Thursday, August 19, 2010

Economist Poll Shows 17.5% Support for Ground Zero Mosque

I have two quick thoughts here -

1. It's stunning to me that any President would support anything this unpopular less than 90 days from an election. Obama's showing just about the same level of disregard to his own party as he does Republicans. Maybe that old quote where Obama says he'll stand with the Muslims (Dreams of My Father?) was accurate.

2. It surprises me that even something as near-universally reviled as the Cordoba House project isn't enough to get Democrats to stand united against it - only 41% of Dems are against the project, while 28% are for it. Presumably the other 31% have put the matter completely out of their minds. Support of Obama is an exercise best practiced in ignorance.

The Islamic cultural centre that is sorta near ground zero

Mosque-building and its discontents

Aug 19th 2010, 13:59 by R.M. | WASHINGTON, DC

From this week's Economist/YouGov poll:


Do you think the Islamic cultural centre and mosque should be built near the World Trade Centre site, or not?

Whether or not you think the Islamic cultural centre and mosque should be built near the World Trade Center site, do you think that Muslims have a constitutional right to build a mosque there?

Which of these statements comes closest to your opinion?

How much would you say you know about the religion of Islam and its practices?

As of today, what is your impression of the religion called Islam?

And then there's this.

Data links: Our topline numbers can be found here. All of the data can be found here.


Image and video hosting by TinyPicImage and video hosting by TinyPicJoin: Email Updates

If We Were As Intelligent as Obama, We'd Be FOR the 9/11 Mosque

Columnist: Obama having trouble because rest of America ‘not as gifted’

By: Mark Hemingway
Commentary Staff Writer
08/19/10 11:05 AM EDT

Here’s Bloomberg’s Margret Carlson this morning on the mosque controversy:

How can President Barack Obama be so right about the mosque and yet get it so wrong?

Here’s how: He is so supremely confident in his intellect that he forgets, on his way to the correct decision, to slow down and pick up not-so-gifted stragglers.

The controversy over locating a mosque close to Ground Zero in New York City created the perfect storm, putting Obama’s strengths and weaknesses into play.

He’s an intellectual comfortable with abstractions, a former editor of the Harvard Law Review, a constitutional scholar, a community organizer. When convinced he’s right — which is often — he turns his head at the podium to the right and left, gazing above his audience into the near distance, chin elevated, and makes his pronouncement about what is just and reasonable. We are expected to nod.

With the mosque, he didn’t bother with feelings when he saw that the U.S. Constitution and facts were on his side.

Everytime I think commentators can’t possibly hit new levels of arrogance and condescension on this mosque issue, I’m surprised yet again. Reciting Obama’s resume for the millionth time prove exactly nothing, and if you’re going to flatly declare that the “facts” and Constitution are firmly on one-side of the debate right away, why even bother writing the column? Further, if the idea is that Americans can’t handle abstractions, Carlson’s dead wrong about that. Here’s the Siena poll of New Yorkers on the mosque issue from yesterday:

Opposition remains strong against building the mosque, 63-27 percent, however, by a margin of 64-28 percent voters say that the developers of the Cordoba House have a Constitutional right to build it.

Clear majorities in New York both don’t want it built, and recognize it’s generally not the government’s place to tell people whether they can build a church on private property. Those positions are not inconsistent. Holding fast those beliefs does, however, put one at odds a liberal elite desperate to prove they’re so much more tolerant than the little people.



Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/columnist-obama-having-trouble-because-rest-of-america-not-as-gifted-101074784.html#ixzz0x45TXlHZ

Image and video hosting by TinyPicImage and video hosting by TinyPicJoin: Email Updates

Why Play Leapfrog?

Enjoy.

Image and video hosting by TinyPicImage and video hosting by TinyPicJoin: Email Updates

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Creepy Google CEO Says Stop Thinking for Yourself - Google Can Tell You What to Do

"I actually think most people don't want Google to answer their questions. They want Google to tell them what they should be doing next."

Young will have to change names to escape 'cyber past' warns Google's Eric Schmidt

The private lives of young people are now so well documented on the internet that many will have to change their names on reaching adulthood, Google’s CEO has claimed.

Google's CEO Eric Schmidt says young people should be allowed to change their names to escape their past lives on Facebook
Google's CEO Eric Schmidt Photo: AFP

Eric Schmidt suggested that young people should be entitled to change their identity to escape their misspent youth, which is now recorded in excruciating detail on social networking sites such as Facebook.

"I don't believe society understands what happens when everything is available, knowable and recorded by everyone all the time," Mr Schmidt told the Wall Street Journal.

In an interview Mr Schmidt said he believed that every young person will one day be allowed to change their name to distance themselves from embarrasssing photographs and material stored on their friends' social media sites.

The 55-year-old also predicted that in the future, Google will know so much about its users that the search engine will be able to help them plan their lives.

Using profiles of it customers and tracking their locations through their smart phones, it will be able to provide live updates on their surroundings and inform them of tasks they need to do.

"We're trying to figure out what the future of search is," Mr Schmidt said. “One idea is that more and more searches are done on your behalf without you needing to type.

"I actually think most people don't want Google to answer their questions. They want Google to tell them what they should be doing next."

He suggested, as an example, that because Google would know “roughly who you are, roughly what you care about, roughly who your friends are”, it could remind users what groceries they needed to buy when passing a shop.

The comments are not the first time Mr Schmidt has courted controversy over the wealth of personal information people reveal on the internet. Last year, he notoriously remarked: “If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."

Earlier this year, Google was condemned by the privacy watchdogs of 10 countries for showing a “disappointing disregard” for safeguarding private information of its users.

In a letter to Mr Schmidt, Britain's Information Commissioner Chris Graham joined his counterparts in countries including Canada, France, Germany and Italy, in raising concerns over its Street View and Buzz social networking services.



















































Image and video hosting by TinyPicImage and video hosting by TinyPicJoin: Email Updates

Homeschooled Mathletes Banned from Competition

I guess being taught to your full potential is now considered cheating.


MATHCOUNTS Decision Does Not Compute

A group of middle school students gather around a dining room table after a day of school work discussing the question, “How many integers between 500 and 1000 contain both the digits 3 and 4?” While some are busily writing out notes on scratch paper and consulting their TI-84 graphing calculators, one student picks up a marker on to a white board propped in the corner. “Here, let me show you …..,” he says.

These are not your average students. They are homeschoolers who have a passion for math and spend their free time investigating math problems that extend far beyond the typical curriculum. They solve problems involving number theory, counting, probability, algebra and advanced geometry concepts – subjects not usually taught in the classroom.
Some students will even take online courses to hone their skills. Others will compete and practice their skills online with students throughout the country on a website called the Art of Problem Solving, where they will play a game called “For the Win.” They will also expand their math know how by watching math tutorial videos on AOPS’ Alcumus page.
All this training will culminate in a competition with some of the country’s most talented middle school math students. These competitions are held throughout the country in January and February and are sponsored by the Mathcounts Foundation and local members of the National Society of Professional Engineers. These engineers volunteer their time to administer and financially support the competition. In most regions (called chapters) more than 100 students from surrounding counties will come to test their math skills by taking a 30 question individual test, then a series of short “target round” test with more complex problems, followed by a team round of 10 questions where students will collaborate to produce their answers.
Students compete among one another to select four members who will be designated to participate in the team round of the Mathcounts competition. Six additional students are permitted to attend with the team and take the first two individual tests. This “second string” team of students may try the team round questions but the results will not contribute to the team’s standing. Many teams design t-shirts to show their school pride and the younger students who are often part of the “second string” watch their older team members and aspire to reach the top four in their school so that they too will be able to participate in the spoils of a successful competition.
The top two or three of the school teams will advance to Mathcounts’ statewide competitions in March. In addition to these 8-12 team members (who don’t necessarily finish among the top of the competition), any student who places in the top 4 scorers in the individual event will be invited to compete as an individual at the state level. During this “March madness of math”, the top four students from the state competition will form a team which is funded by the NSPE and will be sent to the annual Raytheon Mathcounts National Competition. Winners at the state level and at the national level, receive monetary prizes, scholarships and the top scorers at the national level may even get to visit the White House. There is a lot at stake.
The competition is stiff. Students will compete with county magnet schools and schools for the gifted who are often formed by consolidating students who test in the top 3-5% in their school districts. Many teams will be coached not only by school teachers, but parents with a background in mathematics or engineering or by local professors. The homeschoolers will also compete with students from private schools and charter schools that specialize in math and science studies. Nonetheless, with hours of extra study, additional classes and the collaborative efforts of the team, these students will be able to compete with some of the most talented students in the country.
Unfortunately, this year, these homeschoolers, some of whom have worked for years to participate on a team as an eighth grader, will not be able to compete as teams at the Mathcounts chapter, state, and national competitions. Although they may enter the competitions individuals, there will be no opportunities to collaborate with the friends they have worked so hard with. In addition, these students’ odds of being able to advance to the Mathcounts state and national competitions will be significantly reduced in comparison to their public and private school counterparts. They will have to place among the top four students (among the team members and individuals) to be considered for further competition. If they do in fact accomplish this feat, they will not attend the state and national competition with their friends, but will do so alone. They will not enjoy the collaborative study and preparation as a team but will be subject to watching their public and private school counterparts enjoy and celebrate their team achievements.
The recent decision made by the board members of the national Mathcounts Foundation, who are comprised of engineers from major U.S. companies like Raytheon, Texas Instruments, 3M, GM, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Conoco Phillips, CNA Insurance and others, has banished homeschool teams from the benefits their competition has to offer. According to a recent letter, posted on the Mathcounts website, board members made this decision unanimously for a number of reasons. According to some, teams who were not truly homeschoolers were registering as homeschoolers in order to participate in the competition without going through the school they attend. In addition, Mathcounts claims that homeschoolers somehow form “super teams” made up of only the best students in their areas to compete with their public and private school counterparts. Since Mathcounts board members do feel they can accurately discern which teams are homeschoolers and which are masquerading as homeschoolers, they felt it was most prudent to simply ban homeschoolers from the team competition altogether. Local homeschooling associations have offered to certify their teams and produce state documents to prove their homeschooling status, but to no avail. Hence, after many years of homeschool teams enjoying the challenge and rigor of this national math bee, no homeschool teams will be present at local, state or national competitions this year.
The claims of the Mathcounts board don’t quite add up. According to Mathcounts, between 1- 2% of their participants of their contest participants are homeschoolers. This is fairly consistent with roughly 2% of the overall student population that are now homeschooled. Nonetheless, according to Chris Bright, Program Manager for the MATHCOUNTS Foundation, in a recent letter to homeschool parents, since the amount of homeschool students is relatively small in the competition, it is more efficient to dispense with the homeschoolers than to ferret out the alleged cheaters.

While there are certainly many capable and talented homeschooled middle school students, only a few will place among the top four scorers of chapter and state competition. Likewise, although many homeschool teams have enjoyed the excitement of the preparation and collaboration it takes to compete as a team in these competitions, few teams actually dominate chapter or state competitions. More often than not, homeschool teams and mainstream public middle schools are handily beaten by the local chapter’s and state’s gifted and talented magnet schools.
Homeschoolers don’t really mind this inequity and the parents and coaches don’t really mind either. Despite the recent Mathcounts explanation for the ban, these activities are not primarily about winning or being the top team. Instead, parents and coaches of these middle schoolers simply want to expand and encourage their student’s passion and excitement for mathematics and problem solving. They wish to provide an opportunity and environment where their students can expand and enhance their communication and collaborative skills with other students who share their interests. They simply want their students to have the same opportunity to participate as a team as any other school in their region, without being discriminated against.
Without the opportunity of team participation in Mathcounts, this contagious enthusiasm for computation and problem solving will be severely diminished. In the eyes of both homeschoolers, their public school friends and even the engineers who host the local chapter and state competitions, the decision of the Raytheon Mathcounts Foundation board members simply does not compute.

Image and video hosting by TinyPicImage and video hosting by TinyPicJoin: Email Updates

Ground Zero Mosque: Peace Project or Sharia Beachhead?

Hidden websites? One secret agenda and one skeaky-clean, scrubbed agenda for public perusal?

Ground Zero Mosque’s Hidden Websites: Follow the Shariah

Do the math. The 15 floors planned for the Ground Zero Mosque just don’t add up.

What’s the goal? Maybe the Imam’s goal is not simply to force a provocative “insensitivity” about 9-11 on the American public, with the help of America’s elites. Maybe the Imam’s long-term goal is to force Shariah law on the American public – of course, again, with the help of America’s elites.

ground zero mosque

Why don’t the 15 floors add up? How many floors does Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf need for the mosque portion of this triumphal Islamic command center planned for the two building sites at 45-47 Park Place in New York City? Think about it: maybe 2 floors for the mosque itself and related offices. A 3rd floor for the swimming pool, a 4th for the 500 seat auditorium, a 5th for the halal restaurant and halal culinary school, a 6th for the art studios, the childcare center and library, a 7th for the gym and basketball court. Add an 8th floor for miscellaneous storage and offices. And then add a 9th floor for the September 11 memorial, an after-thought that was recently added to the Imam’s plan, although that may in fact be more of a room off to one side than a whole floor.

That leaves six mystery floors empty – or dedicated to other activities. Six floors – that’s a lot of offices, a lot of employees, maybe more than half of the 150 full-time and 500 part-time jobs the Imam says he’ll bring to Lower Manhattan. What are Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf’s plans for those six mystery floors?

Follow the Shariah Index Project to solve the puzzle of the 6 mystery floors: We found two hidden websites with copiously deleted information, all about the Imam’s Cordoba Institute Shariah Index Project. For reference, here’s the Imam’s most recent hidden website (also available here as a pdf). And here’s the Imam’s earlierhidden website (also available here as a pdf). The information on those websites – information that the Imam tried to hide with a new whitewashed version – suggests that the six mystery floors of the Ground Zero Mosque will be dedicated to the Imam’s long-term goal: the Shariah Index Project, designed to benchmark Shariah compliance, to distribute Shariah propaganda, and to enforce Shariah law in America and worldwide.

Drawing from those hidden webpages and other sites, we’ve constructed a timeline for the Shariah Index Project and a partial list of Rauf’s partners in the Project. In Part 2, we’ll reveal the disturbing background and views of those partners. And in Part 3, we’ll present the bottom line – how this all ties together as a historic Islamist effort to market and to enforce Shariah in America, starting from Ground Zero.

Numbered Documents, for everyone’s convenience! Below, from the hidden websites, is the evidence Rauf tried to cover-up. We’ve even numbered the Shariah Index Project documents he mentioned, to make it easy for the Imam and his staff – for example, Courtney Erwin, attorney and director of the Shariah Index Project andcorporate contact for the Cordoba Institute - to provide copies to the American public.

Courtney Erwin could end the cover-up of these documents today, given her leading role in the Shariah Index Project since its inception. Erwin, by the way, has been working in Doha (Qatar, home of jihad-supporter Sheik Qaradawi, so admired by Imam Rauf) for the past three months. She states that her team includes a “Qatari legal researcher,” presumably for ongoing work on the Shariah Index Project. She may also be working with one of the core Shariah experts partnering in the Shariah Index Project, Dr. Jasser Auda, since January 2010 an Associate Professor in the Public Policy Program, Faculty of Islamic Studies, Qatar Foundation in Qatar. (Qatar is also one of the countries Imam Rauf is scheduled to visit on his State Department-funded trip this summer.) Look for much more on Erwin and Auda in Part 2.

American citizens and their elected officials should ask Rauf, Erwin and their associates to end the Shariah Index Project cover-up, and to disclose all documents, meeting notes, emails and attendee lists from 2006 to the present day. You don’t ask, you don’t get.

August 2006 – The Planning Meeting – Meeting #1

We know from the first hidden website that the Shariah Index Project (SIP) had its initial meeting in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, in August 2006. Attendees explored the idea of creating an “index” to measure the degree of Shariah governance for ALL nations, and deliverables from the meeting were (1) a “vision” statement and (2) a roadmap for the project. Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf convened and chaired this meeting, which included “four scholars from India, Malaysia, and Pakistan.” From the second hidden website, we know that these first four participants Rauf recruited were international leaders affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood - and on key advisory boards in Shariah Compliant Finance:

Professor Dr. Mahmood Ahmad Ghazi, Pakistan, (Chairman of the Shariah Board for the State Bank of Pakistan and former president of International Islamic University);

Professor Dr. Mohammad Hashim Kamali, Malaysia (Dean of the International Institute of Islamic Thought & Civilization and Former Interim Chairman, Constitutional Review Committee, Afghanistan);

Professor Dr. Tahir Mahmood, India (Founder/Chairman, Amity University Institute for Advanced Legal Studies, New Delhi, and former Dean of the Faculty of Law, Delhi University);

Dato’ Abdul Hamid Mohamad, Malaysia (Judge, Federal Court of Malaysia … Malaysian Supreme Court). [Such a small world here at Big Peace - this is the same judge honored by Elena Kagan in the Al-Sanhuri lecture series at Harvard on November 11, 2008, as we reported here a couple weeks ago.]

February, 2007 - Expanding the Core Group – Meeting #2

The original five Shariah authorities (1 from Pakistan, 3 including Rauf from Malaysia, 1 from India) met again, adding five more members from Indonesia, Iran (to “represent the Shi’a perspective,” possibly Mohammad Javad Larijani – see Bayefsky’s research below for August 2008), Turkey, Pakistan and Malaysia. This new Group of Ten Shariah Index Authorities created a new (3) Roadmap (2.0), and a new (4) Basis for Evaluation Document,which sets out an initial list of Islamic legal principles relating to governance. The group also distributed (5) Research Assignments, which would support the project and which they would present at the next meeting.

May 2007 – The First Draft of the Shariah Index – Meeting #3

This was a very productive session, involving the same ten Shariah experts. They refined the Basis for Evaluation document, resulting in the “creation of two new documents: (6) Essential Features of Shariah-Compliant Governance and the first iteration of the (7) Shariah Index (1.0), inclusive of seventy-four principles of Islamic governance derived from Islamic law.”

“Additionally, the group developed a (8) Strategic Plan for the project, which highlighted key dates and tasks.They also identified a (9) short and long-list of scholars to approach for support.”

October 2007 - Expansion and Operations Plans – Meeting #4

The Core Group of Ten grew to at least 14 members, with new Shariah authorities from Bahrain, England (possibly Dr. Jasser Auda who may have been in the UK at the time?), Morocco, and Lebanon (to “include the Arab Shi’a perspective”). Interestingly, it also included three ratings experts – identified later as unnamed representatives from Gallup Organization, Pew Research Center, and Dr. Robert Rotberg of Harvard University. The meeting’s deliverables were closing in on the final product:

“the group further refined the (10) Index [ie, Shariah Index 2.0], which they organized into four major sections—1)Normative Declarations, 2) Qualifications ofLeaders, 3) Governance, and 4) Maqasid al Shariah—with each of these sections broken down into a number of measurable principles derived from Shariah. “

The group also revisited and refined their (11) strategic plan [2.0] and committed to (12) three detailed research and writing tasks: 1) long articles, 2) sourcing and citing principles, 3) proxy questions for each principle.

November 2007 – July 2008 – Building the Shariah Index Apparatus – Individual Meetings #5

Over the next eight months, the Cordoba Initiative staff worked with the 14 Shariah experts – and the 3 “ratings experts” from Gallup, Pew and Harvard – to write the (13) Preamble to the Project and “further refine the philosophy, overall structure, and organization of the (14) Index [ie, Shariah Index 3.0] as well as each of the principles.”

August 2008 - Final Publication Plans – Meeting #6

Anne Bayefsky identified the Iranian participant in Shariah Index Project from this photo from the August 2008 meeting: Iranian Mohammad Javad Larijani, who has justified torture of Iranian dissidents as legal punishments under Shariah law. This August 2008 meeting planned the publication of the Shariah Index Project book – and associated polls done by Gallup and Pew – for March 2009:

At the most recent meeting in August 2008, the scholars agreed that the index would be a Maqasid al Shariah Index [the influence of Jasser Auda who had possibly joined in October 2007], measuring a state’s Islamicity through both its governance and society. Representatives from the Gallup Organization governance index pioneer, Dr. Robert Rotberg, joined the discussion by phone on the second day. Following these conversations with rating and indexing specialists, the scholars worked to (15) finalize the index, including its methodology and measurable indicators [ie, Shariah Index 4.0]. The scholars also finalized preparations for the book to be published concurrently with the Index and findings. After the formal meetings concluded, Cordoba staff worked one-on-one with a number of the scholars, soliciting additional information requested by the ratings experts prior to their formal work on the Index as well about the Indexing methodology and the book, with significant work with Gallup and Dr. Rotberg as well as production of the book scheduled for the upcoming 6 months. The target date for the (16) Index results and book is March 2009, with the public launch to follow.

November 21, 2008 – The Book Launch Celebration with the Muslim Brotherhood’s IIIT- Meeting #7

The International Institute of Islamist Thought (IIIT), a Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated organization in Northern Virginia,met to launch the publication (pdf here) of an abridged edition of Rauf’s “What is Right with Islam is what is Right for America.” The meeting was chaired by IIIT Vice President Jamal Barzinji, and the publisher of the abridged edition is a group called American Muslims for Constructive Engagement (AMCE). Also promoted in that series of “Reader’s Digest Condensed Islamism”: Harvard’s Noah Feldman’s “Fall and Rise of the Islamic State,” “1) Who Speaks for Islam: By John Esposito and Dalia Mogahed. Dalia Mogahed is head of the Gallup project on Muslim public opinion, the most likely contact at Gallup for the earlier meetings on the Shariah Index Project (more on that relationship, and on the AMCE and their U.S. government backers in Part 2).

The book series, by the way, was funded by the Kingdom Foundation – as in the Alwaleed Bin Talal Kingdom Foundation of Saudi Arabia.

December 19, 2008 – Final Coordination with the Muslim Brotherhood’s IIIT – Meeting #8

Rauf met with Muslim Brotherhood’s IIIT leadership to discuss the Shariah Index Project (here as pdf). A key figure, Dr. Jasser Auda, met with Rauf at IIIT Headquarters in Northern Virginia. Auda has the background and the brains to be coordinating the Shariah Index Project behind the scenes from Qatar, making Rauf simply a U.S. salesman for an effort that may actually be directed by others. More on Auda in Part 2.

Let’s Review. All those numbers begin to add up:

The Ground Zero Mosque has at least 6 mystery floors. We suggest that they’ll be used by the Shariah Index Project.

The Shariah Index Project was built by at least 14 Shariah experts. We have the identities probably of 7 of them, and Rauf should reveal the other 7 right away.

The Shariah Index Project generated at least 16 documents and maybe a final book, and Rauf should release all of these – right away.

The issues at stake in the Ground Zero Mosque and the Shariah Index Project are not about Americans supporting the Constitution’s protection of religious freedom. Americans support that protection.

The issues at stake here are about Americans protecting the Constitution from Shariah-adherent groups using the protective guise of religious freedom to attack the Constitution itself – using a triumphal Ground Zero mosque as “the base” for a project to institutionalize Shariah in America.




Image and video hosting by TinyPicImage and video hosting by TinyPicJoin: Email Updates