between Catholics and Protestants, that eventually necessitated the treaty of Westphalia in 1648, which in turn ushered an end to the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648) between the religious and ethnic communities of Europe.

As a result, European societies went through a sacrilegious process that essentially diminished the power of religion in the public square, thus creating a sort of rupture between religion and the individual, and also marked a retreat of religion from public life.

For Muslims, on the other hand, those historical events were peculiarly European; there were no Reformation, no religious warfare of European sort and more importantly no rupture between religion and the individual.

The Muslim world is not a one monolithic giant. It is, rather, a vast expanse of multitudes of races, cultures, languages and ethnic groups, and could not be expected to behave as if they were a product of European historical experiences.

Muslims therefore remained passionate about their religion, and religion remained active in both private and public domain.

If lessons could be learned from this issue, it is that Muslims, Christians, Jews and others must work harder to better understand each other and create a reservoir of tolerance and good well for all.

 

From : jasb@mail.dk
Sent : Friday, February 3, 2006 11:39 PM
To : arabtimesnewspaper@hotmail.com
Subject : your article about prophet Mohammed cartoons


Dear Usama Fawzi
Salam:

Is it ok with you to translate the article and press it in Danish news papers

Jame Sbaih
Hareskovvej 3 1 th
2700 Brّnshّj
DK



From : suwwan.moussa@neuf.fr
Sent : Tuesday, January 31, 2006 6:50 PM
To : arabtimesnewspaper@hotmail.com
Subject : for osama fawzi

Marhaba, your article on Mohammade ibne Abdallah is excellent, walak inteh jabbare ya osama fawzi, ...good luck, Moussa SUWWAN Halasseh, min alqodsse

From : duhadanoon@hot