Fasting teaches us patience and modesty

Short nights, early mornings and sacrificing the temptation of food and drink whilst working on an empty stomach are just one side of the Ramadhan coin.

On the flip side, favourite popular Ramadhan beverages, lavish Iftar parties and the Eid festival celebrations, lasting for three days, complete the experience of the month.

However, many of us experience the holy month without truly understanding it. Ramadhan is supposed to raise awareness of hunger and poverty by teaching Muslims patience, modesty and appreciation for what we would normally take for granted that those less fortunate than ourselves could only dream of.

Food attracts me towards it like the sticky end of a magnet that is hard to break free from. When Ramadhan arrives, it is like having to free yourself from that forceful magnetic field.

My typical day during this month begins with early morning breakfast to keep me going through the day, followed by pre-dawn prayers and a few more hours of sleep after that, if time permits.

As the day begins to come to a close after sunset, the fast breaks with the call for prayer (Adhaan). All day, the thought of stuffing my face the minute I hear the Adhaan keeps me going. But in reality, when I finally open my mouth to put a date in it to break my fast, the thought at how greedy I have been makes me feel very guilty for those who spend a lifetime working blood and sweat for a piece of bread.

This in turns makes me very thankful for having the many blessings in life that seem immeasurable compared to those who don’t.

Every day seems like a test of self-control and it is this final thought of realisation that determines how well I might have passed.


(Source: Woking News and Mail, 12.08.2010 )

The Ballot is stronger than the Bullet

A US President once said: “The Ballot is stronger than the Bullet,” (Abraham Lincoln) and how powerful this quote has proved to be in the recent years as the bullet is aimed in the direction only determined by the government of the day.

The irritating reality is that anti-politics is now reaching the stage where the public wants a politician to say: “We don’t know much about politics but we will help solve your problems.” The fact that young voters want ‘straight talking’ politicians is understandable. But this must be achieved in a more prudent way.

As a student, there are many issues that would shape my decision to elect a specific party when dropping my vote in the ballot box, such as education and crime. However, the decision is not an easy one, as it is hard to tell how honest the party leaders will prove to be in practice.

Much of the party policies are easier said than done. An example of this is the Tories incorporating their fight to tackle forced marriages as part of their campaign. With Britain’s rule of law (no one, including the Sovereign is above the law) and forced marriage Acts proving to be unsuccessful, this promise requires stronger preventative measures to be taken rather than mere words of assurances.

While some might use ‘tactical voting’ to vote for their least sincere preference in order to save the party with the most votes from winning, many people would feel safer in voting for the party they have always voted for and follow suit this time round as well.

However, with around four million young people becoming eligible to vote since 2005, it is uncertain how many actually avail the opportunity.

A recent survey revealed that the religious vote could be ‘critical’ in making or breaking a party’s election dreams, where it was highlighted that despite the Iraq war and anti-terror legislations, over half of Muslims intend to vote for the Labour party, as they were thought to be the friendliest towards Muslims. However, the survey also showed that most of these people would not vote.

As a member of the worldwide Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, I believe that interculturalism and religious integration is the basis for community cohesion in Britain and it is, therefore, important to cast your vote for someone who is independently able to respect your beliefs and guarantee your rights as a British citizen for a secure society, not being influenced by our European counterparts.

We are living in a world in which politics replaces personal responsibility. Lets hope that whichever party wins, the majority vote aims its bullet towards trust and accountability.

Pressure mounts on Kingston Hospital as closure of Accident and Emergency and Maternity services come under scrutiny

MEMBERS of the Kingston Hospital NHS Trust Board faced pressure today as they were questioned over the plans to close the hospital’s accident and emergency and maternity services.

Tory Councillor, David Cunningham, asked the chairman of the hospital, Christopher Smallwood, to put forward to its board members to answer whether they would actively resist closure of the units if proposals were carried forward.

Mr Smallwood said: “I am not prepared to do that as we are trying to conduct a constructive dialogue in the process going on which is developing these options and it will damage us if we dig our heels in and effectively withdraw from that dialogue.”

With future healthcare services at Kingston Hospital looking unsustainable, Mr Smallwood said that if the plans do go ahead, “it will have a damaging effect on recruitment and is especially worrying for those women thinking of coming to deliver in this hospital.” He also recognised that: “If we go in the wrong direction, there will be general outrage and enormous opposition.”

Chief Executive, Kate Grimes, said that although the plans were still very vague, “there will be a point where it will become clear.” She added that: “if there were any changes made, Kingston Hospital would be in a very good position as it has the biggest maternity unit in south west London, with an exceptionally good reputation.”

Although there was no robust denial of the plans to close the A&E and maternity units within the room, a spokesperson for the Trust said: “Kingston Hospital has provided the local community with excellent maternity and A&E provision for many years and we look forward to continuing to provide an increasingly enhanced service to our community in the future.”

The news to close the units broke earlier this week when Edward Davey, Kingston and Surbiton MP, and Susan Kramer, Richmond Park MP, were told by senior managers within the NHS that a review of hospitals across south west London showed that only three of four hospitals should have either a maternity unit or an A&E and Kingston Hospital was in the list of possible closures.

Speaking outside the public board meeting, parliamentary candidate for Kingston and Surbiton, Helen Whately opposed the action being pursued by the two local MPs: “When the chief executive and the chairman have said there are no conclusions being reached to close the A&E and maternity services and changes to the site are not under consideration, then I am a bit concerned that this might be becoming a electoral pawning for the Liberal Democrats.”

To join the petition visit savekingstonhospital.org.uk.

BBC under attack over marginalising of faith

At the Church of England's headquarters in Victoria, I am being reminded that the backbone of strengthening community cohesion, cooperation and mutual understanding is the correct representation of faith. But what is going to become of society when religion and ethics are instead being presented in a dangerous and distorted way through British television? This is the concern raised by former BBC radio producer, Nigel Holmes.

Mr Holmes, who is also a lay member of the General Synod of the Church of England, will call upon the BBC and broadcasting watchdog Ofcom next month to explain why British television, which once was "exemplary in its coverage of religious and ethical issues, now marginalises the few such programmes which remain."

With hardly any religion on television in peak time, even at festive periods, Mr Holmes accused the BBC of overlooking the Christian significance of Good Friday 2009 and labelled ITV as a "lost cause" in terms of religious broadcasting.

The paper revealed that whilst general output on BBC One and Two had doubled over the last ten years, religious output had declined from 177 hours to 155 hours a year.

This is despite the BBC’s own research showing that 78% of Britons recognise Christianity as the "backbone of their spirituality" and 80% of respondents of a survey conducted by Mothers’ Union, an Anglican organisation, believed that religion is generally not well covered on British television.

So a certain factor has affected this decline, but where should the blame be placed? Mr Holmes proposed that the cuts in religious programmes are to be blamed on those in broadcasting hierarchies, who "are not in tune with a sizeable slice of their potential audience."

The BBC, however, presents in its annual report for 2009 that it is exceeding the required number of hours of religious programming set by Ofcom and has further programmes scheduled for this year, including God don’t live here no more, an investigation into what is known about President Obama’s faith.

Mr Holmes said: "My hope is that the Synod is not percieved to be complaining but rather prompting and enouraging broadcasters to raise their horizons and so make more moving and memorable programmes which more appropriately reflect, celebrate and articulate faith."

With the BBC being the cornerstone of the provision of public service broadcasting for UK audiences, its governing body is to be blamed for being keen on retaining its competitive position, in terms of audience numbers and appreciation of its output, regardless of the content of the programmes. But really, the incurable problem is that culture and religion will always get into a mess whenever they are fused.

Social change in new media damaging accurate news

Over the past few years, the social change that new media has witnessed has been detrimental, and to a certain extent, dangerously damaging to the content of accurate foreign news. To be specific, the language used by foreign newspapers and satellite television channels is often interpreted in a different way to what it may actually mean. The biggest illustration of this is the Arab news channel, Al Jazeera. This is arguably due to the formula of achieveing viewer retention through audience participation.

Researchers and speakers from around the World gathered together last year at the Centre for Arab and Muslim Media Research (CAMMRO) for its fourth annual conference at the King’s College in London. During the conference, it had emerged how the emergent transnational satellite television channels and the Internet (online newspapers in particular) affect politics, the public sphere and the daily lives of the public just by merely translating a news story in a different language.

Instead of pointing towards accurate readability, word for word translating (often in the sense of online newspapers) leads to literal precision. Within the framework of news, some readers may argue that it is essential to be as literal as possible and translate each word as it is it. However, in doing so some may forget the necessity of maintaining clarity of expression.

Non-fluent arabic speakers can use the example of movie subtitles to undertsand this point. Writing from experience, watching a bollywood movie with subtitles often diverts my attention to reading the subtitles and listening to the speech, rather than watching the directions in the movie. I often end up laughing and then sighing at the way exact word for word translating in subtitles can lead to a totally different meaning to what has actually been said.

The same can be said about reading news in English being translated into Arabic, only to witness the information so abundantly present in the original text be substantially altered.

Commercial enterprises have commented that Arab satellite broadcasters do not have an intrinsic interest in politics and the development of societies. Rather, they follow the same rationale as their Western counterparts. That is, to build and retain an audience that can be turned into advertising revenue.

Is it this retention of audience that leads to inaccuracies?

The CAMMRO conference led to the conclusion that the process of media-induced change in the Arab countries, which has only just begun and is unstoppable, will give more power to individual citizens. This will in turn create more commonality between citizens and countries generating new ties between the Arab World and the Western world.

However, does that mean that the Arab nations are now on the fast track to European-style democratisation and open societies or are they on the way to modernise their own traditions, however damaging and painful it may be?

112 year old Somali man marries girl, 17

Click here

Hmm...interesting! God bless them! hope Mr Dore can give her equal rights, which seems as if he has no issue with.

Reforming the law- new inheritance rights for cohabiting couples

Unmarried partners could automatically receive the same inheritance rights as married couples under a recent proposal by the Law Commission

Where a cohabitant dies without a will (intestate), the surviving partner would have automatic rights to inherit half of their partner's estate, if they have been together for two years, under the new proposal. Under the current law, the estate is transferred to the intestate's children or family memebrs. Cohabitees have no automatic right to inherit their partner's assets if they die without leaving a will, unless if an application is made to the courts under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975) where the partner is granted a discretionary award on the basis of their needs. This is currently a complex procedure as the Commission says it causes "great financial and emotional cost".


The commission acknowledges that some people will find the review of the intestate rules controversial but says that research shows it would match public expectations, and is a welcomed issue. However, the question thus arises whether it undermines marriages. Will this step drive the issue of marriages and the overwhelming rise in divorce rates further underground? Do people marry with a crude expectation that when their partner dies they will receive their estate? Ultimately, is this review of reasonable legislation necessary at all? It is certianly a striding step in the wrong direction which will make our society increasingly corrupt...one issue leads onto another, and I dread to think what step the law will take in the next few years after such a law is implemented to follow on from this! I hope our judges aren't getting too old to lose sense.