R.E.A.L. urges all people to Choose Love, Not Hate – Love Wins.
Security officials examine the site of suicide bomb attacks at the Saint Syed Ali bin Osman Al-Hajvery shrine, popularly known as Data Ganj Bakhsh in Lahore on July 2, 2010. - Photo by AFP.
The British Muslims for Secular Democracy (BMSD) has issued a press release on its views supporting the barring of Imam Zakir Naik from the United Kingdom. BMSD stated that “British Muslims for Secular Democracy (bmsd) approves of the decision to exclude Zakir Naik from the UK, based on thorough research conducted by the Home Office,” stating that many of Zakir Naik’s “statements are not conducive to the public good. For example, he made this remark on Osama bin Laden in 2006: ‘If he is terrorising the terrorists, if he is terrorising America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, every Muslim should be a terrorist.’ bmsd supports rigorous application of the exclusion policy to any international speaker who incites hatred and violence. However, it is also vital that the Home Office are consistent in their application of a tool as powerful – and potentially controversial – as exclusion. ”
Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.) reported on May 31, 2010 on the plans of Zakir Naik to visit the United Kingdom and his history of promoting views that seek to encourage others to deny religious freedom.
In October 2009, BMSD challenged the anti-democracy organization Islam4UK and its planned “Sharia law” march in London. BMSD stated that “Our protest against Islam4UK is based on our belief in, and commitment to, those liberal values that define the British state. This includes legal and constitutional equality for all, equal rights for women and minorities, and religious freedom, including the right to be free of faith.” In December 2009, BMSD led a counterprotest against the further efforts of the anti-democracy organization Islam4UK.
In November 2009 and December 2009, BMSD was critical of the efforts of the Stop Islamisation of Europe (SIOE) organization goals to have protests outside the Harrow Central Mosque, stating that “fear-mongering and misinformation whipped up by these demonstrations poses a threat to all British citizens who wants to live in a harmonious society.” In BMSD’s letter to SIOE, it stated that “By demonstrating outside a mosque under the banner, ‘Stop the Islamisation of Europe,’ ordinary peace-loving British Muslims end up feeling threatened and have begun to believe that their fundamental right to practice their religion is being curtailed. In any case, Harrow is an exemplar of good community relations, facilitated by strong communication and co-operation between different faith communities and various agencies such as the police and the local council. Our Director Tehmina Kazi can testify to this, as she has lived in Harrow for over 20 years. Individuals affiliated with Harrow Central Mosque joined our counter-protest against Al Muhajiroun and their leading members wholeheartedly support the merits of secular democracy alongside bmsd. Your campaign is also fuelling the notion that somehow organisations such as SIOE are against all Muslims and the religion Islam in itself. This is being used by the extremist elements within Muslim communities to enhance their recruitment.”
— “Raise awareness within British Muslims and the wider public, of democracy particularly ‘secular democracy’ helping to contribute to a shared vision of citizenship (the separation of faith and state, so faiths exert no undue influence on policies and there is a shared public space).”
— “Encourage religious understanding and harmony, respect for different systems of beliefs, and encourage an understanding and celebration of the variety of Muslim cultures, values and traditions which are present in British society.”
BMSD states that it seeks to achieve these aims by:
— “Facilitating discourse and raising awareness of democracy particularly ‘secular democracy’ and its benefits.”
— “Facilitating broad and enlightened theological discourses, to enable British Muslims and the wider public to be better informed about the Islamic faith.”
— “Raising awareness of religious influence on UK domestic and foreign policies, particularly those which may lead to undue effect on civil liberties.”
— “Addressing Islamophobia and prejudice against Muslims and Muslim communities.”
— “Working with UK and global Muslim and other organisations, opposing radicalism and intolerant beliefs.”
— “Ensuring that politicians and community leaders encourage and practise transparency and ensure legitimate voting practices are followed.”
— “Engaging with marginalised Muslim communities, helping to identify root causes of deprivation and social exclusion, and help work towards a solution.”
— “Providing a lively and interesting social/educational programme which showcases the variety of Muslim histories, cultures, values and traditions in the UK today.”
— “Be responsive to the changing needs and pressures on succeeding generations of British Muslims and adjust and add to its programmes and projects accordingly.”
“British Muslims for Secular Democracy (bmsd) approves of the decision to exclude Zakir Naik from the UK, based on thorough research conducted by the Home Office. Dr Naik is a high-profile figure who has been elevated to a position of power and influence, and many of his statements are not conducive to the public good. For example, he made this remark on Osama bin Laden in 2006: ‘If he is terrorising the terrorists, if he is terrorising America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, every Muslim should be a terrorist.'”
“bmsd supports rigorous application of the exclusion policy to any international speaker who incites hatred and violence. However, it is also vital that the Home Office are consistent in their application of a tool as powerful – and potentially controversial – as exclusion. ”
“Dr Shaaz Mahboob, Vice-Chair of bmsd, said: ‘This is an encouraging decision from the new Government. We would now like to see them take a similarly firm approach to far-right organisations that stir up racial hatred, and domestic extremists such as the newly-formed ‘Muslims Against Crusades,’ who hurled abuse at the Royal Anglian Regiment homecoming parade in Barking on 15th June 2010.’ ”
Notes to the editors:
“1. bmsd is made up of a group of Muslim democrats of diverse ethnic and social backgrounds, who support a clear separation between religion and the State.”
“2. bmsd’s mission statement: ‘To promote civic engagement, social inclusion, responsible citizenship and good governance particularly within constituent Muslim communities of Britain; in order to build an understanding of the shared values between all citizens to enable them to live in an inclusive, pluralist, secular and confident Britain.'”
“3. bmsd claims no mandate or false representative status. Our primary concern is democratic engagement not detailed theological analysis or debate. The level and depth of commitment to the doctrinal core and orthodoxy of the faith varies among Muslims as much as it does in members of other faith groups. bmsd founders wish to create a platform for alternative, diverse Muslim views, essential for a progressive, multi-layered, democratic identity that is not in conflict with itself or fellow citizens.”
“4. For details please visit http://www.bmsd.org.uk ”
Freedom of speech includes freedom to offend – but when a preacher’s words incite violence, there has to be some sanction
British Muslims for Secular Democracy (BMSD)'s Tehmina Kazi
“What do Dr Zakir Naik, Russian skinhead Pavel Skachevsky, far-right US talk show host Michael Savage, former Kahane Chai leader Mike Guzovsky and Kansas Baptist pastor Fred Phelps have in common? They are all on the list of people who have been banned from entering the UK.”
“Several commentators, like Inayat Bunglawala last week, have asked exactly what Naik has done to deserve such company. A quick internet search of his public statements throws up the following: ‘You heard the Muslims saying Osama Bin Laden is right or wrong. I reject them … We don’t know. But if you ask my view, if this is the truth, if he is fighting the enemies of Islam, I am for him. I don’t know what he’s doing. I’m not in touch with him. I don’t know him personally. I read the newspaper. If he is terrorising the terrorists, if he is terrorising America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, I am with him … The thing is, if he’s terrorising a terrorist, he’s following Islam.’ Other incendiary remarks include: ‘Muslims in India would prefer the Islamic criminal law to be implemented on all Indians since it is the most practical’, ‘The Jews, by nature as a whole, will be against Muslims’, (Western Mail, 16 August 2006) plus an assertion that western women make themselves more susceptible to sexual assault by wearing revealing clothing.”
“While it is evident that most of Naik’s views are out of step with the values of any 21st-century liberal democracy, this in itself does not provide sufficient justification to exclude him from the UK. As Lord Justice Sedley stated in the notable high court judgment Redmond-Bate vs Director of Public Prosecutions [1999]: ‘Free speech includes not only the inoffensive, but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative, providing it does not intend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having.’ Incitement to violence is a crucial caveat of this fundamental principle, and forms the basis of the Home Office’s ‘unacceptable behaviour’ policy. Proscribed actions on the list include the glorification of terrorism, provoking others to commit terrorist or criminal acts, and fostering hatred which might lead to inter-community violence within the UK. Therefore, the most problematic of Naik’s statements are the ones that appear to condone violence: ‘If a Muslim becomes a non-Muslim and propagates his/her new religion then, it is as good as treason. There is a ‘death penalty’ in Islam for such a person.’ Naik’s supporters have cited his freedom of speech as a reason for overturning this exclusion order, but would he take a similar stance if a famous ex-Muslim chose to convene a speaking tour in Pakistan, for example? Further, Najibullah Zazi, who was arrested in September 2009 for planning suicide attacks on the New York subway, is said to have become ‘enchanted’ with Zakir Naik before planning his attack.”
“My organisation, British Muslims for Secular Democracy, supports rigorous application of the exclusion policy to any international speaker who incites hatred or violence. However, it is also vital that the Home Office is consistent in its application of a tool as powerful — and potentially controversial — as exclusion. To its credit, the Home Office made a statement on Geert Wilders clarifying its position, after the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal overturned the ban on his entry to the UK in October 2009. Contrary to popular opinion, it wasn’t the Home Office but the tribunal that allowed Wilders into the country.”
“Supporters of Naik have jumped to his defence by claiming that his more controversial statements, like ‘Every Muslim should be a terrorist’, should be viewed in their proper context: ‘Every Muslim should be a terrorist. A terrorist is a person who causes terror. The moment a robber sees a policeman he is terrified. A policeman is a terrorist for the robber. Similarly every Muslim should be a terrorist for the antisocial elements of society, such as thieves, dacoits and rapists. Whenever such an antisocial element sees a Muslim, he should be terrified. It is true that the word ‘terrorist’ is generally used for a person who causes terror among the common people. But a true Muslim should only be a terrorist to selective people ie antisocial elements, and not to the common innocent people. In fact, a Muslim should be a source of peace for innocent people.'”
“This semi-clarification of ‘antisocial elements’ is all well and good, but what Naik fails to elucidate is exactly who the ‘common innocent people’ are. One would imagine that based on his other pronouncements, they don’t include apostates or gay people. In any case, such defences of Naik entirely miss the point. As a medical doctor and speaker whose lectures on Peace TV are broadcast to millions of Muslims across the world, he is in an incredibly powerful position. Therefore, he must bear total responsibility for every single word that leaves his lips (or his keyboard). Not only should Naik and other religious leaders be extremely careful with the terminology they use (as per the Qur’anic injunction, ‘Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious’), they should be prepared for any criticism that comes their way if certain individuals cite them as ‘inspirations’ and take their more controversial statements too literally. Many of Naik’s supporters point to his remarks condemning 9/11 and 7/7, but nothing less than a clear and consistent repudiation of the quotes mentioned in this article will do.”
We have written the Hizb ut-Tahrir America organization and challenged them to a public debate before the American people on their views in seeking a global Khilafah (Caliphate) versus our views of unqualified, Universal Human Rights for all people. We are issuing this public challenge to Hizb ut-Tahrir America to do so.
Hizb ut-Tahrir also has repeatedly called for the “death penalty” for those who leave Islam. At Hizb ut-Tahrir America’s July 19, 2009 event in Chicago, they distributed a pamphlet (page 62) that supports killing those individuals who leave Islam as guilty of “treason and a political attack on the Khilafah.”
R.E.A.L. has Muslim supporters who share this commitment for democracy, equality, liberty, and our universal human rights. We know that Hizb ut-Tahrir does not represent all Muslims.
We ask such Muslims who support human freedoms to contact us, so that we can stand in solidarity to show groups like Hizb ut-Tahrir that we are united in rejecting their calls against democracy and against human freedoms. Join us to demonstrate that we are all united in being Responsible for Equality and Liberty.
Our stand for human rights is also a stand for respect, for dignity, and for love of our fellow human beings. We do not offer an upraised fist to those we disagree with, but instead offer an outstretched hand of fellowship to urge them to embrace our unqualified universal human rights.
What We Believe - Responsible for Equality And Liberty's Jeffrey Imm Demonstrating Outside Hizb ut-Tahrir America's July 19, 2009 Chicago EventOrange Ribbon for Universal Human Rights - Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.)
Canadian media have reported on the conviction of Muhammad Parvez and Waqas Parvez, the 60 year old father and brother of 16 year old Muslim girl Aqsa Parvez, in the “honor killing” murder of Aqsa Parvez on December 10, 2007 in Mississauga, Canada.
Aqsa Parvez - 16 year old victim of December 10, 2007 "honor killing"
Canadian Justice Bruce Durno told a Brampton court that the actions of Muhammad Parvez and Waqas Parvez were “that twisted, chilling and repugnant mindset could imply that the family pride could at least be kept intact — or perhaps even enhanced — by having two grown men overpower and kill a vulnerable teenager.” Justice Durno stated that “It is profoundly disturbing that a 16-year-old woman, no doubt facing significant challenges adjusting to living in a very different society than her parents’, could be murdered by her father and brother for the purpose of saving the family pride.” Justice Durno concluded that the “twisted, repugnant mindset requires a sentence that sends a message to others who would be like-minded. Because of the abhorrent motivation behind this crime and the gender inequality issues, 18 years is a fit sentence.”
Muslim teenager Aqsa Parvez killed in "honor killing" in December 2007 (Photo: Courtesy Ebonie Mitchell)
The Parvez family moved from Pakistan to Mississauga, Canada in 2001. Media reports that 16 year old Aqsa Parvez spoke to school officials about abusive home conditions. She preferred to wear Western fashions, rejected the hijab, sought to spend time with friends her age, sought to have a room with a door for privacy, and was seeking to hold a part-time job. She had gone to her first movie shortly before her death in December 2007. She had run away from home twice.
Canadian prosecuting attorney Sandra Caponecchia was quoted as stating “She confided in her closest friends that her father had sworn to her on the Koran that if she ran away again, he would kill her.”
The Toronto Star reported: “Based on their admissions and Aqsa’s mother’s words that were recorded in a police interview room, Durno seemed to agree with Crown prosecutors Sandra Caponecchia and Mara Basso that they killed her to uphold the family honor in their community.”
Mississauga News reported that Tarek Fatah, founder of the Canadian Muslim Congress stated Aqsa Parvez’ murder was “a blight on Islam” and that “Canadians are justified in raising concerns as to whether this is a sign of the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in their own backyard… A young life has been snuffed out — likely in the name of honor and Islam.” On June 17, 2010, the National Post reported that “Canada should expect rise in honor killings,” quoting “Amin Muhammad, a professor of psychiatry at Memorial University of Newfoundland who specializes in transcultural psychiatry.”
Muslim teenager Aqsa Parvez killed in "honor killing" in December 2007 (Photo: Courtesy Ebonie Mitchell)
========================================
Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.) supports women’s rights and children’s rights to live without oppression, without fear, without intimidation, and without the threat and reality of violence against them. We urge all to support such universal human rights and dignity for all people, in accordance with our universal human rights. Choose Love, Not Hate. Love Wins.
In Afghanistan, over 1,000 protesters have demonstrated in Mazar-e-Sharif in northern Afghanistan against foreign Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and allegations of proselytizing by two Christian aid organizations, with protesters calling for punishment against Christian converts.
Afghanistan: Over 1000 at Mazar-e-Sharif Protest against Christian Converts
The Church World Service Deputy Director and Head of Programs Maurice A. Bloem stated that “Our work is entirely humanitarian — meaning we are impartial, neutral, and independent. We fully adhere to and support the Red Cross/Red Crescent Code of Conduct, which mandates that Ingots do nothing to further a religious agenda. We have never and will never engage in any religious proselytism. Such activities are contrary to our mandate as a humanitarian organization, and we fully respect the religion of the communities we serve. Any allegations that we have engaged in proselytism are entirely false — and we are fully cooperating with the investigation by the Ministry of Economy and look forward to its result.”
On June 1, 2010, a member of the Afghanistan Parliament called for the death penalty for any possible Christian converts. AFP and ICC reported that Abdul Sattar Khawasi, deputy secretary of the Afghan lower house in parliament, called for the death penalty of Afghanistan citizens choosing to become Christians, shown in a television program showing Afghans being baptized with water.Khawasi stated: “Those Afghans that appeared in this video film should be executed in public, the house should order the attorney general and the NDS (intelligence agency) to arrest these Afghans and execute them.” RAWA also reported that “Qazi Nazir Ahmad, a lawmaker from the western province of Herat, said killing a converted Muslim was ‘not a crime.'”
Image of Afghan Being Baptized - Shown to Afghanistan Parliament
Afghan Parliament Calling for Death Penalty for Apostates (Photo: Gulf Times)
Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.) supports our unqualified, universal human rights for all people – including their freedom of religion, freedom of worship, and freedom of conscience, as defined in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.” Our unqualified support for such universal human rights do not apply just for those we like or those who are like us, but for all people, everywhere, whether it is convenient or not, and whether it is popular or not.
We offer an outstretched hand, not an upraised fist, to those who reject such freedoms, and urge them to understand that such human rights are for us all.
We urge the Afghan people, the Afghanistan government to accept such universal human rights for all people. We call upon the United States government, international governments, international bodies, and the American and European people involved in the Afghanistan war to demand genuine support of such universal human rights by the Afghanistan government – and to be Responsible for Equality And Liberty.
We urge those who support hatred and violence to people of different faiths and different identity groups, to release the burden of hate and violence from your hearts. Choose Love, Not Hate. Love Wins.
In NYC’s John F. Kennedy airport, two New Jersey men were arrested and have been charged with planning terrorism . The initial reports have indicated that the two men arrested, Mohamed Hamoud Alessa and Carlos Eduardo Almonte, were planning to join terrorist groups in Somalia, and were flying from JFK airport to Egypt en route to Somalia. In Somalia, they planned to join the Al Shabaab, which has been linked to Al-Qaeda. They planned to arrive in Cairo, Egypt, and then perhaps take a boat to Somalia. They had previously been in Jordan in 2007, and AP reports that they unsuccessfully tried to get to Iraq in the past.
Police Photos of Mohamed Alessa and Carlos Almonte (Photo: Department of Justice)
The accused Alessa and Almonte had been training in an “outdoor facility in West Milford, New Jersey” and had been teaching military tactics to an undercover law enforcement officer in Jersey City, New Jersey. The accused repeatedly listened to and played recording of American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki “promoting violent jihad and martyrdom.” Anwar al-Awlaki, who is now believed to be in Yemen, has regularly praised terrorist organizations and was in contact with the Fort Hood accused terrorist Nidal Hasan. In addition, the accused reportedly also watched videos by Adam Gadahn (aka Azzam al-Amriki) praising Nidal Hasan.
Inspirations for Mohamed Alessa and Carlos Almonte to Kill Non-Muslims: Anwar Al-Awlaki, Nidal Hassan, Adam Gadahn
The criminal complaint also addresses the accused regularly discussing plans to “wage violent jihad” and join “violent jihadist groups operating in Somalia.” In their discussions, they reportedly considered joining various “violent jihadist groups that were operating in Somalia, including Al-Shabaab, Hizbul Islam, and Ahlu Sunna wa’l Jama’a, ” but Almonte viewed that Al-Shabaab “is the main one… the main thing.”
The criminal complaint states that “On November 29, 2009, in Jersey City, New Jersey, in the presence of Almonte, Alessa stated, in part: “We’ll start doing killing here, if I can’t do it over there.” Alessa also reportedly stated “A lot of people need to get killed, bro, swear to God… I have to get a… assault rifle and just kill anyone that even looks at me the wrong way, bro. Nah, I swear to God, bro. I wanna, like – I’m not – my – my soul cannot rest until I shed blood. I wanna, like, be the world’s known terrorist… I swear to God.” He also reportedly stated: “I’m gonna get a gun…. I’ll have more bodies on it – than the – than the hairs on my beard. You know what I’m saying? It’s already enough, you don’t worship Allah, so… that’s a reason for you to die… We’re being pushed by every corner of the earth, yanni. They only fear you when you have a gun and when you – when you start killing them, and when you – when you take their head, and you go like this, and you behead it on camera, and you – you have to be ruthless bro. I swear to God, bro. Enough of this punk (expletive). It’s that everyone has to be ruthless to – with these people. We’ll start doing killing here, if I can’t do it over there. I’m gonna get locked up in the airport? Then you’re gonna die here, then. That’s how it is. Freaking Major-Nidal-shaved-face-Palestinian-crazy guy; he’s not better than me. I’ll do twice what he did.”
According to the complaint, on November 30, 2009, Alessa instructed Almonte and the FBI undercover agent on how to kill a guard with a knife, and then Alessa told the FBI undercover agent “and whenever they think I’m leaving, they always think I’m gonna come back, yanni. I leave this time, God Willing, I never come back. I’ll never see this crap hole. Only way I would come back here is if I was in the land of jihad and the leader ordered me to come back here and do something here. Ah, I love that.”
The complaint also reveals Alessa talking to Almonte and the FBI undercover agent about saving up money for the trip to Somalia. The complaint indicates that the duo planned to fly to Cairo, Egypt, and then considered various options on getting to Somalia, including taking a boat from Egypt to Somalia. During the discussion on funds saved for the Somalia trip, Alessa reportedly told Almonte and the FBI undercover agent that about stealing equipment, saying “you get your weapons when you get there… and then, you kill non-Muslims and you take the spoils of war. The leader gets them (referring to weapons), and distributes it amongst the ranks. Best life.”
The duo frequently worked out, and according to the complaint “Alessa stated [on January 3, 2010] that stronger muscles mean bigger muscles which means killing more non-Muslims.” On the same date, they listened to another lecture from Anwar al-Awlaki who “emphasized that an individual need not rely on others or have a leader in order to wage violent jihad.”
According to the complaint, on January 17, 2010, Alessa providing instruction to Almonte and the FBI Undercover Agent regarding: “(1) how they should love believers of Islam and hate non-Muslims; (2) the enemies of Allah, specifically: (a) the devil; (b) one’s self; (c) non-believers; (d) hypocrites; (e) Jews; and (f) Christians; and (3) the importance of waging violent jihad.”
THe FBI had been watching the accused for 4 years, and according to the criminal complaint, “On October 9, 2006, a member of the public (‘Individual 1’) who knows the DEFENDANTS sent a tip through the FBI’S website concerning the activities of the DEFENDANTS. In that electronic message, Individual 1 stated” ‘every time they (referring to the DEFENDANTS) access the Internet all they look for is all those terrorist videos about the Islam holly [sic] war and where they kill US soldiers and other terrible things… They keep saying that Americans are their enemies, that everybody other than Islamic followers are their enemies.. and they all must be killed.”
The complaint also stated that a family member told law enforcement that the accused “watched a video on the computer about suicide vest bombs.”
— New Jersey Star-Ledger: Two N.J. men arrested at JFK airport before boarding plane to join Islamist terrorist group, authorities say
— New Jersey Star-Ledger reports: “Mohamed Hamoud Alessa, 20, of North Bergen, and Carlos Eduardo Almonte, 26, of Elmwood Park were apprehended at John F. Kennedy International Airport in Queens before they could board separate flights to Egypt, where they were to start journeys to Somalia”
— “Officials said the suspects were not planning an imminent attack in the New Jersey-New York area but were believed to be joining with the terrorist fight against Americans in Somalia.”
— “Authorities said the men planned to wage jihad as part of a Somalia-based Islamist terror group called al Shabaab, an organization of several thousand fighters spread through Somalia’s southern region. Al Shabaab, whose full Arabic name means ‘Mujahideen Youth Movement,’ has had ties to al Qaeda since 2007, according to national security experts.”
— New Jersey Star-Ledger: Federal authorities charge 2 men from N.J. with pursuing dream of ‘holy war’ in Somalia
— Star-Ledger: “Also according to the complaint, Alessa said he wanted to be more successful at waging jihad than the Fort Hood shooter. ‘He’s not better than me. I’ll do twice what he did.'”
— “He also said he would start his holy war in the United States if he couldn’t get overseas and then hauntingly foreshadowed his own apprehension. “We’ll start doing (killing) here, if I can’t do it over there. I’m gonna get locked up in the airport? Then you’re gonna die here, then.'”
Hamas has raided and closed groups designed to support charity efforts for women and children in Gaza, according to the Jerusalem Post: and according to the Al-Mezan Center for Human Rights.
— “Gaza Internal Security Break into Offices of Five NGOs; Confiscate Belongings:Al Mezan Condemns the Assaults, Calls for Respecting the Law”
— “Five non-governmental organizations (NGOs) were raided and some of their belongings were confiscated by persons who presented themselves as members of the Gaza internal security apparatus. When they broke into the NGOs offices, these persons did not provide their names. They did not have any documents from courts or any other authorized bodies that would enable them to lawfully search the NGOs offices. Al Mezan condemns these assaults against NGOs and views them with much concern. Al Mezan calls on the Gaza Government to initiate an investigation into these acts, ensure full respect of the law, and protect the right of NGOs to work freely.”
— “According to affidavits given to Al Mezan by persons employed by the NGOs, between 10am and 12am on Monday 31 May 2010, the Gaza Government’s internal security apparatus broke into four NGOs offices in the town of Rafah in the south of the Gaza Strip. The NGOs are: Sharik Youth Institution, Bonat Al-Mustaqbal (Future Builders) Society, the South Society for Women’s Health, and the Women and Children Society. The raiders searched the offices and made a list of the equipment and other belongings in the NGOs. Later, between 6pm and 8pm on the same day, a group of persons, who also identified themselves as from the internal security apparatus, went to the offices of the same NGOs and called the directors by telephone. They confiscated most of the equipment and belongings, including computers, faxes, cameras, part of the documents, reports as well as the keys to their doors. The security members informed the directors that their organizations were closed. They did not provide any reasons behind this decision.”
— “At approximately 3pm on Monday 31 May 2010, eight members of the Gaza internal security apparatus appeared at Sharik Youth Institution office in Gaza City. They searched the office and confiscated 18 laptops, two desktops, three digital cameras and three USB memory sticks. They also took some papers and lists of names. One of the Sharik staff members made a list of the confiscated equipment. He asked the security members to sign the list One of them signed; however, without writing his name on it.”
— “In a separate incident, at approximately, 8am on Tuesday 1 June 2010, a group of persons who identified themselves as from the internal security apparatus broke into and Palestinian Mini Parliament and the National Reconciliation Committee. They confiscated the keys to their doors and ordered them closed.”
— “Al Mezan views these assaults on NGOs and the way they were carried out without any respect to the law with great concern….Al Mezan asserts that attacks on NGOs violate constitutional rights under Article 26 of the amended Palestinian Basic Law. Article 26 of this law provides for Palestinians right to participate in public life, particularly by forming syndicates, unions, institutions, clubs and popular institutions.”
Hamas Security (Photo: AP)Sharik Youth Institution Sea Camp (Photo: Sharik Youth Institution)Sharik Youth Institution on International Women's Day (Photo: Sharik Youth Institution)
Freedom House has announced its list of the “worst of the worst” human right violators in a report issued on June 3, 2010, which include three nations that are members of the U.N. Human Rights Council Saudi Arabia, Libya, Communist China, and Cuba). The Freedom House list includes 9 Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) nations (Somalia, Sudan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Chad, Guinea, and Syria), 5 Communist nations (North Korea, Communist China, Cuba, Laos, and the territory of Tibet under Communist Chinese jurisidiction), Burmese/Myanmar, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, and Belarus.
Leaders of Some of "Worst" Nations for Human Rights: OIC's Sudan President Omar Al-Bashir, Communist China's CCP General Secretary Hu Jintao, Burma/Myamar's Senior General Than Shwe
“Nine countries and one territory are judged to have the worst human rights conditions, receiving the lowest possible score of 7 (based on a 1 to 7 scale, with 1 representing the most free and 7 representing the least free) on both political rights and civil liberties: Burma, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Sudan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tibet.”
“An additional 8 countries and 2 territories score only slightly better, with a score of 7 in political rights and a score of 6 in the civil liberties category: Belarus, Chad, China, Cuba, Guinea, Laos, Saudi Arabia, and Syria.”
“The event included a release of the results by Freedom House director of advocacy, Paula Schriefer and remarks by Mr. Mamadi Kaba, President of RADDHO-Guinea, a leading Guinean human rights organization. Mr. Kaba is part of a delegation from Africa, sponsored by Freedom House, which is attending the Human Rights Council session to lobby for greater human rights in Africa. Of the 20 countries identified in the report, 6 are from Sub-Saharan Africa, including Guinea.”
“‘While it is shameful that three of the ‘Worst of the Worst’ regimes now actually sit on the Council (China, Cuba and Saudi Arabia) and a fourth (Libya) was just elected, we nonetheless call on the member states of the Council to fulfill their mandate and take actions to address the systemic abuses in these countries,’ continued Schriefer.”
“Since the Council was first established in 2006 to replace the widely discredited UN Commission on Human Rights, only a handful of ‘Worst of the Worst’ states — Burma, Guinea, Somalia, Sudan and North Korea — have been the focus of resolutions or special sessions by the UN body.”
— UN estimates that 1 in 3 women in Afghanistan experiences physical, sexual, or psychological abuse
— reports on woman who committed suicide to escape by burning herself alive
— interview with Rana Tarin (also spelled Roona Tahrin), head of women’s department who fears being killed, after replacing woman who was killed by Taliban
— women being taught to sow by Rana Tarin, then allowed to take sowing machine home – “the only safe place for a woman in Kandahar to work”
— CNN reporter Paula Hancock states that some women wearing the burqa for “reasons of becoming unrecognizable”
— women’s rights campaigner Shahidah Hussain does not dare to leave home without wearing burqa due to threats against her life
— threats are not unusual for Kandahar women who work, but now they feel unsafe working in their own homes
Rana Tarin (also spelled Roona Tahrin), head of women's department who fears being killed, after replacing woman who was killed by Taliban (Photo: CNN Clip)women being taught to sow by Rana Tarin, then allowed to take sowing machine home - "the only safe place for a woman in Kandahar to work" (Photo: CNN clip)CNN reporter Paula Hancock states that some women wearing the burqa for "reasons of becoming unrecognizable" (Photo: CNN Clip)women's rights campaigner Shahidah Hussain threatened with death (Photo: CNN Clip)
In the Maldives, Mohamed Nazim has announced his “reversion” to Islam, after being taken into police custody after publicly announcing that he was not a Muslim on May 28, 2010. As reported in our previous posting “Maldives: Man Attacked, Threatened with Death, for Freedom of Conscience,” Mohamed Nazim had announced that he was not a Muslim at a lecture by Zakir Naik (who widely calls for the death penalty for “apostates”), and then was promptly taken into police custody and given “counseling” by the Maldives government Islamic Ministry. Mohamed Nazim made his public “reversion” to Islam at the Maldives government Islamic Ministry before journalists invited by the Islamic Ministry.
Mohamed Nazim was brought before Maldivian media to make a statement to the press about his “reversion” to Islam, while the police are still deciding whether or not to bring criminal charges against Mohamed Nazim for choosing his freedom of conscience.
A Maldivian lawyer previously told the Maldives press that Mohamed Nazim had to be given such government “Islamic counseling” before capital punishment charges were considered against Mohamed Nazim for “apostasy.”
Haveeru News stated that: “Mohamed Nazim, 38, repented and gave the ‘Shahaadha’ testimony before journalists at the Islamic Ministry Tuesday with a public apology.” It quoted Mohamed Nazim as stating “And as that action was very much related to the feelings of all Maldivians, I believe that it was an agony for the Maldivian people. I deeply apologize for that to all the Maldivians. Along with that, I would like to say that the major misconceptions I had regarding Islam have been clarified. Therefore, I am now a Muslim. I want Maldivians to accept me as a Maldivian and as a child of this community.”
Maldives: While in Police Custody and Given Government "Islamic Counseling," Mohamed Nazim "Reverts" to Islam
The Minivan News also reported on the “reversion” of Mohamed Nazim while in police custody. The Minivan News further reported that the Maldivian NGO the “Islamic Foundation” leader Jammiyyathu Salaf Sheikh Abdulla Bin Mohamed stated that there were “many people trying to introduce other religions to the Maldives underground” and that he would “release the names of these underground people at the appropriate time.”
Article 18 of the UDHR reads: “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.”
