Tuesday, September 30, 2008
France: Sarkozy Should Use Syria Visit to Raise Rights, by Jessica Leblanc
French President Nicolas Sarkozy should use his visit to Syria on September 3 and 4, 2008, to raise human rights concerns with President Bashar al-Asad, Human Rights Watch said today. In particular, Sarkozy should urge Asad to release activists detained solely for exercising their rights to freedom of expression and association. He should also ask Asad to make public all information on the violent suppression of a riot at Sednaya prison in July 2008.
Commenting on his planned visit, Sarkozy said that he rejected the idea of isolating Syria, preferring “open dialogue leading to tangible progress.”
“Sarkozy should push for open dialogue on many issues, including the state of emergency, arrests of activists, the events at Sednaya prison and the repression of Kurdish identity,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “If President Sarkozy seeks tangible progress he should request the immediate release of peaceful activists.”
Sarkozy’s visit comes at a time of increased repression in Syria. Twelve activists, including Riad Seif, 61, a former member of parliament, are currently on trial for attending a meeting on December 1, 2007, of the National Council of the Damascus Declaration, a gathering of numerous opposition groups. They face politically motivated charges, such as “weakening national sentiment and awakening sectarian strife” and “spreading false news which would affect the morale of the country.” Their next trial session is scheduled for September 24.
Two other prominent activists, Michel Kilo and Mahmud `Issa, are serving prison terms for having called in May 2006 for improved relations between Lebanon and Syria – one of Sarkozy’s key policy objectives.
“Michel Kilo and Mahmud `Issa are in jail for demanding the exact same thing that President Sarkozy has asked of President Asad,” Whitson said.
Emergency rule, imposed in 1963, remains in effect, and Syria’s security services continue arbitrarily to detain people and frequently refuse to disclose their whereabouts for weeks – in effect forcibly disappearing them. Two weeks ago, on August 15, Syrian security services arrested Mash`al al-Temmo, the official spokesperson for the Kurdish Future Current in Syria, an unauthorized political party, while he was driving, and held him incommunicado for 11 days.
The authorities still restrict freedom of expression, and independent press remains nonexistent in Syria. The government has extended to online outlets restrictions it has traditionally applied to print and televised media, detaining and trying a number of journalists and activists for posting information online. Karim `Arbaji, 29, the moderator of www.akhwia.net, a popular online forum for Syrian youth covering social and political issues, is currently facing trial before the State Security Court for “spreading false information that may weaken national sentiment.” The Syrian government’s censorship extends to popular websites, such as www.facebook.com and www.youtube.com.
The authorities’ control of information in Syria is reflected in the complete blackout on any information concerning the prison riot that occurred at Sednaya prison in July. On the morning of July 5, Syrian military police opened fire on inmates at the military-run prison in an attempt to quell a riot that began following an aggressive prison search.
Two months after the incident, there is still no information about how the prison standoff ended, or the exact number and names of those killed and wounded. Human Rights Watch obtained the names of nine inmates who were believed killed. Syrian human rights organizations reported that as many as 25 may have been killed. The families of inmates thus far have been unable to obtain any information about their relatives.
In a briefing memorandum on the human rights situation in Syria sent Sarkozy on September 1, Human Rights Watch urged the French president to inquire about the deadly shooting and to urge Asad to order an independent investigation into the police’s use of lethal force at the prison and to make public immediately all information about the riot, including the names of those injured or killed.
Labels: Human Rights Watch, Jessica Leblanc, Syria
UN: Five Countries Responsible for All Executions of Juvenile Offenders Since 2005, by Renata Daninsky
Ending executions for crimes committed by children in just five countries would result in universal implementation of the prohibition on the juvenile death penalty, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. Governments should use next week’s United Nations General Assembly session opening to commit to urgently needed reforms to protect the rights of children in conflict with the law.
In the 20-page report, “The Last Holdouts: Ending the Juvenile Death Penalty in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Pakistan, and Yemen,” Human Rights Watch documents failures in law and practice that since January 2005 have resulted in 32 executions of juvenile offenders in five countries: Iran (26), Saudi Arabia (2), Sudan (2), Pakistan (1), and Yemen (1). The report also highlights cases of individuals recently executed or facing execution in the five countries, where well over 100 juvenile offenders are currently on death row, awaiting the outcome of a judicial appeal, or in some murder cases, the outcome of negotiations for pardons in exchange for financial compensation.
“We are only five states away from a complete ban on the juvenile death penalty,” said Clarisa Bencomo, Middle East children’s rights researcher for Human Rights Watch. “These few holdouts should abandon this barbaric practice so that no one ever again is executed for a crime committed as a child.”
Every state in the world has ratified or acceded to treaties obligating them to ensure that juvenile offenders – persons under 18 at the time of the crime – are never sentenced to death. The overwhelming majority of states complies with this obligation, with several states – including the United States and China – in recent years moving to ban the juvenile death penalty and strengthen juvenile justice protections.
The vast majority of executions of juvenile offenders take place in Iran, where judges can impose the death penalty in capital cases if the defendant has attained “majority,” defined in Iranian law as 9 years for girls and 15 years for boys. Iran is known to have executed six juvenile offenders so far in 2008, including two in August: Behnam Zare on August 26, 2008, and Seyyed Reza Hejazi on August 19, 2008. Over 130 other juvenile offenders are currently sentenced to death.
In Saudi Arabia judges have discretion to impose the death sentence on children from puberty or 15 years – whichever comes first. Saudi Arabia executed at least two juvenile offenders in 2007: Dhahiyan bin Rakan bin Sa`d al-Thawri al-Sibai`i on July 21, 2007, and Mu`id bin Husayn bin Abu al-Qasim bin `Ali Hakami on July 10, 2007. Hakami was only 13 years old at the time of the alleged crime, and 15 at the time of his execution. According to his father, Saudi authorities did not inform the family of the execution until days later, and did not return boy’s body.
In Sudan, the 2005 Interim National Constitution allows for the juvenile death penalty for certain crimes, including murder and armed robbery resulting in murder or rape. Vague language in Sudan’s 2004 Child Law leaves open the possibility that children can still be sentenced to death under the 1991 Penal Code, which defines an adult as “a person whose puberty has been established by definite natural features and who has completed 15 years of age ... [or] attained 18 years of age ... even if the features of puberty do not appear.” With more than 35 percent of Sudanese births not registered, even very young juvenile offenders can face execution because they have no birth certificates to prove their age at the time of the offense. Sudan executed two juvenile offenders, Mohammed Jamal Gesmallah and Imad Ali Abdullah, on August 31, 2005, and has sentenced at least four other juvenile offenders to death since January 2005.
In Pakistan, the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance of 2000 bans the death penalty for crimes committed by persons under 18 at the time of the offense, but authorities have yet to implement it in all territories. With only 29.5 percent of births registered, juvenile offenders can find it impossible to convince a judge they were children at the time of the crime. Pakistan executed one such juvenile offender, Mutabar Khan, on June 13, 2006.
In Yemen, the Penal Code sets a maximum 10-year sentence for capital crimes committed by persons under 18, but in a country with only 22 percent of births registered and minimal capacity for forensic age determinations, children can find it impossible to prove their age at the time of the crime. Yemen last executed a juvenile offender, Adil Muhammad Saif al-Ma'amari, in February 2007, despite his allegation that he was 16 at the time of the crime and had been tortured to confess. According to nongovernmental organizations and government sources, in 2007 at least 18 other juvenile offenders were on death row.
“Even states that still execute juvenile offenders acknowledge that such executions are wrong,” said Bencomo. “But changes in law and practice need to be faster.”
In the coming weeks the United Nations secretary-general will report back to the UN General Assembly on follow-up to the latter’s ground-breaking December 2007 resolution calling for a moratorium on the death penalty for all crimes. Human Right Watch calls on UN member states to request that the secretary-general issue a similar report on compliance with the absolute ban on the juvenile death penalty, including information on:
1. The number of juvenile offenders currently sentenced to death, and the number executed during the last five years;
2. Rates of birth registration; and
3. States’ implementation of relevant domestic legislation, including mechanisms ensuring juvenile offenders have legal assistance at all stages of investigation and trial.
Labels: Children, Human Rights Watch, Renata Daninsky, UN
Afghanistan: Civilian Deaths From Airstrikes, by Marie-Êve Marineau
Civilian deaths in Afghanistan from US and NATO airstrikes nearly tripled from 2006 to 2007, with recent deadly airstrikes exacerbating the problem and fuelling a public backlash, Human Rights Watch said in a new report released today. The report also condemns the Taliban’s use of “human shields” in violation of the laws of war.
Though operational changes advocated by Human Rights Watch have reduced the rate of civilian casualties since they spiked in July 2007, continuing tragedies, such as the July 6, 2008 strike on a wedding party and the August 22, 2008 bombing in Azizabad, have greatly undermined local support for the efforts of international forces providing security in Afghanistan.
The 43-page report, “‘Troops in Contact’: Airstrikes and Civilian Deaths in Afghanistan,” analyzes the use of airstrikes by US and NATO forces and resulting civilian casualties, particularly when used to make up for the lack of ground troops and during emergency situations. Human Rights Watch found few civilian deaths resulted from planned airstrikes, while almost all deaths occurred in unplanned airstrikes.
“Rapid response airstrikes have meant higher civilian casualties, while every bomb dropped in populated areas amplifies the chance of a mistake,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Mistakes by the US and NATO have dramatically decreased public support for the Afghan government and the presence of international forces providing security to Afghans.”
The report documents how insurgent forces have contributed to the civilian toll from airstrikes by deploying their forces in populated villages, at times with the specific intent to shield their forces from counterattack, a serious violation of the laws of war. Human Rights Watch found several instances where Taliban forces purposefully used civilians as shields to deter US and NATO attacks.
In 2006, at least 929 Afghan civilians were killed in fighting related to the armed conflict. Of those, at least 699 died during Taliban attacks (including suicide bombings and other bombings unlawfully targeting civilians) and at least 230 died during US or NATO attacks. Of the latter, 116 were killed by US or NATO airstrikes. In 2007, at least 1,633 Afghan civilians were killed in fighting related to the armed conflict. Of those, some 950 died during attacks by the various insurgent forces, including the Taliban and al-Qaeda. At least 321 were killed by US or NATO airstrikes. Thus, civilian deaths from US and NATO airstrikes nearly tripled from 2006 to 2007.
In the first seven months of 2008, at least 540 Afghan civilians were killed in fighting related to the armed conflict. Of those, at least 367 died during attacks by the various insurgent forces and 173 died during US or NATO attacks. At least 119 were killed by US or NATO airstrikes. For all periods cited, Human Rights Watch uses the most conservative figures available.
Human Rights Watch criticized the poor response by US officials when civilian deaths occur. Prior to conducting investigations into airstrikes causing civilian loss, US officials often immediately deny responsibility for civilian deaths or place all blame on the Taliban. US investigations conducted have been unilateral, ponderous, and lacking in transparency, undercutting rather than improving relations with local populations and the Afghan government. A faulty condolence payment system has not provided timely and adequate compensation to assist civilians harmed by US actions.
“The US needs to end the mistakes that are killing so many civilians,” said Adams. “The US must also take responsibility, including by providing timely compensation, when its airstrikes kill Afghan civilians. While Taliban shielding is a factor in some civilian deaths, the US shouldn’t use this as an excuse when it could have taken better precautions. It is, after all, its bombs that are doing the killing.”
Human Rights Watch found that few civilians casualties occurred as the result of planned airstrikes on suspected Taliban targets. Instead, most cases of civilian deaths from airstrikes occurred during the fluid, rapid-response strikes mostly carried out in support of “troops in contact” – ground troops who are under insurgent attack. Such unplanned strikes included situations where US special forces units – normally small in number and lightly armed – came under insurgent attack; in US/NATO attacks in pursuit of insurgent forces who had retreated to populated villages; and in air attacks where US “anticipatory self-defense” rules of engagement applied.
The effects of airstrikes go beyond civilian deaths. For example, an investigation by the Afghan government found that two battles over a three-day period starting April 30, 2007 in Shindand district resulted in the destruction of numerous homes. In every case investigated by Human Rights Watch where airstrikes hit villages, many civilians had to leave the village because of damage to their homes and fear of further strikes. People from neighboring villages also sometimes fled in fear of future strikes on their villages. This has led to large numbers of internally displaced persons.
To respond to public concern and complaints from President Hamid Karzai, in July 2007 the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) announced several changes in targeting tactics. These changes include employing smaller munitions, delaying attacks where civilians might be harmed, and turning over house-to-house searches to the Afghan National Army. A review of available evidence suggests that the changes had some impact, as there was a significant drop in civilian casualties due to airstrikes in the last half of 2007, even as the overall tonnage of bombs dropped increased.
Human Rights Watch welcomed these changes in targeting, but remained concerned by continuing civilian casualties from airstrikes, particularly as the number of airstrikes has increased dramatically and the number of deaths and injuries has spiked this summer.
Human Rights Watch called for the US and NATO to address the rising civilian death toll from unplanned airstrikes, and to fix continuing problems with field collateral damage estimation and the inconsistent application of their Rules of Engagement.
“The recent airstrikes killing dozens of Afghans make clear that the system is still broken and that civilians continue to pay the ultimate price,” said Adams. “Civilian deaths from airstrikes act as a recruiting tool for the Taliban and risk fatally undermining the international effort to provide basic security to the people of Afghanistan.”
Labels: Afghanistan, Human Rights Watch, Marie-Êve Marineau
France: UN Calls for Counterterrorism Reform, by Noémie Cournoyer
France should urgently carry out recommendations from a top United Nations human rights body critical of its approach to counterterrorism, Human Rights Watch said today in a letter to the French government.
“The UN has given France a roadmap to bring its counterterrorism policies into line with human rights requirements,” said Jean-Marie Fardeau, director of Human Rights Watch’s Paris office. “France sees itself as a leader on human rights. It should demonstrate that leadership by moving promptly to implement the findings of the UN’s key rights body.”
In a report issued following an in-depth review in July 2008, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concern that France’s counterterrorism policies do not fully comply with international fair trial standards and that they put individuals at risk of being returned to nations where they could be subject to torture. The committee, composed of internationally recognized experts, assesses compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Among the problems highlighted in its report on France are:
Lack of appropriate safeguards during police custody. Terrorism suspects can be held in police custody for up to six days before being brought before a judge. They can be held for up to 72 hours before being given access to a lawyer. Like other criminal suspects in France, they are not informed of their right to remain silent under questioning. Research by Human Rights Watch has found that the lack of safeguards means that terrorism suspects in France are often subject to oppressive questioning in police custody.
Lengthy pre-trial detention. Terrorism suspects can be detained for up to four years and eight months before trial. “[T]he institutionalized practice of extended detention for investigative purposes … is difficult to reconcile with the right guaranteed in the Covenant to be tried within a reasonable time,” the committee said in its report.
Inadequate protection against removal to risk of ill-treatment. There is no provision to suspend automatically an order for deportation in national security cases when an appeal is filed, even when individuals allege that they face torture or ill-treatment in the destination country. Another UN body, the Committee against Torture, has twice criticized France since 2005 for deporting individuals who had raised fear of torture on return before their appeals had been fully examined.
“This criticism from the UN tarnishes France’s leadership on counterterrorism and its global efforts to promote respect for human rights,” said Fardeau. “If France listens to the UN and implements its recommendations, it can strengthen its position on both counts. Parliament can also help by monitoring the process.”
Similar concerns about France’s human rights safeguards in its approach to the prosecution of terrorism offenses were expressed during the May 2008 examination of France’s human rights record under the newly established universal periodic review procedure at the UN Human Rights Council.
The Human Rights Committee’s recommendations to the French government include:
Providing any suspect ordered to be forcibly removed from France with time to file for asylum, the services of a translator and a guarantee that the removal order will be suspended until the process is completed.
Informing anyone arrested on a criminal charge, including terrorism suspects, of the right to remain silent and providing a right to see a lawyer immediately. The suspect should be promptly brought before a judge.
Limiting pre-trial detention and strengthening the authority of the judges who determine whether to place someone in detention awaiting trial.
The Human Rights Committee also expressed concern about a recent law allowing detention of certain former violent offenders for one-year renewable periods after they have served their prison sentence, concluding that it called into question the right to the presumption of innocence and the right not to be punished twice for the same crime. The Committee recommended that the law be re-examined in light of France’s obligations under the ICCPR.
Labels: France, Human Rights Watch, Noémie Cournoyer, UN
Quebec - B. Kay et R. Kay and R. Martineau : Mulcair must denounce the fatwas against senseless and Dutrizac Corus network. Pronto!
The radio Dutrizac Benedict, and Corus, the owner of the station 98.5 FM, are the latest victims of Jihad legal conducted under a fatwa as weapons of mass destruction against freedom of expression anywhere in the West by Islamic fascism. The saddest is to see the left and our politicians serve as useful idiots in this intimidation and sabotage our hard-won democratic freedoms. Treason! Cowardice! Shameless opportunism!
Two columnists, Barbara Kay in the National Post, and Richard Martineau on the blog of the Journal of Montreal, Mulcair call to denounce these attacks against indecent Dutrizac Benedict for his interview with the NDP candidate Samira Laoun. The interview of Ms. Laoun is available here. And the reaction of Mark on Lebuis Dutrizac the next day is here.
These ridiculous attacks launched for the purpose of intimidation, from the leftist newspaper The Dominion, the Canadian Arab Federation and the Canadian Union of Public Employees (Ontario). See our brief: Quebec - The Canadian Arab Federation, with support from the Canadian Union of Public Employees, is the head of Dutrizac for his interview with Samira Laoun
SOS Racism, by Richard Martineau
The speed with which some agencies shout racism will continue to m'étonner. Soon it will no longer separate the white and color when will our laundry without receiving a complaint from the League of Rights and Freedoms.
Untouchables
Take Benoît Dutrizac.
On 10 September, my former colleague snipers received Samira Laoun, NDP candidate in Bourassa, the issue that animates the airwaves FM talked about Montreal (98.5 FM).
Ex-citizen of Morocco, Mrs. Laoun bears the hijab. She also worked as a Program Manager at Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC), a lobby ultrareligieux who has campaigned for Ontario allows the introduction of Shariah courts.
If Dutrizac had received Nicole Charbonneau Barron (conservative candidate who has worked for Opus Dei), it would have raised questions about the Catholic extremism, the anti-abortion lobby, creationism, abstinence, his vision of 'Homosexuality, and so on.
Nobody would protest and, as everyone would have found that the normal host of a public affairs program confronts a member in good standing of Opus Dei deal with extremist positions espoused by that organization.
But Dutrizac had the "cap" to confront Ms. Laoun deal with extremist positions advocated by his former cronies of the CIC.
Result: some groups who say they left (but who are more right than the right) are now asking the head of the facilitator.
ERROR OF ATTACKS
"Mrs. Laouni was attacked by a moderator vicieusement racist, misogynist and Islamophobic," wrote the leftist newspaper The Dominion. "Dutrizac must resign and the CRTC must investigate hate speech and obliged sexist towards the Muslim candidate, asked the Ontario branch of the Canadian Union of Public Employees.
"The Corus should review its policies on hate speech and provide mandatory training on harassment to all its staff," demanded the Canadian Arab Federation.
Fuck! He does what, Dutrizac, to deserve such attacks? He insulted his guest, he attacked, he forced her to eat ham and spin around a pole on She's Got Legs ZZ Top?
Absolutely not. Benoît Dutrizac questioned Samira Laoun on sharia, he asked whether she was ready to defend gay rights if elected and he said it was unacceptable that ten years girls are forced to wear the veil .
It's racist, right?
Misogynist is telling a woman veiled we find sexy? It is sexist to ask if she had to get permission from her husband before entering politics?
THE SILENCE OF MULCAIR
If Ms. Laouni found this interview so revolting, would you tell me why she spent her time laughing?
And what about Thomas Mulcair, who accompanied Mrs. Laouni? When Dutrizac asked if he was happy with the interview, the NDP has lifted two thumbs up sign of approval. So what is the problem?
I hope that Mr. Mulcair will have the decency to condemn the gratuitous attacks which were launched against Dutrizac.
Otherwise, we will have the strange feeling that defends the right of extremists to restrict freedom of expression.
Translation of excerpts: Barbara Kay, Quebec shock jock is accused by the usual suspects of a hit job on a hijab
Let us not forget that a Catholic candidate, Nicole Charbonneau Barron, was publicly vilified by the Bloc Quebecois leader for his personal views on abortion. You can be assured that if Benedict had the Dutrizac interviewed, he acted as the aggressive questioning on his views on Opus Dei, the prelature "extremist" to which he belongs, on creationism, the Abstinence, if she thought homosexuality was a sin, and everything else. We could hardly imagine that the left or a Catholic went to lay charges of incitement to hatred. Here is yet another excellent example of the excesses of political correctness. The NDP should denounce these attacks, pronto.
Labels: Hostile races, Islam, New Democratic Party, Religion and fanaticism
Stéphane Dion gave an example. Jack Layton, c’est maintenant à votre tour d’agir, par Barbara Kay Jack Layton is now your turn to act, by Barbara Kay
Translations: Stéphane Dion did the right thing: Now it's your turn, Mr Layton, by Barbara Kay, National Post, September 25 2008
Good for Stéphane Dion for stepping up to the plate and demanding the resignation of Lesley Hughes, Liberal candidate for Kildonan-St Paul. Hughes failed to renounce the anti-Semitic implications of her 9/11 conspiracy theories in suggesting that Israeli companies had vacated the World Trade Center before the attacks. The B'nai B'rith has issued a congratulatory statement: "Stéphane Dion has done the right thing by refusing to let Lesley Hughes, a candidate with a record of antisemitism, stand for the Liberal Party of Canada," said Frank Dimant, Executive Vice President of B'nai Brith Canada.
I now eagerly await Jack Layton's forthright renunciation of a similarly problematic NDP candidate, Samira Laouni, in the Montreal riding of Bourassa. Ms Laouni is a person of influence in the leadership of the Canadian Islamic Congress, Quebec region. She was a principal organizer for a CIC fundraising dinner in September, 2007, whose guest speaker, Yvonne Ridley is an impassioned anti-Zionist, but more importantly a terrorist apologist and proud friend of the Taliban and Hezbollah, an organization officially classified as terrorist by the federal government.
Present at that evening to bring NDP greetings, but not during Ridley's speech, which finished shortly before their arrival, were Thomas Mulcair, MP for Outrement and former NDP leader Alexa McDonough. I spoke to Thomas Mulcair the following day and asked him how the NDP could associate itself with anyone representing such despicable, anti-Canadian views. Mr Mulcair swore up and down that he had no idea of who Yvonne Ridley was or what she was talking about, and that he was merely bringing greetings to a community group, the same as he would for any other. I told him in no uncertain terms who Yvonne Ridley was. So the NDP cannot claim to be ignorant of the CIC's open admiration for her, and Ms Laouni's role in bringing her to Canada. Mr Layton, take a leaf from Mr Dion's book, and do the right thing.
Hezbollah Description: Site of the Canadian Department of Public Safety
Hezbollah, or Party of God, "is an Islamist terrorist organization based in Lebanon. Hezbollah wants to restore the supremacy of Islam on the political, social and economic development in the Muslim world. Its objectives, it stated in its political manifesto of 16 February 1985, include the eradication of Western influence in Lebanon and the Middle East and the annihilation of the Jewish state and the liberation of Jerusalem and all Palestinian territories under the yoke of Israeli occupation, without any possibility of negotiating peace treaty whatsoever. In this context, the ultimate goal of Hezbollah is to establish a radical Shiite theocracy in Lebanon. Hezbollah is responsible for car bombings, to hijacking and abduction of Israeli and Western targets in Israel or Jewish, Western Europe and South America. It operates mainly in Lebanon, but is also active in Europe, North America, South America and Africa.
Labels: New Democratic Party, Religion and fanaticism
Barbara Kay on Campaign Quebec: Attacking Catholics is OK, but please don't mention the jihad
Someone running for office in the Conservative Party, for example, who adheres to a faith holding that abortion is morally wrong may be publicly censured by the Bloc Québécois leader.On the other hand, a candidate linked to terrorist apologists in Quebec won’t raise the slightest objection from that same party leader.
Bloc Québécois leader Gilles Duceppe has taken umbrage because a candidate for the Conservative Party, Nicole Charbonneau Barron, running in the South Shore Montreal riding of St Bruno-St Hubert, is a member of Opus Dei, a personal prelature within the Catholic church.
Attempting to whip up fears that the Tories want to take away a woman’s right to choose, Duceppe complained that “those people are against a lot of things that are generally accepted in Quebec.”
It is true that members of Opus Dei do not support abortion. On the other hand, Opus Dei members do not sympathize with Hamas and Hezbollah or believe Jews are legitimate targets for terrorism, surely views that are not “generally accepted in Quebec” as well?
Which brings me to what should be the actually worrying case of Ms Samira Laouni, the NDP candidate for the riding of Montréal-Bourassa. Some of us in Quebec who keep our eye on activities and players in the Islamic community wonder why Monsieur Duceppe is so fascinated by Ms Charbonneau-Barron’s privately held views on abortion, but is not at all exercised by Ms Laouni’s enthusiasm for Sharia law and anti-Western agents provocateurs.
Ms Laouni was interviewed by outspoken popular radio host Benoit Dutrizac Wednesday. He asked her, “What is the difference between a good Muslim and an Islamist?” She replied: “I don’t know, I have never been around an extremist...”
Not true.
I attended a Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC) fund-raiser in September 2007 in Ms Laouni’s riding that featured the notoriously controversial British journalist Yvonne Ridley. As Project Manager for the CIC's Quebec branch, Ms Laouni’s name was listed on the program as an organizer and contact person.
Ridley, a convert to Islam after a period of captivity with the Taliban, is famous for her provocations: She has defended the Chechen terrorist leader Shamil Basayev, the mastermind behind both the Moscow theatre hostage crisis and Beslan school massacre, as a “shaheed” (martyr) with an assured home in Paradise; and is on record counselling British Muslims "to boycott the police and refuse to co-operate with them in any way, shape or form." Ridley performed as expected that night, praising the misunderstood Taliban, Canada's mortal enemies, cheering on Hezbollah, and bashing the West at every turn. I’d call that extremist.
Ms Laouni’s active participation in the leadership of the CIC is problematic. This organization has petitioned to have Hezbollah and Hamas removed from the government’s official terror list. CIC’s president, Mohamed Elmasry, has declared every adult Jew in Israel to be a legitimate target for murder.
Ms Laouni’s name may be vaguely familiar to those who followed the Reasonable Accommodation hearings in Quebec. She was co-chair of the delegation that went to the famous town of Hérouxville to lecture its residents on “respect” and “tolerance.”
That’s a bit rich in the light of a rather shocking poem that had just been published, written by Ms Laouni’s riding association president (and until recently her campaign manager), Haydar Moussa. Allegedly an expression of the pain felt by Muslim women who experience prejudice, Moussa’s poem lashes out at heritage Quebec culture, portraying Quebec women as promiscuous drunks:
"My veil is not a kerchief," "It's my skin/My modesty, my dignity, my respect.
"And if you, old-stock immigrant/You have neither faith nor law/And you spent your youth drunk/And went from one male to the next/That's not the case for me."
Moussa, who has yet to apologize for the poem, is vice-president of the Association des Jeunes Libanais Muselmans de Montréal. Their website features the Hezbollah war anthem Ya Ashraf An Na (United We Stand), which calls on Muslims to fight the tyrant (the U.S. and Israel presumably) because victory is promised by God.
The association’s website also has links to a number of radical Shiite ayatollahs, including Hezbollah’s spiritual leader, jihadism strategist Sayed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah, who, for the record, supports terrorism, although, ironically enough, does not support abortion. Has anyone asked Ms Laouni what her private views on jihadism, as well as abortion, are? Or, she being Muslim, not Catholic, and NDP, not Conservative, would such an intrusion into her private conscience be considered too politically indelicate?
Labels: Religion and fanaticism
The NDP must indicate the door to Samira Laouni, by Iba Bouramine
The Press revealed links "secrets" by Nicole Charbonneau Barron
Let's recall that the debate on the relationship between religion and politics was launched by La Presse, which has published full pages on the Conservative Party candidate Nicole Charbonneau Barron, revealing that she was a member of Opus Dei. It is information that she failed to disclose to his head. The journalist Denis Lessard "discovered" the pot with roses and wrote an article citing sources describing Opus Dei as a "Catholic mafia". Mathieu Perreault adds and speaks of an "organization outside the modern Quebec." For his part, Vincent Marissal wrote about the Conservative Party, having revealed that the "secrets" of Opus Dei are posted publicly on the Internet:
"The question is what they would have if they had known. To avoid such embarrassment, it is likely that the Conservative Party would have found someone else. The case shows holes in the verification system ... the presence of a candidate linked to a secret organization like Opus Dei confirms, among many voters, doubts about the presence of ultrareligieux within the PC."
La Presse has spoken as if it was discovered that the candidate had hidden a heavy criminal past. It turned out after the party was aware of the role of its candidate in Opus Dei. Ironically, columnist Lysiane Gagnon raises the question: "Why all this uproar around Nicole Charbonneau-Barron ... ?" We dug the meninges and ... eureka ! We found: Ms. Gagnon, it's your own newspaper, which has made an outcry!
La Presse custodial secret links public Ms. Samira Laoun
Both Laura-Julie Perreault to the press that Jeff Heindrich for The Gazette (quoting tipping point, thank you!) Have completely ignored the links Mrs Laoun with the right-wing Canadian Islamic Congress, refraining from denounce the influence of ultrareligieux within the NDP. Jack Layton and Thomas Mulcair were well aware of these facts.
Journalists, as usual, show blindness accomplice when it comes time to scrutinize the Islamist extreme religious right. It is quiet, there is no question about this alliance against nature between the supposedly progressive left and extreme right-wing religious Islamist. It includes citizens to be cynical towards journalists and politicians.
Ms. Laoun assumed responsibility for several projects for the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC), an Islamist lobby chaired by Mohamed Elmasry, which supports the NDP and support of Jack Layton and Thomas Mulcair in return. More than Laoun Samira is the latter that voters and journalists should ask questions.
Here are some items you can use to assess the roadmap respective religious right Christian and Islamic, and determine which present the greatest threat of backwardness for Quebec and Canada, and intrusion of religious fundamentalism in the area policy.
Opus Dei and the ICC: a comparison
- Freedom of expression
ICC tries to recognize the concept of "blasphemy" as the offense continued in Canadian law. Read our many articles on the saga ICC against Maclean's and Mark Steyn. And the excellent background MacLean's: Repress freedom of expression globally, by L. Savage, Maclean’s Savage, Maclean's
Compare this with the reaction of Opus Dei to the release of the film Da Vinci Code. This organization has not sought to censor the film. It merely remind the public that this was a work of fiction.
What is the party that threatens the freedom in Canada on behalf of values that we ultrareligieuses obscurantist away from the modern Quebec? The NDP of course. The party supports the retrograde ICC crusade against freedom of expression. Moreover, the lawyer Julius Gray, a supporter of the NDP, said that speaking of the party in an interview to Radio-Canada journalist Christiane Charette: "... now they are on the side Canadian Islamists against Maclean, against Mark Steyn ... I am in total disagreement with Mark Steyn, but freedom of expression is essential. I could not say that restrict freedom of expression."
Canon law and Sharia law in family
Like other Catholic authorities in Quebec, Opus Dei does not militate for the recognition of canonical courts whose decisions produce civil effects and would be enforceable in domestic courts.
The ICC, for its part, has been behind the campaign for the establishment of Shariah courts in family matters in Ontario. As a member of the World Islamic League, the ICC is one of the many branches of the Saudi religious establishment that propagates through the rigorous version monde Wahhabi / Salafi of Islam in its purity of the 7th century stripped of innovation. It envisages the future as a return to a glorious past far!
Who is the greatest threat to our secular legal system and our institutions in the country? The ICC of course. But the NDP supports the ICC, an Islamist lobby architecture religious right which promotes a medieval form of Islam in full step with the values of a modern liberal democracy.
The religious accommodations
Opus Dei has never claimed to religious accommodations in health services and utilities.
The ICC, through against:
promotes segregation in health facilities, in accordance with Shariah
by its vice-president, Wahida Valiante, contributed to the drafting of the Report of the Task Force on Needs of Muslim Students we summarized the main recommendations obscurantist accordance with Sharia law in our article: Islamization campus
sponsored the coming of the extremist Yvonne Ridley lecturer at the 2007 edition of its benefit dinner. The program mentions the name of Samira Laoun as contact person. Ms. Ridley is an apologist of the Taliban and Hezbollah
by its chairman Mohamed Elmasry who teaches at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, proposed to ban alcohol on campus. This proposal is a recommendation of the report on the needs of Muslim students mentioned above.
Separation of religion and state
Jesus said "Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God." Islam, for against, is still far from being there in terms of separation of religion and state. Read the interview with the theologian George Weigel: Combat (ideological) against Jihad (ideological).
These examples show that other Opus Dei does not threaten the achievements of modern Quebec while the ICC tireless advocate for the introduction of reactionary elements of sharia by the back door. ICC threatens freedoms hard won by our ancestors, with the support of the NDP.
Extremist links
In the Quebec of today, there are no known links between Opus Dei and extremist politicians.
The ICC and Madame Laoun, they have such links. When she said Benoît Dutrizac radio interview last September 10 that it has no Islamist or extremist, Ms. Laoun takes us for fools. (Marc Lebuis was invited to speak on Mrs Laoun Dutrizac the next day. Click here). Julius Gray has understood that the ICC is an Islamist lobby. Tarek Fatah, a progressive Muslim, describes the ICC to hold medieval Islamists in a commentary in which he does not mince words. And what about Yvonne Ridley, the apologist of the Taliban and Hezbollah? If this is not an extremist, then it lacks words in the dictionary to describe.
Barbara Kay wrote a column in the National Post on dinner benefit of CIC and the conference Yvonne Ridley, under Taliban Stooge. We contacted Ms. Kay asking why she did not mention the presence of Thomas Mulcair and Alexa McDonough this evening. She said having spoken to Mr Mulcair who told him arriving after the conference Mrs Ridley. He said that Ms. Kay had never heard of Ms Ridley and he did not know it was supporting the Islamists. It will be presented this evening in good faith in its campaign in the riding of Outremont.
Today, however, Thomas Mulcair can not plead ignorance. Its full support to Ms. Laoun therefore brings us to the conclusion that it sees no problem with the values that the ICC and its candidate supporters. Let us not forget that Yvonne Ridley was the glorification of the Taliban at a time when soldiers of the Royal 22nd of Quebec were to leave for Afghanistan. Guests present at this dinner we have expressed have felt deeply betrayed.
Qualifications Ms. Laoun
Ms. Laoun involved in community reconciliation initiatives. His county includes the City of Montreal-North, which has recently experienced riots ethnic.
We can wonder about the qualifications of Ms. Laoun as intermediary in the community dialogue. Indeed, Yvonne Ridley is known for his exhortations to Muslims not to cooperate with law enforcement. As citizens, we suffer the disadvantages of this irresponsibility of much of the Muslim community that refuses to clean up its ranks. We must wait for hours in airports and pay taxes for heavy security arrangements. Ms. Laoun sharing Does the views of Ms Ridley?
The headscarf
Mrs. Laouni and Mr. Mulcair will the temptation to attribute any electoral defeat to a lack of openness of Quebecers facing the scarf that covers Mrs. Laoun. For us to tipping point, that is not the main issue. Ms. Laoun itself associated with groups whose values are at odds with those that we support and share many Muslims. Read reviews, among other things left on our site by the Quebec Mokhtar Wahid, a Muslim of Algerian origin.
Conclusion
Layton and Mulcair, it is time to choose your camp. Or you defend the fundamental values of Canada and Quebec, or you side remote Islamist organizations by Saudi Arabia and Iran. Voters have a right to know where your allegiance.
Labels: Iba Bouramine, New Democratic Party, Religion and fanaticism
Samira Laoumi, by Francis Chartrand
When it launches in the political arena, it is expected to be upset. Ms. Laoun studio was accompanied by the member Thomas Mulcair. If he values the freedom of expression, Thomas Mulcair should encourage the Canadian Arab Federation and the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) to drop their request absurd. It also wondered about the reasons for the intervention of CUPE. Why is it that this issue is concerned?
CUPE emulates Islamism in its hatred of freedom and tactics totalitarians. When the left hand to give the Islamists, we are dealing with an alliance of gravediggers of freedom and bullies. It is suffocating.
You can listen to the interview of Mrs. Laoun, the NDP candidate in Montreal-Bourassa with Benedict Dutrizac here. And the reaction of Marc Lebuis the next day here.
Listen as Mohamed Elmasry, president of the Islamic Canadian Congress (ICC), a lobby member of the Islamist Muslim World League based in Mecca. Ms. Laoun was responsible for numerous projects on behalf of the ICC.
Interviews reveal that Samira Laoun lied, and that the Thomas Mulcair supported. That is why the Canadian Arab Federation, together with CUPE, proceeded to attack. Said Ms. Laoun not know any Islamist or extremist. One of the projects in which she was involved for this branch of the Muslim World League is organizing a benefit dinner with keynote speaker for the extremist Yvonne Ridley, apologist of the Taliban and Hezbollah.
Journalists and media owners must not be intimidated by these kinds of strategies used by Islamists throughout the world. They seriously threaten our freedoms.
Also note the demand compulsory training for all staff of the radio station on "oppression". That is typically used by Islamists to do their proselytizing and disseminating their propaganda at the expense of the unbelievers of course. They send Islamist groups like CAIR and others of the same ilk provide "training".
TORONTO, Sept. 19 / CNW Telbec / - The Quebec radio host, Benoît Dutrizac must resign and the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) must investigate what hate and sexist resolutely kept to a Muslim candidate in the federal election underway. That is what the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) Ontario. The interview was conducted with Samira Laoun, the NDP candidate in the Montreal riding of Bourassa, September 10.
Questions and comments of Benedict Dutrizac were simply racist and degrading and far exceeded the bounds of what is acceptable in society, says President CUPE Ontario, Sid Ryan. Madam Laoun was subjected to a series of questions that was nothing less than an attack against its identity as a woman and a Muslim."
Mr. Ryan asked the trade union movement and other stakeholders to support the call of the Canadian Arab Federation of resignation immediately Dutrizac. Moreover, he argues that the CRTC must investigate this broadcast by a station Corus, a Toronto-based network.
If as a society we do not stand to defend the identity and life choices, costume and religion of a person when that person is attacked and ridiculed, we put at risk our freedom to everyone in this democratic society, "said Ryan.
"The CRTC must send a clear message to" bridge of radio-trash "as Benedict Dutrizac. They are monitored and their behavior and racist and sexist comments will not be tolerated," said Mr. Ryan.
The Canadian Arab Federation also requested a review of all policies of the network in terms of hate speech and mandatory training on oppression and harassment for all members of management and staff of Corus.
Information: Sid Ryan, President of CUPE Ontario, (416) 209-0066; Valerie Dugale Service CUPE Communications, (647) 225-3685
Labels: Francis Chartrand, Islam, Religion and fanaticism
The dubious friends of the NDP, by Anne Humphreys
Maybe yes, because it was the subject of several articles in the press. Indeed, columnist Lysiane Gagnon is not in the lace Ms. Laoun.
But what you might not know is that the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC), an Islamist-minded say ... particular, has already had as vice-president Mrs Laoun! Here are some facts arms Canadian Islamic Congress and Ms. Laoun.
When the controversy surrounding the veil at the time to vote in an election, Ms. Laoun said: "For me, this bill of Quebec, one is political recovery, two, it is a editing, it's controversial, therefore joins political recovery, and three of Islamophobia is because Muslim women who never wear the niqab has never requested." (Téléjournal / Le Point de Radio-Canada, 27 October 2007)
When the controversy over Hérouxville, the ICC has threatened to continue the city if it does not reviewing his famous Charter of reasonable accommodations (Le Soleil, 6 February 2006). Hérouxville is certainly went a little hard, but I defy anyone to tell me what the code of life violated a fundamental right!
ICC considers Hezbollah as a simple resistance group, while this terrorist organization is responsible for pluisieurs attacks against civilians. (Marc Nadeau, blog silent majority in the new, 28 August 2006)
The ICC has made 2006 a list of personalities anti when the name of the president of another Muslim organization included: Tariq Fateh ... who founded his own body to denounce the Muslim fundamentalist imams of several Canadian! (La Presse, 6 August 2006)
A spokesman for the ICC was "happy" not to recognize friends in the list of 17 people arrested on terrorism charges in Toronto. (La Presse, 4 June 2006)
The ICC has called for "boycott" of provincial and federal Liberals when the Ontario government has denied that Islamic law (Sharia) applies to family disputes between Muslims. (Canadian Press, 26 September 2005). Tariq Fateh, the moderately while ago, was found when had interviewed on the subject, that the ICC was "ridiculous"!
The chairman of the ICC considers the head of the Shiite militia in Najaf (Iraq) Moqtada Al-Sadr compares to Joan of Arc. Here is what was said Mohamed Elmasry, the big boss of the ICC: "Listening to mention the young religious leader to his supporters or the media, one can not help but believe that this young man is telling the truth-liberation, peace and justice for his people is his deepest desire. As Jeanne d'Arc, Moqtada Al-Sadr is a soldier and a saint." Note that Salam Elmenyawi, a moderate leader of the community, a giggle and heard that comparison. (La Presse, 19 August 2004)
The ICC has defended the visit to Canada of a radical Sunni imam from Saudi Arabia, Abdul Rahman Al-Sudayyis. To note the curiosity that ultimately he was not allowed to return. (La Presse, 15 May 2004)
Of course, the ICC also participated in various demonstrations in which he saw as an entirely legitimate use by Palestinian suicide bombers against Israeli civilians. (Le Droit, 22 April 2002)
The ICC objected in 2001 to various amendments to the Income Tax Act to crack down against the organizations funding terrorism. (Canadian Press, 29 May 2001)
Let's clarify something: I want to believe that Ms. Laoun is not responsible for all stupidities of the ICC. But if it does not share any of the views mentioned above, she says!
I also want to show you some excerpts of the National Post last Friday, in which the columnist Barbara Kay stake is disturbing facts: 
Yvonne Ridley is a victim of Stockholm syndrome who became a radical Islam after his capture in Afghanistan. She has already defended the leader of the Chechen rebels behind the hostage taking in Beslan that killed dozens of children, and in the evening of CIC which she participated, she defended the Taliban regime, attacked the West and promoted the fight Hezbollah.
And it is also a fucking crazy one, but a nasty fucking wild one.
A final extract at least interesting:
Further reading: an excellent site on the tipping point Canada on the NDP and Samira Laouni. Please move from one section to another, and be sure to deepen the subject of the Canadian Islamic Congress with the text.
I will entrust you something: I have nothing against the fact that Ms. Laoun arise, especially since his chances of being elected are slim that a fence niqab. But the public has a right to ask questions about his candidacy and the doubtful it maintains links with Islamic political thought problem! When people will vote for Bourassa in a month, they deserve to know any political opinions that which represents the NDP in their constituency.
I conclude by addressing members of the NDP in the riding of Bourassa: Here is a personalized sign for your riding association ... to you to refute. 
Me, when I see and hear people claim to defend my female dignity by spiting on me and treating me as shameless fornication because I lost my virginity since I'm 14 years old, and when Francis is told on the radio because he has "listened Blue Night" in the 90s, it made him a "pervert boy, rapist and unscrupulous", believe me, we want to fucking fight.
Anne Humphreys
Labels: Anne Humphreys, Arab World, Hostile races, Human mistake, Islam
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Georgia: Assisting displaced people in Tbilisi, by Marie-Êve Marineau
The MSF medical team begins the day by visiting a kindergarten which has been converted into a centre for displaced people. It is located in an outlying suburb of Tbilisi, the Georgian capital. Kindergarten N°9 currently houses 70 people. But before the Russian forces started their retreat towards South Ossetia following the ceasefire between Russia and Georgia, there were 113 people staying there. Some men have already gone back to their villages to see if a permanent return is possible.
The director of the kindergarten quickly finds a room so that the MSF team can give consultations. No other medical aid has been provided up until now. Mothers come with their children, and there are also elderly people. Nino, a young pregnant woman, wants to see a doctor. Since she left Mereti, her village in the separatist province of South Ossetia, this young Georgian woman has not been examined. Eight months pregnant, there is the possibility she could deliver prematurely. These last weeks have been trying. When fighting broke out on 8 August, she fled Ossetia with her three-year-old daughter. For several days, she had no news of her husband until he was able to join her in Tbilisi. Her daughter is still afraid. “She wakes up in the night when she hears the noise of a plane,” explains Nino. “She thinks that the bombings are starting again.”
In general however, the children are at ease in this new environment. There is a playground in the courtyard, there are some toys. All the families receive food and washing detergent. The only things missing are diapers for the babies, and the MSF team will bring them this afternoon.
However, the conditions are clearly more difficult in a large four-floor building, 100 metres away from the kindergarten. When the displaced families came to this building, a former cardiology institute, there was no water or electricity. The offices were cluttered with laboratory equipment. “We have done everything ourselves,” explains one man. “We have connected plastic pipes so that there is water in a few sinks and toilets and we’ve also connected the electricity.” As for food, supply remains uncertain. From time to time, the 92 people who are living there receive some bread and some sausages as well as rations which are supplied by other organizations.
After being informed about this situation, the MSF team begins its consultations, mainly for women, children and the elderly. The doctors have brought a supply of drugs with them and give the necessary medication to the patients. But they will have to come back in the afternoon to distribute hygiene kits to all the families (soap, washing detergent, buckets, toothpaste) and some kits for babies.
On August 14, the MSF teams began going to the areas in Tbilisi where the displaced people were staying to deliver medical aid. This was their first visit to this particular area. But they will return regularly to all the sites to do follow-up medical care. This is especially important for people with chronic illnesses, in order that they will be able to continue their treatment.
Labels: Doctors Without Borders, Georgia, Marie-Êve Marineau, Russia
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]