Archives: Articles

By Taj Hashmi

Yet another blogger was hacked to death for alleged blasphemous postings against Islam, in Bangladesh. Islamist fanatics killed Oyasiqur Rahman (27) with meat cleavers for his vitriolic anti-Islamic postings on 30th March in broad daylight, on a crowded street in Dhaka. This happened five weeks after the killing of blogger Avijit Roy, in the similar manner, for the similar reason. While police (who were in close proximity) miserably failed to save Roy’s life and arrest his killers, this time they managed to arrest two of the three assailants with the help of bystanders.

Two other Bangladeshi freethinkers got killed at the hands of Islamist zealots-cum-terrorists in the past – Humayun Azad and blogger Ahmed Rajib Haider (aka Thaba Baba) – for blasphemous writings against Islam in 2004 and 2013, respectively. Islamist fanatics in Bangladesh would have killed Daud Haider and Taslima Nasrin for their anti-Islamic writings. As the Bangladesh Government could not ensure their safety, both of them had to leave the country in absolute haste, Haider in 1973 and Nasrin in 1994.

However, we just cannot single out Bangladeshi Muslims to be the most intolerant in this regard. Unlike Pakistan, despite Islamists’ and the Jamaat-e-Islami’s persistent demands, there is no Blasphemy Law in Bangladesh. However, thanks to the persistent Islamization and Arabization of the popular Islamic culture in Bangladesh, many Bangladeshi Muslims have tacit support for killing for blasphemy against Islam. The prevalent media fatigue and the lack of mass protest against killing for blasphemy in the country may be mentioned in this regard. Pakistan and several Muslim-majority countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Afghanistan and Iran have draconian Blasphemy Law. A brief appraisal of the Blasphemy Law in Pakistan may be an eye-opener for many.

Pakistan’s Blasphemy Law is a legacy of a British colonial law introduced in 1860, but very different from the original act. While Pakistan’s Blasphemy Law carries a potential death penalty for anyone who insults Islam, the maximum punishment under the 1860 law ranged from one year to 10 years in jail, with or without a fine. The British law made it a crime to disturb a religious assembly, trespass on burial grounds, insult religious beliefs and intentionally destroy or defile a place or an object of worship. General Zia’s Islamist military regime in Pakistan took full advantage of the Hate Speech Law, which was an amendment to the 1860 Act (Section 295 – A) made in 1927.

Zia ul-Haq’s administration added a number of clauses to the Law between 1980 and 1986 to further Islamicize Pakistan, marginalize the Ahmadiyya community, and persecute opponents in the name of Islam. More than 1300 people – mostly non-Muslims – were accused of blasphemy during 1987 and 2014 for alleged desecration of the Qur’an and insult of the Prophet; more than 100 people were killed for committing “blasphemy”; 50 “blasphemers” got killed during their trials; and fanatics also killed Punjab Governor Salman Taseer and a Federal Minister Shahbaz Bhatti for their opposition to the Blasphemy Law in the recent past. Further amendments to the Law provided life sentence for desecration of the Holy Qur’an, and death penalty for blasphemy against the Prophet of Islam. The Law provides protection to only Islam and its scripture. In sum, many Pakistanis – especially members of non-Muslim minority communities and liberal Muslims – are potential victims of the draconian Blasphemy Law or murder by over-enthused “protectors of Islam”.

We know millions of Muslims throughout the world came out on street, publicly demanding death for Salman Rushdie for his grossly offensive and blasphemous writing against Prophet Muhammad, his family, and the Holy Qur’an in The Satanic Verses, soon after the publication of it 1988. In February 1989, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini issued the famous – or “infamous”, as one might take it – fatwa-to-kill not only Rushdie but also all those involved in the publication of the book for blasphemy against Islam. Although Rushdie escaped violent death for blasphemy (and the Iranian government withdrew the fatwa years after Khomeini’s death), Hitoshi Igarashi, the Japanese translator of The Satanic Verses, was not that lucky. Fanatics killed him and two other translators survived murder attempts, narrowly.

Despite worldwide condemnation of the fatwa, intolerant Muslims throughout the world welcomed the proclamation, killed many “blasphemers” and have not since looked back. However, considering the fatwa unjust for not allowing the accused an opportunity to defend himself in a court of law, some Muslim scholars opined that a Muslim could kill anyone who insulted the Prophet only in his presence – while he was alive – not after his death. However, as Khomeini has spelled out, the supporters of the fatwa believe that even if a blasphemer repents and becomes a pious Muslim, it is incumbent on every Muslim to kill a blasphemer of the Prophet.

Meanwhile, Islamist zealots have killed several European writers, filmmakers and cartoonists for defiling Islam, its Prophet and the Holy Qur’an, their latest victims being people associated with the Leftist satirical weekly magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris, for publishing satirical and offensive cartoons of the Prophet during 2006 and 2012. On 7th January 2015 two Islamist gunmen entered the Paris headquarters of the magazine and killed 12 people, including the cartoonist. During the attack, the gunmen shouted, “Allahu Akbar” (“Allah is Great” in Arabic) and “The Prophet is avenged”.

In the backdrop of growing intolerance among uneducated and highly educated Muslims globally – having no qualms with killing blasphemers of Islam – we must not misconstrue this bigotry as a post-Rushdie or post-9/11 development. One is tempted to cite the example of the killing of Rajpal, the Hindu publisher of Rangeela Rasool (The Promiscuous Prophet), a book written in Urdu (and later in Hindi) by an anonymous Hindu writer in Lahore, in 1929. One Ilm-uddin, an illiterate Muslim carpenter, killed Rajpal in April and was hanged in October 1929. Around 60,000 Muslims attended his funeral in Lahore, and Poet Iqbal carried the funeral bier and placed the body into the grave. He and several Muslim leaders glorified Ilm-uddin as a hero, martyr, and defender of Islam.

Although killing for blasphemy of Islam was allegedly sanctioned by Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), as we find in numerous so-called Sahih or “authentic” hadises by Bukhari, Muslim and Abu Dawood (many of them contradict the Qur’an and the spirit of Islam); and as evident from the Rangeela Rasool episode in British India, Muslim support for killing for blasphemy predates Khomeini’s fatwa against Rushdie. However, the Qur’an does not prescribe any punishment for blasphemers of Islam in this world, let alone death penalty. And we know the Qur’an supersedes the Hadis literature and Shariah law. One may cite the following Qur’anic verses in this regard:

“Indeed, those who abuse Allah and His Messenger – Allah has cursed them in this world and the Hereafter and prepared for them a humiliating punishment [after death]” [33:57]; “…when you hear people denying and mocking the signs of Allah, do not sit with them until they engage in a talk other than that …” [4:141]; “And do not insult those whom they [idol worshippers] worship beside Allah, lest they, out of spite, revile Allah in their ignorance.…” (6:109).

In sum, insensitivity to killing for blasphemy is a sign of weakness, not strength. Those who favour killing for blasphemy are incapable of engaging the critics of their religion with reason; people devoid of respect for dissenting views are not yet ready for liberal democracy. Blasphemy could inspire people to defend one’s faith with reason, which could be a bold step toward the “Dialogue among Civilizations”, as former Iranian President Muhammad Khatami introduced the concept in response to Huntington’s provocative theory of the “Clash of Civilizations”.

The writer teacher security studies at Austin Peay State University. Sage has recently published his latest book, Global Jihad and America: The Hundred-Year War Beyond Iraq and Afghanistan.

11 April, 2015
Countercurrents.org

 

By Andre Vltchek

It is much easier to rule over those people who have lost all their dignity.

There is no reason to fear resistance where cynical consumerism, lack of knowledge, and constant anxiety are shaping the behavioral patterns of a nation; of most of its citizens.

The West made an art form out of controlling the world. Its once rough and simple ‘divide and rule’ tactics have reached, with time, greatvirtuosity. What Richter, Rostropovich or Argerich did for the art of Western classical music, people like Brzezinski, Kissinger and Negroponte matched with their brilliance in the art of destruction and terror.

In today’s world, everything is upside down. Brothers fear brothers, guerilla fighters are made to spy on each other, and heroes who are fighting forthe survival of the planet are labeled by Western regime as demagogues, strongmen or even terrorists.

The Empire successfully mobilized the most regressive elements in each society that it controls.It upheld religions, archaic family compositions and feudalist power structures in order to make rebellion almost impossible.

Albert Camus, a French philosopher, made one of the most important statements of the 20th Century, when he declared: “I rebel, therefore I exist!”

Rebellion is the engine that propels societies and individuals forward.To take it away, to shut it off, means to condemn people and entire nations to stagnation, even to regression.

Which is, of course, the main goal of the Empire. Which is why it employs and grooms entire armies of local collaborators.

*

The Empire created some amazing sights, all over the world: depressing, gore-filled scenes. For much of the planet, it is Halloween every day, every day and every night.

The West has many allies, many collaborators!

Bizarre bearded dudes with machineguns and portable missile launchers, decapitating infidels and blowing up the world heritage sites. That is what the Empire has been trying, painstakingly, to turn Islam into, with full-hearted support of its deranged and blood-drenched allies in the Gulf. First they murdered, sidelined or overthrewprogressive, socialist Islamic leaders, and later they manufactured the most fundamentalist brands, from Al-Qaida to ISIS. Bravo! Great success. As long as the oil flows, as long as the Western weapons are sold and ‘defense budgets’ remain above one trillion. As long as there is always someone people can be told to be scared of, someone who can be used as a justification for new weaponry, and a new post-colonialist and imperialist arrangement of the world.

Or look at those weird preachers and priests in Surabaya, Manila, or in Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo. “The poor are poor because God hates them. The rich are rich because God loves them”, I heard the other day in Indonesia, whilefilming one huge Christian gathering that was taking place in a mall. Pentecostal implants from the West, ‘prosperity gospel’,Evangelicals; fanaticsresembling the Inquisition-era bigots – there is an entire panoptic of monstrous Christian freaks available in the client states. If destabilizing China is the main goal, of course they are always there and ready! Ukraine, Uganda, Indonesia, Egypt, Oceania? No problem: always ready, always there, always handy!

Or those brands ofmilitant Buddhism, in countries like Thailand, where religion beganlosing its grip on power many decades ago, but was reintroduced just in time to join the ideological and real warfare during the Vietnam War! It is once again“big” now, as it used to be centuries ago, and ‘suspiciously’ fully supportive of the feudal elites and the throne, all those staunch allies of the West! And what about that brand of horrid feudal usurpers, the Lamas, paid directly by the US government and fully and continuously supported by the Western liberals?

Then there are all those monarchs reigning over the territories from the Gulf to Southeast Asia.Many of them were directly implanted, watered and groomed by the West, or at least upheld, armed and if needed, turned into deities.

Extreme forms of religion and feudalism are essential for effective control of the population. The Brits were well aware of it, and that is why they gave full support to Wahhabis and other local extremists and bigots.“Caste is often thought of as an ancient fact of Hindu life, but various contemporary scholars argue that the caste system was constructed by the British colonial regime”, argues Frank de Zwart from Leiden University.That is also why the Brits were the most effective of all the colonizers: they knew how to get the worst from the locals!

Ancient forms of oppression, from the caste system in India to family oppression, even terror, in Africa, Indonesia or Pakistan, keep people from learning, from becoming individuals, from daring, from mobilizing and fighting for the better world.

And to make sure that the oppression imposed and upheld by the West in foreign countries, is not challenged even at home, the West’s propagandists invented so-called “political correctness” which was soonturned into sacrosanct dogma. This is how it works, in summary: Attack those extreme religious implants from the West, in some poor country controlled by Washington or London, and you will be branded as intolerant, patronizing or at least as insensitive. Attack some brutal monarchy that is surviving only because the West needs it and supports it, and you will be accused of not respecting local culture and the way of life of local people. Say or write honestly, that in some country, after a Washington-administered coup, and after several decades of continuous brainwashing campaign, that the majority of people were successfully converted to idiots, and you will be described as a racist and bigot.

The collaborators, mainly consisting of the top brass military, of business elites, of religious gurus, ‘academics’ who were indoctrinated and bought while on the scholarship abroad, journalists and pop artists, are fully protected by political correctness. They represent the culture of some destroyed culture, “they are the culture”. Mad monarchs, religious freaks, merciless feudal patriarchs – they cannot be touched, because ‘people love them’, ‘people revere them’. Of course, after hundreds of millions of dollars were spent by the West to uphold the most regressive theories, afterthe children of the elites were put through the standardized brainwashing ‘education’ and afterthe poor majority was put through almost no education at all, little wonder that everybodyis thinking the same, that people “love” what they are suppose to “love”, from abusive husbands and fathers, to military mass murderers, insane religious fanatics and ruthless robbers repainted and rebranded as CEO’s.

*

If a spaceship filled with advanced, refined and objectively thinking beings coming from outer space would visit our planet, the visitors would be surely horrified by observing those individuals who are ruling such countries as Indonesia or Uganda, or those in the Gulf. They would most likely ask: “What kind of Empire is it, that is employing such vile butlers and servants?”

Nobody is laughing or puking, only because all of us, even the most outspoken critics of the regime, were already somehow conditioned. We are all behaving, and to some extent playing the game.

None of us starts rolling on the floor, in total amusement, pointing fingers at the television screen that is showing dozens of former Indonesian generals and officers, responsible for the genocides of 1965, or those in East Timor and Papua, now holding some of the highest positions in their land.

Nobody is throwing up when the UN Secretary General of the United Nations flies to Kampala or Kigali and begs countries responsible for genocide of millions of innocent people in the neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo (according to his own UN staff which produced several detailed reports on the subject), to please not withdraw their ‘peacekeeping forces’ (operating and getting royally paid) from their missions all over Africa.

Nobody is fuming and drawing political cartoons depicting the horrific nature of the Saudi regime and its arch-henchmen, who are giving orders to blast Yemen, killing hundreds and most likely thousands of innocent people, simply because they are Shi’a and because they are demanding social justice.

No Hollywood horror film could match the monsters that are ruling many corners of the globe, controlling, raping, robbing and brainwashing their own people, on behalf of the Empire.

Collaborators…

How many of those cars, those Ferraris and the latest BMWs, in some miserable country that is being fully plundered by Western mining and oil companies, are running on gas, and how many on blood?

How many of those “proud” professors holding doctorates from Western universities, are actually teaching – giving knowledge – and how many are infiltrating the education systems all over the world, as China’s Minister of Education, Mr. Yuan Guiren, wrote recently in a Communist Party journal “Seeking Truth”? “Young teachers and students are key targets of infiltration by enemy forces,” Mr. Yuan argued on Feb. 2, 2015.

They are. All over Africa, Asia, the Middle East. Fortunately, at least in Latin America, the enemy forces have been mostly identified.

How many magazines, newspapers and television stations in the Middle East, Southeast Asia or East and West Africa are actually there to inform people, and how many are serving, dutifully, the propaganda apparatus of the Empire? It is enough to check the sources of the foreign news coverage, incountries like Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, the entire Gulf, or even India, and the answer becomes obvious.

*

The level of collaboration with the West is scandalous; it is shocking.

The most notorious forms of collaboration and spite towards the people can be found in what I lately call “the Belt”, which consists of the client states and semi-colonies, spreading from Southeast Asia, to East and West Africa, with the sub-Continent and the Middle East in between. In that part of the world, countries that refused to collaborate (Indonesia before 1965, Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Syria, Somalia, Congo under Patrice Lumumba, to name just a few) were muzzled, raped, destroyed, annihilated and leveled with the ground.

In that ‘belt’, there is no shame left, and no dignity.

For those of us who worked during the racist anti-Muslim massacres in Gujarat, in 2002, the fact that Mr. Modi(Chief Minister of Gujarat during the mass murder) became the Prime Minister of India, is not only outrageous, it is monstrous. But he is, in his heart, a neocon, a neoliberal, a “nationalist”, not unlike his counterpart in Japan, whose allegiances are more towards the global capitalism and Washington, than towards his own impoverished, humiliated and robbed people. And that is why the Empire supports him.

And what should be said about Egypt, Bahrain, Thailand or Rwanda, to mention just a few client states?

Intellectual cowardice, repulsive egoism and servility in the countries like Malaysia or Indonesia are beyond obscene. They are grotesque, perverse. Almost entire, pathetically shallow, art establishments in Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur are living from Western handouts, from so-called “funding”.“Artists” and “intellectuals” say and write and film what is expected of them, what the West pays them to produce, and then of course, what sells. In the meantime, corporate gangsters are plundering land with absolutely no obstacles, murdering indigenous people if they cross their way, and then build their palaces abroad from the booty, all in the plain daylight, with no fear and no shame. There is no real ‘opposition’ in Indonesia and Malaysia. Intellectuals, with some rare exceptions of people like Djokopekik( theMarxist Indonesian painter), in both countries, were turned into spineless cowards.

It gets even worse in Uganda and Rwanda, countries that are murdering millions in the Democratic Republic of Congo, on behalf of Western governments and companies. It gets equally bad in India, whose modern history is dotted with genocides, including the ongoing one in Kashmir.

Most of the countries of that “Belt” are treating their citizens (particularly poor ones) with absolute spite. Most of them, including India, are police states. But they are hailed as “democracies” by Western media and regime, because they are allies, client states and because they collaborate.

In almost all countries of The Belt, collaborators hold power. Without exception, these horrible regimes are mixtures of capitalism, feudalism and fascism.

*

Since WWII, the panoptic of the pro-Western puppets is truly horrifying. It would take an entire book to list at least the most “important”, the most bloodstained names of the collaborators with Western regime. Let us recall just a few, those responsible for the most repulsive atrocities:

Trujillo in Dominican Republic, ‘Papa Doc’ Duvalier and ‘Baby Doc Duvalier in Haiti, Batista in Cuba, Somoza in Nicaragua, the military junta in Brazil, Pinochet in Chile, Videla in Argentina, Stroessner in Paraguay, the South African apartheid “governments”,Moi in Kenya, Kagame in Rwanda, Museveni in Uganda, Mubarak in Egypt, Zine Ben Ali of Tunisia, Hadi of Yemen, present-day rulers of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, Jordan and Oman, Mobutu SeseSeko of Congo, Shah Reza Pahlavi of Iran, Lon Nol and Pol Pot of Cambodia, almost entire Thai leadership after the WWII, Marcos of Philippines, Osama bin-Laden of Saudi Arabia, a series of pro-US dictators in South Vietnam, Suharto in Indonesia…

And what about the other side? As horrible as those individuals were, mentioned above, people who resisted and fought for freedom of the mankind were some of the greatest human beings of the 20th Century but that did not spare many of them from being murdered, and then smeared by the Empire and its lackeys. Many of them were aided by the Soviet Union and China in their efforts to break shackles of their people:

Nasser of Egypt, Patrice Lumumba of Congo, Julius Nyerere of Tanzania, Ernesto “Che” Guevara of Argentina, Salvador Allende Gossens of Chile, DilmaVanaRoussef of Brazil, Nelson Mandela of South Africa, Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua, Evo Morales of Bolivia, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, Ho Chi Ming of Vietnam, Mao Zedong of China, Fidel Castro of Cuba, Mosaddegh of Iran, Thomas Isidore Noël Sankara of Burkina Faso.

To compare two lists would, if one werereally willing to see and to compare, destroy all remaining illusions about the West “supporting and aiding democracy”. For years, decades and centuries, the West was actually aiding the most extreme forces of oppression, of terror and nihilism.

*

Direct support given by the West to fascist governments, to right-wing militaries, to religious zealots and feudal family and power structures, is actually something that is visible and easily detectable, at least if one wants to see and to notice.

The West operates in concealed ways,while creating and sustaining an enormous and complex group(or call it army) of collaborators in all its client states, as well as in those countries that have been selected for destabilization and destruction.

It is done through “support for arts and culture”, by funding those artists who are willing to produce empty pop, to put form over substance, refusing to address social and political problems of the country and to bring them to the masses.

It is done through the UN and countless international NGO’s thatare, in many loyal and servile countries (like Kenya), hiking salaries and benefits of the local staff, and this way are helping to manufactureand sustain the new elites. These elites (well paid and therefore loyal), instead of serving their people, are actually enjoying the tremendous gap created between them and the impoverished, often starving masses.

It is done through corrupting journalists, by sending them on all-paid ‘training courses’ to London, New York, Paris or Tokyo.

It is done through “education”, through scholarships given to the selected groups of young people who are willing to accept “Western democratic values” and fully abandon revolutionary struggle at home. These people, after returning “home”, are usually joiningthe ‘fifth column’, infiltrating government offices, academia, and mass media. Be it in business or in the state sector, they are serving their foreign masters and their own pockets, instead of their nations.

It is done through direct corruption, because corruption, as was described by John Perkins in his “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man”, is one of the main tools utilized by the Western imperialism. The more corrupt, the more pampered are the elites in a client state, the more reliablethey become.

The Western colonialist establishment knows perfectly well “how to deal with the locals”, how to tickle the vanity of the elites in the Middle East, the sub-Continent, Africa and Southeast Asia. How to make them feel “exceptional”, “enlightened”, “sophisticated”, oceans away from that “brutal and ignorant” majority. Deep rifts are created, in order to prevent nations from unitingagainst external enemies.

Elites are sipping cafe lattes, reading books that made it to the New York Times bestseller lists;they are boozing up, watching CNN or BBC or Al-Jazeera and doing all they can, to live “normal life”, as they see it in commercial films imported from the West.

What is grotesque is that it is actually those members of the collaborating elites all over the poor world that are “mass produced”, desperately gray, tugging the same line. They think the same, reason in the same way, and live a similarly empty existence. It is because, no matter on what continent they live, the Empire injects them with the same doctrines, makes them desire same things. Their dreams are mass-produced, and so are their loves and even their betrayals. They shop in the same malls for the same brands, eat in the same chain restaurants, watch the same stupid films and listen to similar crappy music. They use the same social media;the same phones and they succumb to the same extreme individualism. It is “me time” and “me-me-me goes first”, while millions of their compatriots are forced to live in a gutter.

Most of the collaborators support similar political ideas – almost all of them are right wing, pro-Western and neoliberal. Almost all of them are nationalists, but to them nationalism means, as they were taught by Western-style political correctness,a boastful admiration for their horrid failed states that imperialism and neoliberalism turned their exploited countries into. To them, nationalism definitely does not mean a determined fight, a struggle against the foreign dictates, for true freedom and social justice!

After working and living in many client states of the Empire, I now clearly see that even the most ‘uneducated’ farmers in the countryside are more creative, have more dignity and understanding of the world, than the collaborating urban “elites”. Simple people have their individual views, and they have at least some basic human instincts, like compassion and kindness.

The Empire is manufacturing emptiness, nihilism. It is an extremely depressing Empire. Those who are serving it, or more precisely those who are prostituting themselves with it, are actually very sad, even pathetic individuals, lacking character, integrity, and diversity.

In the same time, they are extremely brutal and selfish, and they are looting their own countries, oppressing their own people. But even power does not seem to bring them much joy.

They are scared. They don’t know exactly why, but they sense that they are doing something wrong. The more scared they arethe more power they think they need; more power and more wealth. In order to be ‘protected’, in order to be able to build fences and to hire guards, and eventually disappear to their mansions and condominiums abroad, if things explode at home.

*

In India, Indonesia, all over Africa, colonialist empires used to employ local people to control and to terrorize masses. It was more effective that way, more practical. Locals knew locals better. They spoke the languages and they knew “where it hurts” when pain was administered.

Nothing changed. The Empire still gives orders to its servants, to the elites inside the client states. It intervenes directly only when the local cadres become ‘unreliable’ and fail to oppress their people, as happened in Iraq, Libya or Syria.

The organizations like IMF and the World Bank employ great numbers of members of the elites from sub-Continent, Africa and Southeast Asia, as it is understood that they will beextremely effective and brutal towards their own people, stripping them of everything, on behalf of the Empire. They do it in order to impress their masters, or simply out of deep spite for their own people.

This arrangement will not last forever. “The Belt” is gaining a notorious reputation all over the world. Hardy anyone would want to follow its example voluntarily.

Now there isa great number of countries fighting for a better arrangement of the world. Almost all Latin America, Russia, China, South Africa, Eritrea, and Iran, refuse to succumb to the Empire. Others are joining.

No matter how brilliant the masters of the horror scenarios, no matter how well they play their flutes, no matter how many millions of servants are licking their boots, it is certain that their violent art will not be allowed to dominate the world stage for much longer.

*

Andre Vltchek is a novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He covered wars and conflicts in dozens of countries. The result is his latest book:Exposing Lies of the Empire, “Fighting Against Western Imperialism”.

11 April, 2015
Countercurrents.org

 

By Ben Beaumont

Amnesty International

Raif Badawi is serving a 10-year prison sentence in Saudi Arabia, mainly for setting up a website. We talk to another local blogger – who has to remain anonymous for their own safety – about different tactics the authorities use to silence people online.

1. Gagging anyone with an independent opinion

“Overall, the situation in Saudi Arabia is very bad, particularly from the point of view of people with independent opinions who go against the grain. Recently, there have been investigations, arrests and short-term detentions of journalists, athletes, poets, bloggers, activists and tweeters.”

2. Blaming everything on terrorism

“The authorities are fragile. They seek to gag and stifle dissent using various means, including the shameful Terrorism Law that has become a sword waved in the faces of people with opinions. Courts issue prison sentences of 10 years or more as a result of a single tweet. Atheists and people who contact human rights organizations are attacked as ‘terrorists’.”

3. Personal attacks on bloggers

“I have been harassed in many ways. The authorities approached the internet providers hosting my personal website and asked them to block it and delete all the content. They also dispatched security officers to tell me to stop what I was doing in my own and my family’s best interests. I was later officially banned from blogging and threatened with arrest if I continued. I succumbed and stopped in order to protect my family.”

4. Bans, false accusations and being fired from your job

“There are many cases of bloggers being restricted or banned. Some of them – whom I know – are still being investigated about blogs they wrote in 2008, even though they aren’t involved in blogging anymore. Saudi bloggers can also be fired from their jobs and prevented from making a living. Many face false allegations that they are ‘atheists’ or ‘demented’. Restrictions are imposed on almost every aspect of the blogger’s life.”

5. Far-reaching online surveillance and censorship

“Censorship is at its maximum, especially after passing the Terrorism Law. A poet was arrested as a result of a single tweet which indirectly criticized King Abdullah using symbolic language. With millions of web users in Saudi Arabia, this means the authorities are keeping an eye on everything that’s being written. We have also received reports through international newspapers that Saudi Arabia uses surveillance to hack and monitor activists’ accounts.”

6. Deploying an electronic army

“The authorities have powerful cyber armies which give a false impression of the situation in Saudi Arabia to deceive people overseas. They launch websites, YouTube channels and blogs to target activists and opponents, and depict them as atheists, infidels and agents who promote disobedience of the Ruler. By contrast, these websites, channels and blogs often praise the state and its efforts. I have personally been the victim of such state orchestrated campaigns that harmed my reputation.”

7. Brutal punishments

“Raif Badawi’s case further demonstrates the brutality of a state that still rules through punishments from the Middle Ages, like flogging, hefty fines and exaggerated prison terms. The Saudi government needs to know that it doesn’t own the world and that it can’t silence the world’s voice with its money.”

This blog first appeared as an article in the November-December 2014 edition of Wire, Amnesty’s global magazine.

Take action

Sign our petition to #FreeRaif and discover five other ways you can help him.

More than 1 million people worldwide have so far signed our petition to #FreeRaif. © Jorn van Eck
10 April 2015

 

By Eric Zuesse

As I reported yesterday, the Security Bureau of Ukraine, on April 7th, had seized and disappeared two Odessa bloggers, who were trying to get an independent investigation, and ultimate prosecution, of the individuals who participated in the 2 May 2014 massacre of regime opponents, and who burned, shot, and clubbed to death perhaps over 200 in the Odessa Trade Unions Building — the event that precipitated the breakaway of Donbass from the rest of the former Ukraine, the country’s civil war.

And I also reported that April 7th saw the official announcement that, “The security service of Ukraine … has discontinued operation of a number of Internet sites that were used to perpetrate information campaigns of aggression on the part of the Russian Federation aimed at violent change or overthrow of the constitutional order and territorial integrity and inviolability of Ukraine.”

The follow-up to that story is the news on April 9th, which was reported in the courageous independent Kiev newspaper, Vesti, that “SBU has blocked more than 10,000 websites.” It says that, “Law enforcers seized the servers,” and that one SBU official told the newspaper, “‘We have made the decision of the court and confiscated equipment.’ He promised to return the servers in two months.”

Another news report on April 9th in Vesti tells of seizures of that day’s edition of newspapers by far-right toughs at news stands throughout the city, and the story even shows a video of Right Sector toughs raiding and emptying a Vesti delivery van headed out for distribution. The report also said:

“On Thursday, April 9, machines [coin-operated distribution boxes] that were transporting part of the circulation of the Kiev edition of the newspaper ‘Vesti’ were attacked. The attacks occurred around the metro stations ‘Heroes of Dnepr’ and ‘Vasylkivska.’ In both cases, the scenario was the same: the circulation machine was blocked by two cars that emerged containing unidentified men wearing symbols of the ‘Right Sector’ who illegally seized the circulation. In the case near the metro station ‘Vasylkivska,’ a driver was beaten, and the attackers threatened to burn his car.”

Back on 5 July 2014, Vesti had headlined, “Masked men smashed and fired into ‘Vesti’: broke windows, spread tear gas.” A video accompanied that news report, too. The video showed a man outside the newspaper’s office, opening the door, being suddenly attacked by approximately a hundred men who rushed at him from hiding and beat him.
The accompanying news report from a witness said:

“I first heard several shots. Then stones and Molotov cocktails were hurled at windows on the first and second floors. After that, the room filled with tear gas, which quickly spread throughout the office, and it’s still very hard to breathe. One of the guards who tried to stop the thugs was beaten.”

The video shows all of this from the outside of the building.

There are accompanying photos of the ransacked office.

That news report, in turn, linked to an earlier one, on 27 June 2014. That report had said: “Suddenly, four dozen masked strangers came, headed by the controversial deputy of Kyiv City Council, Igor Lutsenko.” These men “began to shout anti-Putin slogans, and then climbed onto the improvised stage” where there was to be presentation of a Constitution Day award. “Finally, radicals tried to throw bricks at our editors, but Maidan volunteers blocked that.”

The head of the Security Bureau of Ukraine, Valentyn Nalyvaychenko, the man who closed 10,000 online sites on April 7th, was reported, a week earlier, on April 1st, (translation here) saying:

“SBU does not need to invent anything new. It is necessary only to build on the traditions and approaches that were set forth by the Security Service of the OUN-UPA in the 1930-1950 years. They battled against the aggressor [Russia] during the temporary occupation of the territory [Ukraine, which ‘temporary’ period was already 350 years], had a patriotic education, military counterintelligence, and relied on the peaceful Ukrainian population, using its unprecedented support.”

This video recounts and shows the history of “OUN-UPA in the 1930-1950 years” and documents that it carried out most of Adolf Hitler’s extermination program in Ukraine during World War II — including 80% of the Babi Yar massacre of Jews, which the Russian poet Yevtushenko memorialized. To the people that the Obama Administration has placed in power in Ukraine, it was a heroic achievement. And yet, far-right Jews are part of it — ideological brothers-under-the-skin, and it also has the support of 98%+ of the U.S. Congress.

The head of the Security Bureau of Ukraine lied about the ‘temporary’ inclusion of Ukraine as part of Russia, and also about how ‘peaceful’ was the reign of Ukraine’s and Germany’s nazis over Ukraine during 1940-1944. But at least he was honest that he is returning to those “traditions and approaches.”

Barack Obama reigned over the entire process and installed these people into power over Ukraine. He has almost 100% congressional support for that within both the Republican and Democratic Parties, even though over two-thirds of Americans who have an opinion on the matter are opposed to his policy. America’s Establishment wants him to pursue this policy more aggressively. And the West’s newsmedia blame Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

Here is a video of Ukraine’s troops shelling the Donbass village of Slavyansk and joking that they’ll turn it into a “crematorium.”

As I reported earlier, the founder of Right Sector, Dmitriy Yarosh, was the leader of the thugs who perpetrated the May 2nd massacre, and who also carried out the February 2014 coup that brought these people to power in Ukraine. Starting on April 20th (Hitler’s birthday), his men will be receiving military training and weapons from U.S. troops, whom Obama is sending in to help them and other exectuioners with their program of exterminating the residents in Donbass — the region that rejects the coup-imposed government. So, Yarosh helps Obama not only by terrorizing the few remaining independent news media in Ukraine, but also by installing Obama’s regime there, and now, increasingly, by fighting his war there. Yarosh is already the most powerful person in Ukraine, and yet his power is still increasing there. He’s a man to watch. He wants Putin dead, so Putin is probably watching him carefully. Obama meanwhile, is watching Putin’s ‘aggression.’
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity, and of Feudalism, Fascism, Libertarianism and Economics.

11 March, 2015
Countercurrents.org

 

By Eric Zuesse

On the Friday before Russian Orthodox Easter, the Poroshenko-Yatsenyuk U.S-coup-installed Ukrainian Government attacks on all fronts on April 9th, to continue their extermination-campaign against the residents of the area, Donbass, that refuses to accept the coup-government that was installed by the U.S. when the Ukrainian President whom 90% of those residents had voted for was overthrown by the U.S. This bare-faced violation of the Merkel-Hollande-arranged Minsk truce would not happen without Obama’s approval. He is choosing to have this done on Russian holy days in order to intensify the provocation against Russia. Obama is thus going all-out now to provoke from Russia a sending-in of Russian army troops and air power in order for Obama to have a pretext to go to war against Russia, his real target “in order to defend an ally” (which has been trying to exterminate the residents in the area that won’t accept Obama’s imposed rule).

The following reposts from Fort Russ:

http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/04/kiev-junta-launches-large-scale-attack.html

Kiev junta launches a large scale attack on Novorossia right in time for Russian Orthodox Easter

April 9, 2015
Translated by Kristina Rus
Based on reports from Rusvesna

Ex-Minister of Defence of DPR Igor Strelkov:

“In general, we can say that the ceasefire is over – the entire front is under fire, including artillery. Shock troops of the enemy moved to the forefront.”

Donetsk under fire
War correspondent “Step” reports:

Shells are whistling again over the cities of Donbass. In Donetsk the sirens of ambulances and emergency services are heard. Under fire: Kievsky district, Oktyabrsky village, Panfilov mine village, Gladkova, Severny, Putilovka.

The entire evening of April 9 there was a battle in the village of Spartak and near Peski. The punishers used artillery guns, tanks, mortars, heavy barreled artillery. Under the cover of artillery, the enemy attempted to seize the positions of the militia in Spartak and near the airport. During the battle, this attempt was severely suppressed.

Also suddenly the positions of the militia near the town of Yasynovataya were attacked. There was a battle using small arms. To the West of Petrovsky district of Donetsk working mortars are also heard, as well as grenade launchers and heavy machine guns.

From the occupied Volnovakha Dokuchayevsk was fired on. The outskirts of the city are under a heavy fire of the enemy, the people are hiding in shelters fearing the assault on the city by the punishers, who have assembled the biggest formation in this area of about 8 thousand people.

According to a resident of Dokuchayevsk, “Locals demand that the militia do not leave them alone and hold positions at any cost, women are hysterically crying, saying that Ukrainians will go into the city and start a massacre. Older women bless the passing trucks with soldiers and pray for the victory and a speedy liberation to the district from the Ukrainian troops”.

Over Donetsk about a dozen enemy drones were spotted, one of which was shot down near the Lidiyevka mine.

The militia is put on full alert and is ready for a full-scale attack of the enemy.

Shirokino
On April 9, 2015 near Mariupol in Shirokino there was a fierce battle. There were dead and wounded among the militia and the Ukrainian occupation troops.

Tanks approaching Donetsk

The Operational Coordination Centre reports Ukrainian armored column appraching Donetsk.
00:10. Donetsk.

From several directions at the moment, the occupants are pulling the tank columns to Donetsk.

In particular, a few dozen tanks approached the airport from the direction of Marinka and Avdeevka.

For the latest, see http://fortruss.blogspot.com/

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity, and of Feudalism, Fascism, Libertarianism and Economics.
11 Apil, 2015
Countercurrents.org

 

By Manzoor Alam

The speed and rapidity with which the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) was established occupying a large chunk of territory, in Iraq and Syria, including Mosul, the second largest city in Iraq, was really amazing and mind boggling. The rulers of this State exercise full administrative and political control and execute all state functions in the territories occupied by them. It appears that they have stabilised themselves and it will be difficult to dislodge them from the territories under their control.

The founders of ISIS claim that they are strictly adhering to the commands of the Qur’an and the methodology of the Prophet Muhammad (saw) while implementing the basic tenets and Shariah of Islam. Let us dispassionately examine the authenticity and validity of this claim.

The ideology of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has been succinctly summed up by Bernard Haykal, a leading authority on Islam. He states that, “the group is trying to recreate the earliest days of Islam and is faithfully reproducing the norms of war.” He further states that, “what is striking about them is not just the literalism but also the seriousness with which they read their texts. There is an assiduous, obsessive seriousness that Muslims don’t have normally.” Hence the main ideology of ISIS is to revive the practices of the tribal culture of the 7th century, which they assert were used by the Prophet (saw)- in the incipient stage of the foundation of Islam, such as slavery, sex with female slaves was legitimate, killing of captives captured during the course of a war, crucifixion and revenge against individuals and enemy tribes. Further, they want revival of the Caliphate (Khilafat) and predict the imminent occurrence of the Apocalypse or Yaumul Qiamah or the Day of Resurrection ( Graeme Woo
d: What ISIS really wants, The Atlantic, March 2015)

The founders of the Islamic State ignore the fact that these were tribal practices some of which the Prophet (saw) could not reform in the early stage of the development of Islam. However, even in its initial phase of development, Islam emerged as a progressive religion and introduced many significant reforms in tribal society. For instance, women were given the right to property, granted freedom of speech and equal rights to grant protection to an acquaintance in distress as enjoyed by men. The Prophet’s daughter, Zainab, used this right to give protection to her polytheist husband Abul As. Islam abolished usury or exorbitant interests on loans. One of the most significant achievements of Islam was to abolish and dispense with the institution of priesthood which is still prevalent in most other religions. Similarly many other evil practices in the tribal society were abolished within the territory under the jurisdiction of the Islamic state of Madinah.

The rulers of ISIS assert that the following are the genuine Islamic practices which must be vigorously pursued:
A. Islam Rejects Peace as a Matter of Principle;
B. Forcible Conversion of Non-Muslims to Islam;
C. Revival of Slavery;
D. Crucifixion;
E. The Instituition of Caliphate;
F. The Apocalypse;
G. Apostasy (Takfeer );
H. Other Crazy Ideas Advanced by founders of the Islamic State.

A. Islam Rejects Peace as a matter of Principle: This perverts the fundamental principle of the mission of Islam which is renowned as a religion of peace, compassion and justice. It is an inconceivable travesty of truth. This is a blatantly false statement not supported by the Qur’an and the Traditions of the Prophet (saw). On the contrary, the Qur’an categorically states that “so long as they honour the treaty they have entered with you, have faith in them, Allah loves the righteous”. (At-Taubah (9), Verse 7). The Prophet (saw) signed the Treaty of Hudaibiya in 6th Hijri which even contained some unfavourable clauses. He had declared Jews as citizens of the Islamic state established in Madinah and granted them equal rights with the Muslim citizens. The Prophet was designated in the Qur’an as “Mercy unto world” and not as “Tyrant unto world” which according to ISIS leaders he was. The Prophet (saw) strictly adhered to the principle of peace and invariably followed it. This is evident from the fact that he did not initiate any aggressive war except against the Jews of Khyber who had conspired with the polytheists of Makkah, in the Battle of Uhad, to destroy the state of Madinah. Most of the wars were imposed upon him by polytheists of Makkah. Bernard Haykal incorrectly states that “it is true that all Muslims acknowledge that Muhammad’s earliest conquests were not tidy affairs”. Unfortunately he has not cited any example. The conquest of Makkah was a bloodless affair where the Prophet declared general amnesty to all whether they had accepted Islam or not. The Non-Muslims were allowed to participate in the Battle of Hunain and also received their share of the spoils of war.

B. Forcible conversion of people to Islam: A large number of Non-Muslims have been forcibly converted to Islam by ISIS. This contravenes the basic principle of Islam. The Qur’an categorically states “No compulsion in religion,” (Al-Baqarah (2) :verse 256). The Prophet Muhammad (saw) strictly adhered to this divine command. He conveyed the message but did not force any one to convert to Islam even after the conquest of Makkah. The peaceful missionary role of Islam was stressed by a distinguished scholar, Thomas Arnold, who stressed that “even where the Muslims ruled there was no complaint of any organized attempt to force the acceptance of Islam on Non-Muslims or any systematic execution to stamp out the Christian religion.”

C. Revival of slavery: The custom of slavery was the norm in the 7th century and even prior to that. It was customary even in the Roman and Persian empires. It is true that the Prophet (saw) did not abolish slavery because of the prevailing practice in the then tribal society. But he did encourage the freedom of slaves. Many of the freed slaves attained prominent positions in Islamic society such as Bilal who became Muezzin (calling people to come to prayer five times a day). The custom of slavery and trade in slave was abolished in a Geneva Convention held in 1926. Abolition of slavery stands for the restoration of human dignity. Islam is committed to it because of its inherent humanitarian nature. Thus the very idea of revival of slavery is reprehensible and denial of the progressive character of Islam. The Prophet (saw) was totally against oppression. He had joined an association called Hilful- Fudul formed in Makkah to prevent the elite of Makkah from committing oppression, tyranny, injustice and bullying against traders and businessmen coming from outside Makkah. He was proud of his association with this organization even after he was divinely commissioned as a Prophet. Finally the Qur’an unambiguously states “Cooperate with each other in performing pious and righteous deeds, do not cooperate in sinful and malicious deeds´(Al-Maeda (5):verse 2).The revival of slavery will be a malicious and repulsive act. The very concept of its revival is repugnant to Islam because it violates principle of human equality which is fundamenta to Islam.

D. Crucifixion: It is totally misleading to state that “the Qur’an specifies crucifixion as the only punishment permitted for enemies of Islam.” This was valid only for the then tribal society provided they were participating in a war Thus, it applied only to the combatants who were involved in the act of war. The civilian population was not to be touched. The terms and conditions for crucifixion prevailing in the seventh century cannot be superimposed in the 21st century. It is totally irrelevant to even conceive of it in the modern context. Moreover, the Prophet did not apply it after the conquest of Makkah. All the prisoners of war after the Battle of Badar, were released on payment of rans

E. The Institution of Caliphate (Khilafat): There is no reference to the institution of Caliphate in the Qur’an. In fact it does not reveal anything about the political system that should govern an Islamic country. The Prophet (saw), in one of his Traditions, did speak about 12 Caliphs (Khulafa), 7 of them are clearly identified including Mahdi, the last of them who is most likely appear just prior to Apocalypse. However, this Hadith (Tradition) clearly indicates that there is no permanency to the institution of Caliphate ( Khilafat). Moreover, Abu Bakar (r.a) who succeeded the Prophet Muhammad (saw), as the ruler of the State of Madinah did not adopt the title of a Caliph. Omar (r.a) adopted the title of Amirul Mominin. His successors Othman and Ali (r.a) were also addressed by the same title. It may be observed that Muslims, across the world, are now divided into various nationalities and sovereign states, each with its own system of government. It is impossible to pool them together into a single nation under the political jurisdiction of a Caliph (Khalifa). The concept is irrelevant in the contemporary context. It amounts to polytheism to suggest that “caliphate is not just a political entity but also a vehicle for salvation.” And to attribute to the Prophet (saw) such a statement that to “ die without pledging allegiance to a caliph is to die a Jahil (ignorant) and in disbelief”, is calumnious. Salvation is subject to observing the commands of Allah (swt) regarding the obligatory rituals with sincerity and devotion and not by offering allegiance or Bayah to a Caliph.

F. The Apocalypse: It refers to the Day of Reckoning or Resurrection when all the dead bodies will be brought back to life. All the human beings shall have to account for their earthly deeds. The Day of Reckoning is repeatedly stressed in the Qur’an and the Traditions of the Prophet. However, no one knows when it will happen. The Qur’an only reveals that the entire universe will be rudely shaken, mountains will be torn to pieces and the earth will be completely flattened. There is no controversy about the Apocalypse. What is questionable is their prediction about its imminence. It is meaningless to stress about its immediate occurrence because this catastrophic event is entirely in the domain of Allah (swt). No one knows when it will happen. The Prophet warned the people about this cataclysmic event but never predicted its period of occurrence.

G. Apostasy (Takfeer): The concept of Apostasy or Takfeer, calling a Muslim a non-believer, has been used very loosely and lightly by the ideologues of the ISIS. They cannot condemn any Muslim a Kafir or non-believer if he or she believes in the Unity of Allah, the divine revelations, in all the Prophets commissioned by Allah((swt) and that Muhammad (saw) was the last Prophet, the Qur’an is the last and final revealed book, and in the Day of Resurrection. To call such a person Kafir or Non-believer will be a sinful act. In order to proclaim a Fatwa of Kufr (religious ruling on Apostasy), Islamic scholars have to be very circumspect. They must bear in mind that Allah (swt) has reiterated in the Qur’an that He may forgive all sins except that of Shirk (Joining other gods with Allah (swt) ). IIt will be pertinent for the Muslim theologians to keep in mind the following two Qur’anic verses while issuing a ruling on Takfeer (declaring a Muslim as unbeliever); An-Nisa (4): verse 48: “ Allah does not forgive for partners to be set up with His worship. But He may forgive other sins. It is a grievous sin to associate partners with Allah”; also see verse 116 in An-Nisa); Al-Zumar (39): verse 53 “Say O my servants who have transgressed themselves by sinning do not despair of the mercy of Allah. Indeed Allah forgives all sins (of those who sincerely repent and seek forgiveness). Indeed it is He Who is the forgiving and the merciful”. Remember how the Prophet (saw) tolerated the Munafeqin (Hypocrites) who pretended to be Muslims while they were secretly intriguing to undermine Islam.

H. Other crazy ideas advanced by the followers of ISIS: One of the prominent ideologues of the Islamic State called upon the Muslims in western countries to find the infidel, smash his head with a rock, poison him, run him over with a car or destroy his crop” even when he has not hurt the Muslims in any way. This is clear incitement to violence which violates the Divine command. The Qur’an categorically states that if you “kill an innocent person you have killed the entire community. If you saved a life you have saved the entire community (Al-Maeda (5) verse 32). The Prophet (saw) and his companions (Sahabi) firmly adhered to this noble principle enunciated in the Qur’an.

There are numerous other bizarre ideas expounded by the leaders of the Islamic State. For instance the Caliph must wage Jihad at least once a year even without any provocation. Obviously they do not appreciate the meaning and significance of Jihad. Maarcel Brosard in his book “Jihad a Commitment to Universal Peace”, wrote about the Prophet’s battle with the enemies of Islam: “It is just in its causes, defensive in its initiative, decent in its proceeding, pacific in its treatment of the conquered enemy.” Thus Jihad cannot be launched unless it is just in its cause.

They make a mockery of Islam when they assert that “to recognize the United Nations and send an ambassador to this organization is polytheism”. It is meaningless and insensible to state that “a Muslim will cease to be a Muslim if he “wears western clothes, shaves his beard, and votes in an election even for a Muslim candidate.” A Muslim is not identified by his/her dress but by his/her deeds. By expounding of the aforesaid weird and irrational ideas the leaders of the Islamic State expose their narrow mindedness and total ignorance of the fundamental principles of Islam as enunciated in the Qur’an and the Traditions of the Prophet (saw).

Islam was a progressive religion in its incipient state and it ought to maintain this character in the modern context. The Prophet (saw) himself initiated the concept of Ijtihad (independent thinking) so that Islam may maintain its progressive character. The Prophet (saw) had realized that with the evolution of human society, it may be observed that the Qur’an and Sunnah (Traditions of the Prophet) may not offer complete guidance in the conduct of human life. He asked Moaz bin Jabl, whom he had appointed Governor of Yemen, as to how he would deal with the problems in such a situation. Moaz bin Jabal said that he would apply his intelligence and ingenuity and make decisions which, while resolving problems of human society, also do not violate the fundamental principles of Islam as enshrined in the Qur’an and Traditions of the Prophet (saw). He agreed with him.

The Prophet (saw) and the four Rightly Guided Caliphs (Khulafa), always preached and practiced a compassionate, just and tolerant Islam. The Prophet was an epitome of tolerance. He allowed the Christians of Najran who had come to meet him to offer their prayer with the Cross facing east right in the Prophet’s Mosque. Omar (ra), the second Caliph, offered generous terms of treaty to the vanquished Christians of Palestine. He allowed them complete freedom to celebrate their festivals with full pomp and pageantry. The Qur’an also encourages Muslims to repel evil with good deeds which may dramatically change the relationship between feuding parties. It proclaims that “the evil deeds and good deeds cannot be equal, repel evil with good deeds, then he, between he and you is enmity will become as though he was a close friend”,( Ham Mim As-Sajdah (41): verse 32).

The leaders of the Islamic State must remember and reflect that Islam was not spread by the sword. It was promoted by generous acts of rulers like Salahuddin Ayyubi. In order to regain control of Palestine the Third Crusade was launched in 1187 by the Pope and rulers of France, Spain and Germany. They were routed by Salahuddin Ayyubi, governor of Egypt, in the battle of Hattin. The leaders of Christian forces, kings, princes, cardinals and bishops fled back to Europe leaving behind their soldiers. Salahuddin Ayyubi treated these soldiers with compassion and generosity and they all voluntarily converted to Islam. It is the humanitarian values of Islam, as preached and practiced by the Prophet (saw), that shall have universal relevance, not the obsolete and inhuman tribal culture of the 7th century. The Muslims should avoid brutal and repulsive actions that cause aversion to Islam. The Prophet (saw) emphasised to“treat the people with ease, do not be hard on them, give them glad tidings, do not fill them with aversion, love each other and do not differ” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir Vol.1, p.503).The Prophet (saw) and his companions displayed love and compassion, justice and honesty, tolerance and peace, and patience and perseverance to attract non-Muslims to Islam. These were the methods used by the Prophet which Muslims should sincerely try to emulate. This Prophetic method conforms to the commands of Allah (swt) as enshrined in the Qur’an.

8 April 2015

By Prof. Henry Francis B. Espiritu

As a lifetime student of classical mainline Islamic jurisprudential school of thought called “Sunni fiqh”, I feel saddened to note how the Western mainstream media succumbed to the Islamophobic propaganda of affixing the epithet “Sunni” to the militia of the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

I can confidently say that ISIS is not Sunni because all that ISIS has done is to contravene the ethical teachings of Sunni Islam.

I consider Sunni Islam as the normative Islam practiced by the disciples of the Prophet Muhammad, who are called Sahabah (model companions) and the righteous caliphs “Al Khalifah Rashidun” (The Rightly Guided Caliphs) who were democratically elected by the whole Islamic Ummah (community). When the Islamophobic Western media equates ISIS barbarity and inhumanity to the normative Islamic term “Sunni” (which literally means followers of orthodox Islam), the Western media is simply serving US Hegemonic interests: by ensuring that neo-colonial and hegemonic forces will continue unabated the rising Islamophobia against Muslims and by effectively maligning Sunni Islam which is the prevalent school of Islamic jurisprudence in the Middle East and the rest of the Muslim world.

I can honestly attest that as per my readings of Shariah principles of the Four Imams of Sunni Islam (Imams Abu Hanifa, Shafi’i, Malik and Ibn Hanbal) who were the eminent jurisprudents of classical Sunni Islam, I have never encountered any of their treatise justifying barbarism and inhumanity that are now being perpetrated by ISIS.

In fact, these Four Imams of classical Sunni Islam through their treatises strongly detest the barbarity of the ISIS militia. Here are six (6) reasons why the entire ISIS war outfit cannot not be considered a ‘Sunni movement” and should never be called “Sunni” militia, and therefore Western mainstream media should not and must not commit Islamophobic name-calling, and must therefore stop referring to ISIS as “Sunni” militia:

1.) ISIS destroyed many holy shrines of Sunni Muslims in Iraq and Syria, including the shrine and mosque of the Prophet Yunus (Jonah) of Ninawa (Nineveh), Iraq and the shrine of Prophet Ayyub (Job) in Oz, Mosul, Iraq; to mention a few. They destroyed holy graves of Sufi-Sunni Muslim saints in and around Mosul and Kirkuk in Iraq and in Damascus, Aleppo and Kobane in Syria.

2.) The Holy Quran declares that Muslims are forbidden to destroy places of worship of all religions; and particularly, the shrines of the Ahl-ul-Kitab (literally, “People with Sacred Scriptures”) i.e., Jews and Christians must be held inviolable and must even be secured by Muslims (Al-Qur-an 22:40-41), and yet ISIS barbarically destroyed Christian churches. Also, Islam in the Holy Quran solemnly declares that there should be no compulsion in religion (Al-Qur’an 2:256), and yet this ISIS militia are forcing Yezidis and Christians to convert or else face death. This is very strange: there is no news that records that Jews were forcibly converted by ISIS and synagogues around Mosul, Aleppo, Kirkuk and in cities of North Iraq were never destroyed by ISIS, even though there are resident Jews and there are a number of synagogues in these areas. This is a strange thing indeed! (See, The Majlis: Council of Ulama in South Africa; p. 8.)

3.) The Shariah Islamiyyah (Divine Law) of classical Sunni Islam are found in the Holy Qur’an and the Holy Qur’an clearly says that civilians and non-combatants’ lives are inviolable: (Al-Qur’an2:256, 5:69). As of this juncture, to quote from the Holy Qur’an is in order: “Allah forbids you to fight those who did not oppress you, nor threw you out of your homes, you ought to show compassion on them and manifest justice upon them. Verily Allah loves those who are just” (60:8). The killing of innocent non-combatants is forbidden in all Sunni rulings concerning defensive warfare. Sayyidina Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, the first Caliph of Sunni Islam penned this ruling to the armies of the Caliphate: “I instruct you in ten matters: Do not kill women, children, the old, or the infirm; do not cut down fruit-bearing trees; do not destroy any town and do not touch those who do not bear arms, do not kill those who surrender and take refuge in the designated places of refuge, all who surrender to you must be safe in your care.” (See Imam Malik’s Muwatta’, “Kitab al-Fatawah-ul-Jihad-e-Abu Bakr Siddiq” [The Book of Abu Bakr Siddiq on the Proper Conduct of Warfare], pp. 37-39.).

4.) As far as my research goes, there are no Sunni scholars (ulama) and legitimate Sunni muftis and fuqaha (Islamic jurists and doctors of Islamic law) among the so-called ISIS Caliphate to clearly establish legitimate fatwas (Shariah rulings) on the legitimacy of their jihad from the Sunni Islamic perspective. There is not even an ustadh (Islamic scholar) of eminence among their ranks! The truth is that eminent Sunni scholars of Iraq and Syria have denounced ISIS for killing over 300 Sunni imams: which effectively belied the ISIS claim that it represents itself as the protector of Sunnis in Iraq and Syria. Many Sunni clerics in Iraq and the Levant declare ISIS combatants as “outside the bounds of Islam and are therefore excommunicated from the Islamic faith” because of their brutality inflicted on non-Muslims and on Sunni Muslims

(See: www.breitbart.com/national-security/2014/07/03/sunni-mufti-isis-and-affiliates-have-killed-over-300-sunni-imams-and-preachers/).

5.) Using the classical rulings of Sunni Islam on governance as basis of legitimacy, the so-called ISIS Caliphate is illegitimate. Genuine and bonafide Sunni Caliphate is established by the expressed consensus and consent (al-mushshuw’ara al jamaah) of the whole Islamic community by explicit public allegiance (bay-ah) of the whole body of Muslims. ISIS has unilaterally declared their so-called caliph, Al-Baghdadi as Khalifah-ul-Muslimin” (Caliph of all Muslims) clandestinely and covertly, in which the whole Muslim Ummah did not participate in his election, nor choose him to be its caliph, nor give him pledge of allegiance!

6.) ISIS was only able to successfully recruit combatants from Europe to wage war in Iraq and the Levant, but it failed to enlist the grassroot support of Iraqi and Levantine Sunnis. Furthermore, it failed to enlist allegiance of the Sunni Arab and Kurdish clergies who strongly denounced ISIS as outside the pale of the Islamic faith

(See: www.breitbart.com/national-security/2014/07/03/sunni-mufti-isis-and-affiliates-have-killed-over-300-sunni-imams-and-preachers/).

In fact most of these ISIS militia are Australians, British, Americans, Belgian, French, German, Chechens, who mostly came from Europe, so that most Iraqis and Syrians regard ISIS as an alien power forcing and imposing themselves and their barbarity upon Arab lands with their sophisticated weaponries and ammunition that are mostly sourced from US, Britain and the rest of Europe.

If ISIS is not a Sunni militia, then who are they working for?

Who employed them to wreck havoc in the Middle East?

Why is it that the US government and its NATO allies cannot seriously fight ISIS in Iraq, Syria and the rest of the Levant? ISIS is US-made monster! ISIS Caliphate is never an Islamic Caliphate.

It is a “U.S.-made Caliphate” that does not have any binding authority whatsoever over worldwide Muslims.

It is known truth that CIA constantly backs-up and supports all known so-called jihadist groups from the Taliban of Afghanistan and Pakistan, to even Jemaa Islamiyya and Al-Qaeda in the Middle East, and the Boko Haram of Nigeria.

That is why US will never seriously fight these monsters it created.

US is the invisible director of all international terrorism groups so that these monsters can commit crimes mercilessly and with impunity against humanity. These monsters are made alive and sustained by American dollars and ably, yet subtly directed by the master of the puppetry: US invisible hegemonic hand!

NATO is in unholy partnership with the CIA operators who are currently training, arming, funding and equipping thousands of ISIS combatants from Europe to overthrow secular and socialist Syria as part of the CIA ploy called “Arab Spring”—which is nothing but a covert ideological operation to to conquer the Middle East and Central Asia, its oil reserves, its pipeline corridors as part of an imperial agenda. (On The Trans-Afghan pipeline see Michel Chossudovsky, “America’s War on Terrorism”, chapter 5, pp. 65-91).

Therefore, who is supporting this ISIS militia, who is equipping them, who is funding them so heftily?

For what purpose are they doing these despicable acts? If they are truly Islamic fighters bent on fighting for the rights of Islam and the Muslims, then why do they bomb Sunni Muslim mosques, Sufi Muslim shrines and Shi’ite Muslim prayer halls of their co-religionists?

Is this about establishing a war scenario in the Middle East so that the global weaponry business of the US military industrial complex is at its best and profitable business as usual?

These are relevant questions for our sober reflection.

Professor Henry Francis B. Espiritu is Associate Professor of Philosophy and Asian Studies at the University of the Philippines, Cebu City.

19 March 2015

By Peace for Life

The Working Group members and program teams of Peace for Life (PFL) has gathered here in Nairobi Kenya 8 to 10 April 2015 at a time when Kenya is in mourning for her 148 people who were mercilessly massacred my members of Al-Shabbab terror Group for the sole reason of being Christians. We are Muslims and Christians from Kenya, Zambia, Philippines, South Korea, Tanzania and India representing social movements around the world.

We join the Kenyan people who aspire for sustainable peace, conveying a strong message of solidarity to all who are directly affected by the Garissa massacre.

We, strongly condemn this act of terror, seeking to discern the root causes and searching for true means and ways of making true peace in Kenya and in the world.

We lament the loss of young innocent lives; pray for healing for all survivors of these violent acts of terror. We stand in deep sympathy with all the parents and relatives of the young students and workers and their families and friends.

We call upon all peace loving Muslims and Christians to stand together in a unified response that rejects acts of terror in the name of religion and to increase all efforts in working together for justice and peace in Kenya in seeking peaceful means to resolve conflict.

We urge the Kenyan government and international organisations to ensure the safety of all citizens by not engaging in further violent responses to this terror attack, and engage in peace building with all Kenyan people and with all people of the world struggling for peace. Peace is essential for social transformation, and for the attainment of dignity and rights for all people.

Peace for Life is a faith-based peace and justice movement and forum engaged in building interfaith solidarity and mobilising the power of spirituality for the struggle against life threatening forces of the empire.
April 10 2015

 

Why the conservatives will not be heard this time

By Julia Sveshnikova and Amir Roknifard

On April 2, 2015, or 13 farvardin 1394 on the Iranian calendar, marked for Iranians as a day of nature and the adjournment of the new year holidays, the the Parameters for a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action Regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Nuclear Program were agreed upon.

The Supreme Leader of Iran kept silent, which in this case should be treated as a sign of approval. Many commentaries had discussed the advantages of the interim deal as a whole and the disadvantages of it in details that appeared in the media.

Foreign minister Mohammad-Javad Zarif was twitting in real-time mode and probably the one who reacted among the first was the famous political analyst Sadegh Zibakalam: “If my fellow compatriots knew how much the nuclear program already cost to the nation, directly and indirectly, they would be celebrating in the streets by now”.

In fact, people came out to the streets and pretty quickly – the Internet blew up with photos and videos capturing young people dancing with clamorous glee. It is only that not everyone in Iran is convinced there was an unconditional reason for the celebration, albeit the positive comments that prevailed.

MP Ali Mottahari said that disregarding Ali Khamenei’s silence, all this time he casted a wary eye on what was going on in Lausanne (1).

On Friday, following the day when the framework document was signed, the Friday Imam Emami-Kashani (who is appointed directly by the Supreme Leader) spoke in support of the agreement and the negotiation team. However, in Kashani’s list, rating the factors of success, the negotiation team endeavor and took only the fourth place, ceding to the wise leadership of the Supreme Leader (this again speaks in favor of the leader’s approval of the interim result), the advancement of Iranian science and the results of the implementation of Iran’s Economy of Resistance plan. Among the gains of the deal, Emami-Kashani mentioned the acknowledgement of Iran’s right on the enrichment and the agreement to lift up the sanctions. Meanwhile, the Friday Imam stressed that Iran’s return to the negotiation table was not a result of sanctions and the outside pressure, but an evidence of the rational approach of Tehran to the current situation (2).

Editor in chief of the Sharg newspaper, Ahmad Gholami, in his article, “Uranium Enrichment – Trust Building” delicately puts that the appropriate mis en scene became a cornerstone of success. For example, precarious economic situation in Iran served as a background to the negotiation process, but it did not become the real reason of success, thinks Gholami. The agreement was not possible neither with Rafsanjani being a president, nor Khatami or even Ahmadinejad, because the conditions were not right, says Gholami, implying the strategic decision of the Supreme Leader. However, he leaves aside the reasons underlying this decision (3).

The most optimistic assessment of the interim result was given by the President Hassan Rouhani, who called the agreement just the first step to the fruitful collaboration between Iran and the other countries and promised that Iran will assiduously implement its part of the deal. “Centrifuges are spinning, so we need people’s life to ‘spin’ as well” – this was one of the mottos of Rouhani’s election campaign, and now the President intentionally underscores the significance of the agreement, even an interim, as an important step for improving the economic situation in Iran (4).

The response from the Iranian majlis was also mostly positive (5). For instance, MP Shahbaz Hassanpour believes that the negotiation team successfully played a kind of gambit, which was earlier mentioned by ayatollah Khamenei; Zarif made small concessions to win the major game (6).

It also did not become a secret that the main negotiations took place between Tehran and Washington, so the main concerns are about the US commitment to the deal. For example, paying a tribute to the mass glee, Matin Moslem in the Shahrvand newspaper agrees with the positive estimate of the negotiations at large, because there was no drums of war during the last one year and a half, besides the parties engaged into some trust building process. At the same time he throws cold water on the youngsters dancing in the streets; during the negotiations, adversaries of the deal had hoped for Iran to leave the negotiation table. Now, when there are not only options, but the interim agreement on the table, the ‘hawks’ will play trump opposing to Obama’s initiative in the new parliamentary session (7). Therefore, Moslem suggests to oversee first if they will succeed or otherwise.

In its recent speech, ayatollah Khamenei called the new 1394 year to be “a year of unity between the Iranian people and government”. Conservative media apparently considered the leader’s initiative on easing tension in relationship between the government and the people, and criticized the framework agreement quite carefully. This time the conservative press deserves a particular attention though, because inherent to it rationalism was not peculiar to the fervently celebrating reformists and liberals.

In the «Battle of Commentaries» in the Javan newspaper (associated with the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps), its editor in chief, Abdollah Ganji sarcastically argues that the current agreement was the only option for the USA, which, in fact, by their participation in the negotiations verified the failure of sanctions and irrelevance of the other options. However, this is not the most important of his comments. Ganji reasonably reminds the readers that Zarif ceded in several issues while he promised not to give up certain positions. For example, the negotiation team promised to keep all the enrichment facilities intact. Then how we should treat the situation with the Fordow enrichment facility now? Ganji compares Fordow under the agreement to a bus that is allowed to move, but prohibited from accepting more than one passenger on board. Besides, the Javan’s editor is wary of a simple shift of sanctions from the nuclear dossier to the profile of another issues regarding Iran, for instance, human rights issue. The USA are conducting negotiations as if they were at the table with an enemy, warns Ganji, thus, Iranians should not forget either that the battle with “the enemies of the revolution” is not over due to the current negotiations (8).

Asking the very same question about the strategy of the negotiation team, Mohammad Safari, in the conservative newspaper Siyasat-e rooz, recalls Zarif’s determination to attain cancellation of all the sanctions and also to forward the final agreement to the UN, so it would pass the resolution, compelling all the parties to annul all the sanctions, including the unilateral ones (9). Currently the framework agreement talks only about suspension, but not the cancellation of the American sanctions, which was mentioned by Barak Obama in his speech that followed the agreement.

Safari also mentions the Iranian concern about the impartiality of the IAEA, which is the final arbiter to verify Iran’s compliance with the deal, while, he argues, exactly the ambiguity of IAEA’s reports during recent years became the reason of protraction in negotiations. Then how Iran can be sure that the West will comply with its commitments, he asks (10).

Finally, the editor in chief of the conservative Kayhan, Hossein Shariatmadari, supports his colleagues, recalling the promises of the negotiation team that without the condition of full lifting the sanctions, the agreement would not be signed. Recently, after the collective letter of American congressmen to the Iranian government, Javad Zarif also stated that it will be impossible to reach the agreement on the nuclear issue without the guarantee that the Congress is compelled to withdraw the sanctions. The same way Shariatmadari is wary of the controversial role of IAEA, which assessment must comply not only with objective criteria but also with the political circumstances, he believes.

 

In our opinion, to celebrate anything before reading the text of the agreement is premature, and after it – unduly optimistic. This time, curiously enough, conservatives address very reasonable concerns that regard the impartiality of the IAEA as a final arbiter; the possibility of the suspended sanctions to be reinstalled and the duration of the agreement that do not guarantee the subsequent restoration of Iran’s unrestricted status as a member of the NPT. With these concerns in mind, the only reason why the agreement was initially signed and received such a warm reception in Iran is the approval of the Supreme Leader, of which this is still painful for Iranians to bargain.

It is natural that the immediate participants of this process, that is Zarif and Rouhani, make an accent on the positive side of the agreement, in particular acknowledgement of Iran’s rights on enrichment and the perspective of lifting the sanctions. However, this will happen on the conditions other than those promised by the negotiation team at the beginning. This is for that reason that the Deputy Minister Abbas Araghchi, on his arrival to Tehran, rushed to tell the public that the agreement is only an interim one and can be amended in the course of negotiations. For the same reason, the conservatives stress so intensively, that the West have to comply with its commitments. Eventually, for this same reason the analysts argue that not economic sanctions, but Tehran’s reasonable policy and good will became the real reason for Iranians to return to the negotiation table.

Theoretically, the ideal agreement on the Iranian nuclear program must include the most important element. This element is to save the face of the Iranian government that for many years stood firm on the nuclear issue and on the issues of international cooperation. We are observing this image therapy right now.

Meanwhile, those who celebrated the deal needed not the text of the agreement, but the opportunity to conduct an ‘informal referendum’ on the concessions in the nuclear issue. Everybody and, it seems, even the blatant conservatives, grew weary of sanctions, politicisation of the nuclear issue and the social tension. However it is not necessary at all to discuss that somebody is giving up here. What is necessary is to look for the new forms of cooperation and in perspective – for the national consensus on another basis, not the nuclear one and, pehaps, not even the post-revolutionary one.

 

1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/persian/iran/2015/04/150404_l26_iran_nuclear_motahari_majlis_reactions

2 http://www.tabnak.ir/fa/news/ بیانیه-شب-گذشته-موفقیت-نظام-جمهوری-اسلامی-است
3 http://sharghdaily.ir/News/ غنی سازی- اعتمادسازی/ 59218
4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/persian/iran/2015/04/150403_l45_iran_rouhani_lussane_nuclear
5 http://isna.ir/fa/news/ حمایت-مجلس-از-عملکرد-تیم-مذاکره-کننده-هسته-ای/ 94011503231
6 http://isna.ir/fa/news/ اینک-هم-چرخ-اقتصاد-می-چرخد-و-هم-چرخ-سانتریفیوژها/ 94011503262
7 http://shahrvand-newspaper.ir/?News_Id=27289
8 http://javanonline.ir/fa/news/ نبرد-تفسیرها/ 711625
9 http://www.siasatrooz.ir/vdccoeqo.2bqs48laa2.html
10 http://www.siasatrooz.ir/vdccoeqo.2bqs48laa2.html
Julia Sveshnikova is a Junior Research Fellow in international relations at the National Research University – Higher School of Economics (Moscow), an expert at the Russian Center for Political Studies (PIR Center) and a Policy Analyst at the Islamic Renaissance Front (Kuala Lumpur).

Amir Roknifard is an information security specialist with an interest in the Middle East politics based in South East Asia.

11 April 2015