hat tip Rut A firm of Saudi Arabian lawyers has demanded that Danish newspapers apologise for re-printing cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed. A firm of Saudi lawyers, purportedly acting on behalf of descendants of the Prophet Mohammed, has demanded printed and multi-lingual apologies from Danish newspapers who re-printed cartoons of the Prophet, as well as undertakings that all Internet pictures of the caricatures be removed in perpetuity. The demand from the Saudi Arabian legal firm of A.Z. Yamani, is contained in letters sent to about a dozen Danish editors-in-chief and gives the end of September as a deadline for compliance. The A.Z. Yamani firm was founded by Sheikh Ahmed Zaki Yamani, Saudi Arabia’s former Oil Minister from 1962 and until 1986 when he was summarily dismissed. The letter in question was sent by his lawyer son Faisal Yamani. MinistriesThe Danish Newspapers Association said at the weekend that it plans to contact the Danish foreign and justice ministries to discuss the issue after finding out exactly how many newspapers had received the letter in question. Some Danish newspapers re-printed one of the controversial cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed as an illustration in connection with the police discovery of plans to murder Kurt Westergaard, a cartoonist who originally produced one of the caricatures. Front pageDemands in the letter from the Yamani lawyers require newspapers who reproduced the cartoons to print an unconditional apology in Danish, Arabic, French and English for having offended alleged descendants of the Prophet Mohammed, as well as undertaking never again to reproduce similar drawings or material. The demand includes a requirement that a front page reference to the apology must also be made. Newspaper AssociationThe Danish Newspaper Association says it doubts that newspapers will comply. »Everything has to be looked into and it is clear that we will be speaking with the Justice and Foreign ministries in a case like this – but first of all we have to get an overview of the situation«, says Newspaper Association Chairman Ebbe Dahl. But he adds that the Saudi legal firm’s demands are ‘clearly unacceptable’ and he is in no doubt that newspapers will stand fast. »It’s completely natural that media use the core of the issue when something like this comes up«, says Dahl referring to the murder plans.
Court wades into brewing battle over rights of Internet journalists July 04 | By Drew Zahn When Internet journalist Joe Kaufman wrote an article exposing terrorist connections in two American Muslim groups, he was sued by a swarm of Islamic organizations, none of which he had mentioned in his online article. The technique is called by some "legal jihad" or "Islamist lawfare," and the Thomas More Law Center, which is representing Kaufman in the lawsuit, claims Muslim advocates are using the strategy to bully online journalists into silence. "The lawsuit against Kaufman was funded by the Muslim Legal Fund for America. The head of that organization, Khalil Meek, admitted on a Muslim radio show that lawsuits were being filed against Kaufman and others to set an example," claims a Thomas More statement on the case. "Indeed, for the last several years, Muslim groups in the U.S. have engaged in the tactic of filing meritless lawsuits to silence any public discussion of Islamic terrorist threats." The organizations suing Kaufman also sought to legally deny him certain legal protections granted to traditional journalists, claiming that as an Internet writer, his right to seek a quick and inexpensive dismissal of the case didn't apply. The case set up a battle, not only between Islamic advocates and those that would question their political connections, but also between organizations that fly low under the mass media's radar, enjoying little public scrutiny, and the burgeoning field of Internet journalism that often investigates places the mainstream media ignores. In an unanimous decision from a three-judge panel of the Texas Second Court of Appeals, however, not only did the court rule that the Muslim organizations had no basis for claiming defamation – since Kaufman didn't name or point to them in his article – but the judges also declared that online journalists do merit the same status and legal protections that their more traditional media peers enjoy. Though the case against Kaufman is therefore dismissed for now, the Law Center reports the seven Muslim organizations have filed an appeal, continuing their quest for, according to court documents, "injunctive relief related to Kaufman's existing and future Internet publications." As WND reported, Kaufman's troubles began when he wrote an article for the online FrontPage Magazine in 2007, criticizing two Islamic groups for hosting a "Muslim Family Day" at Six Flags over Texas, a Dallas-area amusement park. The Islamic Circle of North America and the Islamic Association of North Texas, Kaufman revealed, had funneled money to the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and al-Qaida. "While using images of cartoon characters and sponsoring events at amusement parks may seem innocuous, the danger that the Islamic Circle of North America poses to the United States, Canada and others is clear," Kaufman wrote. "As a faction of the Muslim Brotherhood, the organization looks to impose Islam on Western society, and as a donor to a terrorist organization, the group is a willing participant in the act of violence." And while neither the ICNA nor the IANT claimed libel, seven other Muslim organizations – the Islamic Society of Arlington, Texas, Islamic Center of Irving, DFW Islamic Educational Center, Inc., Dar Elsalam Islamic Center, Al Hedayah Islamic Center, Islamic Association of Tarrant County and Muslim American Society of Dallas – cried foul, bringing the defamation suit against Kaufman. Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, "This frivolous lawsuit is an example of the legal jihad being waged by radical Islamic organizations throughout our nation. These lawsuits are aimed at stifling the free speech rights of Americans who dare to expose their agenda. They intentionally file lawsuits to intimidate reporters who seek to expose their agenda. By making it costly to defend against their lawsuits, they hope journalists will refrain from writing about the threat to our nation." The opinion of the court, written by Justice Terrie Livingston, overturned a lower court's denial of Kaufmann's motion to dismiss the libel claim before a time-consuming and expensive trial. Listing seven different reasons for the court's decision, Justice Livingston wrote, "We conclude that an Internet author's status as a member of the electronic media should be adjudged by the same principles that courts should use to determine the author's status under more traditional media." The court did not, however, uphold that all Internet writers – such as bloggers – should be afforded the protections traditional journalists enjoy. Kaufman, the court noted, has written for a variety of national publications since 1995, has appeared on several television news networks and in writing for FrontPage Magazine, was writing for a separate online news source with the freedom to accept or reject his article. The court concluded, "We believe that these facts and circumstances, establishing Kaufman's journalistic background and his notoriety outside of the parameters of the article and graphic at issue and FrontPage Magazine's broad readership and its existence as a news/commentary medium that is independent from Kaufman's articles, are sufficient to qualify Kaufman as a member of the electronic or print media and to qualify FrontPage Magazine as an electronic or print medium." Furthermore, the court ruled, that the Muslim organizations' contention that an Internet author could "never" qualify as a member of the media "would make as little sense as an inverse rule that a print author (such as someone distributing their own photocopied musings) would always qualify as such." Source: WorldNetDaily
 By David Solway According to Syrian revolutionary thinker Said Hawwa in his influential book Min Ajl Khutwa (English: For the Sake of a Step), jihad may come in three flavors: by heart, by word, and by hand, a tripartite distinction derived from the hadith literature. The jihad of the heart is an ambiguous formulation: it can mean self-discipline or the passion and steadfastness applied to waging war. The jihad of the hand (also known as the jihad of the sword) is the most conspicuous in virtue of its immediate destructiveness. But the jihad of the word — of indoctrination, propaganda, and institutional infiltration — is perhaps even more menacing since it operates virally, as it were, infecting the organs of the open society with a view to its gradual demise. Pajamas MediaSource: Pajamas Media
 By Johann Hari The right to criticize religion is being slowly doused in acid. Across the world, the small, incremental gains made by secularism -- giving us the space to doubt and question and make up our own minds -- are being beaten back by belligerent demands that we "respect" religion. A historic marker has just been passed, showing how far we have been shoved. The UN rapporteur who is supposed to be the global guardian of free speech has had his job rewritten -- to put him on the side of the religious censors. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights stated sixty years ago that "a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief is the highest aspiration of the common people." It was a Magna Carta for mankind -- and loathed by every human rights abuser on earth. Today, the Chinese dictatorship calls it "Western", Robert Mugabe calls it "colonialist", and Dick Cheney calls it "outdated." The countries of the world have chronically failed to meet it -- but the document has been held up by the United Nations as the ultimate standard against which to check ourselves. Until now. Read more ...Source: Huffington Post
 Geneva, March 11, 2009 - A new U.N. resolution circulated today by Islamic states would define any questioning of Islamic dogma as a human rights violation, intimidate dissenting voices, and encourage the forced imposition of Sharia law.... UN Watch obtained a copy of the Pakistani-authored proposal after it was distributed today among Geneva diplomats attending the current session of the UN Human Rights Council. Entitled "Combating defamation of religions," it mentions only Islam. While non-binding, the resolution constitutes a dangerous threat to free speech everywhere. It would ban any perceived offense to Islamic sensitivities as a "serious affront to human dignity" and a violation of religious freedom, and would pressure U.N. member states -- at the "local, national, regional and international levels" -- to erode free speech guarantees in their "legal and constitutional systems." It's an Orwellian text that distorts the meaning of human rights, free speech, and religious freedom, and marks a giant step backwards for liberty and democracy worldwide. Read more ...Source: UN WatchH/T: Jihad Watch
 By Ryan Mauro Last month, the British government controversially refused entry to Geert Wilders, enforcing a ban it had placed on the Dutch parliamentarian for his anti-Islam film, Fitna. While Britain works to eliminate the “threat” from the critics of Islam, however, the British government is facing a far greater peril from the spread of radical Islam on its own territory. The CIA reportedly has warned President Obama that Islamic extremists living in the United Kingdom are now viewed as the greatest threat to the United States. “Around 40 per cent of CIA activity on homeland threats is now in the UK. This is quite unprecedented,” one British official was quoted as saying in The Telegraph. Further heightening the threat, these extremists are becoming ever more connected with overseas terrorist networks. Dozens of British citizens are believed to have traveled to Somalia, to fight alongside Al-Qaeda-linked Islamic militants seeking to seize the country from the current government. The Somali militants are reportedly receiving funding from the large Somali community in the United Kingdom. British Muslims have also been providing Taliban forces in Afghanistan with bomb parts, while others are thought to have joined the battlefield and fought against the British military.  Britain’s terrorist networks are vast. According to a joint intelligence report by Britain’s Defense Ministry, MI5 and Special Branch, there are thousands of terrorism supporters in the country. These findings echo an earlier warning from the director of MI-5 that there were at least 2,000 people in the country identified as posing a threat to national security. “It is also estimated that there are some 200 terrorist networks functioning in Britain today who are involved in at least 30 plots,” The Telegraph reported in November 2008. The pool of potential terrorist recruits appears to be growing. In 2008, the non-partisan Center for Social Cohesion released a poll of 1,400 Muslim students in the United Kingdom and found some frightening results. While there was strong support for some moderate beliefs – including the notion that Islam is compatible with democracy and support for gender equality – some 24 percent felt that Allah did not view males and females equally, and 33 percent favored the construction of “a worldwide Caliphate based on Sharia law.”  Sharia law, indeed, already has found purchase on British soil. For example, the British judicial system must now enforce the decisions of Sharia-based courts. Although participation in the Sharia system is voluntary, similar to accommodations made for orthodox Jews, such parallel courts are bound to conflict with the values of the Western system of justice. They also serve as the infrastructure necessary for Islamist leaders to institute Sharia law in Britain’s Muslim communities. Hence there is understandable concern that some Muslim citizens, particularly women, will be forced “voluntarily” to submit to this form of justice, lest they be labeled apostates. Younger generations of Muslims make up another concern. The websites of some Muslim schools have been found to be promoting extremist thinking and have pushed children to isolate themselves from the surrounding culture and society. Some websites denounced Harry Potter, chess, Monopoly, Ludo, draughts and even cricket as un-Islamic and one even linked to a website that promoted jihad. Another website claimed that women should remain indoors and that rape victims shared partial blame for their attack. This type of teaching contributes to the lack of assimilation that fuels radicalism and leads to creation of “No-Go Zones” – essentially, Muslim states within states shut off from mainstream British society. Read more ...Source: FrontPage Magazine
 By Jacob Laksin NEW YORK – It’s been a tough few weeks for Geert Wilders. First, an Amsterdam appeals court announced in late January that it was going to bring the blunt-speaking Dutch parliamentarian to trial for offending Muslims with his anti-Islam film, Fitna. Just a few weeks later, Wilders was controversially denied entry into Britain after the British Home Office declared that his views on Islam "would threaten community harmony and therefore public security in the United Kingdom." Set against the near-daily threats on his life, the 24-hour security detail, and the restrictions on travel that have been Wilders’ lot since he first emerged as an outspoken critic of extremist Islam in 2004, these latest setbacks might have tested even the most determined public crusader. But Wilders seems to draw strength from intimidation, whether from aggrieved Muslims or zealous multiculturalists. So it was not entirely surprising that during a visit this week to New York, where he spoke at the invitation of the Hudson New York Briefing Council, the embattled Wilders was as upbeat and unyielding as ever. Read more ...Source: FrontPage MagazineGeert Wilders
Latest recipient of The MASH Award
 By John Armor It was just a minor story on a Friday about a Dutch politician being denied entry to Britain at a London airport. You might well have missed it. But it was an extremely important event for its broader meaning. Geert Wilders, a member of the Netherlands parliament, was invited to Britain by a member of the House of Lords. The invitation asked Wilders to show his 17-minute film Fitna, which he made last year. Fitna juxtaposes quotes from the Koran with images of Islamofascists attacking and murdering various non-Muslims. Last year there were riots around the world by Muslims against this “anti-Islamic” film. None of the protesters claimed that the quotes from the Koran were inaccurate, nor did they claim that the murders and assaults depicted were in any way inaccurate. The day before Wilders was to fly to London, British Home Secretary Jacqui Smith told Wilders not to come because “his opinions would threaten security.” Wilders made the trip anyway, and was arrested at the airport in London and put on another flight back to Amsterdam. While he was on the ground in London, he condemned Britain for stopping him. He called the British government “the biggest bunch of cowards in Europe.” Read more ...Source: Family Security MattersBritish Government
Latest recipient of The Dhimmi Award
By Subir Bhaumik The editor and publisher of a top English-language Indian daily have been arrested on charges of "hurting the religious feelings" of Muslims.The Statesman's editor Ravindra Kumar and publisher Anand Sinha were detained in Calcutta after complaints. Muslims said they were upset with the Statesman for reproducing an article from the UK's Independent daily in its 5 February edition. The article was entitled: "Why should I respect these oppressive religions?" It concerns the erosion of the right to criticise all religions. In it, the author, Johann Hari, writes: "I don't respect the idea that we should follow a 'Prophet' who at the age of 53 had sex with a nine-year old girl, and ordered the murder of whole villages of Jews because they wouldn't follow him." Mr Kumar and Mr Sinha appeared in court on Wednesday and were granted bail. Read more ...Source: BBC NewsH/T: Jihad Watch
 By Nat Hentoff Geert Wilders - a film producer and also a member of parliament in the Netherlands - is facing a prison term there for "insulting" Muslims. His short film "Fitna" in 2008 juxtaposed verses from the Koran with scenes of violence committed by jihadist terrorists. The Dutch appellate court refused a free-speech defense because the insults were so egregious. If convicted, Wilders faces a maximum sentence of two years in prison. Said the defendant: "I lost my freedom already four and a half years ago in October 2004, when my 24-hour police protection started because of threats by Muslims in Holland and abroad to kill me." I have heard from Muslims in this country that jihadists around the world have more than insulted traditional Muslim law by their fierce punishments of both non-Muslims and Muslims who have acted in speech or writing against jihadists' reinterpretations of the Quran. Some of these protesters, exercising freedom of conscience, have been killed for their "blasphemy." Read more ...Source: The Washington Times
By Abul Kasem Sura 19: Maryam (Mary) 19:10 When Zachariah requested for the appropriate sign, Allah told him not to speak to people for three consecutive nights. Contradiction: 3:41 says three days. 19:17 An angel, as a man, appeared before Mary. (It was Gabriel; he appeared to her complete and perfect in the shape of a man. Gabriel is Allah’s Ruh—ibn Kathir.) Contradiction: 3:42, 45 say several angels visited Mary. 19:40 Ultimately, Allah will inherit the earth and all things in it; and everyone will have to return to Allah. Contradiction: 2:116, 3:189, 20:6, 21:19, 57:2 say Allah is the owner of all things in the heavens and on earth and under the soil. Read more ...Source: Islam Watch
 By Gregg Krupa SOUTHFIELD -- Muslims and interfaith leaders in Metro Detroit are asking a local radio station owner to discontinue broadcasts in which, they say, a Coptic priest has repeatedly defamed the Prophet Muhammad over the past year. In an Arabic-language broadcast Wednesday on WNZK 680/690 AM, the Rev. Zakariah Boutros said the Muslim prophet Muhammad had engaged in necrophilia and gay sex, according to the Council on American Islamic Relations. Boutros has previously come under fire from area Muslims, who say he disparages Islam. The controversial, American-based priest can be heard on purchased time slots on radio stations internationally. His words have stirred controversy in Egypt and Great Britain, and are embraced by a number of bloggers and Web sites that criticize Islam. Amani Mostafa, who hosts the program "Questions About Faith" on which Boutros spoke Thursday, said Boutros was "reading from an Islamic text" when he said, over the air, that the Prophet Muhammad slept in the grave of a dead woman and allowed a man to kiss and caress his chest. Read more ...Source: The Detroit News
Under international law (under the impetus of the U.N. resolution) nations would be able to seek extradition and trial abroad of persons who make statements critical or offensive anywhere in the worldBy Nat Hentoff On Inauguration Day, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, in a New York Times ad ("An Invitation to a New Partnership"), told "Dear President OBAMA" that Muslims "have compelling strategic and moral reasons to cooperate and peacefully co-exist with the United States in particular, and with the West in general." Many Muslims here and elsewhere want that partnership; but some, jihadists in the name of Islam, disagree violently. In its address to our new president, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (which has permanent status at the United Nations) made no mention of its own strategic skills that resulted, on Dec. 18, in the passage by the U.N. General Assembly of a nonbinding resolution (with strong advice to its members) that condemns "defamation of religion," especially Islam. Read more ... Source: Jewish World ReviewUnited Nations
Latest recipient of The Dhimmi Award
 By Joseph Loconte London TWENTY YEARS AGO THIS month an Islamic organization in Great Britain staged a 1,000-strong rally of rage: with BBC cameras rolling, Muslim protestors burned copies of The Satanic Verses, the 1988 work by British novelist Salman Rushdie criticizing Mohammed. Death threats and a fatwa from the Iranian government anathematizing Rushdie forced the author into hiding. "I have come to feel that what happened with The Satanic Verses was a kind of prologue," he later told The Times, "and that now we're in the main event." The effort to silence criticism of Islam has become a main event not only in Muslim lands, but increasingly in the democratic West. Last month the London-based Centre for Social Cohesion released a report cataloguing the plight of European Muslims and ex-Muslims who have dared to challenge the forces of extremism. The study, Victims of Intimidation: Freedom of Speech Within Europe's Muslim Communities, recounts the careers of 27 leading detractors. All of them -- politicians, journalists, academics, and artists -- have experienced "significant and credible threats of violence" from Islamists and radical Muslims because of their criticism of Islam. Mansur Escudero, an Islamic leader in Spain, has felt the wrath of extremists despite his aggressive advocacy for Muslim immigrant groups. Escudero was the secretary-general of the country's largest Muslim organization when the Madrid train bombings, orchestrated by an al Qaeda terrorist cell, killed 191 people and wounded over 1,700. His organization, the Islamic Commission, eventually issued a fatwa condemning Osama bin Laden and calling him an apostate - probably the first Muslim group to do so. Read more ...Source: The Weekly Standard
 The latest twist in the clash between Western values and the Muslim world took place yesterday in the Netherlands, where a court ordered the prosecution of lawmaker and provocateur Geert Wilders for inciting violence. The Dutch MP and leader of the Freedom Party, which opposes Muslim immigration into Holland, will stand trial soon for his harsh criticism of Islam.
Mr. Wilders, who made world news last year with the release of a short anti-Islam film called "Fitna," certainly intends to provoke. In his 15-minute video, he juxtaposes verses from the Koran that call for jihad with clips of Islamic hate preachers and terror attacks. He has compared the Koran to Hitler's "Mein Kampf" and urged Muslims to tear out "hate-filled" verses from their scripture.
This is a frontal assault on Islam -- but, as Mr. Wilders points out, he's targeting the religion, not its followers. "Fitna," in fact, sparked a refreshing debate between moderate Muslims and non-Muslims in the Netherlands, and beyond.
There are of course limits to free speech, such as calls for violence. But one doesn't need to agree with Mr. Wilders to acknowledge that he hasn't crossed that line. Some Muslims say they are outraged by his statements. But if freedom of speech means anything, it means the freedom of controversial speech. Consensus views need no protection.
This is exactly what Dutch prosecutors said in June when they rejected the complaints against Mr. Wilders. "That comments are hurtful and offensive for a large number of Muslims does not mean that they are punishable," the prosecutors said in a statement. "Freedom of expression fulfills an essential role in public debate in a democratic society. That means that offensive comments can be made in a political debate."
The court yesterday overruled this decision, arguing that the lawmaker should be prosecuted for "inciting hatred and discrimination" and also "for insulting Muslim worshippers because of comparisons between Islam and Nazism."
The concept of punishing people for "insulting" religious feelings sounds dangerously close to what Islamic countries have long been pushing for: that Western nations adopt blasphemy laws and stop the "defamation" of Islam.
The Amsterdam court yesterday obliged. This is no small victory for Islamic regimes that seek to export their censorship laws to wherever Muslims happen to reside. But the successful integration of Muslims in the Netherlands and the rest of Europe will require that immigrants adapt to Western norms, not vice versa. Limiting the Dutch debate of Islam to standards acceptable in, say, Saudi Arabia, will only shore up support for Mr. Wilders's argument that Muslim immigration is eroding traditional Dutch liberties.
Islamists have long tried to silence Mr. Wilders, who has been living for years under 24-hour police protection. Dutch judges may finally succeed where jihadist death threats so far have failed. Source: The Wall Street Journal - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123257047606303395.html H/T: Weasel Zippers
 PUTRAJAYA: The police have started investigating a blog said to have insulted Islam and Prophet Muhammad.
This comes less than a month after another blog was found to have posted insults against the prophet.
Deputy Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar said he viewed the matter seriously and that appropriate action would be taken against the blogger.
"It humiliates and insults not only the religion but Muslims all over the world. Clearly, this is against the law and to me, the blogger wants to create animosity between Muslims and non-Muslims," he told the New Straits Times.
The blog does not carry any photographs, only an illustration of a woman wearing a tudung.
Towards the end of December, the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) and the police were reported to be working together to trace the people behind the first blog said to have insulted the prophet.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had asked the Home Ministry and police to act fast, saying the matter had to be nipped in the bud or it could lead to problems in the country.
He had also reminded Malaysians that it was wrong to insult any religion, whether Islam, Christianity, Buddhism or Hinduism.
The prime minister said it was every citizen's responsibility to preserve the country's peace and stability.
A woman was picked up at her home in Kota Damansara to assist investigations but was later released on police bail. Source: New Strait Times
The problems here are manifold. Chief among them is the fact that Islamic groups in American have found any examination by non-Muslims of how Islamic jihadists use Islamic texts and teachings to justify their actions and make recruits among peaceful Muslims to be offensive. If laws like this travel West, we will be rendered mute and defenseless in the face of the jihad and Islamic supremacism. Read more ...Source: IANSH/T: Jihad Watch
 Victims of Intimidation: Freedom of Speech within Europe's Muslim Communities warns that unless European governments take urgent action to protect these individuals and their right to freedom of speech, Islamic extremists will be empowered and the evolution of a peaceful, tolerant 'European Islam' will never take place. Victims of Intimidation, by Douglas Murray and Johan Pieter Verwey, tells the stories of nearly 30 Europeans of Muslim background - some believing Muslims and others not - who have been threatened by Muslim extremists. Based on interviews with many of these individuals, the report details the substantial threats and violence they have faced as a result of critical inquiry into aspects of their faith or lifestyle. The victims of this intimidation include politicians, journalists, writers, artists and human rights activists. Their personal stories are diverse and wide-ranging. Some have criticised Islam itself; others seek to reform traditionalist practices. All, however, have been targeted on the pretext that they have broken Islamic rules and traditions. Read more ... Source: The Centre For Social Cohesion
 |
|
|
Copyright Muslims Against Sharia 2008. All rights reserved.
E-mail: info AT ReformIslam.org
|
|
|
Posts
