Captive Nation - Egypt And The West - MEDIA LENS. UK

http://medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=602:egypt-in-chains-torture-military-aid-and-the-real-predators&catid=24:alerts-2011&Itemid=68

February 09, 2011

Captive Nation - Egypt And The West

In 1886, Tolstoy wrote:

‘Slavery has long been abolished. It was abolished in Rome, and in America, and in Russia, but what was abolished was the word and not the thing in itself.’ (Tolstoy, What Then Must We Do?, Green Classics, 1991, p.104)

In 2011, ‘the thing in itself’ is alive and well in Egypt. What an extraordinary spectacle it is - a dictatorship behaving as though an entire people were its personal property. Henchmen aside, the people have spoken, almost as one, and their demands are very clear. The blunt government response, in effect: We react as we want. If we don’t want to, we don’t have to. Why? Because we have a monopoly of violence.

A government thus stands exposed for what it is, a parasite feeding off the people it claims to represent.

And what of the West? Obama - Washington's bargain basement bodhisattva - said:

‘We pray that the violence in Egypt will end and that the rights and aspirations of the Egyptian people will be realised and that a better day will dawn over Egypt and throughout the world.’

, again, had the perfect retort:

‘I came to the simple and natural conclusion that if I pity a tired horse on which I am riding, the first thing I must do if I am really sorry for it, is to get off and walk on my own feet.’ (Tolstoy, op. cit., p.111) 

But this the US elites pulling Obama’s strings will never do of their own volition – they have been riding the tired horse far too long. Thus, Hillary Clinton said of the Egyptian dictator on March 10, 2009:

‘I really consider President and Mrs. Mubarak to be friends of my family. So I hope to see him often here in Egypt and in the United States.’

Thus, Middle East Envoy, Tony Blair, said of Mubarak on February 1, 2011:

‘Well, where you stand on him depends on whether you've worked with him from the outside or on the inside. And for those of us who worked with him over the - particularly now I worked with him on the Middle East peace process between the Israelis and the Palestinians, so this is somebody I'm constantly in contact with and working with. And on that issue, I have to say, he's been immensely courageous and a force for good.’

As ever, Blair knows: he is ‘on the inside’ and has ‘worked with him’. As ever, Blair is sincere: ‘I have to say’ - truth compels him. As ever, Blair’s ‘force for good’ is enforcing somebody’s hell.
On January 30, 2011, Human Rights Watch (HRW) published a report, ‘“Work on Him Until He Confesses” - Impunity for Torture in Egypt.’

The report observes:

‘According to Egyptian lawyers and domestic and international human rights groups… law enforcement officials have used torture and ill-treatment on a widespread, deliberate, and systematic basis over the past two decades to glean confessions and information, or to punish detainees. The United Nations Committee Against Torture has confirmed the systematic nature of torture in Egypt.’

Abuses include ‘beatings, electric shocks, suspension in painful positions, forced standing for long periods, waterboarding, as well as rape and threatening to rape victims and their family’.

The horrors constitute ‘an epidemic of habitual, widespread, and deliberate torture perpetrated on a regular basis by security forces against political dissidents, Islamists allegedly engaged in terrorist activity, and ordinary citizens suspected of links to criminal activity or who simply look suspicious’.

Our search of the LexisNexis database found that HRW’s report has so far received three mentions in the national UK press.

Military 'Aid' – Corporate Welfare At A Price

Western journalists, then, are confronted by three salient facts in Egypt:

1) Mubarak’s regime is a brutal military dictatorship responsible for widespread torture.

2) The Egyptian people are clearly intent on removing this dictator.

But also:

3) A major reason why the Egyptian people are currently unable to achieve this aim is that the United States supports the tyranny with around $1.3 billion in military 'aid' every year.

According to LexisNexis, over the last month, the word 'Mubarak' has appeared in 1,652 UK press articles. The words 'Mubarak' and 'military aid' have appeared in 11 national UK articles.

With rare exceptions, these mentions are mere crumbs, one-liners in passing. In The Times, Bill Emmott observes that ‘the Mubarak regime is still receiving $1.3 billion of military aid each year from America, making it the second biggest recipient of American aid after Israel’. (Emmott, 'Obama's riddle: withdraw or keep military aid?,’ The Times, January 31, 2011 Monday)
The Guardian has published one in-depth online article by investigative journalist Pratap Chatterjee, who wrote:

‘So, when protesters in Cairo last week were struck by tear gas canisters fired by Egyptian security officials, it was not surprising that pictures taken by ABC TV would show that the canisters were manufactured in the US. Nor does it seem that surprising that a journalist from the Sydney Morning Herald would find 12-gauge shotgun shells with “MADE IN USA” stamped on their brass heads when he visited the wounded in a makeshift casualty ward in a tiny mosque behind Tahrir (Liberation) Square.’ 

By contrast, when we turn away from the establishment media, we find ample discussion of the missing facts. On Democracy Now!, the superb Amy Goodman comments:

‘According to lists of arms sales notifications compiled by the Pentagon’s Defense Security Assistance Agency, in the last decade alone, the Department of Defense has brokered over $11 billion in U.S. arms offers to the Egyptian regime on behalf of weapons manufacturers Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Boeing, Raytheon and General Electric.’

Goodman interviewed William Hartung, author of Prophets of War: Lockheed Martin and the 

Making of the Military-Industrial Complex. Hartung said:

‘Mubarak has been getting $1.3 billion per year, like clockwork, since the beginning of his regime. So that’s about $40 billion…’

He also explained that this was an example of socialism-for-the-rich:

‘It’s a form of corporate welfare for companies like Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics, because it goes to Egypt, then it comes back for F-16 aircraft, for M1 tanks, for aircraft engines, for all kinds of missiles, for guns, for tear gas canisters, as was discussed, a company called Combined Systems International, which actually has its name on the side of the canisters that have been found on the streets there.’ (Hartung, ibid.)

In an article for Huffington Post, Hartung added more detail:

‘Aside from some leftover Soviet equipment from the pre-Camp David era (before 1979), the Egyptian military is virtually made in the USA. Fighter planes (Lockheed Martin F-16s), tanks (General Dynamics's M-1A1s), missiles (Harpoon, TOW, Hellfire, and Stinger, made by Boeing, Raytheon, and Lockheed Martin), howitzers (United Defense), aircraft engines (General Electric) have all been purchased for the Egyptian armed forces with U.S. taxpayer dollars. The biggest winners have been Lockheed Martin ($3.8 billion); General Dynamics ($2.5 billion); Boeing ($1.7 billion); Raytheon ($750 million); and GE ($750 million).’

According to Campaign Against the Arms Trade, Britain sold £16.4m worth of arms to Egypt in 2009 - 81 export licences were approved for a wide range of weapons systems components.

Alas, the US is not eager to cut its supply of weapons to Mubarak. Admiral Mike Mullen, the chair of the US joint chiefs of staff, said the US should wait before suspending aid:

‘There is a lot of uncertainty out there and I would just caution against doing anything until we really understand what's going on. I recognise that [$1.3bn] certainly is a significant investment, but it's an investment that has paid off for a long, long time.’

Paid off for whom? Leading Arab scholar-activist Gilbert Achcar explains: ‘the truth is that the army as an institution is not “neutral” at all. If it has not been used yet to repress the movement, it is only because Mubarak and the general staff did not see it appropriate to resort to such a move, probably because they fear that the soldiers would be reluctant to carry out a repression’.

Stability Through Repression

What mainstream media consumers will find almost nowhere (perhaps literally nowhere) is a detailed analysis of how US-UK support for Mubarak fits with a pattern of US-UK support for dictators across the world over many decades, indeed centuries. A US Department of State memorandum of March 15, 1946, commented:

‘The position of the rulers of the Persian Gulf might be thought of as that of independence, regulated, supervised and defined’ by the British government. (Quoted, Mark Curtis, The Ambiguities of Power, Zed Books, 1995, p.22)

Five years later, a State Department memo gave an idea of how the British defined ‘independence’ in the region:

‘North Africa enjoys stability, even though stability is obtained largely through repression.’ (Curtis, ibid., p.31)

In January 1956, the Foreign Office noted that Egyptian nationalist leader Gamal Abdel Nasser was ‘avowedly anti-communist’ but was ‘unfortunately... strongly neutralist’. (Curtis, ibid., p.96)
Winston Churchill regarded it as outrageous that, thanks to Nasser, Britain could no longer dictate terms. Churchill urged prime minister Anthony Eden to tell the Egyptians ‘that if we had any more of their cheek we will set the Jews on them and drive them into the gutter from which they should never have emerged’. (Quoted, John Newsinger, The Blood Never Dried, Bookmarks, 2006, p.172) 

Anthony Nutting, a junior minister at the Foreign Office, recommended a restrained response to Nasser. In reply, Eden made his feelings clear:

‘I want him destroyed, can’t you understand? I want him murdered, and if you and the Foreign Office don’t agree, then you’d better come to the cabinet and explain why.’

When Nutting pointed out that they had no alternative government to replace Nasser, Eden replied: ‘I don’t give a damn if there’s anarchy and chaos in Egypt.’ (Newsinger, ibid., pp. 173-174)
And there is, of course, next to no mention in the media of how this long history of support for repression is rooted in the needs of Western realpolitik, itself rooted in the need of Western corporations for control of human and natural resources. The trend is so striking, so obvious even from released government documents, and makes complete logical sense. But on some level, mostly beneath conscious awareness, journalists understand that this is not a fit topic for discussion within the corporate media. Some of our society’s interior décor can be challenged, but the fundamental design and foundations of the building are presumably just fine. To say otherwise would be honest but ‘biased’ journalism, and ‘neutrality’ comes first (in fact, that’s a big reason why 'neutrality' comes first).

And so the real story goes unreported: if Egypt’s freedom fighters succeed in ousting Mubarak, far deadlier predators will be lying in wait for them. Us!

SUGGESTED ACTION

The goal of Media Lens is to promote rationality, compassion and respect for others. If you do write to journalists, we strongly urge you to maintain a polite, non-aggressive and non-abusive tone.

Write to: Alan Rusbridger, Guardian editor
Email: alan.rusbridger@guardian.co.uk
Write to Simon Kelner, acting editor of the Independent
Email: s.kelner@independent.co.uk
Write to John Mulholland, editor of the Observer
Email: john.mulholland@observer.co.uk

Europe Must Reclaim the Mediterranean - By Brad Macdonald - The Trumpet.com

The entire analysis by Brad Macdonald, of the changes post Tahrir Square that may or may not come about in the vulnerable western continents and their civilization, given West's enormous capabilities not only in Mediterranean but aro und the world, is based on a highly exaggerated picture of 'Islam, Islamists and Muslims' as bloodthirsty hordes of Mongols about to be unleashed on a very all fields, and thus decries the panic button, knee-jerk scare-mongering that is commonly used to inflict a fraud on the people. The propaganda has to be countered by Islamic Media, to allay unwarranted fears of the Christian World, as also to offer assurances of cooperation in making the world safe and peaceful in the interest of entire humankind.

Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai

http://www.thetrumpet.com/?q=7963.6580.0.0

Europe Must Reclaim the Mediterranean

February 10, 2011 | From theTrumpet.com

For Europe, preventing radical Islam from gaining a foothold in North Africa and the Middle East is a matter of survival.

Brad Macdonald

Brad Macdonald

In the world of geopolitics, the map is a prophetic instrument.

Consider the political upheavals in Egypt and the inevitable emergence of the Muslim Brotherhood in Cairo’s new government. More broadly, consider radical Islam’s growing presence and influence in places like Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Somalia, Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon and Pakistan. As extremist Islamic forces gain footholds in these countries, will they provoke transformations beyond the Middle East and North Africa? If so, where?

For the answers, we need only study a world map.

What quickly becomes apparent is radical Islam’s rise as a potent and controlling force in the southern and eastern Mediterranean. And who, outside that theater, does this trend threaten more than any other region? In virtually every conceivable way—politically, economically, strategically, demographically, culturally—it threatens Europe!

In an article aptly titled “If This Is Young Arabs’ 1989, Europe Must Be Ready With a Bold Response,” the Guardian’s Timothy Garton Ash warned last week that if violent, anti-Western Islamic forces gain the upper hand in Egypt and throughout North Africa, “producing so many new Irans,” then “heaven help us all” (emphasis mine throughout). The stakes in the Mediterranean could hardly be higher for Europe, Ash stated: “If that does not add up to a vital European interest, I don’t know what does.”

Shamefully, few commentators beyond Mr. Ash have analyzed the rise of radical Islam in Egypt, Tunisia and throughout the Arab world in this context. Some of Europe’s leaders, on the other hand, know precisely what is at stake. Last Friday, for example, former German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer, in an article that warranted more attention than it received, warned it was time for 

Europe to think “geopolitically, not just fiscally, about the Mediterranean.”

In a glimpse of how European elites are digesting events in Egypt, Fischer warned that “what the European Union is facing in the Mediterranean region isn’t primarily a currency problem; first and foremost, it is a strategic problem—one that requires finding solutions urgently.”

View Image

Description: Map of radical Islam and Europe’s strategic assets

Copyright © 2011 Philadelphia Church of God, All Rights Reserved.

In other words, the possibility of losing southern and eastern Mediterranean countries to radical Islam is a greater problem than even the eurozone crisis!

To understand Fischer’s alarm, a person need only consider a map of the Mediterranean Sea in light of radical Islam’s growing footprint in Egypt, Tunisia, Lebanon and throughout much of North Africa and the Middle East.

One of Europe’s most important strategic assets is the Strait of Gibraltar. Situated on Spain’s southern tip, dividing Europe from Africa, the sea-lane is the western gateway into the Mediterranean Sea. Each year more than 80,000 vessels, many carrying goods to and from the shores of Europe’s largest economies, particularly Spain, Italy and Greece, transit the maritime gateway. The Port of Gibraltar is a deep-water port, one of the busiest and most important in Europe.

From Gibraltar, one can peer across less than 15 miles of ocean and see Morocco, a bustling nation of 31 million, 96 percent of whom are Muslim. Morocco’s government and populace is relatively stable, but experts say Islamic terrorist organizations in recent years have taken root in the country. Some have joined forces with drug cartels smuggling their wares into Europe. Others are actively working to overthrow the Moroccan government.

Moreover, neighboring Algeria has emerged as a terrorist mecca. According to former cia official and counterterrorism expert Charles Allen, al Qaeda is using Algeria as a breeding ground. Al Qaeda “functions as an umbrella organization for a disparate collection of Sunni Muslim terrorist elements determined to attack what they see as apostate regimes in Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Mauritania and Morocco,” he said. Another expert said the region is emerging as al Qaeda’s next Afghanistan.

For Europe, the rising dominance of radical Islam in territory adjacent to its most crucial sea-lane amounts to a major strategic threat!

Roughly 1,000 miles east of Morocco is Tunisia. We’re told that this country, after the recent ousting of its authoritarian president, is embracing the democratic election of a new government. No one knows what this government will look like, but experts expect Islamist political parties will emerge with considerable influence. The leading Islamist party, Ennahdha—known for its anti-Western, extremist roots—is expected to gain significant power.

For Europe, Tunisia is immensely important. The shores of Sicily are less than 150 miles away, and the region has historically been a staging ground for armies seeking to invade Europe via the Italian peninsula.

For Europe, the emergence in Tunisia of a government that identifies with radical Islam—and possibly condones its ambitions for an Islamic caliphate—is a strategic threat!

Then there’s the Suez Canal, which bisects Egypt, connecting the Mediterranean Sea with the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean. Each day, 2 to 3 million barrels of oil and fuel products pass through the canal and the energy pipelines that transit the Suez desert, which is controlled by Egypt. About two thirds of that energy ends up in Europe, where it accounts for 5 to 7 percent of the continent’s oil consumption. As Joel Hilliker highlighted last week, if the Muslim Brotherhood gains the levers of power in Cairo, it will be able to shut down the Suez, halting the flow of oil and goods.

For Europe, the transition of the Suez Canal into the hands of radical Islam would be a strategic and financial catastrophe!

Beyond Egypt, radical Islam is making its presence felt in Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia and Yemen. Except for Ethiopia, each of these countries is adjacent to the Red Sea or the Gulf of Aden, the vital sea-lanes connecting the Arabian Sea with the Mediterranean Sea, connecting Asia with Europe. Beyond their role as maritime highways, the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden contain vital ports from which oil is shipped to the world.

For Europe, the possibility of the Red Sea falling under the influence of radical Islam is a strategic and economic nightmare!

Another sliver of territory of extreme importance to Europe is the Dardanelle Strait and the Sea of Marmara, both of which connect the Black Sea to the Mediterranean. Historically, these have generally marked the line between Europe and the Middle East. Today, these vital sea-lanes are controlled by Turkey. Since World War i this nation has been a secular state nurturing warm relations with the West, especially Europe. For Europe, as long as Turkey remained a secular, pro-Western state, there was no need to worry about the vital sea-lanes.

In the last couple of years, however, Turkey has given Europe cause for concern. Hardline Islamist forces have gained greater influence, both politically and religiously. More worryingly, Istanbul seems to be losing interest in sustaining rosy relations with the West, including Europe; it is showing an ominous tendency to prioritize relations with its Muslim neighbors, particularly Iran. Just this week Turkey and Iran furthered their diplomatic and political alignment, concluding agreements that will triple bilateral trade between the two states.

For Europe, the thought of Iran’s mullahs exploiting relations with Turkey to meddle in the Dardanelles and the Black Sea is deeply alarming!

Truly, when you look at the map and track the rise of radical Islam, it’s difficult to exaggerate just how much is at stake for Europe in the Mediterranean. Historically, the Mediterranean Sea belongs to Europe. Strategically, the Straits of Gibraltar, the coast of Tunisia, the Suez Canal and Red Sea, the Dardanelles and the island of Cyprus are absolutely vital to Europe’s national security.

In the last two months, it has become obvious that radical Islam—a vehemently anti-Western, intensely violent, aggressive and uncompromising force—is engaged in a campaign to take control of Europe’s southern flank. Iran is at the vanguard of this uprising.

As reality sinks in, Europe is realizing: Inaction is not an option!

This explains why Joshcka Fischer is imploring Europe to seriously engage governments in North Africa and the Middle East that have yet to come under the influence of radical Islamic forces. 

“European officials in Brussels and the major European Union governments should not go for political and economic half-measures when it comes to the Mediterranean states,” he wrote. In the time ahead, the EU will likely heed Fischer’s advice and engage more directly in North Africa and the Middle East. It has too much at stake to do nothing!

More significantly, the rise of radical Islam in the Mediterranean Sea—the region Winston Churchill termed Europe’s soft underbelly—will serve as a powerful impetus for Europe to continue to forge itself into a streamlined and dominant political, economic and military superstate. Be assured, events in Egypt are serving to assure Europe that if it wants to survive as a unified power—if it wants continued access to energy and resources from Africa and the Middle East—if it wants to stop radical Islam’s war on Christians—if it wants to purge the Islamic extremists from the Continent—then it must develop the political and military might to confront Iran and its radical Islamic proxies.

Watch Europe closely. It knows the window of opportunity to tackle radical Islam’s mounting armies is closing. It is about to reclaim the Mediterranean! •

 

BE CAREFUL - SPY CAMERAS EVERYWHERE !!!

ATTENTION... ...!!!!!! !!!
BE CARE FULL...!!!!!

A state of intimidation: Sexual abuse and arrest of Godhra Muslim women - By Rehan Ansari & Afroz Alam Sahil for TwoCircles.net

http://twocircles.net/2011feb08/state_intimidation_sexual_abuse_and_arrest_godhra_muslim_women.html?nocache=1#comment-199162

A state of intimidation: Sexual abuse and arrest of Godhra Muslim women

Submitted by admin4 on 8 February 2011 - 12:06pm

• Crime/Terrorism
• Indian Muslim
• Women

TCN investigates the case and digs out the unpublished inquiry report of National Commission for Women,

By Rehan Ansari & Afroz Alam Sahil for TwoCircles.net,

A simple arrest goes wrong, horribly wrong but incidents that follow are not less than a heinous crime. In December of 2009, Gujarat Police went to Geni Plot area of Godhra to arrest one Rafiq Husain alias Haji for alleged cow slaughter complaints against him. Police encountered resistance from Husain’s family and friends and he managed to give them a slip. Same night, a large battalion of police force came back to the area, forced their ways into many homes and sexually abused and assaulted many women.

On a complaint by Teesta Setalvad, Secretary of Citizen for Justice and Peace, a delegation of National Commission for Women (NCW) visited the area on a fact-finding mission. The NCW report released after an RTI application filed by noted RTI-activist Afroz Alam Sahil, documented findings, recommendations of the three-member NCW inquiry committee and also include submissions made to them by different parties including various NGOs. The Report which is being made public for the first time by TwoCircles.net makes for a difficult reading and shows the conditions that Muslims in Gujarat are living in and also difficulties that even a statutory government body like NCW faces in working in this state.

Case

Rafiq Husain alias Haji has a number of complaints registered against him for stealing and killing cows. On December 19th, 2009 a group of policemen went to arrest him. They were able to catch him but his family and friends resisted and in that confusion Haji was able to escape. Later that night, a battalion of police force again descended in the Geni Plot area of Godhra. This time they arrested 31 people including eight women.

NCW Report

NCW noted that the Godhra Police allegedly forced themselves into the houses in around 1.30 in the night, abused and misbehaved with a woman observing iddat (religiously mandated seclusion), a mother with a new-born was badly beaten while she was holding her baby. The policemen indulged in crass acts like taking off their pants and displaying their genitals to the women.

Slideshow:


NCW further observed, “The Senior Inspector Mr. A.V. Parmar, constables, Prabhatsingh and Suresh from Godhra had led the “criminal group” of Policemen.”

NCW is extremely critical of Police Sub Inspector, Parmar and the constables and said, “They crossed all the limits of indecency, when their gruesome acts included grabbing and applying brutal pressure on the breasts, buttocks and other private parts of the women victims, while verbally and physically assaulting them.” It further observed that on resisting the women were brutally beaten by lathis and kicked dangerously on the stomach and other body parts.

The commission also noted in its report that even after 14 days, marks of clots and of having sustained injuries were there all over the victims’ body. It reported, “The Children and young adults who had been eye witnesses of such violence are in a state of shock. The trauma has been so great, that family members of most of the victims still find it laborious task to even fall asleep at night.”

Magisterial Inquiry

The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Godhra court ordered an inquiry on December 28th, 2009 to look into the allegations by some Muslim women that they were physically and sexually assaulted by policemen while in custody.

The police allegedly showed the arrest only at around 5.30 p.m. on December 20th although the women were in detention from the wee hours of the morning around 3.00 a.m. However when the women were finally produced before the magistrate, who happens to be a woman, she listened to the victims, examined their injuries and ordered the police to take them right away to the civil hospital.

Even this, the police delayed and also forced the medical staff to get the medical examination done in their presence and by male staff.

A state of intimidation

Set up in 1992, National Commission for Women (NCW) is a statutory body to protect and promote the interests of women. The three-member NCW inquiry committee was repeatedly told by a group of people not to listen to the affected Muslim women. In its report the NCW noted that a particular group of around 60 people acted in an excessively aggressive manner.” They refused to move out of the corridors of Circuit house, where the NCW members were hearing all parties. The report noted that “even the Police force didn’t ask them to move away.”

The intimidation was so severe that NCW committee members feared that in such hostile circumstances, there was a possibility that the affected women might have been intimidated or attacked by this group and therefore NCW asked the Collector and the SP to get the crowd dispersed not only from circuit house but from the adjoining area and requested the women victims for their support and patience, in waiting for this mob to disperse and then only come to Circuit house to make their representation.

The representation of these NGOs also tried to influence the NCW and was malicious and defaming against Muslim Community specially Ganchi Muslims.

Siddhi Joshi of Shri Siddhi Sarvajanik Trust which has its registered office in Panchmahal district, Shahera alleged that “Why the NCW is not taking steps to prevent atrocities on majority of women.”

NCW further reported their statements as “The area in which the alleged incident took place is a dangerous area. People support criminals there and it is very difficult for police to enter this area. Muslims are committing various crimes against women. They have abducted 3 women and converted them. They are married but have abducted 18 years old girl to marry her.”

About Ganchi Muslims they said, “Muslims from Godhra are decent but only Ganchi community who live in that area are criminals.”

Representations of Secular and other NGOs

NCW have also reported the representation of other secular NGOs. Prof. J.S. Bandukwala, President Gujarat PUCL had demanded strong action against P.I. Parmar and other accused named by women and was extremely critical of the inaction of SP and Collector.

PUCL and 105 people Human Rights and women’s organizations from Gujarat and more than 150 local residents of Godhra signed and submitted the memorandum which states, “We are not supporting any criminal. We believe that there should not be cow slaughter if it is hurting the feelings of our Hindu brothers. But in the name of combing operation the inhuman atrocities and sexual abuse on Muslim women by Police cannot be tolerated. Prof. Bandukwala himself has visited the area and women cannot describe their plight in words. The Police have not spared even a 15-day infant or a 60 year old widow who was in her iddat and the girl who was getting married that day.”

ANNADI, Aman Samuday and other NGOs also presented the case before NCW and was extremely critical of police atrocities specially P.I. Parmar and his colleagues. NCW has reported their statement as, “they were disturbed by the attitude and action/inaction of the entire state machinery and asked a direct question to the Collector and SP that: Is a Muslim life so cheap or being a Muslim is a crime in Gujarat? According to them the only relief in this entire episode was the inquiry ordered by the judicial magistrate against police under 202 of CrPC.”

Women were sexually assaulted and booked by the Godhra police

The police booked complaints against Salma (19), Naseembanu (22), Haksabibi (27), Fareeda (28), Ruksanabibi (30), Saraben (35), Rahimabibi (39), and Saberabibi (40) under sections 224, 225, 332, 333, 353, 506(2), 186, 147, 148 and 149 of IPC and Bombay Police Act for rioting, illegal assembly, causing hurt to public servant, resisting arrest and obstructing the arrest of another person. The women were released on bail on December 21.

NCW Recommendations

Three-member team of National Commission for Women consisted of Wasnuk Syiem, member of NCW, who led the team of Advocate Priya Hingorani and Professor Tripti Shah of MS University, Baroda.

The Commission submitted its report on April 26th, 2010, with 7 recommendations, including actions against the concerned police officers, compensation, counseling and security to the victims who have been traumatized by the inhuman act of the police personals, government lawyers for the case pending before the high court along with an apology by the state government.

“The Gujarat Government has to come out with a statement accepting responsibility for this serious atrocity and human rights violation, apologize to the women victims and circulate clear written instructions and warning to the police across the state so that similar atrocities do not happen in the future.” National commission for women recommended.

No Information available about the NCW Report and action on it

Teesta Setalwad, the complainant to the NCW told TwoCircles.net that the case is still pending in the High Court and despite repeated attempts they could not get the copy of the of report of National Commission for Women. She said, “We tried many times to get the report but failed due to which the case could not move forward in the high court.”

Alfazal Education & Charitable Trust of Godhra tried to get the report of NCW but in vain. Mohammed Yusuf of the trust said, "We have been trying to know about the commission report, even filed the RTI but could not get the report since last one year."

It is puzzling why the premier women body didn’t release this report and follow-through with the Gujarat government regarding action taken.

Pages from the NCW report:

The Maulana's Challenge - By Seema Chishti - The Indian Express

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/the-maulanas-challenge/747300/0

Tuesday, February 08, 2011

RE : The Maulana’s challenge

Seema Mustafa has written a very comprehensive study of issues surrounding Maulana Ghulam Mohammed Vastanvi's entry into a debate that is continuing for last 150 years within Indian Muslim community (IE, 8/2/11). However, she has been using tools of analysis mostly used by progressives who have an inbuilt blind spot for anything religious. (Note her use of small m for Maulana). Her mention of Ashraaf, the status of community as a monolith as decried by the Left, the different levels of social consciousness that separates different regions; their Muslim traditions and traits, are subjects that are routine and inadequate to go to the heart of the issues. She has failed to pick up the historical perspective that has dominated the 'moments' in history that she correctly highlighted; though without elaborating that those moments were occasioned for reasons of faith, security and identity.

Be that Sir Syed, or Deoband or now Vastanvi, all three had made a breakthrough to bring Muslim community to keep pace with the times. Vastanvi inadvertently had made the same mistake that Sir Syed had made, when Sir Syed directly challenged the Ulama's turf and tried to administer a shock to the community, so that they can better grasp his message of cooperation with the new British colonial rulers. British rulers too, not unlike Modi, had inflicted genocidal massacre of Muslims in the aftermath of Sepoy Mutiny of 1857. Compare this, with the shocking message of Maulana Vastanvi, albeit on mischievous prodding and front-paging by Time of India. Maulana had not grasped the depth of feeling of wider Muslim and secular reaction to Gujarat riots and enunciated his otherwise pioneering mission while assuming the office of the head of Deoband seminary on a very wrong foot! If he had properly understood his position and his mission's wider implications, he would have been able to embark on leading Indian Muslims as the second coming of Sir Syed, without any challenges from the Ulama.

While Sir Syed started from scratch and fought his religious battle side by side his message of a new beginning for Indian Muslims, Vastanvi had the enviable position to have gained his career's best achievements long before he had to take over Deoband. He had so much working for him. Unlike Sir Syed, he was not preaching modernizing in religious space, but was able to chalk out a parallel path to align the community with the times and give Muslim Madarsa education a multifaceted direction. His unfortunate aside over a political matter, added a further dimension to his mission that the people were not prepared for and that was entirely unproductive and unwarranted.

An additional boost to Vastanvi’s mission of educating the Muslim masses was the gradual decline the political power in India in comparison to the rising corporate power in line with the economic progress. India is at the threshold of a peaceful revolution that will change its oligarchic political structure without any violence. As it is, Muslims have failed to make a mark in political field in last 63 years. With the arrival of private enterprise, including foreign investments with legal compulsion to follow universal norms over equal opportunity and against discrimination, the future is brighter than ever for Indian Muslims to make a mark in meritorious competition.

All this is not lost with the announcement of Maulana to submit his resignation to the Shoora on February 23rd. There is every reason to believe that the shoora will rise above petty internal dissensions, grasp the wider implication of a Vastanvi as Mohtamim of Deoband and reject his resignation.

Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai

ghulammuhammed3@gmail.com

http://ghulammuhammed.blogspot.com  

-----------

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/the-maulanas-challenge/747300/0

Tue, 8 Feb 2011

The maulana’s challenge

Seema Chishti
Tags : seemachishti, columns
Posted: Tue Feb 08 2011, 03:49 hrs

Debate around Ghulam Mohammed Vastanvi, the Surat-born maulana who was elected last month to head the Darul Uloom at Deoband, provides a great moment to look at various aspects of being Muslim in India.


There have been several such moments over the past century, many of them seminal, as they have shed light on hidden truths, unpeeled stereotypes and challenged the claims of those who hope to either understand Muslim dynamics in India or play the dynamics. Sir Syed’s decision to start his Mohammedan Anglo-Oriental College (later the Aligarh Muslim University) was one such. The rise of Jinnah, who challenged Indian Muslims to choose between a syncretic environment and a
“separate” one, was another. More recently, there was the Sachar Committee report. Some Muslims sneered at it: “We knew we were at the bottom of the pile.” But as it zeroed in and provided numbers and statistics on the backwardness of Indian Muslims, it shifted the debate even within the community to issues like drinking water, drainage and drop-out rates, away from daadhi-topi issues, peripheral identity questions isolated from their engagement and requirements as citizens. 

Conversely, for those who thrive on portraying Muslims as the “other”, the myth of appeasement was blown apart. Findings such as the fact that just 4 per cent of Muslims were madrasa-educated were like sunlight on the cobwebbed corners of a room full of prejudices.

Vastanvi has stirred up debate on a whole range of issues. What did he mean by the Gujarat statement, should Muslims accede to Modi in Gujarat, even vote for him? Is he right in talking pharmacology when he is expected to think of deeniyat (or theology) and not duniyadari in his new role? Is Vastanvi a dyed-in-the-wool believer in the Qasimi way of doing things (Qasimi referring to those schooled at the Deobandi madrasa)? Is the fuss only because he is a backward, a non-Ashraf, a Gujarati? Is there an old UP-led order he is challenging?


The biggest realisation for those of us who subscribe to the “Muslim monolith” argument is how rich, complex and colourful the variations within the community are. As a Gujarati, Vastanvi’s orientation, his approach to business, his purpose in the world, are strikingly different. The fact that he runs engineering colleges and pharma courses has become as much as a bane for him with the purists as it is an advantage with the rest of the world. His critics went blue in the face, saying it was like offering to open a polytechnic in the Vatican.

That he is, strictly speaking, not an Ashraf is brushed aside as a non-issue by several respectable clerics who have never wanted to accept that caste divisions are prevalent amongst their community. But go down the list of the OBCs in B.P. Mandal’s report — Noniya, Dhuniya, Bhishti or Nat — and then examine where and how, far from city centres, they stay in small-town India, and you will see that caste is always a question, irrespective of where you go to pray.

Rapidly altering levels of aspiration over the past two decades have impacted the minorities as much as anyone else. Old inhibitory factors have been blown away by new pulls: opportunity, hopes for a better life for younger people, the unspoken comfort provided by a fairly long spell of governance without needing to debate or fortify themselves from destructive elements on the right. There have been pushes too: for example, the collapse of traditional crafts (which Muslims have depended upon in clusters) has forced people out of old networks. Government largesse has been more innovative; scholarships, bicycles, housing loans, education opportunities and a promise of more, even in BJP-ruled states, have expanded the space for the Indian Muslim. The virtual collapse of Pakistan as an ideal Islamic state (with Shia-Sunni conflicts and Hanafi-Wahhabi strife tearing the country apart, making even offering prayers in mosques a risky proposition) has also sobered down those who may have secretly yearned for the comfort of being “there”.

Of course, to many of those watching the Vastanvi debate from outside, it is a story of a modern game-changer being done in. But it is much more than that. Of course, the battles, debates and squabbles in the Urdu press, in English, on TV and in drawing rooms have helped the debate pan across these many faultlines. What Vastanvi’s comment on Gujarat did was to again bring to the fore the reaction of a very small minority (7 per cent in Gujarat) telling an incredulous and large minority (18.5 per cent in UP) that they have got to “adjust”, “accept” and get on with it. In states like UP, Bihar, Bengal and Assam, minorities have been able to push their interests into the political mainstream by virtue of their numbers, and they were horrified at the suggestion of a supposed direct victim being so off-key.

Navigating for the Muslim between the Hindu and the Muslim right (and others in the political spectrum happy to keep Muslims slotted) has been tight. The Modi chapter that Vastanvi opened, therefore, should be dealt with and understood.

In Gujarat, elections did not provide for any resolution. The BJP adamantly never reached out, or even did what the Congress tried after the anti-Sikh pogrom, symbolically and politically. So the oversimplified and incorrect “development versus justice” choice squeezes Muslims into a binary trap. Is saying that good roads in Gujarat help us, too, akin to saying that Modi’s politics is acceptable, or that the economic environment there is not discriminatory? Is it okay to wave away the “justice” issue as boring and ideological if a Muslim wants access to better prospects? Most importantly, is it now to be expected of all “modern” Muslims (of the “moving-on” school) to, like the British Tebbit test of nationality, say they are alright with Modi?

Most of these questions will not be answered in one go. The Supreme Court is, of course, hearing several cases on the Gujarat riots. But on the 23rd of this month, some will be addressed by the 17 clerics in the Majlis-e-Shoora in Deoband. They are expected to say what they propose to do with Maulana Vastanvi.
Irrespective of what they choose to do, one good thing that Darul Uloom has done is what it is supposed to be doing — educate us. To educate us about several dimensions of what it means to be a Muslim in India in 2011. And beyond.

seema.chishti@expressindia.com

Will Ikhwan-al-muslimeen have a day in the Egyptian sun ? By Kaleem Kawaja

Will Ikhwan-al-muslimeen have a day in the Egyptian sun ?

 

By Kaleem Kawaja

 

 

After 3 decades of the autocratic rule and domination of the Egyptian state by one family and their wealthy cronies, finally the day of reckoning has arrived.  For three decades this clique headed by Hosni Mubarak, supported by the American military industrial complex and the US oil lobby, allowed neither political freedom nor economic emancipation, nor religious expression to the ordinary people of Egypt.  In the face of the brutal onslaught of the Israelis on the impoverished Palestinians, this regime prevented the free expressions of solidarity by the Egyptians.

 

But as the saying goes, every dog has his day.  So now the powerless and helpless ordinary people of Egypt are bringing down this arrogant oligarchy that lived on the support of the foreigners. Noting the crowds in Tahrir square in Cairo for about 12 days now it was impossible to ignore the large masses of Muslim Egyptians offering two Juma congregational prayers on two successive Fridays.  What was unmistakable was the fact that the ordinary Egyptian Muslims are relgious people who find offering congregational prayers in the full view of the western media an important part of their daily lives.  Indeed at a time of crisis and facing many dangers and divisions they felt that the congregational prayer to Allah can keep them united and relieve their national afflictions and emergency.  The message is that the view that Islam can help them in their hour of crisis is not something to be shy about.

 

Surely that must have felt good to the many Egyptians who have good feelings towards the eighty year old Ikhwan-al-Muslimeen, who anchor the life of the Egyptian nation around the core valus of Islam.  Over the last eight decades Ikhwan has seen many ups and downs and has made many mistakes.   When they tried to make Ikhwan militant, that ran against the core values of Egyptians.  Ikhwan faced many hardships from even the venerable Gamal Nasir, the popular hero of Egypt, who has been the only uncorruptible head of the Egyptian state in the last hundred years. Mubarak was just a oligarch who usurped power and kept it with foreign help.

 

At this time while the miseries of the Egyptian people should be the focus for a change in regime in Cairo, in America the media is full of only one concern: will the new regime be friendly towards not only America but also Israel.  Even in this time of Egypt's national peril the American politicians are thinking mostly of the interests of theocratic and brutal Israel.  And they wonder why America is not popular in the Muslim world?  Indeed the manner of discussion in the Ametrican media gives one the impression as if they are talking about one of the states in US itself.  Look at the press statements of the US President and Secretary of State.

 

An interesting element that I observed in the US media is that several American commentators have said that Ikhwan-al-Muslimeen is not an extremist Muslim organization and they do not pose a danger to a secular polity in Egypt.  Apparently some Americans have learned a lesson from the sad experience in Algeria where annuling an election in which the Muslim group had won, caused much instability and violence.  Yet Ikhwan faces many dangers, most from the Israelis and Americans and their henchmen in Egypt who may try to pursuade the Egyptian army to keep Ikhwan out.  Even though of all parties Ikhwan suffered the most for decades at the hands of the Mubarak regime.

 

Let us hope that at this time as several national political groups come together to change the nature of the despotic regime, Ikhwan will project a cooperative and constructive face, allaying the fears of those who fear a militant Islamic face from them.  Like the Istiqlal party in Turkey they have an opportunity to gradually return Egypt to its long peaceful Islamic heritage.  Let us hope that they will not make the mistake that Taliban did in Afhganistan when they mindlessly put militant and sectarian postures as policies of the state, that scared the world and that also did damage to the core peaceful and egalitarian image of Islam as a political force. 

'Ferment in Arab World Can Be Traced to the Denial of Power to Islamists' : Ayed bin Abdullah Al-Qarni

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Siraj Wahab <sirajwahab@gmail.com>

- Hide quoted text -

Date: Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 3:50 AM
Subject: 'Ferment in Arab World Can Be Traced to the Denial of Power to Islamists'

http://arabnews.com/saudiarabia/article252786.ece

                                                                               Ayed bin Abdullah Al-Qarni

Shariah the Only Path for Arabs, Says Saudi Scholar

By SIRAJ WAHAB
Published in Arab News on Feb 7, 2011

A popular Saudi author and religious scholar says the current ferment in the Arab world can be traced to the denial of power to Islamists in the past. Only Saudi Arabia and some other Gulf states have been the exception where Shariah or Islamic law became the constitution.

Writing in Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper, Ayed bin Abdullah Al-Qarni said that in Egypt, a revolution for change took place in 1952, championing reform and an adherence to post-monarchical values, whereas the Egyptian people actually wanted Islam as their means of reform, as advocated by Muhammad Abduh and Jamaluddin Afghani.

When the Free Officers assumed power in 1952, they cast Islam aside, denounced the Shariah and ruled according to a constitution derived from French and English law.

In Yemen, Islamic scholars, judges, and intellectuals such as Al-Zubayri, Ibn Al-Numan, Al-Kibsi and others, staged a revolution in 1962. Al-Qarni said they were putting forth the Islamic project against the Yemeni imamate. However, Abdullah Al-Sallal, a former student of Abdel Nasser, hijacked the Yemeni revolution along with the military. Again, they cast Islam aside, objected to Shariah law and ruled in accordance with a set of legislation derived from various dubious sources.

The Algerians staged their glorious revolution against French colonialism, under the leadership of great Islamic scholars such as Abdel Hamid Ben Badis, Lakhdar Brahimi, and others — all carrying the spirit of Islam. Al-Qarni noted that when Algeria achieved independence, it was governed by a socialist, Western-orientated regime, which deprived the Algerian Muslim people of their ambitions and aspirations for Islamic rule. “The Algerian people are Muslims; Islam is inherent to the Arab nature,” Al-Qarni said.

In Sudan, the Mahdi reformist revolution took place advocating a project of Islamic renaissance. When English colonialism was ousted, military figures assumed power, although they knew nothing about Islam. Hence, they rejected the Shariah and imposed a foreign, Western-oriented constitution.

In Libya, the descendants and followers of the martyred freedom fighter, Omar Mukhtar, were eager to raise the banner of Islam during the 1969 revolution. However, the Libyan people were surprised when this movement was hijacked by a government that discounted the Shariah and usurped freedom.

In Iraq and Syria, Al-Qarni said the people were 100 percent Muslim, and they led their struggle and revolution against French and English colonialism under the banner of Islam. However, when the Baath Party assumed power in both countries, its first move was to denounce Shariah and marginalize Islam.

Regarding revolutions in the Middle East, Al-Qarni said no one has adhered to Islam, its rule, doctrine and approach, except King Abdul Aziz when he led the revolution in the Arabian Peninsula. He was revolting against delusion, heresy, division, dispute, looting and robbery. His first announcement was that Saudi Arabia was an Islamic state, which would be governed according to the Qur’an and Sunnah. He wrote on its flag: “There is no god other than God, and Muhammad is His Messenger.”

Al-Qarni says this is not hypocrisy or flattery, but it is a fact to which historians, Western or otherwise, have testified. Such historians include Muhammad Jalal Kishk, author of “The Saudis and the Islamic Solution.”

He is an impartial writer who wrote the book from a neutral standpoint supporting it with documents and evidence. Another example would be the late Austrian Muslim, Muhammad Asad, who mentioned in his book “The Road to Mecca” that he had met King Abdul Aziz. According to Asad, all that King Abdul Aziz spoke about during their meeting was Islam and his pride in the religion.

The Tunisian people are Sunni Muslims who follow the Maliki school. Their land is the home of great heroes and conquerors such as Uqba bin Nafi, Ibn Khaldun and Al-Tahir bin Ashur. It is also the land of great seats of learning such as Al-Zaytuna and Al-Qayrawan. The majority of Tunisian people want Islam as their source of governance. However, the followers of some left-wing parties considered themselves to be worthier of running the country than anyone else and thus tried to remove Islam from Tunisian life. "This was yet another example of a revolution being hijacked in the same manner as previous Arab republics," said Al-Qarni.

--