News  #  1116
[ Arabic ][ Chinese ][ Deutsch ][ Espa˝ol ][ Franšais ][ Italiano ][ Korean ]

Dr Kaukab Siddique | Editor-in-Chief Rabi' al-Awwal 3, 1428/ March 23, 2007 #24

SOMALIA: New Islamic Uprising

March 21: Heavy fighting erupted when Ethiopian troops and U.S. funded Somalis entered the Islamic stronghold of south Mogadishu. The people fought back with weapons and drove out the invaders killing 9 Ethiopian troops and 7 Somali mercenaries and wounding 34. Islamic women helped the resistance.
[Source: Philadelphia Inquirer, 3.22, p.A8]

SUDAN: Censorship of Islamic Viewpoint on Darfur

During its huge gathering in Detroit, Michigan, the Nation of Islam brought in the President of Sudan, Omar al-Bashir, to talk to the audience by TV link. The audience, African American, were enabled to question the president of Sudan. Al-Bashir debunked the Zionist propaganda that "genocide" is going on in Darfur. Thousands watched and saw directly that Al-Bashir is not an "Arab" but a Black African.
[Dr. Akbar Muhammad emceed the appearance.]

Here is the shocker: The corporate-zionist media completely blocked the reporting on the TV link appearance of the Sudanese President.

PALESTINE: Mufti Warns: Al-Aqsa in Danger

The Mufti of Palestine, Ikrima Sabri, has warned that Israel is continuing to dig adjacent to the al-Aqsa masjid. The digging is now being done at night and away from media coverage. The Mufti warned the Muslim world: He said the time for talk is over. The Muslims must take action to stop Israel before it is too late. [March 16]

AFGHANISTAN: Taliban Advance into Badghis Province

March 19: Kabul: A martyrdom operator hit a U.S. embassy convoy only 2 miles from the U.S. embassy. All three cars in the convoy were destroyed. Karzai troops cordoned off the area and kept out the media. Casualties were not revealed. A taliban spokesman told Pakistani media that the martyr was from Khost province.
Also on 3.19, in a totally new development, an estimated 500 Taliban advanced into Badghis province on the Turkmenistan border, northeast of Herat.
The Taliban are holding on to Helmand province. NATO advance has stopped.

PAKISTAN: Backlash on Suspension of Chief Justice: +Jamaat ad-Da'wa Rallies in 53 Cities

General Musharraf's attempt to destroy Pakistan's judiciary seems to have backfired. For a whole week, lawyers have been demonstrating against the suspension of the Chief Justice. In Lahore things became serious when police beat up demonstrating lawyers wounding more than 100. Jamaate Islami is supporting the rule of law and holding rallies in support of the judiciary. Pakistan Peoples Party is preparing to step in if Musharraf is removed but till now the U.S. [including the Zionist media] have not shown signs of abandoning Musharraf.

On March 23, the anniversary of the Pakistan movement, Jamaate ad-Da'wa, which works for the liberation of Kashmir, held rallies in 53 cities. The biggest rally was in Karachi in which Hafiz Saeed said that defense of Pakistan's ideological frontiers is as important as defense of its physical frontiers.

USA's moves against Muslims have backfired. Remember that a Dubai shipping company lost big business in America when the Zionists identified it as "Arab" [and therefore Muslim]. USA says NO MUSLIMS IN SENSITIVE POSITIONS. Now in PAKISTAN, in Lahore, speaking to a huge Friday prayer crowd, Jamaate ad-Da'wa leader Hafiz al-Makki said that the appointment of Bhagwan Das [a Hindu judge] to replace Justice Choudhury, removed by Musharraf, would not be ideologically valid because Pakistan is an Islamic state. Non-Muslims, he said, can hold all positions, but not the top most sensitive positions.
[Bhagwan Das was in Lucknow, India, when Musharraf removed Choudhury.]
[March 23, from Abdullah Muntazer.]

In Southern Waziristan, [Kelosha area] Pakistani military in civilian clothes, with local tribesmen, successfully attacked Islamic fighters from Uzbekistan and their Pakistani supporters, The Pakistanis used artillery to kill the Uzbeks of whom many were killed, some say as high as 100. The local people later came out in support of the Islamic fighters and blocked the highway. The Pakistani military is trying to find and kill Tahir Yuldashev, a famous Islamic fighter from Uzbekistan, who is said to have taken refuge in the area.

Shaikh Omar Buried alive by Zionists & their Muslim Allies

Siraj Wahhaj Refuses to Reply: His buddy Imam Talib Issues Long Winded Defense.

Also, the role of Dr. Cheema, Al-Amoudi and Al-Haggag

By Kaukab Siddique, Ph.D

Associate Professor of English

Several times in New Trend, Siraj Wahhaj has been advised to apologize to the Muslim Ummah for helping the Zionists sentence Dr. Omar 'Abdel Rahman to life and 65 years. Siraj Wahhaj did not apologize. Now on March 18, I again asked him to do tawba, ask for Allah's forgiveness and apologize for helping to send one of the greatest Islamic scholars of our time to prison.

Again Siraj has not replied. This time, a well known Islamic da'i, Br. Shamim Siddiqi, who also lives in New York, wrote to Siraj and urged him to respond to New Trend. Again, no reply from Siraj. One wonders what Islamic reason Siraj can have for non-reply to a serious matter in which he helped the Zionists to convict the leader of the Islamic movement in Egypt and the philosopher of Jihad in our times.

Instead of Siraj, his long time friend, Imam Talib has issued a long email, most of which consists of praise for Siraj as an Islamic leader and for himself [Talib] also as an Islamic leader. It amounts to saying: How dare you question Siraj Wahhaj!

I wish to address the arguments Talib has used because it looks like we are not going to get a response from Siraj. Here are Talib's main points along with my rebuttal:

1. Talib quotes from the Qur'an to claim that criticism of Siraj Wahhaj is suspicion, backbiting and slander which are strictly forbidden in Islam:

"Avoid suspicion as much (as possible), for suspicion in some cases is a sin, and spy not on each other, nor speak ill of each other behind their backs. Would any of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? Nay, you would abhor it".
(Q 49:12)

Talib is completely off the mark. This verse has nothing to do with investigation and questioning of public personalities. Abul 'Ala Maudoodi points out the restriction on the application of this verse:

"The prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be on him, said that the worst transgression is to attack a Muslim's honor UNJUSTLY."
[Hadith, Sunan of Abu Dawood.]

Maudoodi emphasizes "unjustly" [baghair-e-haq in Arabic] and states: "the qualifying phrase 'unjustly' indicates that criticism in the way of justice is permitted." see Maudoodi's Tafhim-ul-Qur'an vol.5, p. 91, Sept. 1971 edition.

My own research shows that criticism of persons who misbehave and lie in public is not only permitted in Islam but is required. It comes under the Qur'anic command to "Command the good and reject the bad." [9:71.] Hadith has spelled it out in great detail. Two texts here will suffice:

Abu Huraira, r.a., narrates that the messenger of Allah, pbuh, said: It is enough for a man to be deemed a liar that he narrates uncritically whatever he has heard." [Hadith, Sahih Muslim.]

Umar ibn al-Khattab, r.a., narrates: Narrating anything, uncritically, just because one has heard it is enough for anyone to be a liar.

Imam Malik makes it clear that a person who narrates something just because he has heard it somewhere disqualifies him from being an Imam:

" Ibn Wahb says that Malik said to me: Understand this well: One who narrates, uncritically, whatever he hears, cannot escape [error] and he can never be an imam.' [Sahih Muslim]

I have noticed that the translators of Sahih Muslim into English have somehow omitted the entire preface to the book, muqaddamatul kitab, in which Imam Muslim himself, the eminent compiler of the second most important book of Hadith indicates that expression of suspicion and outright criticism of the public behavior of personalities claiming to be Islamic is not only theoretically permitted in Islam but was vigorously carried out to separate the false purveyors of religion from the authentic ones. Here are a couple of examples Imam Muslim gives:

"Ibn 'Awn narrates that Ibrahim [a scholar of Hadith] told us: Be careful of Mughira ibn Saeed and Abdur Raheem because both of them are great liars." [#50 in Sahih Muslim.]

"Abu Dawood al-'Amma came to us and said: Bara' bin Azib, r.a., and Zaid ibn Arqam, r.a., narrated to me. [both were companions of the Prophet, pbuh.] Qatada [who knew him] said: Abu Dawood is a liar. He never heard anything from them. He used to be a beggar when the plague of Jarif came." [#63 in Sahih Muslim.]

"Mughira says that Harith 'Awr narrated Hadith to me but Sh'abi swore to me that Harith Awr is one of the liars." [#45 in Sahih Muslim.]

Imam Muslim would not be including these personal comments in his great book of authentic Hadith if all criticism were considered backbiting. Obviously Talib has misunderstood or misused 49:12.

1. Now let us come to the discussion of the specific issue at hand. In his defense of Siraj Wahhaj, Talib ADMITS that Siraj did claim that the Shaikh taught the robbing of banks (!) but Talib makes excuses for Siraj. Talib says that the Shaikh did teach the robbing of banks. Siraj heard him say so; therefore he had to say so in court because he was under oath. Talib's LIE is caught when he claims that Siraj was surprised by the defense attorney's question and simply blurted out the truth. These are Talib's words:

"Undoubtedly that day in court, Imam Siraj was caught off-guard, even shocked, when he was questioned under oath by the defense lawyer of Shaikh Omar (May Allah preserve him), about the Shaikh's comments at Masjid At-Taqwa. Not knowing whether or not the prosecution was also aware of what took place that day (e.g. was Emad Salem the informant and agent provocateur there at that moment at Taqwa, with the tape running?), Imam Siraj chose to be truthful rather than perjure himself (which is not to say that he would do so anyway), or to give a more vague answer (as someone else might have done under similar circumstances). In fact, Imam Siraj told me that the lawyer said to him beforehand, "be truthful". He was. So what's the beef?"

Talib's statement shows that either he has not studied the case or his friend Siraj Wahhaj has mislead him. The story that the great scholar of Islam Shaikh Omar taught people to rob banks was started by an Egyptian named Abdo Haggag, who received in excess of $60,000 and a reducation of charges by the U.S. government. According to the Shaikh's attorney, Lynne Stewart, Haggag said "He heard the sheik on about 15 occasions and how he said at Farooq mosque, go blow some military bases or steal some bank. We asked ten people who have heard the sheik speak all over the metropolitan area if they ever heard him say such a thing. Never." (Stewart's summation of Abdel Rahman case, p. 18995). According to Stewart, "This man [Haggag] hated Sheik Omar." The defense, wanting to put the bank robbing tale to rest, called Siraj Wahhaj to the stand to stop the falsehood being spread against the Shaikh.

To the consternation of Abdeen Jabara, the defense attorney, who had called Siraj as a friendly witness, Siraj repeated the slander initiated by the government agent Haggag.

Let us consider:
1) Could the Shaikh have taught the robbing of banks?
2) Could Siraj Wahhaj have known what the Shaikh was teaching.

1) Note that the Shaikh is:
Hafiz-e-Sahih Bukhari.
Faqih and expert in Islamic Law.
Ph.D. from al-Azhar university
He is very strict in matters of law. For instance, he does not permit Muslims to eat meat, even while living in America, which has not been sacrificed in a Zabiha way. He has never in his life taken anything unlawfully or taught anyone to do so. Before his arrival in the U.S., he was repeatedly arrested and tried by the corrupt Egyptian government but was acquitted each time.
2) Could Siraj Wahhaj have known anything about the Shaikh's teachings? Siraj admitted in court that he knew very little about the Shaikh's teachings. He did not interview the Shaikh, he did not travel with the Shaikh, he did not live with the Shaikh. How could he have known anything? If on one occasion, let us suppose, as Siraj claims [according to Talib] that he heard the Shaikh saying something about robbing banks, it had to be through a translator. The Shaikh spoke Arabic and Siraj only understood him through a translator. On the basis of the Shaikh's life long record as a purist and strict follower of Sunnah, Siraj should have given him the benefit of the doubt.
3) What are the chances that Siraj deliberately lied to hand over the Shaikh to the government? The chances are very high. Why? Because Siraj has for a very LONG time been a central leader of the Shoora [central committee] of ISNA [Islamic Society of North America, so called]. Anyone who has seen the publications of ISNA or been to ISNA's Conventions would know that ISNA is a bootlicker of the Bush administration. ISNA organized a BLOC vote of the Muslims of America in support of Bush. Before that ISNA supported Clinton and its leaders repeatedly visited the White House. ISNA-CAIR have close relationship with the FBI. At the ISNA Convention Muslims were shocked to see that the FBI had a booth. At CAIR's conferences FBI are routinely invited as honored guests. Is it possible that as the leader of ISNA and member of its central body, Siraj would not be involved with or assenting to the government's oppression of the Muslims of America?
How much access did Siraj have to the power structure? He boasted to the Wall Street Journal after a paper referred to his name being placed on a list of "un-indicted co-conspirators": " I had dinner with Secretary of State Albright after the list" was published. [Wall Street Journal October 24, 2003] This is the same Madeleine Albright who was involved in the death of a million Iraqi children through sanctions.
In March 2001, Siraj Wahhaj helped the government convict "four Muslim extremists" in the bombing of two U.S. embassies in Africa. Siraj Wahhaj was not in Africa when the two bombings took place. He took the trouble to help the U.S. government. How did he know that the government version was correct? In any case, he testified against the bombers. [page 8, interview with WSJ] HAS HE TESTIFIED AGAINST THE U.S. BOMBING of MUSLIMS in IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN? Of course not.
After Imam Warith Deen Umar gave a juma' khutba at Siraj Wahhaj's Masjid Taqwa, the tape of the khutba reached the FBI and Imam Umar was questioned about it when he was arrested in a blatantly illegal manner. Talib tries to justify the tape thus: "In a recent e-mail, brother Kaukab inquired as to how a copy of a taped khutba given by brother Warith Deem Umar at Masjid At-Taqwa "got out" and into the hands of the police or government. When one understands the reality of COINTELPRO 21st CENTURY,the answer to such a question becomes obvious. "
I would say that Siraj is answerable for the tape. He knew that Imam Umar would give a powerful khutba but he took no steps to stop the taping or to control its distribution. Siraj's friends say he is very security conscious, then why the easy access given to the FBI?
Laughably, Talib goes to the extent of claiming that Siraj does not take funds for his Islamic services. Here is what Talib says: "Oh yes, here's another false accusation - that Imam Siraj gets a percentage, or has consistently gotten a percentage of the vast monies he has raised over the years for Islamic causes. Again, this can only be thought by someone who doesn't really know the Imam. He has been so self-less in this regard that he has been criticized by some of his peers for not looking out for himself. All have come to see his self-lessness as his own unique contribution of personal gifts and talent, to the work we commonly hold dear."
But here is what Siraj told the Wall Street Journal when he was interviewed [and has never retracted it]: "The mosque operates on an annual budget of about $200,000, the imam says..." "His own $44,000 salary comes out of that budget." It is supplemented by "$1,000 or $2,000 for giving speeches." So Br. Talib, go talk to your friend who takes $44,000 for leading prayers and giving khutbas. I know many Muslims who have never taken a cent for giving khutbas. I never have. If Siraj has to have the money, at least don't lie about it!
Finally a word about Imam Talib. There is something bogus about this man. After talking all all that Islam, he is SUPPORTING THE ZIONIST POSITION on DARFUR and condemning Sudan [He is very active in opposition to Sudan.] He has stabbed the Muslim community in the back on the Darfur issue.
One point of agreement: Yes, Talib is right. Siraj Wahhaj is not the only one who betrayed the great scholar of Islam. The Majlis-e-Shura of New York, to whom the Shaikh's supporters and friends cried out for support, refused point blank to support him, allowing the Zionists to do their worst in destroying the servant of Allah. Talib is right that a Sudanese named Siddig Ali joined the government and plea bargained on February 6, 1995. Emad, the key FBI witness, too, was a "Muslim."
The biggest blow was struck by the AMC led by Abdur Rahman Alamoudi and Dr. Mohammed Cheema. On January 18, 1994, the defense made a motion to remove Judge Mukasey from the Shaikh's case, owing to his pro-Zionist bias. On January 28, 1994, the American Muslim Council (AMC) of Cheema and Alamoudi joined hands with the American Jewish Congress (AJC) to file a JOINT amicus curiae brief in support of retaining Mukasey as presiding judge. Although the AMC later retracted their name from the amicus brief, claiming they had signed it by mistake, the deadline for recusal of the zionist judge had elapsed, and the damage was done. Today Alamoudi is in prison on unrelated charges, but Dr. Cheema retains high standing within ISNA-CAIR circles.

Obama: US Should Never Dictate What's Best for Israel
Ynet News (Israel), 7340,L-3371763,00.html

In a speech delivered before AIPAC lobbyists in Chicago, US Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama reveals strongly pro-Israel platform: US must preserve 'total commitment to unique defense relationship with Israel', work to stop Iran's nuclear program even if military action is necessary. "But in the end," he added, "we also know that we should never seek to dictate what is best for the Israelis and their security interests. No Israeli prime minister should ever feel dragged to or blocked from the negotiating table by the United States."

David Irving Speaks: The Lion has NOT Lost his Teeth!

An extremely abusive article appeared in the Hungarian media, reporting on the first trip by world famous historian David Irving after his release from an Austrian prison. Unable to face his massive documentation of unpalatable facts about the war, International Jewry tried to silence him by imprisoning him.

[ We have removed all the abusive commentary and kept only the news aspect.]

Budapest Times, March 19 [excerpted]

Irving, who will be 69 on 24 March, was in Hungary to promote his latest Hungarian-language publication, which deals with the 1945-1946 International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. He was also a guest of the nationalist Hungarian Justice and Life Party (MI╔P).
At the Szabˇ Dezs§ Theatre, he began with a joke about the similarities between his own country and Hungary, as both are being run by liars. This was enthusiastically received, as were all of his comments and gags. The English interpreter failed to turn up, so Irving spoke chiefly in fluent German. He said that while in prison, he wrote 2,000 pages for a book on Himmler, and 2,000 pages of his memoir. "I can recommend prison to writers," he quipped.
The audience consisted mostly of middle-aged men and women, with some pensioners and twenty-somethings mixed in. There were no stereotypical extreme right supporters: no skinheads, no swastikas. In Hungary, the far right parties, especially MI╔P, tend to draw crowds of moustachioed men in leather jerkins and stern-looking housewives.
After admitting that he has been in Hungary, where he has a number of "good, special friends", for the past month - "and no one knew I was here, I'm glad to say" - he went on to rail against what he sees as a growing curtailment of freedom of speech in Europe. "I have to behave myself," he said, bitterly. He added that the war was fought for freedom but now "some are more free than others".
He told his audience how the criticism of his work started when "things I uncovered during my research did not conform" to the opinions of conventional historians. He has no formal training as a historian, and used to hanker after acceptance from the academic community. He reportedly said during the Lipstadt libel case that drove the last nails into the coffin of his reputation that he has "no academic qualifications whatsoever".
Irving campaigns for what he calls "Real History" and is in demand as a speaker. Having no serious publishing deal, he has put his works on line for free download. His connection with Hungary goes back to the 1970s, when he was researching his 1981 book Uprising! about the 1956 revolution. That book has been criticised for implying that rebels were chiefly motivated by anti-Semitism and for ignoring events that took place in the years immediately preceding the 1956 revolution.
Irving said Austrian authorities would only allow him to see his twelve-year-old daughter for 15 minutes through a reinforced glass screen while in prison. The Hungarian audience applauded him warmly in sympathy. Many warned that imprisoning him would only heighten his importance to those sympathetic to his marginal, extremist views. To the small audience that came to hear him talk in a subterranean theatre in Budapest, people who like to think of themselves as victims living in a police state, David Irving was, at least for one night, a hero.

America Senses Danger of Rising Islamic Tide in Bangladesh. Read it carefully: This is from a rabidly anti-Islam Bangladeshi paper called Blitz.

Position to fight back radical Islamism

Sunita Paul writes for Blitz
Policy-makers in the US are increasingly worried about "the secular underpinnings of moderate Bangladesh being undermined by a culture of political violence and the rise of Islamic extremists".
With bilateral aid during the next fiscal up for discussion on the Hill, the Congressional Research Service has circulated a report for members of the House and Senate on 'Islamist Extremism in Bangladesh'.
The report comes at a time when the scheduled January 21 General Election in Bangladesh has been postponed indefinitely and Emergency imposed. The interim Government, now headed by economist Fakhruddin Ahmed, has begun to crack down on graft and Islamic extremism, which are often interlinked in Bangladesh, with the help of the newly-set up Anti-Corruption Commission headed by a former Army officer, Lt Gen Hasan Mashhud Chowdhury.
Both Ahmed and Chowdhury command greater credibility with the US and its European allies than the squabbling contenders for power - Sheikh Hasina Wajed of the Awami League and Begum Khaleda Zia of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party. The countrywide swoop on close associates of the two leaders and seizure of their property, cheered by Bangladeshis, is believed to have the blessings of the US.
The US and its allies, which were increasingly alarmed by the rise of Islamism in Bangladesh during Begum Zia's rule, had pinned their hopes on the Awami League to check extremism if it won the scheduled poll. At the last minute, that hope gave way to despair when Sheikh Hasina signed a 'memorandum of understanding' with the stridently fundamentalist Khelaphat-e-Majlish, promising rapid Islamisation of state policy if voted to power.
Sheikh Hasina's decision to nominate Majlish's Maulana Habibur Rehman, an ardent advocate of "Taliban-style rule in Bangladesh", and pro-Al Qaeda Mufti Shahidul Islam, an Afghan war veteran, sent alarm bells ringing in Dhaka's diplomatic circles and hastened the cancellation of election and imposition of Emergency. Rehman and Islam are intimately involved with the activities of the terrorist organization, Harkat-ul-Jihad Islami. The mufti has been arrested by the interim Government.
With Washington and its allies in European capitals showing little or no interest in pushing for an early election, Sheikh Hasina and Begum Zia have begun to panic. Recent clippings from Bangladeshi newspapers reported that Sheikh Hasina is now willing to give up some of her key demands -including mandatory voter ID cards -to settle for an early poll. The ongoing crackdown on corruption and Islamism, unless checked, could severely denude the support base of both leaders.
The Congressional report, underscoring the concern of "the US and Britain over the rise of Islamist influence and militancy in Bangladesh", points out that "the roughly even political split between the BNP and the AL has given small Islamist parties a political voice disproportionate with their overall electoral support".
Rather than allow Islamists to play a decisive role, the West seems to be interested in promoting apolitical individuals during the interregnum before election is held. This could explain Nobel peace laureate and Grameen Bank founder Muhammad Yunus' sudden decision to float a political party, Nagarik Shakti (Citizens Power) recently.
While US Ambassador to Bangladesh Patricia A Butenis, according to Bangladeshi media reports, is believed to have expressed her "position favoring an early election during meetings with the top two rival political leaders and with the advisers to the caretaker Government", there is no palpable 'push factor' at play. The lack of urgency to push for an early poll is partly explained by the perception, which is gaining ground in Washington, that the main contenders for power are in no position to fight back radical Islamism.
"Bangladesh's form of moderate Islam is increasingly under threat by radical elements while its political and economic development continues to be hampered by the forces of corruption, radicalism and partisan fighting," the report says in a clear indictment of both Sheikh Hasina and Begum Zia.
The report suggests that the US and its allies have begun to veer round to the view of security experts in India that Bangladesh has the potential to become a "centre of extremist Wahabi-oriented terrorism". It refers to former US State Department Coordinator for Counter-terrorism Cofer Black's assessment that Bangladesh has the potential to become a "platform for international terrorism". It says, "There is concern that Bangladesh might serve as a base of support to various militant groups."
At the same time, the US and its allies are not keen on a military takeover in Bangladesh, which has been ruled by the Army for 15 of the past 35 years. "Given its past use of Islam for legitimacy, a return to power by the military could create further opportunities for Islamists in Bangladesh," the report says. But, according to South Asian political analysts, generally Bangladesh Army is a secular force promoting peaceful co-existence of people from every religious belief. Moreover, in recent years, the armed forces have attained highest appreciation abroad by having prominent contributions in the US Peace corps. On the other hand, recent remarks by the Chief of Armed Forces in the country quite evidently shows that, the army has no intention in capturing power.
With both early poll and military takeover ruled out, the options narrow down to allowing the interim Government, supported by the Army, to stay in power for some time and work in tandem with apolitical civil society groups like the one headed by Yunus to strengthen them while the Anti-Corruption Commission cuts the Awami League and BNP to size. Huge dollops of Western aid, it is believed, will help this neutralizing process along.
Bangladesh, it seems, is set to become the new center point for yet another Western experiment at promoting secular democracy.

2007-03-23 Fri 19:18:05 cst