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
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
MSF assisting Haitians and assessing needs after successive hurricanes, by Noémie Cournoyer
According to authorities, 25,000 to 30,000 houses were destroyed and up to 500 people have died nationwide. People have very little access to food and clean water, and major crops have been destroyed.
On Thursday, September 4, an MSF team of eight medical and non-medical personnel arrived in Gonaïves to clean out the Rabouteau Health Center, the only working structure (out of four health centers and one hospital) after the floods. Thanks to the support of the local population, MSF was able to clean the facility, supply medicine, and restart the operating room. On September, 5, MSF performed 110 consultations, treated 49 injured people and carried out 16 surgical procedures.
On Saturday people started fleeing the city by the thousands to seek refuge, after authorities warned of the arrival of Hurricane Ike. The Rabouteau Health Center MSF is supporting remains the only working health structure in the town.
A critical concern is the lack of access to clean water for the city’s inhabitants. All the local sources of water were contaminated as a result of the flooding. This concern is compounded by the fact that most of the local medical staff have fled the area.
MSF has not been able to reach many areas of the city given the flooding, making it difficult to properly assess the scope of needs of the population.
An MSF physician went on Saturday to Saint Michel de l’Atalaye, where 400 people have been stranded without food or water for five days. MSF brought one child to Gonaïves for surgical care and distributed food and water from the World Food Program.
A three-person MSF team went to Cap Haïtien to assess the emergency response capacities and establish local contacts to help immediately assess needs in aftermath of Hurricane Ike. MSF teams have not been able to reach many of the flooded areas on the eastern side of the community. Hospitals and health structures are reported to have been seriously damaged in this area.
Today the flooded areas between Gonaïves, Port de Paix, and Cap Haïtien cannot be reached while towns like Enry or Gros Morne, which were strongly affected by Hanna, have not received any assistance. MSF is still pushing to gain access to these areas, though the coming hurricane might limit their ability to reach these areas.
Existing MSF activities in Port-au-Prince are continuing. The organization provides medical and surgical care at La Trinité trauma centre; emergency obstetrical care in Jude Anne Hospital; and emergency health-care services and essential health services through mobile clinics in the Martissant slum. A mobile clinic team went to the La Saline slum earlier this week.
Ike, a category four hurricane, has now reached Haiti’s neighborhood and rains have started again.
Labels: Doctors Without Borders, Haiti, Noémie Cournoyer
Afghanistan: Civilian Deaths From Airstrikes, by Anne Humphreys
(New York, September 8, 2008) – 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, Anne Humphreys, Human Rights Watch
Georgia/Russia: Do Not Attack Civilians in South Ossetia, by Francis Chartrand
“All sides must remember that attacks on civilians, or acts intended to terrorize civilians, clearly violate international humanitarian law, and may constitute war crimes,” said Holly Cartner, Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “This would be true even if they are carried out in reprisal for indiscriminate attacks by the adversary.”
After weeks of low-level hostilities, the conflict in South Ossetia, a breakaway region of Georgia backed by Moscow, escalated dramatically in the early morning of August 8, 2008. Georgia declared that it intended to restore constitutional order and launched a large-scale military offensive. Russia sent additional troops to South Ossetia, saying they were reinforcements to Russian peacekeepers who are in the area to monitor a 1992 ceasefire between Georgian and South Ossetian forces.
South Ossetia authorities claimed that Georgian forces used Grad multiple launch rocket systems to shell civilian areas, particularly in the capital, Tskhinvali, and that dozens of buildings were destroyed or damaged, including the university, the hospital, a shopping center, schools, and several government buildings. According to unconfirmed media reports, several Ossetian villages, including Dmenis and Tsunar, also sustained significant damage.
Reports on casualties vary widely, with different media agencies citing figures ranging from 15 to 1,400 people killed in South Ossetia as a result of the attacks. None of these reports could be confirmed.
According to the Russian Federal Migration Service, 971 people fled South Ossetia on August 8 and sought refuge in North Ossetia, a Russian province that borders South Ossetia. North Ossetian hospitals reported that they were ready to admit the wounded; but the head of the regional hospital was quoted by Kavkazskii Uzel, a news website, as saying that, “the road which was intended for evacuation of the wounded has been bombed,” and doctors did not have access to the wounded.
Russia’s military command claimed that 12 Russian peacekeepers deployed in South Ossetia were killed and 120 injured, and also blamed the Georgian side for obstructing the evacuation of the wounded from Tskhinvali.
In the meantime, according to the BBC and other international media, Russian tanks have reportedly reached the northern suburbs of Tskhinvali while the Russian air force has been carrying out air raids in South Ossetia and further into Georgian territory. Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili accused Moscow of bombing Georgian air bases and towns, resulting in the deaths of 30 military personnel and civilians.
Human Rights Watch called on both parties to abide by the fundamental principle of international humanitarian law, which requires armed forces to distinguish between combatants and civilians, and between military objects and civilian objects, at all times. It is also forbidden to carry out indiscriminate attacks or attacks that cause damage disproportionate to the anticipated concrete military advantage.
South Ossetia was an autonomous province of Georgia during the Soviet era. It declared independence from Georgia in 1990, and armed conflict between South Ossetian and Georgian forces ensued in 1991 and 1992. The conflict ended in 1992 with a ceasefire and establishment of a tripartite peacekeeping force, with Russian, Ossetian and Georgian peacekeeping battalions. The ceasefire adhered, but tensions continued, with Georgia accusing Russia of providing assistance to South Ossetia’s separatist movement.
Labels: Francis Chartrand, Human Rights Watch, Russia
UN: Five Countries Responsible for All Executions of Juvenile Offenders Since 2005, by Francis Chartrand
(New York, September 10, 2008) – 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: Arab World, Francis Chartrand, Human Rights Watch
The Next Cuban Missile Crisis?, by Marie-Êve Marineau
"Russia's naval fleet is welcome here," Chávez said on his weekly broadcast program. "If it's possible, we'll stage an exercise in our Caribbean waters." Russian naval vessels, including a nuclear cruiser, are due to call on Venezuelan ports in late November or December, Chávez said.
The Venezuelan leader is known for his rhetorical ripostes and once again he did not disappoint. "Go ahead and squeal, Yankees," he said, taunting the Bush White House.
Even before the April 2002 coup in Venezuela that sought to topple Chávez from power, diplomatic relations between the South American nation and the United States were tense. Chávez for example criticized U.S.-style free trade in the region and pursued a nationalistic oil policy. When it emerged that the United States had aided opposition forces involved in the coup, relations took a nosedive and never fully recovered.
Unfortunately the Bush White House has done everything in its power to provoke Chávez yet further. Last April, the Pentagon announced that it would revive its Fourth Fleet in the Caribbean. The fleet is based at the Mayport Naval Station in Jacksonville, Florida and answers to the U.S. Southern Command (Southcom) in Miami. Southcom has about 11 vessels currently under its command, a number that could increase in future.
An April 24 Bloomberg report claimed that the fleet would be lead by the nuclear aircraft carrier USS George Washington. But a subsequent report appearing in the Venezuelan newspaper El Universal quoted U.S. Admiral James Stavridis as saying that the force would not have an offensive capability. "We have no intention whatsoever to have an aircraft carrier as part of the Fourth Fleet," Stavridis said.
The Navy claims it resuscitated the Fourth Fleet to combat terrorism, to keep the economic sea lanes of trade free and open, to counter illicit trafficking, and to provide humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.
Such claims notwithstanding, it's no secret that the United States would like to head off the left wing-alliance between Venezuela, Cuba and Bolivia. And Chávez is probably correct in seeing the Fourth Fleet in Caribbean waters as a "shot across his bow."
In an interview with Cuban television, Bolivian President Evo Morales remarked that the U.S. naval force constituted "the Fourth Fleet of intervention." Cuba's former leader Fidel Castro asked why the Pentagon sought to revive the Fourth Fleet at the current time. Writing in the Cuban newspaper Granma, Castro suggested that the move constituted a return to U.S. gunboat diplomacy. Castro, whose island nation confronted a U.S. naval blockade during the Cuban missile crisis of 1962, declared, "The aircraft carriers and nuclear bombs that threaten our countries are used to sow terror and death, but not to combat terrorism and illegal activities."
Echoes of the Cold War
Like Castro, who sought out a diplomatic alliance with Russia to protect Cuba from the United States, Chávez is now cozying up to Moscow. For years, oil-flush Venezuela has been buying up Russian arms including Kalashnikov assault rifles and Sukhoi fighter jets. Chávez has justified the arms purchases as a necessary measure to dissuade the North American "empire" from invading his country.
Just two months ago, Chávez called for a strategic alliance with Russia to protect Venezuela from the United States. Caracas and Moscow agreed to extend bilateral cooperation on energy, with three Russian energy companies to be allowed to operate in Venezuela.
The Russian naval squadron and long-range patrol planes could arrive in the Caribbean for the exercises later this year. The deployment is expected to be the largest Russian naval maneuvers in the Caribbean, and perhaps the Western Hemisphere, since the Cold War.
Worryingly, the nuclear-powered guided missile cruiser Peter the Great, a vessel with massive firepower whose missiles can deliver nuclear or conventional warheads, will participate in the Caribbean maneuvers. The ship is armed with the Granit long-range anti-ship missile system, which is known in military circles as the Shipwreck missile. It also has a sophisticated air defense missile system capable of striking both air and surface targets.
Jon Rosamund, editor of Jane's Navy International, a specialist maritime publication, said the Peter the Great is large and heavily armed with both surface-to-surface and around 500 surface-to-air missiles. "On paper it's an immensely powerful ship," he said. "We are not really sure if this is a show of force or if it poses a viable operational capability at this stage."
Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko said the Admiral Chabanenko, Russia's most modern anti-submarine destroyer, would also join the exercises, along with an unspecified number of anti-submarine naval aircraft. Venezuela's naval intelligence chief, Admiral Salbatore Cammarata Bastidas, said that 1,000 Russian military personnel would take part in mid-November exercises with Venezuelan frigates, patrol boats, submarines, and aircraft.
Worst Case Scenario: McCain
Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko insisted that Russia's decision to send a naval squadron and planes to Venezuela was made before Russia's war with Georgia and is unrelated to the conflict. Last month, Russian forces fought a brief war with U.S.-ally Georgia over the breakaway province of South Ossetia. During the brief war and the ongoing standoff, Chávez has backed Russia's calls for Abkhazian and South Ossetian independence in opposition to Mikhail Saakashvili's government in Tbilisi, the Georgian capital.
U.S.-Russian relations hit their lowest point in years following the crisis in Georgia and even sparked fears of a new Cold War. Following the conflict, the Pentagon sent U.S. warships to the Black Sea to deliver humanitarian aid for Georgia. Hardly amused, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin warned that Russia would mount an unspecified response to the aid shipments. Asked what he thought about the U.S. naval presence near where the Russian Black Sea fleet was based, Putin said that Moscow would definitely respond with "calm."
When asked about the possibility of Russian naval exercises in the Caribbean, U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack mockingly responded, "If it is, in fact, true, then they found a few ships that can make it that far."
Far from calming the situation, such flippant statements will only serve to further antagonize Russia, which is already angry about NATO expansion on its borders, not to mention the installation of U.S. missile defense systems in Poland. With tensions in the Caucasus and Eastern Europe already on the upswing, the last thing the world needs is a naval face-off in the Caribbean.
Judging from recent campaign statements, a John McCain administration would do little to calm the waters. During the war in the Caucasus, the Arizona Senator remarked, "Russia should immediately and unconditionally cease its military operations and withdraw all forces from sovereign Georgian territory."
A sharp critic of the Putin government, McCain said, "The consequences of Euro-Atlantic stability and security are grave." McCain also called for "a truly independent" international peacekeeping force for South Ossetia, and said the United States should work with the European Union to pressure Russia to halt its military efforts.
McCain is hardly a neutral arbiter when it comes to the conflict in the Caucasus. His top foreign policy adviser, Randy Scheunemann, works for lobbying firm Orion Strategies. According to the Washington Post, the company has provided "strategic advice" to the Georgian government. Scheunemann himself helped McCain draft a strong statement in support of Saakashvili during the war in South Ossetia.
If geopolitical tensions should spread to the Caribbean, McCain is surely the last politician one might want in the White House. Speaking in Miami's Little Havana, McCain argued that "everyone should understand the connections" between Evo Morales, Castro, and Chávez. "They inspire each other. They assist each other. They get ideas from each other. It's very disturbing." McCain said Chávez breathed "new oxygen" into the Cuban government, and that Washington should do more to quell dictatorships throughout Latin America.
Time for Obama to Step Up
To his credit, Barack Obama has been somewhat less bellicose. At the height of the war in South Ossetia, the Illinois Senator called for an end to the violence but stopped short of assigning blame or making strong demands on Moscow. "I strongly condemn the outbreak of violence in Georgia, and urge an immediate end to armed conflict," he said.
On Venezuela, Obama has been somewhat vague. Speaking with his supporters, Obama said Chávez had "despotic tendencies" and was using oil money to fan anti-U.S. sentiment. The Illinois Senator did however manage to stir the waters when he declared in a CNN-YouTube debate that he would open diplomatic channels to "rogue nations" such as Venezuela. Though certainly mild, Obama's remark quickly embroiled him in a political firestorm with his chief rival, Hillary Clinton, who labeled him "naïve."
Obama is still a relative unknown on foreign policy but at least he hasn't staked out hawkish stances like John McCain, a politician who would surely continue the Bush legacy by antagonizing, bullying, and pushing around smaller, poorer countries like Venezuela. In response, Chávez might deepen his relationship with Russia if McCain pursues Big Stick diplomacy in Latin America, ratcheting up tensions.
Obama has been eager to prove that he is "strong" on national security. And this could be his chance. But rather than try outflanking McCain by staking out a position further to the right, Obama would be wise to use escalating tensions with Russia to his advantage. He might declare, for example, that McCain has been reckless in dealing with the unfolding conflict in the Caucasus. U.S. voters, Obama might argue, have no desire to go back to the paranoid Cold War or to relive the hair-raising days of the Cuban missile crisis.
Labels: Marie-Êve Marineau, McCain, Obama, United States, Venezuela
Canada needs a law to counter the Islamist ideology of hate, by Tahir Aslam Gora, captured by Noémie Cournoyer
Mr. Gora is quite right. Our elites and encourage the Islamists away from progressives as Tahir Gora. Our elites are navist mired in the post-modern relativism and chartisme they lost their bearings. They are easily charmées by Islamists who know how to use the vocabulary of the Bill of Rights for advancing their agenda. Our politicians covet the block vote of the Salafists, outnumber progressive Muslims. As our courts and our institutions, they care much more about the whereabouts of Islamists that of the people. 
Tahir Aslam Gora is a writer and journalist Canadian of Pakistani origin living in Burlington, Ontario. For information on Mr. Gora, read biographical notes posted at the beginning of the following article: accommodations reinforce the marginalization of Muslims in Canada, by Tahir Gora
Translation: Why can not we fight the Taliban at home? By Tahir Aslam Gora, The Hamilton Spectator, August 21, 2008
"We are looking for solutions to people who are causing the problem." This comment was made by Tarek Fatah, a Muslim activist progressive, as part of an event of rapprochement with the Muslim community organized by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service in cooperation with the Peel Regional Police and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
The event was intended to counter the radicalisation of Muslim youth. Some prominent imams and Muslim student leaders have commented on the situation, and a group of Muslims progressive Muslim Canadian Congress were also present to counter the radical ideas.
Questions come to mind in such moments as: Does such events contribute to eradicate radicalism? I do not think so, because we do not have clear laws to counter extremist Islamist ideology.
It is for this reason that we have taken no action against a man and his acolytes who suggested that Muslims should attack the Canadian soldiers on Canadian soil. We have taken no action against many Islamists in Canada who openly support the Taliban and, although they are themselves Canadians are showing their hatred of Canada because of its Western values.
Is it not ironic that we are fighting against the Taliban thousands of miles away in Afghanistan, while being unable to combat them and their ideology here at home? Now, the Taliban even dare send us an open letter, demanding under the threat that Canada remains out of the conflict.
Is it too much to ask our politicians to work on legislation that could counter the ideology of hatred propagated daily by the Islamists? Unfortunately, I did not hear anything like our politicians.
They have infiltrated political parties, they took refuge behind our well-righteous media groups and human rights. They hold jobs in government, intelligence agencies and campuses.
And they try to divert the vast silent majority of Muslims who too often are victims of their agenda.
The question remains, how our intelligence services and law enforcement can bring the radicals to justice without appropriate legislation? They can not, of course.
The director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Andy Ellys, and the inspector Jamie Jagoe of the RCMP, have analysed very well in their presentations the evolutionary process of radicalisation, but they seem powerless to put in place adequate measures for the counter.
Apparently, they seek help even circles, in the words of Tarek Fatah, are "a cause of the problem."
If we were able to deport back to their countries of origin of some Islamists who openly preach hatred of Canada, would send a clear message to the rest of the group.
Mahmud Hasan, a Bengali-Canadian writer and author of a book on Islam and Sharia, "said another problem during his presentation: the Muslim community and Canadian society need a modern interpretation of the Islam in order to fight against the radical interpretation of Islam.
He is right. Unfortunately, our media, our national institutions, provincial and local government agencies, political parties and society in general regard the Muslim groups that appear most fundamentalists and radicals as representatives of Islam.
So far, the Canadian government has taken no action to force the Islamists to tolerate the values of a free society. On the contrary, the Islamists are seeking to force Canadians to tolerate their extreme ideology of hatred.
Without recognize and support the role and participation of progressive Muslims, our government and its intelligence services will not be able to fight against Islamic radicalisation.
Tahir Aslam Gora
Labels: Noémie Cournoyer
Investigation of preaching hate in a prestigious mosque in London, by Iba Bouramine
This report is the result of Undercover Mosque aired in 2007 on Channel 4 which showed preachers calling for jihad and the killing of infidels. You can watch here (version subtitled in french): London - preach hatred in mosques. Since the reporting of 2007, nothing has changed in Regent Park, despite promises to rage against extremism.
In an Orwellian reversal, instead pursuing fanatics shown in the report of 2007, the police and the prosecutor's office turned ... against the broadcaster and the authors of the report, accusing them of selective editing, distortions and undermine social cohesion. A complaint was also filed with the supervisory body of British broadcasters. The complaints were all rejected, Channel 4 and then continued the police and the prosecutor's office for defamation. They were sentenced to pay damages and provide important public apology.
For statistics on the number of Muslims who share these extremist views, see: Great Britain - Poll: Pour 1 / 3 of Muslim students, to kill in the name of religion is justified, and a survey by the BBC. According to the latest survey, 37% of young British Muslims want to live under the Shariah and 36% are in favor of the death penalty in cases of apostasy. These surveys highlight the innocence of journalist Sarah Hassan who, like many others, want us to believe that only an infinitesimal proportion of Muslims have extreme views.
The Wahhabi (Salafi) of Islam filmed in London by Sarah Hassan is also taught in Quebec and across Canada. Follow the links at the bottom of the page.
We recommend you also the last article in the Canadian of Pakistani origin Tahir Aslam Gora: Canada needs a law to counter the Islamist ideology of hate Translation: Preachers of separatism at work inside Britain's mosques, by Sarah Hassan, Telegraph, August 31, 2008
Some preachers preach segregation in British mosques
The main Muslim organizations of Great Britain say they are fighting against extremism. Sara Hassan witnessed, in one of our most respected mosques, sermons by radical women who advocate segregation. It reflects the shocking results of his investigation.
From the balcony overlooking the magnificent main hall of the Regent Park mosque in London, considered the largest mosque in Britain, I secretly filming a woman who preaches.
How should we treat Muslim who converts to another religion? "We kill," she says, "kill, kill, kill. You must kill him, do you understand?"
"Adulterers," she says, "must be stoned to death." "As for homosexuals and women who like men ... the punishment is death, kill them, throw them the most high".
These punishments, she says, should be applied in a future Islamic state. "I am not telling you begin to kill people," she says. "There should be a Muslim leader when the Muslim army will be strong, when Islam is strong enough."
A young student group interrupts. The punishment must also include stoning to death of homosexuals after they were thrown from a high place.
I do not ever expect to hear this kind of instruction in the mosque in Regent Park, which is meant to promote interfaith dialogue and moderation. It was established there are more than 60 years to represent British Muslims with the government. Several of those who listened to the sermon were teenage British or, what is even more worrying, young children. My investigation for Channel 4's Dispatches east following the issuance Undercover Mosque aired last year. It was an investigation into allegations that intolerant and fundamentalist teachings have spread in the mosques of Great Britain by the Saudi religious establishment with close ties to the government of Saudi Arabia.
In response to the report, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has denied spread intolerance. The mosque in Regent Park, meanwhile, urged all mosques to "vigilance" and to monitor what is taught in their premises.
Earlier this year, wearing the Islamic jilbaab, I returned to the mosque in Regent Park to see what is taught. As a woman, I had to go to the main section of women where I found a circle preaching every Saturday and Sunday, eight hours in a row, any woman who has just pray.
The mosque is dedicated to promoting moderation and integration. But although the circle does not preach terrorism and does not encourage Muslims to violate the laws of England, it teaches Muslims to "stay away" and not to mingle with unbelievers. "Islam stands on the sidelines of unbelief and unbelievers, people who do not believe."
The friendship with non-Muslims is discouraged because "loyalty is reserved for Muslims only, not the koufars (unbelievers).
A woman who maintained friendly ties with a non-Muslim was severely criticized: "The true Islam teaches that you must love those who love Allah and hate those who hate Allah."
A preacher goes so far as to say that Muslims should not live in Britain: "It is not suitable for Muslims to reside in the country of evil, the country koufars, the country of unbelievers".
Another, Um Saleem, said that Muslims should not acquire British citizenship because their loyalty is reserved for Allah.
"Some conditions may lead you to unbelief. Take British citizenship, whether you like it or not, for these people, you sell your religion is something very serious, it is not permitted to devote another allegiance to Allah. "
Their teaching shocked me. This was not Islam that myself and many other Muslims in the United Kingdom have learned in our youth, nor the version practiced by most Muslims.
I was surprised the number of young British women who seem to find this version of the religion attractive. One girl told me that when she attended the circle for the first time she wore jeans and had many friends non-Muslims. Now she loves only those that surround it, "other sisters of the circle," and does in relation to non-Muslims as an attempt to convert them. Most of the sisters had the idea to live in separate communities, a concept alien to me and several other Muslims that I know.
The mosque in Regent Park has an important interfaith service that receives the visit of government officials, representatives of other religions and thousands of British schoolchildren each year.
I watched the reunion of an interfaith group called the mosque by the circle of women for a civilized exchange. But without the presence of the interfaith group, the preacher attacked other faiths and the very idea of an inter-religious dialogue.
A preacher said about the prayer of Christians in a church: "What these people are there, these things are so odious, what they say with their language is so vile and disgusting is an abomination." As for the notion of live and let-live interreligious: "This is untrue. Cela ne fonctionne pas. It does not work. This concept is a lie, a falsehood, and this is a farce."
Like many other women in the circle, I quickly been invited to private meetings in houses around London to "learn more" about Islam, at least their version of Islam. Um Saleem also attended some of these sessions. Here, women are given strict instructions on how to live. They said that British Muslim women can not travel without a male guardian, they should not mingle with men and must remain fully covered at all times.
A woman in the audience asked about the strict rule preventing him from travelling without being escorted by a mahram or a male member of the family. She asked: "Sister, if me and my husband can not travel together, what do I do if I want to make the trip?" She said she could not travel by itself.
She asked again: "So what do I do?"
"You go with your husband," said Um Saleem.
There were also restrictions on education and employment. A woman who works for the NHS (editor's note: a public hospital) was told that she should leave her job because it involves mixing with men and can not bear the holding Islamic complete.
"You know that working in an environment that is not Islamic to kouffars you away from religion and harden your heart. I be lying if I told you that this is allowed, "said Um Saleem.
Um Saleem also criticized Muslim women who are part of society, a view that is contrary to the objectives of the Regent Park Mosque.
"You see Muslim women in all areas of daily life in this country. I see Muslim and it breaks my heart to see them work in banks, wearing short sleeves, tight scarves, makeup, exposing them to kouffars permanently and even speaking their language," she said.
The Director General of the mosque in Regent Park is Dr. Ahmed Al Dubayan, a Saudi diplomat. He denied that his mosque Dispatches promotes a Saudi version of the religion, often called Wahhabism. In fact, imams in the main hall are Egyptians, and their sermons on Friday that I heard were moderate and tolerant.
But the preachers that I heard in the women's section puisaient their theology directly from Saudi Arabia. One of them returning from a study tour of three years in Saudi Arabia, and other preachers offered me almost exclusively books, sermons, fatwas online sites and scholars of the religious establishment of Saudi Arabia and their followers.
Faced with what these women preachers, Dr Al Dubayan emphasized that these views do not reflect those of the Regent Park mosque, and that Um Saleem was not a teacher allowed. "The ICC (London Central Mosque and Islamic Cultural Centre, commonly known as the Regent Park Mosque) promotes understanding among religions and cultures," he said. "It does not support or tolerate extremist views, racial hatred, violence or intolerance."
He said he did not know one of the preachers that we filmed. Another, Um Saleem, had asked to be allowed a teacher at the mosque, but his request was rejected because it did not provide written references on his teaching and views. Before I communicate with Dr. Dubayan, neither he nor the mosque were aware of these lessons.
Um Saleem told me later that his comments that Muslims could not accept British citizenship were "erroneous" and it is excused. Regarding Muslims who can not live in a non-Muslim, she agreed that the language used was "inappropriate". She continued: "Although it is recommended that a Muslim migrates to a Muslim country, it is not mandatory."
She added: We do not blindly follow the government or religious. We criticize other religions, like other religions criticize Islam… we encourage integration into society.
She nevertheless maintained its other assertions, saying that the rules prohibiting women to travel alone and work if it comes into conflict with religious requirements are "totally justified by Islamic texts."
"You can see these requirements as "extreme restrictions", she said. "But we see as our way of life and liberation of the soul."
The library official of the mosque has also attracted the attention of Dispatches last year when our reporters have discovered DVD fundamentalist and intolerant.
Dr Al Dubayan had said they would be removed, but I found the same books fundamentalist preachers still openly displayed and sold. DVDs teach that the unbelievers are people "bad, evil, malicious… who do things the most vile and evil" that men are responsible for women and that they should control them.
One speaker said about Jews: "Their time will come, as it will for all other evil." Another preaches, this time by Sheikh Khalid Yasin who learned Arabic in Saudi Arabia, welcomed the deterrent effect of the Shariah: "So people can see people without hands, people can see heads roll in the street, hands and feet opposed amputees, people crucified or flogged in public, and what they see acts as a deterrent because they say "I do not want this to me."
Sheikh Yasin said that his remarks should be considered in context. He said he does not promote political Saudi government or its religious rhetoric, and said that several governments and states impose the death penalty. "The sermon was aimed at reforming the Muslim population, Muslim society and the Muslim world… for auction by the Islamic sovereign state when it is established."
The company that runs the bookstore, Darussalam International Publications, is a British company with ties to Saudi Arabia. Darussalam International Publications told me that the bookstore sells a wide variety of books with which "they are not necessarily agree."
They said: "We try to present a variety of opinions… in the products we sell… in order to spread peace, respect, tolerance and understanding."
Dr Al Dubayan reiterated that the library was managed by an independent company. "Although we have no control over the bookstore, we met with the leaders after running your story. We made it clear that it was not acceptable that the custody of library books containing extremist views. We have received assurances… that all the books in question had been withdrawn."
Respondents to the report explained that this ideology has spread across Britain by the Saudi religious establishment. A Muslim leader said:
"Petrodollars from Saudi Arabia have fundamentally distorted growth and development of the Muslim community in Britain", while a British imam accused of dévoyer Islam, "to use and abuse of this great religion that is mine."
I share the indignation of the Imam on how a monotheistic religion peaceful so close to Christianity and Judaism in its core beliefs was diverted. To hear a call to murder a person's sexuality or his conversion to another religion in what is supposed to be a place of prayer is really shocking.
The imam went on to say: "The underlying objective here is to create a permanent division between British society and the young Muslims living in Britain."
As explained by Professor Anthony Glees who heads the Centre for Studies on intelligence and security of Brunel University: "To think, as I believe that our government thinks that it makes sense in terms of ideological court the Saudi government, is a folly of the first magnitude. We will pay the price for years to come."
The name of the reporter was changed. Dispatches: Undercover Mosque - The Return will be broadcast Monday on Channel 4 at 8PM.
Labels: Iba Bouramine
The Rachel Maddow Show, September 9
Countdown with Keith Olbermann, September 9
The Rachel Maddow Show, September 8
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Countdown with Keith Olbermann, Septembre 8
Saturday, September 06, 2008
Defamation against Francis Chartrand, by Anne Humphreys
To my resignation as a candidate for the swearing-in Marc-Aurèle Fortin, plus those of Jeannie Hamel in the constituency of Montcalm, Mario Langlois in the riding of Laval, Christian Barrette in the constituency of Alferd-Pellan, Dounia - Natacha Chikhhani in the riding of Pierrefonds-Dollard, Cynthia Corsilli in the riding of Saint-Jean, Arif Jinha in the riding of Lanark-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington in Ontario, Ryan Sloan in the riding of Scarborough Guildwood and Jean-François Jasmain in the riding of Thunder Bay-Rainy River.
Remember my statement last year on the bullshit surrounding Francis?
But now that on the eve of a possible outbreak of a federal election and in the midst of an election in three constituencies, Guelph, Westmount-Saint-Louis and Saint-Lambert, we knew that a bullshit campaign was good wind in the region. Some "volunteers", obviously the NDP, because they had a badge of the NDP in the neck, were door-to-door in Deux-Montagnes, St. Eustatius and Boisbriand.
The issue of this bullshit campaign sallisage aims to get Francis Chartrand, former NDP candidate in Riviere-des-Mille-Iles and possible independent candidate at the next election, Christian Barrette, a former candidate for investiture in Alfred Pellan, Alexandre Laberge, ex-secretary in the NDP Association for the constituency of Riviere-des-Mille-Iles, as well as myself for racist, xenophobic, Islamophobic, even anti-Semites. As these volunteers were first tour of some 289 members of the association of county, even at home, distributing a pamphlet without photo or image showing that Francis Chartrand is racist because he had been held upright and firmly against the reasonable accommodations on a religious point of view.
It is worth mentioning that all members of the local association of the NDP had been suspended indefinitely from January to August this year, when virtually all members (98%) had chosen to support Francis Chartrand in his fight when s' was made to show the door by his party to the learner through newspapers, which had the effect of "punish" the dissenting members for failing to honour the party instead to investigate the association and a vote of confidence.
We had got wind of this suspension because members had joined the NDP headquarters in Montreal and were answering the phone that no statement should be called the newspapers, and no claims should be made to Francis Chartrand, under penalty of suspension of membership cards. Some members have even been suspended in Argenteuil-Papineau-Mirabel, Marcus Aurelius-Fortin, Terrebonne-Blainville, Montcalm, Alfred Pellan, Laval and Laval-Les Iles, totaling probably more than 500 suspensions membership cards and without notice, until we learned last week.
More than 60 former members have joined the regional committee of Francis Chartrand campaign by phone, stating that they were intimidated during door-to-door by 2 "volunteers" of the NDP. They were male, showed a membership of the county of Notre-Dame-de-Grace-Lachine, and not hindered in any way to treat guests to their own doorsteps, "sals racist", "sals cons suburban" , "Residents of 450 to exterminate" and even "cursed Quebec against Sharia", because yes, these volunteers was apparently the promotion of cultural diversity, including Sharia.
It should be noted that neither Francis Chartrand, neither I or any other persons named above, will not tolerate this campaign of hate and intimidating face to citizens of Deux-Montagnes, St. Eustatius and Boisbriand.
"They have the right to keep the members they can, but do so in compliance. In the election campaign, it is always up to be respectful to a citizen who opens his door, as a citizen, voter or even party member attached to his home, are not affected by our politics, quite possibly nothing to sperm washing clothes sal cultural groups in Montreal and is therefore entitled to its peacefulness. Those who do not take what does this message, have an interest in letting go door-to-door. Are we interfere in the elections campaign, we? No, "says Chartrand.
Another point is startling Francis Chartrand. "What kind of hypocrisy can you have against members or former members of the NDP while volunteers seeking a" support against "against me, or even a renewal of membership card, or even solicit a member to his door to the promotion of cultural diversity, including Shariah, while its membership card is suspended for 7 months by pure disciplinary measure in order to seek censorship on the part of members? And they dare call this party, democratic?"
Following the declaration of secular Francis Chartrand in 2006, he obtained the support of Quebecers Lay Movement, the Association des Laurentides Maghrébine, Regroupement Arabs Canadians against Sharia, the Conference of Arab Atheists of Canada and the supports morale movement American Freedom From Religion Foundation, which makes the former candidate an individual open and aware of the concerns of the Arab world advocating integration and secularism universal and not a racist.
When Francis Chartrand and I, Anne Humphreys, had finished with the internal crisis last January, we had seen that the party supposedly "democratic" is the gulag of Canadian politics, and some members of its executive, are real dictators.
Anne Humphreys
Labels: Anne Humphreys
Worst person in the World, by Keith Olbermann
Friday, September 05, 2008
The 2008 Republican National Convention in Saint Paul
The 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver
Blessed are the poor, by Richard Martineau
Richard Martineau
Have you ever seen pubs World Vision? You know, these pseudo-reports broadcast two hours of the morning, in which celebrities we beg, with tears in her eyes and nose glanders, to sponsor a poor child "for a little over a dollar a day?
I have always found these pubs doubtful. Well, after reading the excellent report by Jean-Yves Girard published in the latest issue of Chatelaine, my worst suspicions were confirmed.
THE GOOD NEWS
The journalist Jean-Yves Girard sponsors a granddaughter of Nicaragua since the summer of 2006. Each month the past two years, he sends $ 35 to the charity.
Recently, he decided to go there to meet his "goddaughter".
Not only did he realized that the girl in question has not received a penny, but he found out that under its secular, World Vision is a religious organization which was established to evangelize people in developing countries, "attest to the good news of God's kingdom" and promoting "abstinence before marriage, the only behavior approved by God."
In short, this is not so poor children help you when you send money to World Vision, but friends of Jesus.
I do not know about you, but I think the next time a spokesman for World Vision m'implore a trembling voice to sponsor a child bedonnant with flies in their eyes, I will close the distance and call OXFAM - Quebec.
THE REST OF GUILDA
Let's talk about reasonable accommodations now. This weekend in the National Post, one could read a new quite tasty.
A few weeks ago, we learned that a high school located in Thailand had ushered in a bathroom for transvestites to assist the 200 adolescents who go to their classes dressed as women. Well, guess what? The idea has been small in Canada!
The University of Victoria, British Colombia, has now toilets désexualisées "to allow transgender students to quietly their needs.
That is not it beautiful?
GLORY TO GOD
And wait, you do not even read. Wanting to also better serve their diverse clientele, Carleton University and the University of Western Ontario have added new holidays in their calendar.
Now, followers of Zoroastrianism (a religion founded during the first millennium before Christ in Kurdistan) may take a few days off at the end of March to celebrate the new year zoroastre and celebrate the divine spirit Asha Vahishta, creator of fire .
Ditto for the followers of Wicca, a pagan religion and mystical whose origins date back to ancient times.
The wiccans revere nature, practiced magic, wearing a talisman around his neck and avoid bright colors during their rituals.
Among the many festivals they celebrate each year, note the Imbolc (February 2, a feast of fire and light during which burning dolls corn offerings to the sun), Beltane (April 30) the Litha (June 21), Lammas (August 2) and Samhain (October 31).
HAPPY HOLIDAY SEASON!
On the site of the Government of Canada, there are 38 religions in this country. Can you imagine the school calendar?
Labels: Canada, Human mistake, Religion and fanaticism, Richard Martineau
Who vote for whom?
Here according to Le Figaro, the choice of a few American stars.
Barack Obama
Oprah Winfrey
Joakim Noah
Will Smith
George Clooney
Edward Norton
Warren Buffet
Matt Damon
Sharon Stone
Halle Berry
Ben Affleck
Wyclef Jean
Jesse Jackson
John Kerry
Caroline Kennedy
Ted Kennedy
Toni Morrison
Will I Am (Black Eyed Peas)
Scarlett Johansson
Herbie Hancock
Robert de Niro
Spike Lee
Jessica Alba
Bruce Springsteen
Tom Hanks
Maria Shriver
Stevie Wonder
John Edwards
Al Gore
and...
Brad Pitt
Angelina Jolie
Ben Stiller
Adam Sandler
Larry David
Morgan Freeman
John Elway
Michael Jordan
Tom Barrasso
George Steinbrenner (Yankees owner of New York)
Reggie Jackson
Jenny McCarthy
Rosie O'Donnell
and so on.
John McCain
Henry Kissinger
Sylvester Stallone
Arnold Schwarzenegger
George Bush
Nancy Reagan
and...
John McCain
Link
Labels: United States
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
Media: No longer Vastel
The journalist Michel Vastel died of cancer Thursday at the age of 68. He leaves in mourning his wife and three children.
Vastel, as it is called, has occupied virtually all journalistic forums Quebec.
The French arrived in Montreal in 1970, was first journalist to Devoir, then to La Presse, the Sun and the law. He also collaborated in the Journal de Montreal, The News magazine, where he also had a blog, and CKAC Radio-Canada.
Michel Vastel was born May 20, 1940, in Saint-Pierre-de-Cormeilles, in Normandy. His studies were interrupted by compulsory military service because he had to participate in the war of Algeria.
He made his journalistic debut in North Eclair, Tourcoing, the section of faits divers. It is through the exchange Franco-Quebec in 1969, it is first come to Montreal. He retains its French nationality, but settled permanently in Quebec in 1970, the same year that the crisis of October. He worked for almost three years the Ministry of Transport Quebec.
Then he entered the newspaper Les Affaires, and then be hired at Devoir in 1976, while Claude Ryan directs the newspaper of the rue Saint-Sacrement.
He became parliamentary correspondent in Ottawa for Le Devoir until 1989, and then change newspaper to become parliamentary correspondent for La Presse, then director of the Ottawa office for Le Soleil of Quebec City, Ottawa Le Droit, and Le Quotidien de Chicoutimi. He is also collaborating regular magazine L'Actualité since 1977. He will be in Ottawa for 17 years before settling in Montreal in 1995.
Assigned to the Montreal office of the newspaper Le Soleil, he continues his column on politics in the country, paying particular attention to current political provincial capitals of English Canada. In addition to his journalistic activities, he is also author. He publishes Le Neveu in 1987, a book about the Mafia, then Trudeau Quebecer, Bourassa, Lucien Bouchard: pending thereafter, and Landry, the great Landry disturbing.
In 2005, he made a foray into the arts, publishing history Nathalie Simard, a victim of sexual abuse during his young career.
Until the end, will Vastel remained journalist, but above all a great columnist and provocateur. "The role of a columnist is to make people react, to express opinions, trigger reactions," he told the newspaper Edition.
Labels: Québec
Michel Vastel 1940-2008
Francis Chartrand wrote: Labels: Francis Chartrand, Québec
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
