Salam Stock: Finally a Priceless Alternative

Through a community of artists and photographers, Salam Stock aims to bring to the world the digital views of the Muslim experience, as vociferated by its slogan. 

From categories ranging from people, nature, objects and nature to the very civilization of Islam today with its unique cultural practices, Salam Stock has nailed every inch. 

It has not only enabled the rest of the world to see the Muslim world differently, but also eased the process for those who were trying to counter the stereotypical image of Muslims. 

With over 60 contributors of photos and other files, one only has to ask what a place this earth would be if even a million people out of a billion started licensing their work for free use. 

Now anyone who has something to say can say it with style; he doesn't have to worry about his work being labeled for copyright infringement. There are no charges for using the content from this site.

However, you can have the gold for free, but the diamond always comes at a price. And therefore, Salam Stock has kept a stock of featured or premium images that only the enthusiasts and the professionals may use and so must pay a certain price for access.

Most of the images used in newspapers, magazines and other publications are in fact stock photos licensed to them by different media agencies. 

Certainly the growth of such web startups like Salam Stock will deal a lethal blow to these agencies who make it unduly hard and expensive to make the world know what it should be knowing. 

With intermediaries gone, the supply of quality media content to the end consumer will become increasingly streamlined in the future years to come. The only question is; how will these intermediaries react?

Yes, Muslim Women Do Speak in Public!

Not long ago, Muslim men tried extremely hard to change the stereotypical image of Islam coupled with bearded beasts who constantly imposed their will on the burkah-clad women. 

Guess what? They failed.  

The world needed live examples, not hollow words. It needed to see in order to believe. Somehow, the idea of Muslim men rising on to podiums and delivering lectures about the rights of women in Islam wasn't really well bought by the largely skeptical audiences of today's society.

It was time the Muslim women called it enough. They needed to speak for themselves now, and not let anyone else speak for them. It was time for Myriam Francois Cerrah to become a voice for modern Muslim women.

A British Muslim and a journalist, Myriam Francois Cerrah started the journey of her life with Hollywood and became a star very early in her childhood. Soon she left the fantasy world to embrace Islam. 

Now, besides being a prolific writer known for her work in the leading newspapers of the U.K., like the Guardian and the Huffington Post, she's also a staunch advocate of women's rights in Islam.

With an audience consisting of both men and women, Muslims and non-Muslims, her lectures and speeches have the ability to hit the bull's eye. 

Very few women master the art of public speaking and even fewer even learn it. What's amazing is that she has mastered it as a Muslim woman, understandably in a more a liberal society, but still a huge achievement.

Her lectures do not follow the crammed speeches of many Muslim male speakers who simply state the same old arguments that don't go down the throat of the audience any longer. 

She uses logic and evidence from the Qur'an and sayings of Prophet Muhammad pbuh to not only convince the non-Muslim audience that women really are equal to men in Islam, but also debunk many myths that the Muslim men have proliferated about the so-called responsibilities of Muslim women.

Participating in various talkshows and programs in the U.K., Myriam Francois Cerrah aims to give a complete picture of what it's really like to be a Muslim women; not submissive and shy, but bold and outspoken.

Talks with the Taliban?

The world is finally coming to a logical conclusion - it's time to talk.

A point reiterated by so many academicians, political scientists and security experts, is finally getting popular acceptance. 

Terrorism can only be defeated through a genuine show of love and concern, not by dropping bombs relentlessly. 

Academic Culture Today

Believe nothing, doubt everything. The way forward - absolute skepticism. That's what we are taught in  universities today.

It has become so inherent in Western educational systems today that it is now profusely adopted by other systems too. 

Those who criticize such an academic culture are labelled as being dogmatized. So there is no such thing as absolute truth according to the skeptics. Truth, can only be relative.
Without venturing into the tedious and perhaps the torturous world of philosophy, one can safely use common sense to realize the fault in such a thinking. 

Many of the debates in higher-ed today are divorced from any religious overtones, and those that do discuss a religious perspective are deliberately portrayed as not being worthy of consideration.

The ongoing debate between evolution and creationism is a quintessential example of a skewed academic culture. Evolution is not only the dominant narrative, but any objections to it are immediately labelled as pseudo-science.

People forget that there are scientists on both sides of the argument. There are evolutionist scientists and there are the creationist scientists. To discredit the work of the creationists, is to discredit science itself. 

It must not be forgotten that the evolutionists don't have a monopoly over science.

Indeed some of the world's most celebrated scientists were creationists. Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, Max Planck, Galileo, Louis Pasteur and Blaise Pascal all believed in God as the Creator of the Universe. It is extremely upsetting not to be informed so in almost all the biology textbooks today.

Today, while asking questions during lectures is highly appreciated and dogmatism discouraged, it is still made sure that the students don't ask any critical questions.

Whenever the discussion begins to be skewed towards 'how the universe could have created itself', 'how we came to be here', 'Is there a God'; it is promptly interrupted either by ridicule or posing it as a purely metaphysical domain that cannot be explored empirically.

Academic culture today therefore stresses 'scientism'. You cannot believe in something, unless or until it is proved scientifically. This leaves the spiritualists out of the domain and into the imaginary world of 'theories'.

International speakers like Adam Deen have been very influential in refuting the concept of 'scientism'. According to him, the very notion itself is self-defeating.

Richard Dawkins and Stephen Hawkings, probably the world's most renowned scientists of the present age, have been instrumental in putting forward the case for atheism and agnosticism respectively.

While Dawkins outrightly denies God, Hawkins still prefers to be skeptical and believes that while God did not create the universe, it is not proof enough to deny the existence of God.

Surely if such important figures are denouncing God, why should the layman believe in Him? That is exactly why more voices need to be heard.

But whatever the case, the reason why in science you are hardly taught about God, is because it is restricted to the realm of theology.

This is not the case for creationist science. That may well be the topic of another discussion. This is simply the case to make the academic culture bias-free.

Again, evolutionists are not the only scientists in the world. And neither do they have a monopoly over science. 

Advocates of freedom of expression, where are you when such an important right to express themselves is taken away from the creationist scientists?

The nature of our skewed academic culture today is also manifested in the way ethics is treated as a separate branch of study and where it does mingle with the fields of business and science, ethics is often treated as a dilemma that can be compromised in some instances.

Not to mention there are debates in the academic world of separating morality from academics. The proponents of the motion argue that forced morality induces dogmatism and so a person should be free to decide his morality for himself.

The opponents argue that morality is going to taught by someone, if not by the school, then by the peers. A person learns morality somehow from his surroundings. What's wrong in giving him a direction?

So are academics only supposed to produce flesh full of data, or a thinking brain that is able to interpret that data and draw meaningful conclusions?

Let's think. Let's not forget to ponder over what we read.

How to Boost your Creativity?

Creativity is not something that can be learnt. It is not a science that can be measured.  

It is but an art, that only comes to life when one keeps it simple. You are a soldier that has to find his way in the world of imagination.

Often a times, in design, people try to overdo  stuff. They try too hard to make things perfect.

Yellow Journalism in Pakistan

Every news is a breaking news in Pakistan. Even if that means that someone dropped their grocery on the road.

Geo TV started the trend while others followed suit. The media in Pakistan realized that in order to attract attention of the generally busy public, you had to make the news titles crisp and catchy.

This is not only the case in Pakistan, but also very well apparent in major news corporations in the U.S. and U.K. 

W.A.R - War Against Rape

Because Pakistan has a hodge-podge of mixed legal systems with a completely screwed justice system, it is always the women that suffer the brunt.

Many women in Pakistan are sentenced to imprisonment or even death because they were convicted of adultery. But in fact they were only raped.

When You Speak Up

Just when you decide to break the shackles, you are ostracized by the status quo. You better be a submissive prisoner, or risk being thrown out.

The quintessential debate on freedom of expression in contemporary times can never be so important. Who draws the lines?

As one of the most misused and misinterpreted of concepts, slogans either for or against freedom of expression have been frequently vociferated to justify ulterior motives. 

It works both ways. 

When you speak up against any injustice in the society, the conservatives rise to push you back by protesting how education has made you rebellious. They claim that you have had too much freedom of expression.

Then when a State TV channel bans a particular show or movie that insults some particular ethnic or religious group, the liberals rise to defend freedom of expression.

Where has it all gone wrong? Some see censorship as an absolutely abhorrent concept, others see it necessary for harmony in the society. Is there any chance of reconciliation between these two extremes?

The opponents of censorship postulate that media censorship allows the state to carry on with its notorious activities. The government of Myanmar had several innocent Rohingya Muslims killed within its territories but the world couldn't possibly know anything about the atrocities due to state censorship.

The Myanmar government, possibly under pressure from the activists, only recently ended this state censorship of the media and allowed the independent reporters to report freely in the media without their work having to pass through a government intermediary for approval.

So where does one draw the line? 

The complexity of the issue is such that it is still being debated vociferously by academicians and lawyers alike, with both sides having convincing arguments to back their stances.

Both the opposing parties agree that while freedom of speech is a right, freedom to insult must be prohibited. However, the definition of what constitutes 'freedom to insult' is still pretty ambiguous; hence, daily occurrences of such matters in secular or religious courts.

The proposed thinking should therefore be to not judge the action, but the intention behind it. And the intention to insult can only be punished, if it is repeated even after admonishment.

Playmancer Helps Heal the Fun Way

When it comes to latest developments in social technology, this one probably is the most exciting.

Using a simulation experience to exercise any disgruntled muscles, heal any broken joints, or improve mental health, Playmancer gives you all that in an ultimate fun experience.

Youth: Hope for the Naive?

Where the young see hope, the old see hopelessness. While the young are passionate about progress, the old are cynical of any change. 

When the young talk about bringing a revolution, the old rebut with their 'been there, done that - nothing is going to change' ideology. 

Beyond The Maternal Wall

We all have heard stories about workplace discrimination against working moms, but few actually bother to understand their plight.

If dads were given the same responsibility, they would probably freak out in a day or two.

How do you even manage to handle a netbook in one arm, a toddler in another?

Corporate Social Responsibility? What a Farce!

Those who know true capitalism know how ridiculous it is to even associate the word 'ethics' with it. 

And yet these corporations would spend billions trying to ensure to the world how 'ethical' they truly are.

Spending huge amounts on public relations campaigns and supporting social causes has
become a necessary part of an organization's strategy today.