Suppose the world does indeed become an Islamic one and suppose all people accepted Islam as a religion and suppose and to make the specific more specific suppose there are no "infidels" left to convert , can it be assumed then that the very nature of Islam will be peaceful ? No , it will NOT. The very laws and regulations of the religion itself is like an apple rotting from the inside and this very unsavoury apple is allowed to grow bigger and bigger by the people that sow its seeds. Women and people of an "inferior" economic and social standing rank are discriminated against , will this change once the world becomes Muslim , No I doubt it heavily and therefore Islam as a relgion cannot be assumed to be peaceful now and can be assumed to be a violent religion in 10 000 years time as it is now. The Muslims who practice it differ in their practice from one another , hence the interpretation of Islam like all other religions lie with the decision of the observer and yet the Koran is openly against Judaism and followers of it and Christianity and followers of it. The religion is the violent ursurper in this instance and the people who interpret it in accordance to this violence are harbingers of a very, very volatile religion inshort adding fuel to the fire. We will not be living in utopia as prophesised by a New Jerusalem or a heaven on earth where the lion and lamb lie idly next to one another , but living in fear and hatred as I assume that many will be forced to convert or accept death if our knees do not meet the earth in acceptance.
--- On Sat, 10/30/10, mechelsambergnew@aol.com <mechelsambergnew@aol.com> wrote:
From: mechelsambergnew@aol.com <mechelsambergnew@aol.com>
Subject: [Politics_CurrentEvents_Group] Somali schoolboy tells of how Islamists cut off his leg and hand/other news
To: oldiesandwavs@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, October 30, 2010, 5:13 PM
Juan Williams Fired by NPR For No Particular Reason (UPDATED)National Public Radio has fired the political analyst Juan Williams for comments he made about Muslims on Bill O'Reilly's Fox show. These are two of the controversial comments in question, according to The New York Times:
'I mean, look, Bill, I'm not a bigot. You know the kind of books I've written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."
And this, in reference to Faisal Shahzad, the Pakistani immigrant who attempted to blow up Times Square with a car bomb:
"He said the war with Muslims, America's war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don't think there's any way to get away from these facts."
The first quotation reflects the views, I'm guessing, of the vast majority of people who fly in this country (and in Europe and Asia and other parts of the world, as well). With some regularity, Muslim men associated with radical Islamist organizations have been trying to kill American civilians, here and abroad. A group of 19 Muslim men succeeded beyond their wildest dreams in their mission nine years ago. The majority of Muslims abhor terrorism, and Muslims are the disproportionate victims of Muslim terror, but the essential truth remains that most of the world's spectacular terrorism today -- thwarted and achieved -- is committed by Muslims. Juan Williams misunderstands one crucial fact: Muslim terrorists who are attempting to commit acts of terror seldom if ever dress in "Muslim garb"; they dress, for obvious tactical reasons, in a manner meant to help them blend in with surroundings. So Williams is wrong, I think, to be particularly suspicious of traditionally-dressed Muslims. But is he wrong to worry about Islamist terrorism? Of course not.
In reference to Faisal Shahzad, Williams is on firmer ground: Shahzad, and other Islamist terrorists, view themselves as engaged in a war with America, in which American cities are meant to be battlegrounds. It is hard to parse Williams's fragmentary comments, but he seems to be simply reporting on an established fact, one that dates back to Osama Bin Laden's original 1998 fatwa calling on Muslims to kill Americans wherever and whenever possible. It is not racist to acknowledge that in many different countries, and even within the United States, young Muslim men -- thousands, it would be fair to say -- spend their days thinking up ways to kill American civilians. What is bigoted is to suggest, as Bill O'Reilly and others have recently done, that all Muslims are potential terrorists, or that all Muslims are enemies of the West, or that Islam itself is a terrorist religion. We'll see, as this story unfolds, if Juan Williams made any uglier assertions than the ones attributed to him in the Times story. But David Folkenflik, NPR's media reporter, just tweeted that Williams actually criticized O'Reilly for making generalizations: "Williams also warned Fox host Bill O'Reilly agst blaming all Muslims for "extremists," saying Christians shouldn't be blamed for Tim McVeigh," Folkenflik wrote.
There's a larger trend here, the increasing tempo of journalist firings around the issues of Islam, terrorism,and Israel. There is Helen Thomas, of course, as well as Octavia Nasr, who was fired by CNN for praising the radical Shi'a Ayatollah Fadlallah. Helen Thomas is a ridiculous figure, and her comments touched on the Shoah, so I think my position on her firing remains, good riddance, but Nasr's firing seemed unjustified to me, and Williams's removal, so far at least, seems unjustified as well. More to come, undoubtedly.
UPDATE: A handful of Goldblog readers have written me to ask what I thought of the Rick Sanchez firing, which I didn't mention in the post above. I don't think Sanchez should have been fired, either. I think he's a schmuck, but being a schmuck in journalism isn't a firing offense. If it were.... Two Decades of the Rushdie Rules by Daniel Pipes
From a novel by Salman Rushdie published in 1989 to an American civil protest called " Everyone Draw Muhammad Day" in 2010, a familiar pattern has evolved. It begins when Westerners say or do something critical of Islam. Islamists respond with name-calling and outrage, demands for retraction, threats of lawsuits and violence, and actual violence. In turn, Westerners hem and haw, prevaricate, and finally fold. Along the way, each controversy prompts a debate focusing on the issue of free speech. I shall argue two points about this sequence. First, that the right of Westerners to discuss, criticize, and even ridicule Islam and Muslims has eroded over the years. Second, that free speech is a minor part of the problem; at stake is something much deeper â€" indeed, a defining question of our time: will Westerners maintain their own historic civilization in the face of assault by Islamists, or will they cede to Islamic culture and law and submit to a form of second-class citizenship?  The cover of the book that prompted the Rushdie Rules. | The era of Islamist uproar began abruptly on February 14, 1989, when Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Iran's supreme leader, watched on television as Pakistanis responded with violence to a new novel by Salman Rushdie, the famous writer of South Asian Muslim origins. His book's very title, The Satanic Verses, refers to the Koran and poses a direct challenge to Islamic sensibilities; its contents further exacerbate the problem. Outraged by what he considered Rushdie's blasphemous portrait of Islam, Khomeini issued an edict whose continued impact makes it worthy of quotation at length: I inform all zealous Muslims of the world that the author of the book entitled The Satanic Verses â€" which has been compiled, printed, and published in opposition to Islam, the Prophet, and the Koran â€" and all those involved in the publication who were aware of its contents, are sentenced to death. I call upon all zealous Muslims to execute them quickly, wherever they may be found, so that no one else will dare to insult the Muslim sanctities. God willing, whoever is killed on this path is a martyr. In addition, anyone who has access to the author of this book but does not possess the power to execute him should report him to the people so that he may be punished for his actions. This unprecedented edict â€" no head of government had ever called for the execution of a novelist living in another country â€" came out of the blue and surprised everyone, from Iranian government officials to Rushdie himself. No one had imagined that a magical realist novel, replete with people falling out of the sky and animals that talk, might incur the wrath of the ruler of Iran, a country to which Rushdie had few connections. The edict led to physical attacks on bookstores in Italy, Norway, and the United States and on translators of The Satanic Verses in Norway, Japan, and Turkey; in the last case, the translator and 36 others perished in an arson attack on a hotel. Other violence in Muslim-majority countries led to more than 20 fatalities, mostly in South Asia. Then, just as the furor wound down, in June 1989, Khomeini died; his death made the edict, sometimes inaccurately called a fatwa, immutable. The edict contains four important elements. First, by noting "opposition to Islam, the Prophet, and the Koran," Khomeini delineated the wide range of sacred topics that may not be treated disrespectfully without invoking a death sentence. Second, by targeting "all those involved in the publication who were aware of its contents," he declared war not just on the artist but also on an entire cultural infrastructure â€" including the thousands of employees of publishing houses, advertisers, distribution companies, and bookstores. Third, by ordering Rushdie's execution "so that no one else will dare to insult the Muslim sanctities," Khomeini made clear his purpose not only to punish one writer but also to prevent further instances of ridicule. Finally, by demanding that those unable to execute Rushdie "report him," Khomeini called on every Muslim worldwide to become part of an informal intelligence network dedicated to upholding Islamic sanctities. These four features together constitute what I call the Rushdie Rules. Two decades later, they remain very much in place. The edict set several precedents in the West. A foreign political leader successfully ignored conventional limits on state powers. A religious leader at will intervened directly, with little cost or resistance, in Western cultural affairs. And a Muslim leader established the precedent of applying an aspect of Islamic law, the Shari'a, in an overwhelmingly non-Muslim country. On this last point: Western states have, at times, served as Khomeini's effective agents. The government of Austria imposed a suspended prison sentence on a person who defied the Rushdie Rules, while the governments of France and Australia brought charges that could have meant jail time. Most strikingly, authorities in Canada, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Finland, and Israel actually jailed Rushdie-Rule trespassers. It takes effort to recall the innocent days before 1989, when Westerners freely spoke and wrote about Islam and related subjects. The Rushdie Rules had an immediate impact on Muslims living in the West, whose outbursts of insults and violence generated a newfound sense of power. From Sweden to New Zealand, Islamists responded with joy that, after centuries on the defensive, Muslims had found their voice and, from the belly of the beast, could challenge the West. Most of the violence that followed was of the indiscriminate sort, on the model of 9/11, Bali, Madrid, Beslan, and London, in which jihadists killed whoever happened to cross their paths; TheReligionOfPeace.com documents on average five indiscriminate Islamist terrorist attacks per day around the world. Less common but more intimidating is the violence that targets those who defy the Rushdie Rules. Let us limit examples of this phenomenon to one country, Denmark. In October 2004, an instructor at the Carsten Niebuhr Institute at the University of Copenhagen was kicked and hit by several strangers as he left the university. They informed him that he had read from the Koran, which as an infidel ( kafir) he had no right to do. In October 2005, Jyllands-Posten editor Flemming Rose was threatened for having commissioned cartoons depicting Muhammad. Two of the cartoonists had to go into hiding. One of them, Kurt Westergaard, subsequently narrowly escaped physical attack inside his home. In March 2006, Naser Khader, an anti-Islamist politician, was threatened by an Islamist who warned that if Khader became a government minister, he and his ministry would be blown up. The Danish experience is typical. According to the Wall Street Journal, "Across Europe, dozens of people are now in hiding or under police protection because of threats from Muslim extremists." Even Pope Benedict XVI received a flurry of threats in the aftermath of his quoting a Byzantine emperor on the subject of Islam. In the Netherlands alone, politicians reported 121 death threats against them in just one year. The November 2004 execution on an Amsterdam street of Theo van Gogh â€" a well known libertarian, filmmaker, talk show host, newspaper columnist, and mischief-maker who had ridiculed Islam â€" traumatized his country and led to a brief state of insurrection. Westerners generally perceive this violence as a challenge to their right to self-expression. But if freedom of speech is the battlefield, the greater war concerns the foundational principles of Western civilization. The recurrent pattern of Islamist uproar exists to achieve three goals â€" not always articulated â€" that go well beyond prohibiting criticism of Islam. A first goal consists of establishing a superior status for Islam. Khomeini's demands for the sacred trinity of "Islam, the Prophet, and the Koran" imply special privileges for one religion, an exclusion from the hurly-burly of the marketplace of ideas. Islam would benefit from unique rules unavailable to other religions. Jesus may be sacrilegiously lampooned in Monty Python's Life of Brian or Terry McNally's Corpus Christi, but, as one book's title puts it, " be careful with Muhammad!" This segues to a second goal â€" Muslim supremacy and Western inferiority. Islamists routinely say and do things more offensive to Westerners than anything Westerners do vis-à -vis Muslims. They openly despise Western culture; in the words of an Algerian Islamist, it's not a civilization, but a " syphilization." Their mainstream media publishes coarser, viler, and more violent cartoons than anything commissioned by Flemming Rose. They freely insult Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism. They murder Jews just for being Jews, like Daniel Pearl in Pakistan, Sébastian Sellam and Ilan Halimi in France, and Pamela Waechter and Ariel Sellouk in the United States. Whether because of fear or inattention, Westerners assent to an imbalance whereby Muslims may offend and attack while they themselves are shielded from any such indignities or pains. Should Westerners accept this imbalance, the dhimmi status will follow. This Islamic concept permits "people of the book," monotheists such as Christians and Jews, to continue to practice their religion under Muslim rule, subject to many restrictions. For its time, the dhimmi status offered certain benefits (until as recently as 1945, Jews generally had better lives in Islamdom than in Christendom), but it is intended to insult and humiliate non-Muslims, even as it exalts Muslims' superiority. Dhimmis pay additional taxes, may not join the military or the government, and suffer from encompassing legal disabilities. In some times and places, dhimmis could ride on a donkey but not on a horse, wore distinctive clothing, and an elderly dhimmi on the street was required to jump out of the way of a Muslim child. Elements of the dhimmi status have recently been applied in such varied places as Gaza, the West Bank, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Malaysia, and the Philippines. Clearly, Londonistan and beyond are also in their sights. In turn, re-establishing the dhimmi status is one step toward the Islamist's third and ultimate ambition, applying full Shari'a law. Closing down discussion of Islam paves the way toward this end. Conversely, retaining free speech about Islam represents a critical defense against the imposition of an Islamic order. Keeping our civilization requires open discussion of Islam. The Shari'a regulates both private and public life. The private dimension includes such intensely personal matters as bodily cleanliness, sexuality, childbearing, family relations, clothing, and diet. In the public realm, the Shari'a regulates social relations, commercial transactions, criminal penalties, the status of women and minorities, slavery, the identity of the ruler, the judiciary, taxation, and warfare. In brief, Islamic law includes everything from toilet etiquette to the conduct of warfare. Yet the Shari'a contradicts the deepest premises of Western civilization. The unequal relations of male and female, of Muslim and kafir, of owner and slave cannot be reconciled with equality of rights. The harem cannot be reconciled with a monogamous order. Islamic supremacism contradicts freedom of religion. A sovereign God cannot allow democracy. Islamists all concur on the goal of applying Islamic law globally. But they differ on whether to achieve this through violence (the preference of bin Laden), totalitarian rule (Khomeini), or by politically gaming the system (the Swiss intellectual Tariq Ramadan). However done, were Islamists to achieve a Shar'i order, they would effectively replace Western civilization with Islamic civilization. In American terms, allowing the Koran to trump the Constitution ends the United States as it has existed for more than two centuries.  The Muslim Council of Britain wishes to transform schools in the United Kingdom. | Accepting the Rushdie Rules, in other words, implies a process that culminates with full application of the Shari'a. Were Khomeini to have his way, those of us who value Western civilization could not argue against Shari'a. To understand the consequences of closing the debate about Islam, note what appears to be an innocuous report published in 2007 by the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), a leading Islamist institution in the United Kingdom. Titled Towards Greater Understanding, it advises British authorities on how to deal with Muslim students in taxpayer-funded schools. The MCB seeks to create an environment in schools in which Muslim children do not make "inappropriate assumptions" that "to progress in society they will have to compromise or give up aspects of who they are, and their religious beliefs and values." Toward this end, the MCB proposes a jaw-dropping list of changes that would fundamentally alter the nature of British schools, transforming them, in effect, into Saudi-like institutions. Some of its suggestions: - Prayers: Provide (1) extra "water cans or bottles" for washing before the prayers and (2) prayer facilities, ideally separate ones for boys and girls. Schools should also make available "a suitable external visitor, a teacher or an older pupil" to lead the communal Friday prayers and give the sermon.
- Toilets: Water available in water cans or bottles for cleansing purposes.
- Social customs: No pressure to shake hands with members of the opposite sex, whether students or teachers.
- Scheduling: Vacation days for all on the two major Muslim holidays, the Eids.
- Holiday celebrations: Involve non-Muslim students and their parents in Islamic holiday rituals. During Ramadan, for instance, all children, not just Muslim ones, should celebrate "the spirit and values of Ramadan through collective worship or assembly themes and communal Iftar (the breaking of the fast)."
- Ramadan: (1) No examinations during this month, "since the combination of preparing for exams and fasting may prove challenging for some pupils" and (2) no sex education, to respect strictures against sex during that month.
- Food: Provide halal meals. Permit students to eat with their right hands.
- Clothing: Accede to the wearing of hijabs and even jilbabs (a long outer garment down to the ankles). In swimming pools, Muslim children should wear modest swimwear (e.g., for girls, full leotards and leggings). Islamic amulets must be permitted.
- Beards: A right for male students.
- Sports: Sex-segregation where there is physical contact with other team players, as in basketball and football, or when exposed, as in swimming.
- Shower rooms: Separate stalls needed, so Muslims are not subject to the "profound indignity" of seeing or being seen in the nude.
- Music: Should be limited to "the human voice and non-tuneable percussion instruments such as drums."
- Dancing: Excluded, unless it is done in a single-sex environment and does not "involve sexual connotations and messages."
- Teacher and administrator training: Staff should undergo Islamic "awareness training" so that schools are "better informed and have greater and more accurate appreciation of their Muslim pupils' needs."
- Art: Exempt Muslim pupils from producing "three dimensional figurative imagery of humans."
- Religious instruction: Pictures of any prophets (including Jesus) prohibited.
- Language instruction: Arabic should be made available to all Muslim students.
- Islamic civilization: (1) Study the contribution of Muslims to Europe in history, art, mathematics, and science classes and (2) emphasize common aspects of European and Islamic heritage.
 One response to the Muslim Council of Britain booklet. | The imposition, explicit or implicit, of Rushdie Rules would render impossible any criticism of a program such as the MCB's. I could not write this article, Commentary could not publish it, and you could not read it. Overhauling schools is just one of a myriad of planned changes. Step by step, piece by piece, Islamists wish to trump the premises of Western life by infusing its education, cultural life, and institutions with a concurrent Islamic system that in time overrides secular institutions, until an Islamic order comes operationally into being. Some changes are already in place and extend to many aspects of life. A few pungent examples: Polygamous marriages are valid under certain circumstances in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, Australia, and the Canadian province of Ontario. Muslim women-only swimming sessions exist in municipal pools in Washington State. Women-only classes are being offered at Virginia Tech, a taxpayer-supported university. Women can have their drivers license photographs taken wearing hijabs in three U.S. states. If they work at IKEA or for the London police, women can wear branded hijabs provided by their employers. Piggybanks have been banned as a symbol of saving at two major British banks. "Any matter containing religious materials contrary to Islamic faith" may not be sent via the U.S. postal system to soldiers serving in the Middle East. Medical personnel may not eat or drink in the presence of Muslim patients or colleagues during the month of Ramadan in a Scottish hospital. The City of Boston sold public land at a discount price to build an Islamic institution.  IKEA, the furnishings store, provides branded hijabs for employees in Great Britain. | These steps, large and small, toward Islamization undermine Western values and mores. They are unacceptable: Muslims are entitled to equal rights and responsibilities but not to special privileges. They must fit into the existing order, not remake Western societies in the Islamist mold. Increasing freedom is welcome, regressing to the medieval norms of the Shari'a is not. In retrospect, responses to the Rushdie edict among intellectuals and politicians in 1989 were noteworthy for the support for the imperiled novelist, especially on the left. Leftist intellectuals were more likely to stand by him (Susan Sontag: "our integrity as a nation is as endangered by an attack on a writer as on an oil tanker") than were those on the right (Patrick Buchanan: "we should shove his blasphemous little novel out into the cold"). But times have changed: Paul Berman recently published a book, The Flight of the Intellectuals, that excoriates his fellow liberals for (as the dust jacket puts it) having "fumbled badly in their effort to grapple with Islamist ideas and violence." At the time, François Mitterrand, the socialist president of France, called the threat to Rushdie an "absolute evil." The Green Party in Germany sought to break all economic agreements with Iran. Hans-Dietrich Genscher, the German foreign minister, endorsed a European Union resolution supporting Rushdie as "a signal to assure the preservation of civilization and human values." The U.S. Senate unanimously passed a resolution that declared its commitment "to protect the right of any person to write, publish, sell, buy, and read books without fear of intimidation and violence" and condemned Khomeini's threat as "state-sponsored terrorism." Such governmental responses are inconceivable in 2010. For every exercise in free speech since 1989, such as the Danish Muhammad cartoons or the no-holds-barred studies of Islam published by Prometheus Books, uncountable legions of writers, publishers, and illustrators have shied away from expressing themselves. Two examples: Paramount Pictures replaced the Hamas-like terrorists of Tom Clancy's novel The Sum of All Fears with European neo-Nazis in its movie version of the story. And Yale University Press published a book on the Danish cartoon crisis without permitting the cartoons to be reproduced in the study. The reasoning of those who capitulate is as unexceptional as it is dismal: "This decision was based solely on concern for public safety"; "the safety and security of our customers and employees is a top priority"; "I feel real fear that someone will slit my throat"; "If I would have said what I actually think about Islam, I wouldn't be in this world for long"; and "'If this goes down badly, I'm writing my own death warrant." Changes since 1989 result mainly from the growth of three isms: multiculturalism, left-fascism, and Islamism. The multicultural impulse regards no way of life, belief system, or political philosophy better or worse than any other. Just as Italian and Japanese food are both delicious and filling, so environmentalism or Wicca offer equally valid alternatives to Judeo-Christian civilization. Why fight for one's way of life when it has no claim to superiority over any other? But perhaps one way is worse: if Western imperialism and the white race pollute the world, who wants Western civilization? A sizable movement of left-fascists, led by Hugo Chávez, sees Western power, which they call " Empire," as the world's main threat, with the United States and Israel viewed as the chief offenders. Islamism has grown spectacularly since 1989, becoming the most powerful form of radical utopianism, forming an alliance with the left, dominating civil societies, challenging many governments and taking over others, establishing a beachhead in the West, and smartly advancing its agenda in international institutions. The yin of Western weakness, in short, has met with the yang of Islamist assertion. Defenders of Western civilization must fight not just Islamists but also the multiculturalists who enable them and the leftists who ally with them. Mr. Pipes is director of the Middle East Forum, Taube distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University, and a columnist at National Review. He delivered an earlier version of this text on receiving an award from the Danish Free Speech Society.
Late Breaking Rushdie-Rule Developments by Daniel Pipes
October 1, 2010 (1) Pastor Terry Jones of Gainesville, Florida planned to burn hundreds of Korans on Sep. 11, but then submitted to pressure and canceled the bonfire. When his intention became international news, it lead, according to established pattern, to unrest and threats in the Muslim world and to at least 18 deaths (5 in Afghanistan, 13 in Kashmir). Under pressure from U.S. government officials, Jones relented and did not burn Korans. I argued in a column, " 'Rushdie Rules' Reach Florida," that the novelty and significance of this incident lies in the full weight of the U.S. government, from Barack Obama on down, bearing down on Jones. In distinct contrast to Margaret Thatcher in 1989, when the Rushdie affair broke, or Anders Fogh Rasmussen in 2006, when the Danish cartoon affair occurred, American authorities took upon themselves the role of protectors of Islam and executors of the Shari'a. In so doing, they extended the Rushdie Rules to the United States.  Mollie Norris' cartoon that ended her normal life and began her "ghost" existence. | (2) Mollie Norris, the cartoonist who devised "Everyone Draw Muhammad Day" went into hiding. As her editor, Mark D. Fefer, at the Seattle Weekly put it, You may have noticed that Molly Norris' comic is not in the paper this week. That's because there is no more Molly. The gifted artist is alive and well, thankfully. But on the insistence of top security specialists at the FBI, she is, as they put it, "going ghost": moving, changing her name, and essentially wiping away her identity. She will no longer be publishing cartoons in our paper or in City Arts magazine, where she has been a regular contributor. She is, in effect, being put into a witness-protection programâ€"except, as she notes, without the government picking up the tab. It's all because of the appalling fatwa issued against her this summer, following her infamous "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" cartoon. That "appalling fatwa" was posted in July by Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen who lives in Yemen. He wrote: A cartoonist out of Seattle, Washington, named Molly Norris started the 'Everybody Draw Mohammed Day'. This snowball rolled out from between her evil fingers. She should be taken as a prime target of assassination along with others who participated in her campaign. This campaign is not a practice of freedom of speech, but is a nationwide mass movement of Americans joining their European counterparts in going out of their way to offend Muslims worldwide. They are expressing their hatred of the Messenger of Islam through ridicule Surely, you say, American journalists and media mogulsâ€"always staunch defenders of the First Amendmentâ€"are proclaiming outrage and rallying round this young woman? On the contrary. The media have largely been silent about her nightmarish plight. When the Washington Examiner, an on-line newspaper in Washington, D.C., asked the American Society of News Editors for a statement about Norris, none was forthcoming. Ditto for the Society of Professional Journalists. This, despite the fact that the editors group's mission statement extols "the First Amendment at home and free speech around the world," while the journalists claim to stand for "the perpetuation of the free press as the cornerstone of our nation and liberty." This incident suggests that Awlaki has the power to turn any American's life upside down by simply uttering a threat against him. This is no longer a battle of giants, Khomeini v. Rushdie, but of pygmies, Awlaki v. Norris. One can imagine the threats proliferating so that any person critical of "Islam, the Prophet, and the Koran" will be in danger of having to "go ghost." It's time for free-speech advocates to take a page from the abortion rights movement's playbook. In the 1990s, abortion providers faced the same sort of intimidation tactics and did not succumb. Instead, they lobbied for a federal law making it a crime to threaten people exercising reproductive rights and permitting victims to sue for damages. The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, or FACE, passed in 1994 by solid bipartisan margins. A similar act is needed to cover threats against free-speech rights. A federal law would do two things. First, it would deter violent tactics, by focusing national attention on the problem and invoking the formidable enforcement apparatus of the federal government. Second, its civil damages provision would empower victims of intimidation to act as private attorneys general to defend their rights. … Existing state laws prohibiting intimidation are inadequate. On the criminal side, the heightened standard of proof deters prosecutors from investing scarce resources. Explicit grounds for a civil action do not always exist, and damages can be difficult to quantify. By contrast, the FACE Act, which provides the model for the proposed legislation, lets victims opt for preset damages. Feared Muslim sect delivers murderous threats in Nigeria By Njadvara Musa Associated Press / October 22, 2010 MAIDUGURI, Nigeria â€" A Muslim sect suspected of a series of targeted killings and a massive prison break has issued new threats in northern Nigeria, this time invoking Al Qaeda’s North Africa branch.
Posters by the Boko Haram sect appeared at key intersections in the city of Maiduguri this week, bearing the name of Imam Abubakar Shekau, the group’s de facto leader. The two top corners of the posters bore a symbol of an opened Koran, flanked on each side by Kalashnikov assault rifles and a flag in the middle â€" mirroring the logo of Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.
The message warned the public against assisting the police or going near soldiers guarding the town at night. The message also acknowledged a recent reward offered for information leading to the arrest of suspected sect members.
“Any Muslim that goes against the establishment of Sharia will be attacked and killed,’’ the message read.
Boko Haram â€" which means “Western education is sacrilege’’ in the local Hausa language â€" has campaigned for the implementation of strict Sharia law. Nigeria, a nation of 150 million people, is divided between the Christian-dominated south and the Muslim north. A dozen states across Nigeria’s north have Sharia law in place, though the area remains under the control of secular state governments.
The poster said it was from Shekau on behalf of “The Group of the People of Sunnah, Call and Jihad.’’
Police officers began removing the signs late Wednesday.
“These publications and messages on Boko Haram activities are seditious and could jeopardize our investigations into the four-month serial attacks and killings in the state,’’ Borno state police commissioner Mohammed Abubakar said yesterday.
Though the Al Qaeda branch has distributed messages by Boko Haram before, it is unclear whether the two groups have operational links. The two groups also come from two different ethnic groups in northern Nigeria.
Boko Haram sect members attacked police stations and homes in July 2009, sparking a violent police and military crackdown. In total, 700 people died.
Christian Pastor in Iran Faces Death Penalty in One Week for 'Thought Crime.'
Believers in the West Urged to Inform Friendly Governments of Pastor's Impending Death Sentence
By Michael Ireland
Chief Correspondent, ASSIST News Service TEHRAN, IRAN (ANS) -- A Christian pastor in Iran who was sentenced to death for what is being called a "thought crime" has less than a week to live.  | | Pastor Youcef and 'Sister Tina' Nadarkhani (Courtesy Present Truth Ministries). | Advocates for Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani told ASSIST News that while all of the other prisoners arrested in a wide-ranging crackdown by Iranian authorities have been released, Nadarkhani still faces the death penalty on October 24. Present Truth Ministries (www.presenttruthmn.com ) says all detained recently by the Iranian Government, except for Youcef and one other pastor who is awaiting one more judge to pass the death sentence, are now free from prison. The ministry says Youcef only has one more week before his sentence is due to be carried out. Sunday, October 24 is the date of his impending execution. However, the ministry did have good news to share about Youcef's wife, known affectionately as "Sister Tina." Writing on the ministry webblog, Jason DeMars says: "We have received news that Monday, October 11, Fatemeh Pasandideh (Youcef Nadarkhani's wife) has been released! A second trial was held and she was acquitted and released and is now home with her two children! What a wonderful thing to be thankful for on Thanksgiving!! (in Canada)." DeMars had just received a report that Fatemeh Pasandideh (Sister Tina), the wife of pastor Youcef Nadarkhani was released as of early last week. DeMars writes: "Previously, she had been convicted and sentenced to life in prison for the 'thought crime' of converting to Christianity." He continued: "The attorney that was hired appealed the verdict and a new trial was held. She was acquitted of the crime and released. She has now been reunited with her two boys. Give thanks to God our Father and our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ for his grace and mercy in answering our prayers and allowing sister Tina to be released." DeMars asks Chrstians in the West to continue to pray for Sister Tina's husband, Youcef Nadarkhani and to approach government authorities to lobby for Youcef's acquittal and release. "He is still in prison and has been sentenced to death. We have a week to spread the word to others to pray and to inform government officials of the violation of his human rights." DeMars said Nadarkhani was convicted of converting to Christianity and bringing others to faith in Christ. DeMars added: "Pray also for pastor Behrouz Sadegh-Khandjani, who is being held in prison in Shiraz, Iran and has been given limited contact with his family and his attorney. "It is reported that he is being held in the area of the prison that holds HIV and Hepatitis patients and that he is quite ill. He will not talk about it to those with whom he speaks, however, he barely has a voice. Please pray for them and ask God to deliver them from the hands of their enemies." According to webblogs following the case, Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani, responsible for one of the largest Protestant communities in Iran, "has been" sentenced to death for apostasy Saturday, October 2 by the 11th Chamber of The Assize Court of the province of Gilan. This information was given to his lawyer Nasser Sarbaz. It was communicated to him verbally, news sources said. Pastor Youcef was transferred after the verdict from Lakan prison to another place of detention, which is under the direction of the Political Police of The Islamic Republic. Pastor Youcef was arrested in October 2009 for protesting against a decision of the Corporation to impose Koranic teaching to his son. Iran adheres, at least officially, to the Charter of Human Rights and the Iranian Constitution recognizes the right to religious freedom and according to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad there is no thought crimes law in Iran. The petition asks Iranian Presidemt Ahmadinejad to release Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani, Fatemeh Pasandideh, Fatemeh Kojouri Tork ( the wife of Pastor Behrouz), Mehdi and Mina Kerbalayi and their mother, Nahid, Brother Afshin, Sister Mahsa, brother mid, Sister Nasrin, Pastor Behnam Irani, Pastor Behrouz Sadegh immediately, without charges. Concerned believers are being asked to contact the German government and human rights associations to let them know about this problem. Www.worthynews.com reports Pastor Youcef faces execution after two judges agreed to make him "liable to capital punishment," as part of a crackdown on the growing Protestant church movement in the Islamic nation. Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani was detained in June along with wife Fatemeh Pasandideh in the city of Rasht in northwestern Iran because of their Christian activities, Iranian Christians said. A senior pastor of the Church of Iran movement, which includes house churches across the country, told Worthy News that judges had "already signed" an Islamic order that would potentially allow a death sentence for Nadarkhani, pending further investigations. The pastor usually speaks on condition of anonymity amid security concerns. News of the execution overshadowed joy over the release of two Church of Iran Christians, a man and a woman, and the expected release this week on bail of two other members, who the movement only identified as "brothers Mehdi and Afshin." MORE DETENTIONS Worthynews.com reports they were part of a group of eight Church of Iran members detained June 18, according to the senior pastor. One of them, a pastor's wife identified as Fatemeh Kojouri Tork, remained in Tehran's notorious Evin prison Tuesday, July 13, while her husband, Behrouz Sadegh Khanjani, was kept in isolation in a security prison in the southwestern city of Shiraz, the Christian leader said. "We still do not hear from Reverend Behrouz Khanjani..." Iranian Christians have also expressed concerns about reports of other detentions, including last month's capture of Pastor Behnam Irani in the city of Karaj, 20 kilometers (12.5 miles) west of Tehran. Several believers have allegedly been mistreated, sources said. "We have learned that information that [security forces] have been using substances to extract confessions from Christians," the senior pastor said. Iranian officials have not commented on the cases, the sources stated. AUTHORITIES CONCERNED Wortheynews.com also says religious rights groups have linked the crackdown to concern among authorities about growing churches and the spread of Christianity among Muslims in the country. Church sources say the number of Christians in Iran has grown from 500 known believers in 1979 to at least 100,000 today. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has reportedly said the government needed to halt the growing movement of house churches across Iran. Under Iran's strict interpretation of Islam, "apostasy" -- or the formal renunciation of religion -- is punishable by death. One Christian persecution watchdog reports that over the last decade, the Iranian church has grown significantly and estimates now say the total number of Christians in Iran to be about 450,000. The group said the government has intentionally sought to stop this growth and make it impossible for Christians to practice their religion. Although churches connected to minority groups, such as Armenians and Assyrians, are allowed to teach their own people in their own language, it is forbidden to minister to people with a Muslim background (speaking Farsi). Please pray: 1. Remember believers such as Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani, Fatemeh Kojouri Tork, Behrouz Sadegh Khanjani and Pastor Behnam who are in prison because of their faith. Ask God to strengthen them physically, emotionally and spiritually, so that they will be a 'light in the darkness.' 2. Thank God that despite the horrendous circumstances for Christians in Iran and the opposition they face from the government, the church is growing. 3. Pray for the house church movement, which is responsible for much of the growth of the church. Ask God to protect its leaders and give them wisdom and understanding. The death sentence imposed on Pastor Youcef is expected to be carried out by October 24. Please feel free to forward this email to members of your church, friends and family.
| ** Michael Ireland, Chief Correspondent of ANS, is an international British freelance journalist who was formerly a reporter with a London (United Kingdom) newspaper and has been a frequent contributor to UCB Europe, a British Christian radio station. While in the UK, Michael traveled to Canada and the United States, Albania,Yugoslavia, Holland, Germany,and Czechoslovakia. He has reported for ANS from Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Israel, Jordan, China,and Russia. Michael's volunteer involvement with ASSIST News Service is a sponsored ministry department -- 'Michael Ireland Media Missionary' (MIMM) -- of A.C.T. International of P.O.Box 1649, Brentwood, TN 37024-1649,at: Artists in Christian Testimony (A.C.T.) International where you can donate online to support his stated mission of 'Truth Through Christian Journalism.' If you have a news or feature story idea for Michael, please contact him at: ANS Chief Reporter |  Honor hit man?
Hired hit men for honor. "Brothers arrested over string of recent 'honor killings' in Lod: Police suspect the two were hired hit men in a string of so-called 'honor killings,' offering their services to locals who wanted to attack their family members," by Yaniv Kubovich and Noah Kosharek in Haaretz, October 21 (thanks to all who sent this in):
Two brothers from Ramle, Ramadan and Khaled Musrati, were arrested yesterday on suspicion of involvement in four recent murders in the city of Lod.
Police suspect the two were hired hit men in a string of so-called "honor killings," offering their services to locals who wanted to attack their family members. The investigation has reportedly linked them to the killings of Jawdat Jasus, Amal Halili, Sami Hijazi and Abir Abu Ktifan.
Police now believe that the four victims were actually two couples, with Jawdat Jasus linked to Amal Khalili, and Sami Hijazi, married with two children, linked to divorced Abir Abu Ktifan.
The two brothers are suspected of various offenses, including conspiring to kill Jawdat Jasus, illegal possession of firearms and possession of drugs not for personal consumption. A police source told Haaretz the connection to the three other killings is still being investigated....
Three of Abu Ktifan's relatives - her husband Ghazi, his brother Abdelmati and his nephew Hassan - were also arrested. They are suspected of involvement in the murder of both alleged lovers.
All three of them were remanded until Sunday yesterday. A police officer told the court the three deny any involvement in the murders, but "confirm certain things that are at the heart of the matter, and which have been detailed for the court."... Salah Misbah will tackle racism in his autobiography TUNIS (Amal al-Helali)
Tunisian singer Salah Misbah said he suffers from discrimination in his country because of his dark skin color and announced his plans to tackle the issue of racism in his upcoming autobiography.
Scripts written for Tunisian cinema and T.V. hardly have place for dark-skinned characters and actors, Salah Misbah told a Tunisian radio station.
 Racial discrimination does not stop at street harassment but also extends to the entertainment industry in Tunisia  Tunisian singer Salah Misbah
“The only exception is historical works. Otherwise, they are absolutely excluded from the entire society.â€
Misbah said he intended to tackle the issue of racial discrimination in his autobiography which he will call “No brother, no friend… not as Arabs, not as Muslims.â€
Misbah, who was once sentenced to jail for assaulting an officer in the Tunisian army, said he is constantly harassed for his skin color and extremely improper racial slurs are hurled at him, the most common of which is calling him “a dirty slave.â€
“Racial discrimination does not stop at street harassment, but also extends to the entertainment industry in Tunisia.â€
Misbah recounted a story when he held a part at his house to celebrate the release of his second album and one of the journalists recommended that he changes his skin color like Michael Jackson.
“He said that this is how I can guarantee having fans in the Arab world.â€
Discrimination based on skin color in Tunisia, Misbah explained, traces its origins to the countryside.
“People in the countryside are not exposed enough and haven’t had the chance to mingle with other colors and other cultures unlike in big cities.â€
However, he added, this ideology has now extended beyond the countryside.
“There is now a trend that tries to instill the idea of racism in people’s minds and encourages them to discriminate between people based on the color of their skin.â€
(Translated from the Arabic by Sonia Farid)
Palestinian Researcher: The Islamists' Claims to Promote an Islamic Culture Are Hollow
|
| Palestinian researcher Dr. Khaled Al-Hroub, of Cambridge University, recently published an article titled "The Hamas Enterprise and the Talibanization of Gaza,"[1] in which he wrote that the claims of the Islamist movements regarding their promotion of an "Islamic culture" are utterly hollow, and that their actions in implementing the Islamic shari'a are detrimental to Islamic unity and women's rights. Following are excerpts from the article: "The Actions of the Islamic [Movements] So Far Do Not Attest to any True Accomplishment in Terms of Implementing a 'Cultural Enterprise' of any Sort" "A popular expression that recurs in the Islamists' writings and theories is 'the Islamic cultural enterprise,' [which is presented] as one of the fundamental [goals] that contemporary Islamic movements aspire to achieve. This expression belongs to a comprehensive lexicon that abounds with expressions enticing to the general public, the best example being [the Muslim Brotherhood's slogan] 'Islam is the solution.' But these are hollow expressions that are only outwardly compelling. "The Islamists must not be judged by the sayings and slogans they demand [to implement] â€" democracy allows them to voice any slogan or call. What is more important and accurate is to judge them according to their actions on the ground. "The actions of the Islamic [movements] so far do not attest to any true accomplishment in terms of implementing a 'cultural enterprise' of any sort, or even to any [progress] in that direction. There are plenty of attempts for us to examine: Islamist movements have risen to power in [various] parts of the world, such as Iran, Afghanistan, and several autonomies in Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Gaza Strip. There are [also] Islamist movements that have gained influence on lawmaking, [whether] directly (through parliament) or indirectly (by [influencing] the public and media), as seen in many Arab and Islamic states (Kuwait, Yemen, Jordan, Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan, and Algeria)... "Sudan is headed towards division and schism under 'Islamic rule,' because the fervor to place restrictions on society surpasses [the fervor for] national unity... The theoreticians of 'the Islamic cultural enterprise' [in Sudan] preferred war and dividing the land [to peace and unity] â€" and with the claim of implementing the shari'a they are persecuting women who wear pants in Khartoum and laying the foundations for an expanding stratum of exploiters and 'fat cats' from among the Islamists in the private sector... "Anyone who visits the Gaza Strip can easily see that Hamas, in its stupidity, has followed the example of Islamists in several [other] places by devoting itself to secondary and marginal matters. The basest of these is the persecution of women at the expense of far more pressing and important matters. [In fact] even if [these matters] are dealt with, it still would not [justify] what they are forcing upon women, which must be opposed in any place and at any time..." "The Islamization that Has Been Forced upon the Gaza Strip... Is an Egregious Deed" "The Islamization that has been forced upon the Gaza Strip â€" the suppression of social, cultural, and press freedoms that do not suit Hamas's view[s] â€" is an egregious deed that must be opposed. It is the reenactment, under a religious guise, of the experience of [other] totalitarian regimes and dictatorships. "Under a barbaric and inhumane siege, which constitutes a crime against humanity to which all of the world powers are party, Hamas is exacerbating the people's suffering by investigating casual meetings [between friends] and attempting to change 100-year-old habits. [Customs of] marriage, dating, and gender-mixing are a matter of social, circumstantial, and status-related conventions, in which the law should not interfere. When married or engaged couples are forced to carry marriage licenses in their pockets, out of fear that some armed [policeman] might burst in on one of their dates and inquire into [the nature of] their relationship, it is a frightening deterioration in the Palestinians' values and lifestyle, which certainly did not exist [previously]. When a [policeman on a] motorcycle pursues a family car in which a woman is sitting beside a man whose arm is resting on the back of her seat, arrests [the family] and takes them to the police [station] â€" it is a stupid patrol [that is detrimental] to people's lives. When a brother and sister are arrested on their way home at night because they do not have identification cards on them to prove 'their legitimate relationship,' it is expressly Taliban-like behavior. "We are talking about a long series of deeds, from the indirect coercion of female students to wear a hijab (without administrative memos or written orders), to the persecution [of girls] in restaurants and cafes, to the ban on smoking hookahs and 'searches' for immoral pictures on private computers. "The Taliban's technical capabilities did not enable it to [do] what Hamas's technical capabilities enable it [to do] today. Hamas â€" which developed a lot of these capabilities, with impressive ingenuity, in the field of rocket production and in order to use modern technology to prevent infiltration [of Gaza] by Israel â€" is now exploiting many of these [capabilities] in order to place restrictions on Gazan society and monitor it with repulsive patriarchalism. Why does Hamas do this when it is clear that it will [ultimately] harm it and provoke criticism against it? How can one understand their preference to enforce Islamization rather than rehabilitate Gaza after the war...? "There are two [possible] explanations for the Taliban-like steps Hamas has taken in the social sphere. The first is the erosion in Hamas of the moderate thinking characteristic of the Muslim Brotherhood, which has been replaced by radical Salafist thinking... "The second [explanation] comprises several issues. The conditions of siege and confrontation to which the movement was subjected following its victory in the elections; the ongoing hiatus in 'resistance' after the barbaric Israeli war; the emergence of corruption among some of its senior officials; and the favoritism that accompanies any rise to power â€" all these led to increased criticism towards Hamas from the smaller and more extremist groups [in Gaza], as well as from [extremists] within [the movement itself], who accused it of straying from 'Islamic practice by failing to establish the regime of Allah on earth.' [Hamas] responded by intensifying the Islamization of society, in order to prove that it is more Islamist [than its critics] and more committed to its [Islamist] slogans."
[1] Al-Ayyam (PA), October 11, 2010 | Austin Dacey and Colin Koproske December 10, 2008, marks the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. There is much to celebrate but even more to fight for, as Islamic states have repeatedly resisted human-rights inspections and proposed Islam-specific rights schemes that place unacceptable limits on fundamental human freedoms. The Center for Inquiry has issued a position paper, authored by Austin Dacey and Colin Koproske, calling on the United Nations and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) worldwide to respond to this movement. The following is an excerpt from that paper, titled "Religion and Human Rights: Defending Universality at the United Nations." To read this paper in its entirety, visit the Center for Inquiry at the United Nations homepage at www.centerforinquiry.net/UN. —The Editors Sixty years have passed since the issuance of the world's first and greatest statement in favor of universal human rights, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR). Today both the document and the institution put in place to protect its ideals (what has, since 2006, been called the U.N. Human Rights Council) are threatened more than ever. There is now an alternative human rights system, infused with religious language and layered with exceptions, omissions, and caveats. The movement toward "Islamic human rights" (IHR) has been successfully presented to the Human Rights Council (HRC) as merely "complementary" to the UDHR. The meager opposition to this subversion is suppressed, as "religious matters" are increasingly forbidden from discussion in U.N. chambers. Western powers have either failed to stand up for the UDHR or have withdrawn from the human rights discussion altogether. In what follows, we will trace the development of these worrying trends. The Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights (UIDHR) provides a useful starting point. While opposition to the UDHR under the banner of conservative Islam was widespread even at its inception in 1948, this 1981 document was the first official political statement of Islamic exceptionalism in the realm of human rights. The UIDHR was written by representatives from Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and various other Muslim states under the auspices of the London-based Islamic Council, a private organization affiliated with the conservative Muslim World League. It drew little criticism as it was rife with ambiguous, equivocal language and had an English translation that masked many of its overt religious references. In its original Arabic, the UIDHR often requires Islamic considerations that limit rather than enshrine human rights as outlined by international norms. For example, compare the English and Arabic versions of Article 12, which outlines the "Right to Freedom of Belief, Thought and Speech"*: English: "Every person has the right to express his thoughts and beliefs so long as he remains within the limits prescribed by the Law. No one, however, is entitled to disseminate falsehood or to circulate reports that may outrage public decency, or to indulge in slander, innuendo, or to cast defamatory aspersions on other persons." Arabic: "Everyone may think, believe and express his ideas and beliefs without interference or opposition from anyone as long as he obeys the limits [hudud] set by the shari'ah. It is not permitted to spread falsehood [al-batil] or disseminate that which involves encouraging abomination [al-fahisha] or forsaking the Islamic community [takhdhil li'l-umma]." The English version reads as an innocuous restatement of well-established norms, embracing rights to speech and generally accepted limits involving slander and libel. In its original Arabic, however, this article demonstrates a clear religious test for speech: one may not express oneself beyond the limits set by Islamic law, and one must not "encourage abomination" or "forsake" the Islamic community. The concepts of "falsehood," "encouraging abomination," and "forsaking" are unclear and dangerously open to potential abuse by religious courts. It is apparent that it is not citizens who are protected, but the umma (Muslim community). The rubric of judgment is not public law, not universal standards of justice, but shari'ah (Islamic law). In 1984, Iran's U.N. representative, Said Raja'i Khorasani, said the following amid allegations of human rights violations: [Iran] recognized no authority . . . apart from Islamic law . . . conventions, declarations and resolutions or decisions of international organizations, which were contrary to Islam, had no validity in the Islamic Republic of Iran. . . . The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which represented secular understanding of the Judaeo-Christian tradition, could not be implemented by Muslims and did not accord with the system of values recognized by the Islamic Republic of Iran; [t]his country would therefore not hesitate to violate its provisions. In the complete version of this document, we critique the argument, expressed by Khorasani, that human rights do not apply beyond the borders of Judeo-Christian societies. At this point, it suffices to say that by the mid-1980s, a strong current of Islamic exceptionalism had established staunch opposition to the UDHR and the U.N. human rights agenda. The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), created in 1969, would take up the mantle of Islamic solidarity established by the Islamic Council and Muslim World League; it is now the preeminent Islamic institution, with fifty-seven member states and a powerful presence in global politics. Even with such a large membership, the OIC has a clear political posture; tasked with "liberating Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa from Zionist occupation," strengthening "Islamic solidarity among Member States," coordinating action to "safeguard the Holy Places," and supporting "the struggle of all Muslim people to safeguard their dignity, independence and national rights," this organization is built for conflict with the non-Muslim world. The OIC's most significant entrance onto the field of human rights came in 1990, with the adoption of the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam. This document, affirmed by all fifty-seven member states and considered canon to this day, used much of the language from the 1981 UIDHR, this time making it clear (even in English) that "All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic shari'ah," and that "The Islamic shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration" (Articles 24 and 25). In place of religious freedom, its authors issue what is in effect a prohibition against conversion from Islam: "Islam is the religion of unspoiled nature. It is prohibited to exercise any form of compulsion on man or to exploit his poverty or ignorance in order to convert him to another religion or to atheism." Article 22, the Cairo Declaration's "free speech" provision, clearly suggests that it is Islam, not the individual, that deserves protection: (a)Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the shari'ah. (b)Everyone shall have the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic shari'ah. (c)Information is a vital necessity to society. It may not be exploited or misused in such a way as may violate sanctities and the dignity of Prophets, undermine moral and ethical values or disintegrate, corrupt or harm society or weaken its faith. Surprisingly, the Cairo Declaration has received little attention from the international community. One reason for this lack of coverage is the continued suppression of criticism by members of the OIC, in conjunction with the so-called nonaligned states and powerful allies in the cause of weakening the U.N.'s human rights apparatus: Russia, China, and Cuba. Every year since 1999, a member of the OIC has proposed a resolution in the Human Rights Council (formerly the Human Rights Commission) called "Combating the Defamation of Religions," which decries the outbreak of "Islamophobia" across the globe and calls for greater efforts to curb defamation, discrimination, or hate speech against Muslims or the Islamic faith. This resolution has passed each year with nearly unanimous support. On June 16, 2008, the Islamic lobby showed its power when representatives from Egypt and Pakistan silenced David Littman, who was speaking for the World Union for Progressive Judaism, during a statement to the Human Rights Council about women's rights and shari'ah law. Within twenty-two seconds, Littman was interrupted by a point of order from the Egyptian representative—the first of sixteen such interruptions. The representative and his Pakistani ally insisted that "Islam will not be crucified in this Council" and argued that any discussion of Islamic shari'ah was irrelevant and inappropriate. After a forty-minute break, the presiding Council president, Doru Romulus Costea of Romania, announced that "The Council is not prepared to discuss religious questions and we don't have to do so. Declarations must avoid judgments or evaluation about religion." Such a statement institutes nothing less than a blasphemy taboo in the Human Rights Council. Members and speakers are effectively prohibited from speaking about the issuance of fatwas, the stoning of women for adultery, or the execution of apostates as it relates to Islam. A month later, at a U.S. congressional panel on religious freedom, former U.S. State Department human rights expert Susan Bunn Livingstone suggested that proponents of such limitations on criticism "are trying to internationalize the concept of blasphemy. . . . They are using this discourse of 'defamation' to carve out any attention we would bring to a country. Abstractions like states and ideologies are seen as more important than individuals. This is a moral failure." The silencing of Littman's criticism takes place against a background of broader cultural clashes. From death threats and assassinations to lawsuits and op-eds, aggressive defenders of Islam have sought retribution against those who would disparage its name. What has the Human Rights Council done about this? On March 28, 2008, the Council actually undermined its own ability to protect free speech. An amendment to a resolution on freedom of expression (passed 27 to 15 with three abstentions) now requires the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression to "report on instances in which the abuse of the right of freedom of expression constitutes an act of racial or religious discrimination." Instead of traveling the world in search of instances in which free speech is unjustly limited, the Rapporteur will now do just the opposite, in an effort to police "abusive" speech. The protector has become the oppressor. The Council failed to note that Muslims (and all citizens) are already protected against discrimination and defamatory speech by Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and reasonable limits to free speech were already referred to in the preamble to the March 28 resolution. Further, concerns for freedom of religion are already reported by the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Religion. With such protections already in place, this amendment's only effect is the undermining of what little ability the HRC has to safeguard free expression around the world. While the HRC has been preoccupied with the fight against "Islamophobia," OIC member states have avoided confrontation by touting the compatibility of the Cairo Declaration and the UDHR, explaining that it simply adapts the letter and intent of the UDHR to the unique cultural context of Islam. In 2002, Mary Robinson, the High Commissioner for Human Rights at the U.N., appeased Islamic states in a speech to the OIC in which she confirmed that "No one can deny that at its core Islam is entirely consonant with the principles of fundamental human rights, including human dignity, tolerance, solidarity and equality. . . . And no one can deny the acceptance of the universality of human rights by Islamic States." Unfortunately, an effort to point out the differences between Islamic and universal human rights by Roy Brown of the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) was silenced by Islamic representatives in predictable fashion. Even as Islamic states continually tout the prominence and exceptional quality of Islam in their conceptions of human rights, they successfully sell their commitment to universality and muffle the cries of critics all over the world. The United States, which has held only observer status in the HRC, quietly withdrew from the Council entirely on June 6, 2008. A State Department spokesman complained that the Council "has really turned into a forum that seems to be almost solely focused on bashing Israel" and announced that the United States would only engage with the Council on matters of national security or compelling national interest. While we share the administration's concern about the notable politicization of the HRC, its complete disengagement from the world's most influential human rights body is worrying. Why is this activity in the HRC so important? The yearly resolutions "Combating the Defamation of Religion" and the wider movement toward a formal Islamic charter on both international law and human rights may have a wider impact than many expect. International covenants and agreements are intended to be introduced into the municipal law of the states that endorse them. The UDHR, for example, has been a positive force primarily by virtue of its influence on the human rights norms of countless states since its inception. The new norms governing the discussion and defamation of religion, as well as the unraveling of human rights universality, could very well have the same effect. The debate between universal and culturally specific human rights schemes is not merely a intellectual hobby of academics and diplomats—it has real consequences in state government. Just as members of the OIC have pushed through legal loopholes in order to escape international human rights standards, many Islamic states (and the Western multiculturalists who support their cultural sovereignty) have used relativist rhetoric as a foundation for marrying religion and politics in the Islamic world. This concession to Islamist philosophy, we argue, is not a show of cultural respect or the most prudent first step on the bridge to modernity. Instead, explicitly "Islamic" states—like "Islamic rights"—fail to respect the basic necessities of conscience and expression and tend to suppress dissent. In light of the creation of rival Islamic conceptions of human rights and the widespread suppression of dissent within Islamic states and throughout the international community, the Center for Inquiry calls for immediate action. The universal human rights agreed to by all United Nations members need philosophical and political defense, and the tools established to maintain those rights (i.e., the Human Rights Council and related offices) need reexamination. In April 2009, the U.N. will host a world conference on racism. Under the guise of protecting racial minorities, this event is likely to produce additional resolutions limiting free speech where it treads on cultural or religious sensitivities. A draft declaration written in Abuja, Nigeria, in preparation for the 2009 conference calls upon states to avoid "inflexibly clinging to free speech in defiance of the sensitivities existing in a society and with absolute disregard for religious feelings." Like many of the HRC "racism" and "religious freedom" resolutions passed in recent years, this declaration focuses primarily on "Islamophobia," seeking to paint all critical discussion of Islam, Islamic states, or Islamic organizations as racist and potentially violent. The trend of enshrining special protection for Islam (or more accurately, protection for rulers of Islamic states and their particular interpretations of Islam) is now pervasive. Will those who value human rights and free expression gather the will to resist this trend? Austin Dacey is a representative to the United Nations for the Center for Inquiry and an associate editor at Free Inquiry. He is the author of The Secular Conscience (Prometheus Books, 2008). Colin Koproske is completing his master's degree in political theory at Oxford University. He is founder and past president of the University of Southern California Secular Alliance and interned at the CFI/Transnational in 2006.
| | Report links Mubarak to 'severe persecution' of Christians by Muslims WASHINGTON â€" The Egyptian regime of President Hosni Mubarak is said to be inciting the Muslim majority against the nation's Christians.
A leading Middle East analyst asserted that the Mubarak regime has facilitated what he termed "severe persecution" by Muslims of Egypt's Christian minority. Raymond Ibrahim, who lectures at the National Defense Intelligence College, said Egypt has transformed into the spearhead of the Muslim Brotherhood, which has intimidated the nation's estimated eight million Coptic Christians.
"Indeed, recent events indicate that the Mubarak regime is intentionally inciting Egypt's Muslims against the Copts," Ibrahim said.
|
In an analysis for the Hudson Institute, Ibrahim, also associate director of the Middle East Forum, said Egypt, amid its crackdown on the pro-democracy opposition, has reverted to what he termed medieval persecution of the Copts. He cited accusations by prominent Egyptian scholars that Copts were aligned with Israel and stockpiling weapons and ammunition in monasteries.
"Israel is in the heart of the Coptic cause, preparing to wage war against Muslims," Mohammed Al Awa, a prominent cleric and former head of the International Union for Muslim Scholars, told A-Jazeera satellite television on Sept. 15.
Al Awa warned that Muslims must halt the rise of the Coptic Church in Egypt. The Muslim cleric charged that Egyptian security forces have been banned from searching for weapons in churches and monasteries.
At the same time, Muslim leaders have been accusing the Coptic Church of abducting Christians who had converted to Islam and forcing them to return to their native faith. The accusations have sparked at least 10 mass demonstrations in Egypt since September 2010, with organizers vowing to massacre Copts.
"The Copts find themselves again in a period of severe persecution," Ibrahim said. "And there appears to be no one to stop it â€" not even those most accountable: America's friend and ally, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and his government."
Ibrahim's assertions have echoed those of Copts and their co-religionists in the United States. Coptic activists in Washington have been lobbying Congress to protest the Muslim backlash in Egypt and pressure Mubarak to protect the Christian community. Egypt receives $1.3 billion in annual U.S. military aid.
Instead, Egyptian state-financed clerics have joined the anti-Coptic campaign. On Sept. 26, the state-controlled Al Azhar seminary, the seat of Sunni Islam, threatened Egypt's Coptics with removal of their citizenship.
A leading Egyptian human rights activist, Magdi Khalil, has asserted that Egyptian security officers were participating in anti-Copt demonstrations. Khalil said the Copts were paying the price of the demise of the 82-year-old Mubarak and the ensuing political vacuum.
"As history teaches, whenever a majority group casts all its woes onto a minority group, great tragedy often follows," Ibrahim said. | Explosion rips through Hamas military compound in Gaza Several women and children wounded; Hamas did not give cause for explosion and IDF says it wasn't involved, signaling blast was an accident.By The Associated Press Tags: Israel news Gaza Hamas Israel Defense Forces
The Hamas militant group says an explosion has ripped through one of its military compounds in the Gaza Strip and wounded a number of women and children.
In a statement, Hamas did not give a cause for the blast. The Israel Defense Forces says it wasn't involved, signaling that the explosion was an accident.
 | Hamas militants take part in a rally marking the 10th anniversary of the second uprising and against peace talks with Israel in the Central Gaza Strip October 10, 2010. | | Photo by: Reuters | The explosion shook through a densely crowded neighborhood in the southern Gaza town of Rafah. Hamas says five children, three women and five other people were lightly wounded, all by flying glass shrapnel.
The Gaza-based Palestinian Center for Human Rights has repeatedly called on the territory's Hamas rulers not to store explosive materials in civilian areas.
It said a similar explosion in August wounded 58 people and destroyed seven houses.
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/indonesia-seeks-jail-for-muslim-cleric-20101021-16vwz.html Indonesia seeks jail for Muslim cleric October 21, 2010 AFP Indonesian prosecutors on Thursday demanded a wealthy Muslim cleric who took a 12-year-old girl as his unofficial wife be convicted of sexually abusing a child and given six years in prison.
Pujiono Cahyo Widiyanto, 45, from the Central Java city of Semarang, sparked nationwide controversy over his decision to marry poor village girl Lutfiana Ulfa.
"We recommend six years prison for him. He has been proven legally as being sexually abusive towards women, especially towards this underage person," prosecutor Suningsih, who goes by one name, said.
"As the owner of a religious school he doesn't set a good example," she said.
Widiyanto, also known as Sheikh Puji, married Ulfa in August 2008.
He had defended the unofficial marriage, his second, saying that the girl had reached puberty.
Widiyanto previously said his actions were acceptable under Islam but critics said he should abide by state law, which sets 16 as the minimum age for marriage.
Indonesian law has harsh penalties for pedophilia, but unregistered and therefore unofficial marriages between older men and under-age girls are common in rural areas. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/20/somali-islamists-schoolboy-amputation-ordeal Somali schoolboy tells of how Islamists cut off his leg and hand Ismael Khalif Abdulle's story provides rare insight into regime of al-Shabaab rebels trying to overthrow Somali government  -
 Ismael Khalif Abdulle, who was "cross amputated" by the Somali Islamist group al-Shabaab. Photograph: Sven Torfinn for the Guardian He has learned to button his shirt using only his left hand, to roll his sleeve with his teeth, to balance on his right foot in the shower. He cannot forgive, though he is desperate to forget. But at night his dreams betray him.
This is how it happened, Abdulle told the Guardian. He was a prisoner in an insurgents' house in Mogadishu, lying on his side, one hand chained to his ankles. He was 17, with fluff on his cheeks and unspeakable fear in his heart. Three other young men were with him â€" Jalylani, Ali, Abduqadir.
A guard, from the Islamist group al-Shabaab, which is trying to overthrow the Somali government, gripped his shoulder. "Ismael Khalif Abdulle, come with me."
A convoy of rebel battlewagons cleared the way through the battered streets. Reaching Masalah, an old military barracks, he saw his mother through the car window and shouted to her. The guard slapped his face. "Today is not the day to call your mother," he said.
Ordered to witness the punishment of the "spies and bandits" or face lashes themselves, the entire neighbourhood had assembled. Also watching were some of the Shabaab's top leaders â€" Sheikh Mukhtar Robow, the Somali-Swede Fuad Shangole, and Abu Mansoor Al-Amriki, the American who recruits and finances foreign fighters.
In the middle of the stony parade ground were about 20 militiamen in green fatigues. Their faces were masked. They were wearing surgical gloves. On the ground was a single plastic mattress.
Abdulle says he was made to lie down. His left hand was tied to his right ankle with a thick rope, leaving the other limbs free for what was to come. Rubber surgical tubing bit into his right biceps â€" a tourniquet. One rebel grabbed his hand, another his forearm. They pulled in opposite directions as a piece of plastic was laid over his wrist.
"Please make it quick," he pleaded.
A heavily built man drew a large wooden-handled knife normally used to slaughter camels. The knife descended.
Though their horror was far from over, Abdulle and the three other young men "cross amputated" â€" a process of cutting off a hand and foot from opposite sides of the body â€" by the Shabaab on 26 June 2009, eventually escaped from their Islamist captors, and managed to cross to the government-controlled side of the city. Abdulle recently managed to flee Somalia, and reach a safehouse in Nairobi, Kenya, where he gave this interview.
His story offers a rare insight into how the Shabaab is using its extreme interpretation of Islam to establish order through fear â€" and to find recruits. Abdulle was born in 1992, a year after the last effective government fell, and warlords took over the country. As far as it is possible to have a normal upbringing amid the anarchy, he did. Once Shabaab forces took full control of the Bakara market area where he lived, in early 2009, security immediately improved â€" but at a huge cost to personal and social freedoms.
"If you saw a man on the street with a beard, you would be worried," Abdulle said. "But if someone was smoking a cigarette, you felt OK."
The Shabaab recruited some of Abdulle's classmates to fight the government, but he insists that he never had anything to do with the Islamists until the day he was abducted.
He said he was not told of his alleged crime until the 26th day of detention, when he and the three other young men were taken to the old military parade ground for the first time. Pistols and mobile phones, allegedly stolen by the accused, were shown to the crowd. Abdulle insists on his innocence to this day, but he was given no chance to speak. Dahir Ga'may, a Shabaab "judge", merely announced his verdict.
"He said we were guilty as spies and thieves, and that under sharia law a hand and a foot must be amputated."
Three days later, the sentence was carried out. Abdulle passed out while his hand was being cut off. After he regained consciousness he heard the screams as the amputations continued. It was several hours before they were given pain relief, and two days before their wounds were stitched.
A fortnight later, Shangole, the Shabaab commander, arrived at the house where they were detained. "He said they had made a mistake. Our legs were cut too low down, and needed to be shortened. He took the end of my leg, and put three fingers above the stump and said: 'That's where it should be.'"
This time, the surgical tool was a plumber's saw. As before, there were no painkillers.
On a separate visit, Ga'may told them that as they were disabled they should become suicide attackers. Sensing a chance to escape, they agreed. A taxi called by a relative picked them up, and took them to the justice ministry. The Red Crescent Society in Mogadishu fitted him with an artificial limb.
His passage out of Mogadishu was risky, as the Shabaab were still after him. In Nairobi, he's keeping a low profile, as the insurgents have supporters in the city. His hope now is to gain asylum and help to deal with the physical and mental scars.
Troubled youth Harakat al-Shabaab al-Mujahideen, better known as al-Shabaab â€" "the youth" â€" first rose to prominence in 2006 as the armed wing of a sharia court alliance that forced warlords from the Somali capital, Mogadishu. After invading Ethiopian troops routed the nascent Islamist movement later that year, the Shabaab re-emerged as a guerilla army, initially winning the sympathy of many Somalis â€" and attracting hundreds of foreign jihadis. Once Ethiopia withdrew in January 2009, Shabaab militants took over large partsmuch of south and central Somalia, training their guns on government forces and African Union peacekeepers. It quickly established security, and delivered social services, but the group's extreme interpretation of Islam and its targeting of civilians has alienated most Somalis. Its "clerics" have banned everything from films to mobile ringtones, school bells and gold fillings. Public amputations of hands and feet are now common, and stonings and beheadings have been reported. Shabaab suicide bombers have killed dozens of innocent people.
TV Footage Shows Taliban-Pakistan Stoning of a Woman and Execution of a Man and a Woman
|
| | The UAE-owned Alaan TV recently broadcast footage showing the stoning of a woman. The anchor stressed in the report that the footage was exclusive, filmed by a member of Taliban-Pakistan with his cell-phone and smuggled out of the Orakzai region of Pakistan. The woman's crime: she was accused of being seen with a man. This was followed by exclusive footage, also from Orakzai, of the summary execution of a man and woman by gunshot. The anchor said: "We do not know why this killing took place, but it is clear that the two victims did not stand any trial, and the decision to shoot them was taken on the spur of the moment." The Stoning of a Woman Presenter: "Alaan TV has obtained exclusive footage, filmed by means of a cell-phone, which shows a woman being stoned to death. The footage is of very poor quality, but it is important because it shows, for the first time, a woman being stoned. According to our sources, the stoning was carried out by Taliban-Pakistan, in the tribal area under its control, near the Afghan border." Reporter: "The story begins with the gathering of men. Some of them are wearing turbans, and some are carrying weapons. They all belong to Taliban-Pakistan in the Orakzai region, which is close to the border with Afghanistan. These are Taliban members who are getting ready to stone a woman, who is sitting motionless on the ground. You can see her in the center of the picture. She was accused by Taliban-Pakistan of being seen with a man. "The footage was filmed by a member of Taliban-Pakistan who was on the scene, using his cell-phone. This is the reason that the images are not clear. Alaan TV has used its sources to smuggle the footage out of Orakzai. This footage is unique, because Taliban-Pakistan tries to conceal such images. They know that images of the stoning of a woman should not be made public, because they might cause a rift between the movement and its supporters. As far as we know, this is the first time anyone has obtained footage of a woman being stoned by Taliban-Pakistan. "The stoning begins. After the woman is struck by one stone, two stones, and many more, her body begins to shudder. The men continue to pelt stones at her, and soon, her body becomes motionless. [...]" The Execution of a Couple Presenter: "Alaan TV has obtained another exclusive video from Orakzai, which is under the control of Taliban-Pakistan. The picture is clearer than in the stoning video. This cell-phone footage can be described as a summary execution. We have removed some of the images because of the graphic nature." Reporter: "At first, one might think this is a normal case of a few men and a woman arguing. But all of a sudden, shouting is heard. From the translation it transpires that the men are shouting: 'Out of the way, kill her, off with her head.' They are handcuffing a man, and the woman seems to be arguing with them. Then she moves away, and gunshots are heard. The woman falls to the ground. The video clearly shows that she was shot in the back. It is also clear the handcuffed man has been shot as well. One of the men shouts: 'The man is still alive,' and another man showers the victim with bullets. Another man finishes the woman off, after apparently seeing her move. "We do not know why this killing took place, but it is clear that the two victims did not stand any trial, and the decision to shoot them was taken on the spur of the moment. This crime took place in the Orakzai region, where Taliban-Pakistan has established their so-called Emirate |
www.dailyalert.org
Subscribe | | DAILY ALERT | Friday,
October 29, 2010 |
In-Depth Issues: MI6 Chief: Spying Crucial to Stop Iran Nuclear Drive ( AFP) Diplomacy is not enough to stop Iran developing nuclear weapons, Britain's MI6 intelligence chief John Sawers said Thursday, urging an "intelligence-led" approach to stopping nuclear proliferation. Sawers said that intelligence activities were responsible for Iran's admission last year of a second enrichment plant, which in turn led to tougher diplomatic pressure. "Stopping nuclear proliferation cannot be addressed purely by conventional diplomacy. We need intelligence-led operations to make it more difficult for countries like Iran to develop nuclear weapons."
D.C. Metro Bomb Suspect Aimed to Be Martyr ( AP-Washington Times) Pakistani-born Farooque Ahmed was trying to enlist in a terrorist organization in January and was eager to become a martyr when he unknowingly walked into an FBI sting and began plotting to kill commuters on the nation's second-busiest subway system, according to court documents. Ahmed, 34, of Ashburn, Va., was caught on FBI surveillance video discussing his firearm, martial-arts and knife skills and offering to teach those deadly tactics to others, according to an FBI affidavit unsealed Thursday.
How the PA Views Security - Khaled Abu Toameh ( Jerusalem Post) Gen. Adnan Damiri, spokesman for the Fatah-dominated Palestinian security forces in the West Bank, said Wednesday that Hamas was exploiting security coordination between the PA and Israel to discredit the Palestinian leadership in the West Bank. "We're not ashamed of security with the Israeli side," he explained. "This is a coordination between a warden and his prisoner. We are using this coordination to meet day-to-day needs of the people because this occupying warden controls everything." He said PA security forces recently seized many weapons belonging to Hamas in the West Bank, including rocket-propelled grenades and automatic rifles. "These weapons were not intended for use against the occupation," he said. "They were being stored to attack the Palestinian Authority."
Israeli Translation of Egyptian Novel Infuriates Author ( AFP) The translation into Hebrew of Egypt's hit novel The Yacoubian Building by the Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information (IPCRI) has infuriated its author, Alaa al-Aswany, who supports a cultural boycott of the Jewish state. "What the center and the translator did is piracy and theft, and I will be complaining to the International Publishers' Association," he said. "My position has not changed regarding normalization with Israel. I reject it completely." Egypt became the first Arab state to sign a peace treaty with Israel in 1979, but virtually all of its artists and intellectuals continue to boycott the Jewish state.
Turkey's Muslim Identity - Irfan Husain ( Dawn-Pakistan) Universities in Turkey are now permitting girls to attend in headscarves for the first time in many years. To many urban, sophisticated Turks, the use of the headscarf is an unwelcome reminder that their country has a strong Islamic identity that is now beginning to reassert itself after decades of being pushed into the mosques and the boondocks of Anatolia. 500 members of the association of university professors recently signed a letter to the Higher Education Board, demanding that the ban on headscarves be retained.
The Sajmiste Exhibition Grounds in Belgrade - Mladenka Ivankovic ( Jewish Political Studies Review) In 1937 the Sajmiste national exhibition site opened in Belgrade. In 1941 it became a Nazi concentration camp called Sajmiste or Semlin. From the autumn of 1941 until mid-1942, the Semlin Judenlager was a Nazi concentration camp for Jewish women, children, and elderly, primarily from Belgrade. They either perished there or faced death in the mobile gas vans on the way to the Jajinci execution site. This was not recognized until the 1980s. Today, the area of the camp and its "hospital" have been transformed into a nightclub. The political changes of 5 October 2000 have relegated World War II, its context, and its results to public oblivion. The writer received a PhD in history at the faculty of humanities in Belgrade, and is currently a researcher at the Institute for the Recent History of Serbia in Belgrade.
Google Search the Recent History of Israel and the Middle East
Use Google Search to explore 8 years of back issues of Daily Alert since May 2002.
|
Send the Daily Alert to a Friend
If you are viewing the email version of the Daily Alert - and want to share it with friends - please click "Forward" in your email program and enter their address. |
|
| News Resources - North America, Europe, and Asia: - U.S. Slams Syrian Interference in Lebanon
U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice said Thursday: "We continue to have deep concerns about Hizbullah's destructive and destabilizing influence in the region, as well as the attempts by other foreign players, including Syria and Iran, to undermine Lebanon's independence and endanger its stability.... Syria, especially, has displayed flagrant disregard for the sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity, and political independence of Lebanon under the sole and exclusive authority of the Lebanese government.... Additionally, Syria continues to provide increasingly sophisticated weapons to Lebanese militias, including Hizbullah."
"Hizbullah remains the most significant and most heavily armed Lebanese militia. It could not have done so if not for Syria's aid and facilitation of Syrian and Iranian arms." (U.S. Mission to the UN) - UN Undeterred by Attack on Investigators in Lebanon - Massoud A. Derhally
The UN tribunal investigating the killing of former Lebanese premier Rafiq Hariri said it is undeterred by an attack on its investigators at a clinic in southern Beirut. Two investigators and their interpreter were "violently attacked" Wednesday by "a large group of people" when they went to meet a doctor at a private women's clinic, the Special Tribunal for Lebanon said in a statement. The Lebanese army rescued the three and they received medical attention. (Bloomberg)
See also Hizbullah Calls on Lebanese to Boycott Hariri Court (Reuters) - Hamas to Step Up Executions of Collaborators - Anne Barker
Hamas authorities in Gaza have begun imposing the death penalty as part of a campaign against Palestinians found guilty of collaborating with Israel. Two men have been executed in Gaza this year for passing information to Israeli forces. Dozens more are in jail. Omar Kaware is one of 42 men who share a single prison cell in Gaza's main jail. The inmates share one toilet and one bathroom between them. Every one of these men is accused of spying for Israel. And several, including Kaware, have been sentenced to death. "They accused me of collaborating with the Israelis, but I'm innocent," he said.
He says he was set up by a vengeful neighbor and was tortured into making a confession. He revealed scars on his hands and feet as evidence. "They beat me. They tied my arms to the ceiling, hit me all over," he s aid. (ABC-Australia)
See also In West Bank, Hamas Beaten Down, But Not Out - Tom Perry
For more than three years, the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank has tried to crush the Islamist movement Hamas and has weakened, but not wiped out, the group. Mass arrests, arbitrary detention and torture, documented by Palestinian human rights groups, are part of the PA's campaign against Hamas. The PA has fired hundreds of people, many of them teachers, for real or suspected Hamas ties.
By its own admission, Hamas is a shadow of its former self in the West Bank, although PA security forces say Hamas continues to plot against Abbas' administration. On Oct. 8, Israeli forces killed two members of the Hamas military wing who were suspected of killing four Israelis in the West Bank. Thousands of Hamas supporters turned out for the funerals in a rare public sh ow of strength. Hamas "is a big organization with wide support from the Muslim Brotherhood, Syria, Iran, Qatar," said Palestinian political commentator Hany al-Masri. "Its strength will retreat, but it will not lose it completely." (Reuters) - Hamas-Fatah Divide Turns the Lights Out on Gazans - Liam Stack
The streets in Gaza City hum with hundreds of diesel-powered generators, the only line of defense against a war-damaged electric grid that plunges the territory into 8-hour-long rolling blackouts each day. The lack of electricity is largely due to a protracted disagreement between Gaza's Hamas government and the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority in the West Bank over who will pay the territory's electricity bill, estimated at more than $20 million each month. From 2006 to November 2009 the EU bought fuel for a local power plant but since December 2009 the EU stopped paying. (Christian Science Monitor) News Resources - Israel and the Mideast: - Abbas: We May Seek UN Recognition
PA President Mahmoud Abbas said Thursday that he would consider asking the UN to recognize a Palestinian state. Speaking in Ramallah, Abbas said the move, one of "seven options," could come within months. (Ma'an News-PA) - Netanyahu: Direct Talks Are Only Path to True Mideast Peace - Barak Ravid and Natasha Mozgovaya
Direct peace talks are the only path to achieve genuine Middle East peace, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a statement on Thursday, hours after Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said the Palestinians were considering a unilateral declaration of statehood. Netanyahu said Israel expected the "Palestinians to live up to their obligations by holding serious direct negotiations, without malice and without preconditions."
"Any attempt to bypass direct talks by appealing to international bodies will do nothing to advance the true peace process." The two peoples could achieve "a secure and stable peace solely through direct negotiations, a path I hope we shall return to in full force soon."
UN diplomats, responding to Abbas' threat of a unilateral declaration, said earlier this week that such a move would represent a severe strategic error on Abbas' side, calling Palestinian hopes of a possible U.S. abandonment of its traditional support of Israel in the UN Security Council a "wild dream." "U.S. support of Israel is part of its DNA," a senior diplomat said. (Ha'aretz)
See also Netanyahu: Settlement Building Won't Affect Final Status Peace Deal
Speaking after a meeting with U.S. Senator Joseph Lieberman on Thursday, Netanyahu said the settlement issue was "not substantial" and that construction in the settlements "will not influence the peace map." (Ha'aretz) - Knesset Speaker: Settlements Are "Palestinian Excuse" for Refusal to Negotiate - Roni Sofer
Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin met with the president of the French Senate, Gerard Larcher, in Paris and discussed Europe's intervention in the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians. "Hundreds of thousands of Israeli people live in the settlements, and they are not an obstacle to peace. You can't ignore the fact that Bush's letter recognizes many of them. It's just an excuse for Palestinians at the negotiating table," Rivlin told Larcher. "The feeling is that Abbas is getting into the talks out of a sense of obligation and cannot convince his people to make compromises." "The people of Israel want peace and not illusions. We must make an effort to live together." (Ynet News)
See also PA TV: Tel A viv Residents Are Also "Settlers" - Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik
PA TV on Oct. 6 broadcast a program about the history of Jaffa (today, southern Tel Aviv), with pictures of a Muslim cemetery that included the caption: "Jaffa's holy sites are in the hands of the settlers." (Palestinian Media Watch) - Jordan Slams UN Official for Urging Palestinian Refugees to Resettle in Arab States
Jordan has condemned remarks by a UN official saying Palestinian refugees must not be deluded about their right to return and that Arab countries must resettle them. Wajih Azaizeh, who directs Jordan's Palestinian Affairs Department, on Thursday called remarks by Andrew Whitley, the N.Y. director of UNRWA, the UN's agency for Palestinian refugees, "irresponsible." Speaking at a National Council for U.S.-Arab Relations conference last week, Whitley said: "If one doesn't start a discussion soon with the refugees for them to consider what their own future might be - for them to start debating their own role in the societies where they are rather than being left in a state of limbo where they are helpless, but preserve rather the cru el illusions that perhaps they will return one day to their homes - then we are storing up trouble for ourselves."
"We recognize, as I think most do, although it's not a position that we publicly articulate, that the right of return is unlikely to be exercised to the territory of Israel to any significant or meaningful extent," he said, adding that "It's not a politically palatable issue, it's not one that UNRWA publicly advocates, but nevertheless it's a known contour to the issue." (Jordan Times-AP-Ha'aretz)
See also below Observations - The Refugee Question: The Bedrock of Palestinian Rejectionism - Ben S. Cohen (Huffington Post) Global Commentary and Think-Tank Analysis (Best of U.S., UK, and Israel): - Palestinian Gambit for Statehood Puts Israel Against Wall - Leslie Susser
With talks at a stalemate, the Palestinians are playing a new card: an end game to statehood through an appeal to the international community. If Israel remains in control of large swaths of the West Bank after a Palestinian state is declared and recognized, even if it's just in the General Assembly, it would provide additional fodder for the campaign to delegitimize Israel. "The Palestinians will declare a state. Virtually the whole world will recognize it. And we will be left without security arrangements," Israeli Trade and Industry Minister Benjamin Ben Eliezer said Monday.
Behind the scenes, Israeli diplomats have been warning their colleagues in Washington and Europe that if the Palestinians act on the UN strategy, the current peace process, and the Oslo process on which it is based, would be over. (JTA) - Will the Palestinians Take Their Case to the UN? - Tony Karon
Palestinian leaders have begun telling the world that they are considering taking matters to the UN Security Council. The downside of the Palestinian UN option is that while UN recognition of a state based on the 1967 borders would "give" the Palestinians more territory than they might achieve in a U.S.-mediated negotiation process, the international body would not address the problem of getting Israel to concede possession - and the "facts on the ground" created by Israel since 1967 include nearly half a million Israelis. So getting UN recognition of Palestinian statehood on the 1967 borders would establish a principle, but brings its implementation no closer - and would probably be the prelude to a protracted struggle between the two sides. (TIME) Weekend Features - Israel Wins Cambridge University Debate - Yaniv Halili
Last Thursday, Israel secured an unexpected triumph at the Cambridge University debate club on the topic: "Israel is a Rogue State," Yediot Ahronot reported Monday. The Israeli side was represented by Ran Gidor, the Israeli embassy's political advisor and a Cambridge graduate, and Shiraz Maher, a former radical Islamist who has become an enthusiastic Israel supporter. The opposing side was represented by journalist and publicist Lauren Booth, the sister-in-law of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and Mark McDonald, who heads the Labour party's Friends of Palestine.
After both sides concluded their arguments, the audience was asked to vote for the side that they deemed more persuasive. Surprisingly, the Israeli side won with 74% of the votes. (Ynet News)
See also Lauren Booth Would Do Anything to Get in with the Tough Kids - Julie Burchill (Independent-UK) - Jews in Arab Lands - Zvi Zameret
An Israeli who seeks a reliable depiction of past events cannot accept a mendacious historiography that portrays Jews as living prosperously and happily in Islamic states until Zionist colonialism and "Zionist aggression" ruined the idyll. Anti-Jewish attacks and massacres were perpetrated in Arab states during the course of the 20th century. In anti-Jewish riots in Iraq in 1941, 180 Jews were murdered and 700 were injured. In violent demonstrations in Egypt in November 1945, 400 Jews were hurt, and much Jewish-owned property was looted and damaged. In rioting in Libya in November 1945, 130 Jews were murdered and 266 were injured. December 1947 riots in Syria left 13 Jews dead (8 of them children) in Damascus, and 26 wounded. At the same time in Aden, Yemen, 97 Jews were murdered and 120 were injured. (Ha'aretz) - Eureka Moment for Israeli Chief Scientist - Sara Toth Stub
As the new chairman of the EUREKA Network, an organization of mainly European countries working to promote industrial innovation and research and development, Israeli chief scientist Eli Opper said his priorities include developing innovative funding tools, enhancing cooperation with Asia and North America, and promoting the development of cleantech. At a meeting in Tel Aviv on Wednesday, EUREKA approved a total investment of ?51 million in 56 R&D projects in member countries, including 17 projects in Israel or with Israeli participation.
Israel, which joined EUREKA in 2000, is the only member country that is not also a member of the EU or geographically in Europe. Coined the "Start-Up Nation" in a 2009 book by Saul Singer and Dan Senor, Israel, with 3,800 start-ups, has the most star t-ups per capita. In 2009, the Israeli government spent 4.9% of GDP on civilian R&D, compared with 2.8% in the U.S., according to the OEDC. (Wall Street Journal) - U.S. Chamber of Commerce Sees Israel Opportunities - Myron Brilliant
This month, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce launches the U.S.-Israel Business Initiative, a national effort to strengthen and advance U.S.-Israel commercial relations. After a global summit in Washington with government leaders, top innovators and entrepreneurs from both countries, the Chamber is implementing a program that includes the development of grassroots and online educational tools, a high-level forum for American and Israeli business exchanges, and events that deepen the commercial connection. As America works to reboot its economy, increased trade with Israel can provide a promising avenue for creating more high-quality jobs in the U.S. (Globes) - Simple Blood Test Developed in Israel that Diagnoses Cancer - Judy Siegel-Itzkovich
An innovative, simple blood test that can diagnose a variety of diseases, including cancer, has been developed by researchers at the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology and was reported in the Proceedings of the [U.S.] National Academy of Sciences. While current blood tests for cancer merely note whether cancerous cells are still in the blood stream, the new test will be able to differentiate between different kinds of cancers and tumors as well as other diseases. (Jerusalem Post) - New IDF Infantry Fighting Vehicle Designed in Israel, Built in America
Israel is having the U.S. firm General Dynamics manufacture 600 of the new Namer IFV (infantry fighting vehicle) over the next eight years. The first hundred were built in Israel, but the rest can be built more cheaply in the U.S. The Namer is based on the chassis of the Merkava tank and has thicker armor than the U.S. Stryker. (Strategy Page) - The IDF Unit that Is Hizbullah's Nightmare - Hanan Greenberg
Egoz unit commandos are training for close-range combat against Hizbullah. A recent training exercise, which was conducted for the most part with complete uncertainty over what to expect, included some of the toughest physical and mental conditions the IDF has to offer. A senior officer described Hizbullah's methods of operation, which include munitions charges, anti-tank missiles, and guerilla fighting. An officer explains the uniqueness of Egoz: "From the dawn of its foundation the unit has sanctified the value of striving for contact, of close range combat." (Ynet News) - Researchers Unearth Ancient Water Secrets at Royal Garden Dig
Researchers at Tel Aviv University, in collaboration with Heidelberg University in Germany, have uncovered an ancient royal garden dating back to the 7th century BCE at the site of Ramat Rachel near Jerusalem. A main feature of the Ramat Rachel gardens is its intricate irrigation system, the likes of which have never been seen before outside of Mesopotamia. (Science Daily) Observations: |
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort. ~Herm Albright~
|
Send
Comment
RSS
![[object Object]](http://memri.convio.net/images/content/pagebuilder/12043.jpg)
![[object Object]](http://memri.convio.net/images/content/pagebuilder/12044.jpg)
![[object Object]](http://memri.convio.net/images/content/pagebuilder/12045.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment