Posts Tagged ‘Islamism’
Tunisian Feminists Show Great Courage.
The FEMEN movement activist in Tunisia, Amina, was arrested on May 19 in Kairouan. Amina tagged the name of the “FEMEN” group on the wall of Uqba Ibn Nafaâ mosque.
This act earned him the resentment and anger of the inhabitants of the places which forced the police to make arrest.
According to a statement published on the FB page of the Ministry of the Interior, it announces the arrest of a woman who “would run contrary gesture of modesty” and that after consultation with the prosecutor.
This arrest is therefore due not an offence, but the intent to commit one, according to own statements of the Ministry of Interior.
En Tunisie, même pas besoin de soulever son T-Shirt. Taguer “FEMEN” sur un mur semble déjà considéré comme un attentat à la pudeur ! … http://fb.me/uv01oCds
In Tunisia you don;t even need to lift up your T-shirt: Tagging FEMEN on a wall seems already considered as an indecent assault.
The Minister of the Interior claims that Amina was about the carry out a “geste contraire à la pudeur” a gesture contrary to morals, the group Femen being known for their “topless” actions.
It is also claimed that this arrest was for her own protection. She was caught in Kairouan, where the Salafists intended to carry out their own actions (from Elle and see previous post here).
More from the French version of the Huffington Post.
The English version says this,
There are reports activist Amina Tyler has been arrested after daubing the word ‘Femen’ on a cemetery wall in Tunisia.
Tyler, who was threatened with death by stoning for baring her breasts online, was pictured being led away after police and Salafists clashed in Kairouan this weekend.
One protester was killed and 15 policemen were wounded after fighting erupted between hardline Islamists and security forces in response to the ban on Salafists from staging their annual congress.
Agence France Presse reports (an hour ago),
One dead in Tunisia showdown with Islamists
TUNIS — Security forces and hardline Islamists fought street battles in Tunis on Sunday, with one protester killed and 15 policemen wounded, after the authorities banned the Salafists from staging their annual congress.
The confrontations infuriated moderate Islamist Prime Minister Ali Larayedh, who for the first time linked the Salafist Ansar al-Sharia group which is considered close to Al-Qaeda to “terrorism”.
“Ansar al-Sharia is an illegal organisation which defies and provokes state authority,” Larayedh told Tunisian state television during a visit to Qatar.
“It has ties to and is involved in terrorism,” he said.
Sunday’s fighting erupted when Ansar al-Sharia (Partisans of Islamic Law) urged its followers to mass in the capital’s suburb of Ettadhamen in defiance of a ban on their gathering in the central city of Kairouan.
Salafists advocate an ultra-conservative brand of Sunni Islam, and Ansar al-Sharia, whose fugitive leader fought with Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, does not recognise the authority of the Tunisian state.
Background on Ansar al-Sharia’a recent actions,
They have been involved in “attacks on a television station that showed the movie Persepolis in October 2011, attacks on a controversial art exhibit in June 2012 and an attack on the US embassy in September 2012.
Libération reports on the Tunisian government’s new harder line,
Ennahda a longtemps été accusé de laxisme pour avoir toléré les groupuscules jihadistes. Il a cependant considérablement durci sa position depuis que 16 militaires et gendarmes ont été blessés entre fin avril et début mai par des mines posées par des groupes armés traqués à la frontière avec l’Algérie. Ansar Ashariaa accuse de son côté Ennahda de mener une politique anti-islamique et a menacé le gouvernement d’une «guerre».
For a long time Ennahda has been accused of being soft towards jihadist groupuscules. They have howver cosndierbaly hardened their position after 16 soldiers and gendarmes were injured – between the end of April and beginning May - by mines left by armed groups they were tracking on the Algerian frontier. Ansar Ashariaa (the Salafists’ leader) has for his part accused Ennahda of anti-Islamic policies and has threatened the government with “war”.
I suppose I should have asked the Suffolk police in case I have offended Tunisian Salafists but here it is anyway.
At the risk of a visit of the Suffolk Police anxious to protect the reputation of the Muslim Brotherhood…
Not an endorsement, but this cover by secular leftists of Gloria Gaynor’s 1978 “I will Survive,” with satirical Arabic lyrics (translated in subtitles) about the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafis in Egypt since the fall of dictator Hosni Mubarak gives a window into the grievances and disappointments of the youth who made the January 25, 2011 revolution.
Thousands of protesters gathered in Tahrir Square today, Friday, demanding that Muslim Brotherhood leader and Egyptian president Muhammad Morsi call early presidential elections. The ‘Rebel’ campaign is supported by a group of leftist and liberal parties.
I have just had an unpleasant visit from the Police.
Apparently it follows a “complaint” from Ipswich-based Islamists, Jimas.
The details of the complaint were not given.
But they apparently centre on this Blog, posts on this organisation (notably a dossier sent to me by somebody close to Harry’s Place) and, it is claimed “E-Mails.”
What they are specifically I do not know.
It all took place, believe or not, well over a year ago, when and what, they did not see fit to elaborate much upon.
But is was claimed that I had a met a leading member of Jimas – completely untrue – to discuss matters.
It was also said that E-Mails from somebody calling themselves The Usual Suspects, were at issue.
I am not the “Usual Suspects” and it is a slander to suggest that I am.
Equally I repeat: I have never met anybody from Jimas.
As for the political attacks on Jimas (and other Islamists) on the Blog Tendance Coatesy, I wonder if it is the business of Suffolk police to act on these matters.
One could say that this is a case of political intervention way beyond their remit.
As for Jimas, well, rest assured that your attempts to ‘get’ me are not appreciated.
Particularly the claim – wholly made-up – that I ‘met’ with them.
As this Blog has an international readership I wonder what people in other countries think of this.
Bangladesh May 6th: Human Rights Watch Calls for Inquiry into Deaths, But Says ‘Genocide’ Claims Unfounded.
Al Jazeera reports,
Al Jazeera has obtained video footage suggesting that the Bangladesh government has been providing inaccurate death tolls from recent violence.
According to official figures, 11 people had died during fighting between police and protesters from Hifazat-e-Islam, an Islamic group, on May 6, a day protesters refer to as the “Siege of Dhaka”.
Human Rights Watch, a US-based rights group, said that the exact number of deaths resulting from the protests are “unclear”.
“Independent news sources put the figure at approximately 50 dead, with others succumbing to injuries later,” HRW said in a statement on Saturday.
In an interview with Al Jazeera, Bangladesh’s Foreign Minister Dipu Moni downplayed reports of inaccuracy in government figures.
Human Rights Watch says,
The Bangladeshi authorities should immediately set up an independent commission to investigate the large numbers of deaths and injuries during the Hefazat-e-Islaam-led protests in Dhaka and elsewhere on May 5-6, 2013, Human Rights Watch said today.
The commission should also investigate violence that killed dozens in February, March, and April after protests and counter-protests broke out after the announcement of verdicts by the country’s International Crimes Tribunal (ICT).
The exact number of deaths during the May 5-6 protest remains unclear, with figures ranging from the official government figure of 11 deaths to Hefazat’s estimate of thousands. Independent news sources put the figure at approximately 50 dead, with others succumbing to injuries later. The dead include several security personnel.
“Bangladesh will see a plethora of demonstrations this year in response to additional verdicts from the ICT and in the run-up to national elections,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Without an independent investigation, accountability, and improved policing methods, we could see serial bloodbaths.”
Human Rights Watch said that political tensions are likely to increase as more war crimes verdicts are handed down at the ICT and as elections scheduled for late 2013 or early 2014 approach. Opposition parties, including Hefazat, have already announced several protests scheduled over the next week. A flashpoint could be the reaction to the May 9 death penalty handed down by the ICT against Mohamed Kamaruzzaman, a leading official of the Jamaat-e-Islami party. Past war crimes verdicts have been a catalyst for protests and violence throughout Bangladesh.
Human Rights Watch called on opposition parties such as the main opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the Jammat-e-Islami Party, as well as independent organizations such as Hefazat, to condemn and take steps to deter their supporters from carrying out unlawful attacks, including on law enforcement officers or members of the public with different political views.
Human Rights Watch called on the government to publicly order the security forces to follow the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, which state that security forces shall “apply non-violent means before resorting to the use of force and firearms,” and that “whenever the lawful use of force and firearms is unavoidable, law enforcement officials shall: (a) Exercise restraint in such use and act in proportion to the seriousness of the offence and the legitimate objective to be achieved; (b) Minimize damage and injury, and respect and preserve human life.”
Section 22 of the Basic Principles states that: “Governments and law enforcement agencies shall establish effective reporting and review procedures for all incidents…Governments and law enforcement agencies shall ensure that an effective review process is available and that independent administrative or prosecutorial authorities are in a position to exercise jurisdiction in appropriate circumstances. In cases of death and serious injury or other grave consequences, a detailed report shall be sent promptly to the competent authorities responsible for administrative review and judicial control.” Section 23 states that, “Persons affected by the use of force and firearms or their legal representatives shall have access to an independent process, including a judicial process. In the event of the death of such persons, this provision shall apply to their dependants accordingly.”
“The Bangladeshi government has a responsibility to victims, whether protesters, bystanders or police, to ensure that an effective investigation is carried out into each death,” Adams said.
Hefazat, the conservative Muslim group that draws support from thousands of religious seminaries, led a “siege of Dhaka” on May 5, with demonstrations taking place in other parts of the country. Human Rights Watch said that claims of “genocide” by Hefazat and other opposition parties are unfounded and have only served to heighten tensions.
“The toxic swirl of rumor and rhetoric surrounding the protest of May 5-6 will only get worse unless the government acts quickly in a transparent manner,” Adams said. “Given the lack of trust between various parties, it is imperative that these answers come from an independent and impartial body.”
Human Rights Watch expressed concern that Hefazat recruited boys from madrassahs to participate in the “siege.” Many of the boys were unaware of the risks of marching into Dhaka. Independent journalists told Human Rights Watch that after the protests were broken up by security forces, they encountered groups of boys who had never been to Dhaka before and were terrified by the experience of seeing dead bodies and large-scale violence. The boys asked journalists for directions to bus stations so they could go home. They were no longer accompanied by adults.
Human Rights Watch called on the government to ensure media and civil society are able to independently report on the protests. Two television stations that support opposition political parties, Islamic TV and Diganta TV, were taken off the air by the government on the night of May 5-6 and remain off the air at the time of writing. The stations were reporting live from the site of the protests. In April, the government shut down opposition newspaper Amar Desh and jailed its editor, Mahmdur Rahman, and other journalists. The government has also jailed some bloggers who had expressed atheist sentiments in their writings.
“The government’s claims to be the most open and democratic in Bangladesh’s history are undermined by censorship of critical voices,” Adams said. “The government can take reasonab
This is what George Galloway said when calling for the overthrow of the Bangladeshi government last weekend ,
Galloway denounced the massacre of Islamic scholars earlier in the week.
“Even on the most conservative estimates of the number of people murdered, it exceeds the loss of life in 9/11,” said Galloway.