Barrak Obama, politics and race

Obama’s skin colour can be harming the principle of democracy in the USA if his race and colour become a major issue instead of his ideas. What matters in a fair election race are the tone and the colour of ideas and not the fair skin of the speakers.

If Obama skin is a major issue in the USA, this means racism isn’t over yet in this country seeking to export democracy to other countries, especially the Middle East where there is argument that democracy isn’t a mass product. It should be implemented according to the specificity of each society.

But it’s too early to judge as the race for the candidacy to the presidency isn’t over. With Hilary, he represents a dichotomy between sexism and racism. Who either wins will be a triumphant over the prejudices associated with them.

Obama, as it is evident, has to battle on two fronts: first to prove the credibility of his ideas in confronting Hilary Clinton camp. The second is to convince the voters that colour shouldn’t be an issue as what matters is the person behind the colour and not the colour making the look of a person.

Obama, supposedly, the victim of his skin, is a striking example of the failure of the US cultural and educational system to eradicate racism after the eradication of slavery, which still continues to be a black part in American history.

His opponents will try to play down the race issue. The fact of some insisting on his past try implicitly to emphasize his black origins. The fact that he severed ties with his former pastor the Rev Jeremiah Wright is an indication that he wants to forcefully show that his allegiance to the country is more important than that to a particular church, which forms a small minority and a platform of attacks on the whole of the US policy. Perhaps Obama’s move to sever ties with his pastor is aimed at limiting controversies around him. After his apparent hesitant remarks about the Rev Jeremiah Wright that he couldn’t disown him, now he directly announces his complete separation of him in an attempt to unite more voters around him.

It can be easy to turn a new page vis-à-vis the Rev Jeremiah Wright. But it will be hard for him to change his political views 180° without paying dearly for that. The church membership can be seen as personal matter, but politics is an issue that interests every member of the society.

Should Obama and Hilary run together?

It can be possible if Barrak Obama and Bill Clinton agree to swap wives. Hilary and Obama married for convenience, they can agree to share power for the duration of their political marriage.

Seriously, for them to run together will pose a challenge as they can’t obviously agree on who should be the presidential candidate and who should be the vice president candidate. Both have apparently different political views. So it will be hard for them to change them to look harmonious without losing their potential voters who will see them ready to change their principles just for their personal advantages. As it is, the race should continue between them. The final judge will be the delegates who should reflect the will of those they represent.

The right to nuclear energy

The UN's nuclear watchdog has said it will investigate US claims that Syria was building a secret nuclear reactor with North Korean help. So does every country have the right to acquire nuclear energy?

Nuclear energy should be seen as an alternative to energy derived from fuel. The majority of the countries have no oil reserves. Their economy largely depends on the fluctuations of the oil market. Morocco is one of the countries that France will help build a civil nuclear energy industry to underpin its development.

The world population is getting more and more urban. Those living in the countryside want their share of access to technology. Oil isn’t endless. It’s time to think of developing alternative energies and making it accessible to every country indiscriminately.

Today there is the danger of the scarcity of drinking water. Nuclear energy can be a cheap means to desalinate sea water for many countries, which can also be used in irrigation to boost food production.

Nuclear energy shouldn’t remain just a weapon in the hands of developed countries like France and the USA which use it as a means of pressure or favouritism. Friendly countries are helped to acquire it while regimes opposed to them are scared into abandoning it.

There should be international cooperation to make nuclear energy available for peaceful purposes and why not have nuclear stations in every country run by an international team, which regularly briefs the International Atomic Energy Agency of all their operations?

Crime and imprisonment

Morocco is one of the countries with a large prison population totalling about 60,000 prisoners. There are all kinds of prisoners from drug dealers and violent criminals. Since the bomb attacks in Casablanca on May 16^th, 2003, there have been prisoners considered as terrorists or with links to terrorist organisations. There were three major occasions in which up to 50,000 prisoners were freed. But in short time, prisons become again overcrowded with the same or new prisoners.

Morocco is planning to build new prisons to cope with overcrowding. It doesn’t seek to be soft on petty crimes or on people suspected of being sympathetic to terrorism or planning terrorist attacks. Currently there are about 2,000 prisoners that have been tried or being tried for terrorism charges.

At the same there are still criminals at large as the security forces is understaffed in comparison of the areas it should cover.

The latest news about prisons in Morocco is the escape of nine Islamist prisoners convicted of terrorist offences.

This will be a reason for the Moroccan authorities to be more vigilant. But at the same time the efforts of the security forces is now more centred on would be terrorists who are more dangerous than ordinary criminals.

The issue of prisons isn’t limited just of the number of prisoners and the expediency to arrest people. It has above all to do with human rights. In democratic countries, people are arrested for their felonies like murder and theft. In other countries where there is no democracy, people are also arrested for their opinions. The police use all means to arrest them, sometimes with trial, sometimes they are left to linger in prisons without being taken to court.

There are also the conditions of the prisoners who live in crowded and squalid prison. They are offered no means for rehabilitation. They spend their sentences just locked.

The reasons to imprison and release has to do with common laws. There is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights apparently adopted by all UN member countries. But still each country has its laws which determine the length of the sentences and the cases a person should be taken to prison.

The issue of prisons isn’t limited just of the number of prisoners and the expediency to arrest people. It has above all to do with human rights. In democratic countries, people are arrested for their felonies like murder and theft. In other countries where there is no democracy, people are also arrested for their opinions. The police use all means to arrest them, sometimes with trial, sometimes they are left to linger in prisons without being taken to court.

There are also the conditions of the prisoners who live in crowded and squalid prison. They are offered no means for rehabilitation. They spend their sentences just locked.

The reasons to imprison and release has to do with common laws. There is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights apparently adopted by all UN member countries. But still each country has its laws which determine the length of the sentences and the cases a person should be taken to prison.

The treatment of Muslim women

The treatment of women around the world still raises hot debates around the world regardless of religion or the political system. Women are still fighting for equal rights and protection from sexual harassment and violence. There is a difference between legislating equality or laws that give women a dignified status in their societies and the implementations of those laws.

In Europe women still need further empowerment as key posts in governments or corporation boards are still heavily dominated by men. Italy is a case in point.

Talking about the treatment of Muslim women, this should be dealt case by case. There are Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia where women have to live under the tutorship of men throughout their lives regardless of their education or age.

Why can’t men in Saudi Arabia allow the world to see Saudi women? Are they too beautiful so they are jealous about them? Or are they such ugly that they are ashamed the world will know about them? Are they too deficient in intelligence that they can’t have common sense and they are likely to tarnish the reputation and the honour of their male relatives? I simply wonder.

Women are badly treated because of the mentality of some men who see themselves as superior and that the women are deficient both in religion and intelligence.

The most horrific threat waiting for women in countries like Jordan and Syria is the killing of a woman by a close relative to save the family honour if found out having a sexual relationship outside marriage or simply suspected of doing so. In this society the killer can spend a prison sentence no longer than a year. That’s the kind of the worst treatment a Muslim woman can come to. Here is an article on BBC website about this issue.

It’s hard to generalise that all Muslim women are badly treated because of the customs and the laws. There are some Muslim countries, like Morocco where they are enjoying more freedom compared to women in countries like Saudi Arabia where a woman can’t do anything without a male tutorship.

There are other countries like Morocco where male tutorship has been abolished in all matters that concern women at the age of consent. Women here are free to travel abroad. They don’t need the consent of a male tutor to get a passport or a visa. They can travel inside or outside the country for studies, tourism or work. (You can see even some women among the illegal immigrants trying to cross from Morocco to Spain through the Strait of Gibraltar.

They are now free to choose their husbands. They no longer need the approval of a male relative. In the government there are now seven women holding positions from ministers to secretaries.

But this doesn’t mean it’s all white and black here. There is still the mentality that has more influence than the laws. Some women are still “coerced” to conform with traditions when it comes to relationship. It is still a shame for a woman to have a child out of wedlock as she can’t openly have a partner she can live with without a marriage contract.

A visitor to Morocco can notice the dichotomy of traditional women as well as modern ones in terms of appearances, behaviour and education. There are still those who believe in the right of men to dominate their lives according to their interpretations of religion.

On the whole the treatment of women depends on societies and communities. There are women who see no harm in getting a controlled treatment in all aspects of their lives. But there are those who are challenging such views citing women from past Islam eras who had their influence in their tribes or societies.

But it isn’t just how women are treated in their societies. It is how all members of societies are treated. Many societies still suffer from nepotism and a class system that put both women and men in awkward situations. Women can’t stand up to men. Men can’t stand up to change the system making them feel second class citizens in their countries. It’s a vicious circle that needs to be redressed by both men and women alike.

South Africa and Zimbabwe

South Africa has the means to put more pressure on Robert Mugabe to soften his attitudes regarding the opposition led by Morgan Tsvangirai. It’s rather queer that the results aren’t released three weeks after the elections. Even recounting the whole votes wouldn’t have taken such a long time. This, maybe, Mugabe is preparing his own results. The opposition is powerless as the army and the courts are under the full authority of Mugabe. The army is on full alert to carry his orders as the courts are apparently politically geared to rule in favour of Mugabe’s decisions.

Zimbabwe is now a torn country. About a third of its population is now living in neighbouring countries, mainly, South Africa. There is a political discord as the political figures are unable to figure out a way out to the current situation even if it comes to power sharing to save the country from its currents crisis.

South Africa looks a lame duck as it has to put up with the consequences of Zimbabwe’s political crisis, mainly through the huge influx of the Zimbabweans on its territory. Thabo Mbeki alone can’t solve the political situation in Zimbabwe. It’s up to African leaders to have a united mediation to bring all the parties together. Imposing economic sanctions on this country will just drive it to complete anarchy and massive starvation. African leaders, especially those neighbouring Zimbabwe should have a common vision of what this country should be. Leaving it drift in its current situations is another disgrace to the whole of Africa, which is doomed to have a crisis ended only to be plagued by a new one. A stable Africa is still a dream as there are countries that can’t look normal without international interventions as it is the case in the Ivory Coast and DR Congo. Somalia is left on its own, making it lack the political infrastructure of a sovereign country.

Zimbabwe leaders should choose between being democratic as it is the case of Senegal or chaotic as it is the case in Somalia. Only the national will and fruitful international mediations can save Zimbabwe from falling into the abyss of total chaos.

Is Zimbabwe Africa's sick man?

South Africa has the means to put more pressure on Robert Mugabe to soften his attitudes regarding the opposition led by Morgan Tsvangirai. It’s rather queer that the results aren’t released three weeks after the elections. Even recounting the whole votes wouldn’t have taken such a long time. This, maybe, Mugabe is preparing his own results. The opposition is powerless as the army and the courts are under the full authority of Mugabe. The army is on full alert to carry his orders as the courts are apparently politically geared to rule in favour of Mugabe’s decisions.

Zimbabwe is now a torn country. About a third of its population is now living in neighbouring countries, mainly, South Africa. There is a political discord as the political figures are unable to figure out a way out to the current situation even if it comes to power sharing to save the country from its currents crisis.

South Africa looks a lame duck as it has to put up with the consequences of Zimbabwe’s political crisis, mainly through the huge influx of the Zimbabweans on its territory. Thabo Mbeki alone can’t solve the political situation in Zimbabwe. It’s up to African leaders to have a united mediation to bring all the parties together. Imposing economic sanctions on this country will just drive it to complete anarchy and massive starvation. African leaders, especially those neighbouring Zimbabwe should have a common vision of what this country should be. Leaving it drift in its current situations is another disgrace to the whole of Africa, which is doomed to have a crisis ended only to be plagued by a new one. A stable Africa is still a dream as there are countries that can’t look normal without international interventions as it is the case in the Ivory Coast and DR Congo. Somalia is left on its own, making it lack the political infrastructure of a sovereign country.

Zimbabwe leaders should choose between being democratic as it is the case of Senegal or chaotic as it is the case in Somalia. Only the national will and fruitful international mediations can save Zimbabwe from falling into the abyss of total chaos.

Glamorizing extreme thinness

Having the right weight has become an obsession for many young women to the point that having it means having it to the most minimum level. There have been many victims of thinness among models themselves. Spain and Italy are one of the first countries to make it illegal to employ super-thin models.

There are many dangers associated with starving one’s body to get extremely thin. This means depriving the body of the necessary minerals and vitamins. This can affect the firmness of bones after the menopause.

There are even few men who can accept to live with a skinny woman as a healthily fleshy woman has more appeal than a skinny one.

In some countries, as in Mauritania, the norm is that a woman should be extremely fat to have more appeal. But this isn’t without a price on her health. In this country, girls, after puberty, are made fat through the traditional force-feeding of young girls.

Perhaps the golden rule is that women should learn to live with their bodies as long as they don’t have health threatening excess in weight. Seeking to lose too many pounds for the sake of looking fashionable is only a cosmetic effort. Women should develop self-esteem through healthy diet and physical exercises. Starving to get thin is killing all body strength. As such, women can look “beautiful” but without enough substance to make a doctor certify that they’re actually healthy and they won’t have any health complications sooner or later.

African leadership and democracy

African leaders in the majority of cases have been disappointing because of the lack of democracy in their countries. Many conflicts in Africa were resolved through the intervention of Western forces as in Sierra Leone, Botswana and Liberia. DR Congo is relatively stable thanks to the UN forces. Darfur was a failure for the African peace keeping forces as no other international forces outside Africa were allowed in it. In other words, African leaders, when faced with crises, can’t sort it out themselves as each has alliances outside the continent.

Chad and Sudan signed a new peace agreement in Senegal, but that was during an Islamic, not an African conference. The annual African summit is just an occasion for meeting without any tangible agreement that ordinary Africans can see on the ground as Africa itself is divided into classical parts, the francophone zone and the Anglophone zone.

Many African leaders are power-manic. They can’t survive without clinching to power as long as possible by any means, like a change in then constitution allowing them to indefinitely stay in power or by vote rigging or intimidating and imprisoning their political opponents. It’s only pressure from the West that makes them bow to make token changes. But at heart the leadership remains in the hand s of the very few.

Africa has historical figure like Nelson Mandela who set the example to other African leaders that remaining in high esteem isn’t to stay in power until asked to leave by popular anger and a coup. Perhaps African leaders should learn from sports champions who leave the fields when they’re still at their apogee and not till they’re completely run out. For Mugabe, he saw his star ascending from the days of struggle against white rule until becoming president. But his intransigent policies and the desire to remain in power, for ever, blemished his image in the eyes of the majority of his countrymen. Had he stepped down before letting his country fall into complete economic chaos, he would now be seen as Zimbabwe’s wise man. Like Nelson Mandela he could have his statue erected in a famous London square or museum.

But as power corrupts , many African leaders are ready to sacrifice the future of their countries as long as they can secure their own future. When democracy becomes a real fact in Africa, elections in them won’t be an occasion for the world to follow them with irony and regret as it happened in Kenya. Perhaps, African politicians should learn how to make fair and free elections a reality. The losers should be the first to announce their defeat and to congratulate their opponents. When politicians go publicly against each other after the elections, it’s no wonder if their supporters bloodily clash in the streets.

African politicians must know that preserving the independence of their countries comes through making sacrifices for them. Intransigence on all sides will keep the continent the poorest in the world, not because it lacks riches, but simply because it lacks politicians with rich ideas to make its multiple miseries a matter of the past.

Food prices and world stability

Food prices have become expensive for the low-paid categories of third world societies. Rich countries, especially in Europe aren’t feeling the crunch because they have the technological means to keep the production stable as they have the money to import the food they can’t grow from developing countries whose economies depend on agriculture.

Food has become the new divide between the rich and the poor. Many governments are concerned about keeping their populations reasonably fed before they become faced with bread riots as it is now happening in many countries around the world. The well known cases are in Egypt, a principally desert country with a population topping 70 million people.

In Morocco, the basic commodities for the Moroccan population have seen a sharp increase surpassing 50% for cooking oil and more than 60% for flour in less than a year, despite these commodities being subsidized by the government.

The cost of living in Morocco has increased because of the soaring prices of housing, electricity ands water bills among other things while the wages are so far frozen, despite an increase not exceeding 10% for salaried workers while the private sector is reluctant to increase wages for its workers, citing foreign competition as the main factor. An increase in wages means an increase in the price of the products sold at home and abroad in face of Chinese competition among other things.

Hunger is a concern for the have and the have not, as it will intensify social tensions and the level of crimes, especially among the unemployed and the heavily disadvantaged populations. There is no need to return to historical periods as in the Middle Ages when hunger because of droughts followed with diseases used to sweep a large proportion of the world population.

Such a situation should be a wakeup call for scientists to concentrate on the means to produce cheap food needing little land and water. But it’s the economic calculations that stand in the way of improving the world food program. There are food companies fearful of the plunge in prices. For them food shortage means rapid benefits.

Currently the Earth can feed more than its current population. But the economic difficulties and the lack of cooperation between nations that makes lands remain barren. What if the world changes its tactics in fighting terror? The looming universal hunger can be the great terror awaiting at least poor countries. There are no armies to maintain peace if there are no full stomachs making people consider what best to make with their lives instead of daily continuous struggle to get basic food that their pockets can’t afford.

Pregancy and employment

Women should have the right to be pregnant and to keep their jobs. Raising a family is a private matter. The market shouldn’t dictate to a woman when she should be pregnant or the frequency of her pregnancies.

Companies should respect the nature of women and by this, the right to procreation. Enforcing regulations that force women to declare their family planning amounts to interference with personal matters. Economic concerns should be set aside when it comes to the fundamental right to keep or have a job.

Women shouldn’t pay a high price to become mothers or have more children by sacrificing job opportunities or the chances for a promotion. Some companies argue that pregnant women affect their level of productivity. But it’s highly unlikely that all working women in a company fall pregnant at the same time.

Companies should provide facilities for pregnant women as well as for mothers with babies. The advantage will be for the future generation as societies with low birth rate won’t be deprived of having more children as a consequence of stringent measures.

In Europe there is the problem of falling birth rate. France, to encourage women have more children has put on incentives for them. They can have a longer maternity leave and they can return to their jobs no matter how their maternity leave is. Here is a BBC report contrasting maternity leave in UK and France.

What is interesting in it is this section as far as women are concerned: “France offers all women workers a paid, job -protected maternity leave six weeks before and 10 weeks after the births of the first two children, eight weeks before and 18 weeks after the birth of the third child, 34 weeks (12 prenatally) for twins and 42 weeks (24 prenatally) for triplets or more. Maternity leave, pre and postnatally, is mandatory.”

At the end of maternity leave, the mother or father can take parental leave until the child reaches the age of three, with entitlement to re-integration into the previous or a similar job. Parents receive a parental leave allowance if they interrupt their employment, totally. “

In the third world country, educated mothers should be encouraged to have children as an educated mother can have a good effect on the education of her child.

In Morocco, women aren’t required to declare their pregnancies before getting a job. This hasn’t become a problem. The majority of women in Morocco are housewives or they practice informal economic activities either as self-employed or for a small private enterprise. Those working ion the public/state sector are free to have as many children as possible without having their salaries suspended or being replaced by another worker.

Whatever, the right of women should be preserved. They shouldn’t be forced to choose between being a mother or a worker. Both go hand in hand as long as there are laws allowing them to be mothers without taking the risk of being made redundant or remaining jobless.

Discrimination against women worldwide

The BBC published a UN-commissioned report according to which Women are discriminated against in almost every country around the world.

I wonder if this can be a subject of debate, as women don’t need laws to curtail their freedom of what they should wear but how they can have a decent life free from the authorities and abuses of men. Or are men in worse situations because in their countries there is still the great divide between the rich and then poor and many of them can’t get to a top position because of nepotism and corruption?

Here is what I personally think as far as women are concerned.

Women should have the same opportunities as men. Girls at school are good achievers but it's the laws and the mentalities of some societies that deprive them from their rights when adults. In Saudi Arabia, women can't drive or travel unaccompanied. They can't set up a business without a male tutor.

Women should be more aware of their rights through education, vigorous national and local campaigns as well as the enforcement of the laws that prohibit discrimination and abuses against them.

Women should be economically and politically empowered to make their voice heard. There must be women associations that deal with abuses against women at home and in public places.

At the local level Laws allowing discrimination against women should change to give them more opportunities to compete with men. Internationally, foreign aid from donor countries, like the EU, for projects to countries where women are abused or denied full rights should be distributed on the understanding that women should benefit from it on equal terms with men.

Should women dress modestly?

One of the aspects of morality in different societies is how men and women interact. Sex is a taboo in many of them and by this, free relations between the two sexes. In conservative societies like Saudi Arabia men and women aren’t allowed to mix. For that there are, among other things, separate schools for boys and girls so the separation continues later in life. Women can’t show any single part of their bodies in public, including the face.

It is still considered as an offence in many societies to walk naked in public, but it’s OK if half naked or almost naked.

The question that remains about women’s dress is which part of the body to show or not to show and how much of it should be shown. This is what seems to define the dress code. Actually it’s female teenagers and young women who are prone to dress “immodestly” as for them this kind of dress is an expression of freedom and self-assertion and a means to attract more attention. They seek to “beam” wherever they go and not to go unnoticed.

Young females and males have a period in their lives in which they go crazy doing what adults consider as irrational. They like to go rowdy and behave uncontrollably. They seek to express themselves by indulging in activities through which they exteriorise their physical and sexual energy. The fashion industry helps promote this trend by making clothes to fit the desire to look the sexiest by among other things designing tight clothes and very short ones. Top clothes cover just half the top and lower clothes cover just 20% or less of the lower parts. There are fashion shows which glamorise every part of the body. So for some women, highlighting their beauty in public becomes an obsession. It’s not enough to show it in private with friends and partners.

But there are limits to what women should wear. They shouldn’t perform a kind of striptease in public through the way they dress and move. There are parts of the body that should be decently covered. A woman showing herself in an “immodest” dress in public becomes just a sexual object in the eyes of many. She becomes far from being treated as a person that should be respected.

Perhaps women should learn to hide the most of their bodies without forgetting to look pretty and sexy. It’s better for them to let men imagine what their bodies look like. Showing it all put an end to men’s curiosity who will look elsewhere to find another woman showing the best of what she has got.

In defense of BBC WHYS

This isn’t the first time that WHYS is receiving critical comments. There were others, to which I responded earlier stating that the BBC views [WHYS] as second rate since none of its seasoned journalists present it.

Contributing to WHYS doesn’t imply making a report on a certain situation but giving one’s opinion about it. As the name of the show shows, it’s about views from different parts of the WORLD. So it is possible that some can be shocked by some views, especially those who can’t interact with opposite views.

Email 1 complains about the fact that “More like AM radio talk shows with British accents controlling content”. This complaint sounds queer as what matters is what people say and not in what voice or accent. Apart from the presenters and some contributors, on the show there are accents from different parts of the world, especially Africa and the USA.

The show may lack depth from time to time. But this also depends on the expectations of the listener. WHYS is by no means a show to lecture on an event inviting just academics and other specialists to capture listeners without giving them a chance to state what they think. An in-depth show requires experts and a preparation taking weeks if not months. There are 30 minutes BBC programmes like “assignment” which must take the presenter at least a week to make search, interviews, editing etc.

But WHYS is a show in which listeners speak to one another about their personal views and experiences. It’s a show done live on the spur of the moment. Listeners and presenter can’t know what’s going to be told next by the contributor speaking live. What matters is that they stick to the subject.

WHYS remains a unique show as its content is made by and for the listeners. It is also an occasion to raise different questions which can have a follow-up on the blog. The fact that is podcast extensively shows its popularity. Just in the past three months, from November to January, the monthly downloads exceeded 143,000. As for January the downloads reached 41,959.

So Mr Ros even if you receive a thousand emails complaining about the show, there are more thousands who will come to its defence. I hope that it will last longer and longer. I hope it won’t be closed as it happened to its sister program Have Your Say , which has been shelved as an archive after being broadcast for more than 25 years first as weekly a radio show before becoming also broadcast on television and online.

Joking about Islam

Blasphemy is punishable by prison and even death in many Muslim countries. Muslims take their religion as the most sacred and consider it as a correction of previous religions, especially Christianity and Judaism.

In Morocco, there are plenty of jokes about Islam ranging from those concerning some Muslim priests who are portrayed as greedy and sexual abusers of women and children and ignorant of the religion they preach. There are jokes about Christians converting to Islam as there are jokes about the doomsday/ Judgment Day. There are jokes about the Islamists.

Last year two Moroccan journalists from Nichane magazine were brought to trial for publishing Moroccan jokes on religion for which WHYS dedicated a part of its show .

Muslims in general are very sensitive about the way they are portrayed in Western media, especially US media which they consider as monopolized by the Jewish lobby. Currently, Holland and Denmark are in the media because of the way Prophet Mohammed and the Koran are portrayed in their media.

For the Shiites, Caliph Ali and his two sons Hassan and Hussein are sacred. I don’t know what can happen to a Sunni if he jokes about them, let alone a non-Muslim.

Muslims learn from their birth the sacredness of their religion. A mosque is a sacred place that one should get into barefoot. They should invoke Allah in every daily gesture or activity as when eating and starting work. Different parts of the day should be started with one of the five daily prayers, the first starts at dawn and the last two or three hours after sunset. Some spend even one third of the night praying. So it’s no wonder if many Muslims get upset when they hear a joke about their religion, especially from someone who doesn’t hold their faith.

In private, many Muslims tell dirty jokes as well as jokes about their religion. But it is the suspicion of the intention of the other that makes them angrily responsive. In France there are plenty of jokes about the Arabs, especially the North Africans.

Refraining from telling jokes about the religion of the others seems impossible. It‘s the behaviour of some Muslims that sparks such jokes or perhaps the differing perceptions the others for whom Muslim beliefs don’t make sense. Muslims can’t stop jokes about them in countries where there is freedom of expression as in their country they can make jokes about Jews and Christians. The best Muslims can do is to ignore jokes about them, take them lightly or invent their own jokes about those who make jokes about them. Responding to joke with a joke can be a good way of making things not always look like a joke. It will make everyone think seriously how to make the best jokes.

Science and religion

Religion isn't an impediment to science. It's the interpretation of religion that makes science and religion irreconcilable. In the Middle Ages, the Church was seen as anti-science. Galileo Galilee had to spend the remaining of his life under house arrest for his scientific beliefs concerning among other things that Earth wasn't the centre of the universe. At the same time the Muslim world had a flourishing civilization in Baghdad and Andalusia.

Centuries later, the order was reversed with the Christian West saw its scientific advancement flourish while the Muslim world retracted from its glorious achievement.

It isn't religion per se that it is an impediment to progress, but it is the mentality of those who consider that religious teachings are supreme and there is no way to adapt them to modern times. The USA is one of the most technologically advanced countries and yet it is perceived as one in which religion has been a key factor since its foundation.

Religion concerns the spiritual side based on (unquestionable) beliefs. Science is about the material side based on evidence. Religion is concerned mainly about after-life, science about this life. There are those who succeed in reconciling the two. They find time for prayer and scientific research. There are those who find religion as a myth when it talks about the origin of creation or simply nonsense when it talks about morality.

There are people who can't live without religion and for them science is a means to be physically stable and comfortable to achieve spiritual fulfilment. For example, they need a car to go to mosque or church as they take a plane to go on a pilgrimage to a site far from their homes.

Spirituality and discoveries are what make humans special. They may sound at odds from time to time concerning for example the limits that should be set concerning among other thing human cloning or the use of contraceptives. But there are areas in which they can have common gaols which are fundamentally the happiness of the human race in a morally balanced environment.

Morocco a great exporter of immigrants par excellence

At least 10% of the Moroccans live abroad as immigrants, mainly ion Europe. They’re estimated to be 4 million. Morocco depends heavily on immigrants’ money transfer to their country. It’s currently above 2 billion dollar a year. Without it, its payment balance would suffer heavily. There are immigrants who choose to return to Morocco and to invest their savings as there are those who stay in the host countries and set up a project in Morocco run by their relatives or associates.

The good aspect of this is that they contribute to the creation of jobs, however their number is small. There are cities in Morocco which heavily depend on income from Moroccan migrants. There are families that can’t survive without money transfer from their kin abroad. That’s the good story.

The bad story is that there are many illegal immigrants who risk their lives trying to cross the Gibraltar Strait to get to Spain. Many are drowned or arrested either by Moroccan border guards or the Spanish guards on the other side. This trend has helped create immigration networks which reap vast sums of money from the aspirants. Morocco has also become a destination for Africans who use its proximity to Europe to cross to Spain, Ceuta, Mellilia or the Canary Islands. So Morocco has to guard it borders constantly, helping the reduction in illegal immigration but not its total eradication.

Morocco also through immigration lose many of its qualified graduates who choose to stay in Europe after finishing their studies or those who choose to leave it for a better future. There are now more than 200,000 qualified Moroccans who live abroad, not to count the unskilled workers. Canada is one of the countries that absorb well qualified Moroccan immigrants.

As such immigration remains a way out for the people and the state. It is a stabilizing factor for both sides although the cost of having the cream of its labour and academic force living abroad makes Morocco make small leaps when it should make giant ones.