Liberalism in Saudi Arabia

Saudi clerics back death fatwa for liberal writers


REUTERS
6:31 a.m. March 19, 2008
RIYADH – A group of Saudi clerics has come out in support of a colleague who issued a fatwa saying two writers deserve to die if they did not retract views that he said made them apostates.
Sheikh Abdul-Rahman al-Barrak, one of the kingdom's most revered clerics, said in a rare fatwa last week the columnists should be tried for apostasy for 'heretical articles' published in al-Riyadh newspaper and put to death if they do not repent.

 They questioned the Sunni Muslim view in Saudi Arabia that adherents of other faiths should be considered unbelievers, which Barrak said implied Muslims were free to follow other religions and their faith was on a par with other religions.

A group of 20 clerics, all associated with Barrak, issued a statement on Tuesday asking God to support him in the face of a 'wicked attack' by liberals with 'polluted beliefs'.

'We know the Sheikh's knowledge in religion and status in the Islamic nation and trust Muslims place in his opinions ... The fatwa is based on the book of God (Koran) and the path of the Prophet,' they said in the statement posted on Web sites.

'The Sheikh's words were clear in placing the issue in the hands of the temporal authorities when he said that there must be a trial. We affirm there should be a trial.'

Barrak, who is thought to be around 75, is viewed by Islamists as the leading independent authority of Saudi Arabia's hardline version of Sunni Islam, often termed Wahhabism.

Liberal reformers are engaged in a battle with religious hardliners over the direction of the country, a key U.S. ally and the world's biggest oil exporter.

'This is in my view the largest show of force in the Wahhabi movement in a long time,' said Ali al-Ahmad, a Saudi opposition figure based in Washington.

Saudi Arabia regularly executes drug traffickers, rapists and murderers, but it is rare for calls to try or execute people for opinions expressed in public.

Rights groups have accused Wahhabism of a xenophobic attitude which demonises other religions.

 

Source

So much for the two-state thing: PA stunt to flood Israel with "refugees"

The Palestinian Authority is planning to mark Israel's 60th anniversary by calling on all Palestinians living abroad to converge on Israel by land, sea and air, the Jerusalem Post reported. The plan, drawn by Ziad Abu Ein, a senior Fatah operative and Deputy Minister for Prisoners' Affairs in the PA, states that the Palestinians have decided to implement United Nations Resolution 194, which deals with the refugees, unilaterally.

In effect, the plan represents the end of PA support for a two-state solution, and is clearly aimed at embarrassing Israel during its sixtieth anniversary celebrations. The PA plans to have "refugees" fly in to Ben Gurion airport between May 14 and 16, while at the same time other "refugees" will arrive by ship.

Article 11 of the resolution, which was passed in December 1948, says that "refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible."
 

CLICK HERE FOR COMPLETE ARTICLE

Iranian Students Urge Kidney Donations to Raise Funds for Bounty on Israeli Officials

TEHRAN —  Iranian students are offering rewards totaling a million dollars for the execution of three top Israeli military officers over the deadly strikes on Gaza, and they are encouraging fellow Iranians to donate their kidneys to raise the funds, the student news agency ISNA reported on Monday.

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Mossad spy agency director Meir Dagan and military intelligence chief Amos Yadlin are the targets of the bounty. They are blamed for last month's assassination of Hezbollah mastermind Imad Mughniyeh.

The rewards were announced by the Justice Seeking Students Group on Sunday at a ceremony in Tehran entitled "setting the bounty for the revolutionary execution of the designers of state terrorism," ISNA said.

The bounty for Defense Minister Barak is set at $400,000 while those for Dagan and Yadlin are $300,000 each, AFP reports. It is not clear where the funds will come from.

"These sums will be given to any person or their families who could punish these individuals in any part of the world," the organizers of the event announced.

Pictures taken at the ceremony showed a banner bearing pictures of the three Israelis against the backdrop of an Israeli flag, with rifle sights stenciled onto the foreheads of the trio, according to AFP.

"Israel must be wiped off the map," read a quote from Iran's revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini printed atop the banner.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad provoked international outrage when he repeated the quote at a conference after taking office in 2005. He has since then repeatedly predicted the imminent disappearance of the Jewish state.

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,336669,00.html

McCain says al Qaeda might try to tip U.S. election

SPRINGFIELD, Pennsylvania (Reuters) - Republican presidential candidate John McCain said on Friday he fears that al Qaeda or another extremist group might attempt spectacular attacks in Iraq to try to tilt the U.S. election against him.

McCain, at a town hall meeting in this Philadelphia suburb, was asked if he had concerns that anti-American militants in Iraq might ratchet up their activities in Iraq to try to increase casualties in September or October and tip the November election against him.

"Yes, I worry about it," McCain said. "And I know they pay attention because of the intercepts we have of their communications ... The hardest thing in warfare is to counter someone or a group of individuals who are willing to take their own lives in order to take others."

 

CLICK HERE FOR COMPLETE ARTICLE.

Iran-Israel war has already begun

The Iranian-Israeli War

by Yossi Klein Halevi
When will Israel and Iran go to war? They already have.
Post Date Tuesday, March 11, 2008

 

Immediately after the massacre of eight students in a yeshiva library in Jerusalem last week, speculation began within the Israeli security establishment and the media about who had dispatched the lone murderer. Was it Hamas? Hezbollah? Perhaps a new, unknown organization claiming to act on behalf of the "liberation" of the Galilee? In fact, the speculation was pointless. Regardless of the affiliation of the actual perpetrator, the ultimate responsibility for this attack, as for almost all the terror attacks on Israel in recent years, lies with Iran.
The Palestinian struggle is no longer about creating an independent state. It is about being a front-line participant in the Iranian-led jihad to destroy Israel, evolving from a nationalist to a religious war. The thousands of celebrants in Gaza who, following the yeshiva massacre, offered prayers of thanksgiving in the mosques and distributed candies to passersby weren't only indulging in feelings of revenge for Israel's recent military incursion but heralding the coming jihadist victory over the enemies of God. A real solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict can only be reached by dealing with its primary instigator: Iran.

 

Israel's seventh war began in September 2000, and was launched by Yasser Arafat, who transformed Fatah into a quasi-Islamist movement, nurturing the rhetoric and martyrology of jihad. Arafat no doubt assumed he could manipulate Islamist trappings for nationalist aims. But then he went one step farther: He initiated an alliance with Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei. Until then, Iran's only client within the Palestinian national movement had been the Islamic Jihad, the smallest of the Palestinian terrorist factions. According to a former chief of Israeli military intelligence, Arafat promised the Iranians that he would turn Gaza into a second southern Lebanon, and Iran began providing weapons and funds to Arafat's Fatah. But then, in January 2002, Israel intercepted the Karine A, a ship carrying Iranian-supplied Katyusha rockets and mortars and C-4 explosives for use in suicide bombings. Exposed and under international pressure, Arafat severed the connection.

 

Ironically, Hamas was initially more reluctant than Fatah to enter into an Iranian alliance, precisely because the Sunni Hamas takes religion more seriously than Fatah and was loathe to accept the authority of the Iranian Shiites. But that squeamishness ended three years ago with a formal alliance, orchestrated by the Damascus-based Hamas leader, Khaled Meshal, and today Hamas is an integral part of the Iranian war against Israel. Iran has trained hundreds of Hamas operatives--and, according to the former intelligence chief, continues to fund individual members of Fatah's Al Aqsa Brigades. Iran's goal is twofold: to extend its influence in the Arab world, and to transform itself, via proxies, into a frontline confrontation state with Israel.

 

The jihadist war against Israel has shifted from one front to another--suicide bombings inside Israeli cities until 2004, Katyushas on Haifa in the north in 2006, and now Katyushas on Ashkelon in the south. All are battles in the same war. So far, it is a war without an all-encompassing name, and that linguistic failure reflects a larger Israeli failure to treat this as a unified conflict. We still refer to the suicide bombings of 2000-2004 by the Palestinians' misnomer, "the second intifada"--which falsely implies a popular uprising, like the first intifada, rather the orchestrated slew of terror attacks that it was. Awkwardly, we call the 2006 battle against Hezbollah "the second Lebanon War," a name that places the conflict in the wrong context--the first Lebanon War against Palestinian nationalist terrorism in the early 1980s rather than one more front in the Iranian war against Israel. And now we are calling the daily rocket attacks against southern Israel "the war of the Qassams," even as the Qassams are augmented by the far more deadly Katyushas

 

In contending with Hezbollah and Hamas, Israel is trying to treat the symptoms, rather than the cause. Not surprisingly, it finds itself repeatedly stymied in efforts to stop the attacks on the home front. All of Israel's options in dealing with Hamas seem unbearable. Allowing rockets to continue to fall on southern towns creates despair among Israelis, who see their nation's sovereignty unraveling. Engaging in limited but costly military operations in Gaza, as Israel did last week, creates international outrage and little lasting security gain. Re-conquering Gaza and its dense refugee camps will result in a devastating number of causalities, both among Israeli soldiers and Palestinian civilians. And even if Israel succeeds in destroying the Hamas infrastructure, Israelis will confront the same dilemmas that forced them to leave Gaza two years ago.  

 

A ceasefire with Hamas--which Prime Minister Ehud Olmert seems to be implementing even as he denies it--may well be the worst option of all. Hamas will likely use that interim period to turn itself into a second Hezbollah, equipped with Iranian weapons. And when Hamas feels empowered to break the ceasefire and resume its attacks, Israel will face a far more formidable enemy.

 

To deal effectively with the jihad requires an awareness that Israel is in fact at war with the Iranian regime, which manipulates proxies along Israel's borders, supplying them with weapons and training, and energizing them with the promise of imminent victory.

 

Understandably, Israel has avoided a confrontation with Iran, which could result in the most devastating war Israel has fought. But as the siege around Israel's borders tightens and as the Iranian nuclear program quickens, that direct confrontation becomes increasingly likely.

 

According to a just-released strategic assessment by the Israeli intelligence community, 2008 will be the "Year of Iran." The Lebanese government, warns the assessment, could collapse in the coming months, allowing Hezbollah to take power. Meanwhile, Hezbollah and Hamas are considering a coordinated rocket assault on Israeli population centers, almost all of which are within rocket range of either group. And, according to the strategic assessment, sometime within the coming year, or by early 2009 at the latest, Iran will achieve nuclear capability. The threat that emerges from the intelligence assessment may well be the most acute that Israel has ever faced.

 

Following the yeshiva massacre, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown speculated that the gunman was attempting to "derail" the peace process. Brown's implication, widely shared in the West, is that the best way to defeat the jihadists is to create a Palestinian state.

 

But a viable Palestinian state living peacefully beside Israel will not be possible without disconnecting Iran from these groups who are attacking Israel on its behalf. This may require destabilizing the Iranian regime--hopefully through intensified sanctions against its nuclear program, and by military force against its nuclear installations if sanctions fail. Without stopping the momentum of the Iranian-led jihad against Israel, the appeal of Hamas among Palestinians will grow. So long as the international community tries to create a Palestinian state without seriously confronting the jihadists, Iran and its proxies will continue to make peace impossible--not by "derailing" negotiations, but by making those negotiations irrelevant.

 

Yossi Klein Halevi is a contributing editor of The New Republic and a senior fellow at the Adelson Center for Strategic Studies of the Shalem Center in Jerusalem.

Cross posted: Israel News  Middle East Analysis

The kafkaesque trial of Bangladesh dissident Sallah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury continues

Despite promises, Bangladesh authothorities have not stopped the "judicial" process against freedom fighter journalist Salahuddin Shoaib Choudhoury, who angered them because of his opposition to Islamist extremism and his support for Israel. Lacking evidence, the government has dragged the process out for several years with endless continuations and a never-ending supply of new court dates.

 

Ami Isseroff

---

Memo to Bangladeshi Metropolitan Session Judge Mohammad Momin Ullah:
  By Judi McLeod  Tuesday, March 11, 2008
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/2198

Memo to Mohammed Momin Ullah, Metropolitan Session Judge, Dhaka, Bangladesh: "We know.  Canada Free Press (CFP) knows that the charges brought up against Bangladeshi journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury by the previous Islamist alliance government in Bangladesh, come up in your court, tomorrow."

And publications with much more international influence than CFP know that a lone journalist who forecast the rise of radical Islam in Bangladesh will stand in your court just when world attention is focused on other matters.

Choudhury, who stands charged with treason, sedition and blasphemy, has friends in the United States of America, including Congressman Mark Kirk (R-IL) and Professor Richard Benkin, who were promised by then-Bangladeshi Ambassador to Washington Shamsher M. Chowdhury that self-described "Muslim Zionist" Shoaib Choudhury would have all charges dropped against him.

Courageous Choudhury has Canadian friends in his corner, notably including the Honourable Irwin Cotler (MP Mount Royal), a world-renowned humanitarian and civil-rights scholar, and one of the best and brightest legal minds in the English-speaking world, who now stands as Choudhury's counsel.

With American attention on disgraced Eliot Spitzer and the fierce fight between Democrat presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, Choudhury faces a trial whose penalties include only execution or imprisonment.

These are the words on the official document demanding Choudhury's March 12th court appearance:

     "The State Prosecution has brought allegation (s) against you, Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury stating that, being the editor and owner of Blitz newspaper, you sent an article titled, `Hello Tel Aviv' to USA Today newspaper published from Washington.  Furthermore, in 2003, while attempting to travel to Israel to attend a conference titled `Education towards Culture of Peace', organized between 1st December to 3rd December 2003, you appeared at the Zia International Airport on the 29th November 2003 and the Immigration police arrested you and found the copy of the speech you prepared to deliver in the conference.  In that speech, you have made offensive comments on (the) Muslim world, Islam and Muslims in Bangladesh and commented about (the) existence of al Qaeda and other Islamist militant groups, by which you have tarnished the image of Bangladesh in the outside world.  Furthermore, you have made (a) conspiracy of spreading anti-state news through that speech and you by sending that speech to (the) outside world, you have played (an) offensive role to Bangladesh's security, public discipline and adverse
role towards Bangladesh's relations with the outside world.  In you (sic) report, you have mentioned about guerilla training in the
Bangladeshi madrassas, by which you have influenced the religious sentiments and made imaginary stories abroad about jihadist training in favor of Laden (sic), Arafat and Saddam, by which you have put Bangladesh's foreign relations to threat and through this you have caused offense under Penal Code section 505 (A), 295 (A) and 120 (B).

"The allegations were read before the accused and he claimed to be innocent (not guilty) and prayed for justice."

In his response to Metropolitan Session Judge Md. Momin Ullah, Choudhury wrote, "it is well known to the international community and even to the Bangladeshi government that there are guerilla trainings in various Madrassas in the country.

"The previous government captured a few hundred such elements from various Madrassas belonging to an Islamist terrorist group named JMB. The kingpins of this group were accorded the death penalty by Bangladeshi courts and were subsequently hanged.

"But I am facing the charges of forecasting the existence of such elements in Bangladeshi Madrassas.  Why?

"I have never sent any article titled `Hello Tel Aviv', nor was it ever printed in any US or international newspaper.  This is a bogus and imaginary allegation brought against me by the government.  The prosecution does not have any evidence of such allegation."

Choudhury asks "How many more years will I have to suffer from these false and ridiculous charges?

"I am continuing to spend money and energy in this case since 2003.  Is it justice to let an innocent journalist suffer for years, just because he forecasted the rise of radical Islam and confronted it?"

Choudhury, who was beaten, imprisoned, denied medication for glaucoma, forbidden to attend his mother's funeral, had his office bombed and his children followed to school, has spent hundreds of hours preparing forand attending court sessions which the government promised to drop.

"People keep asking me what is it that the Bangladeshi government wants," says Choudhury.

"They want to appease the Islamists by continuing the case and even by convicting me.  Many of the top policymakers of the governments are angry with me because I am a Zionist and I continue to defend Jews and Christians as well as combating radical Islam.  They are also angry with me because I demand relations between Israel and Muslim nations."

Choudhury fully understands the possibilities of a horrific fate tomorrow before the Bangladeshi court with international attention
turned elsewhere.

"Please pray for me on March 12," he asked friends living in the free world on the eve of his court appearance.

But even though Bangladeshi Islamists have continued the harassment of Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury at will, they at least cannot count on the privilege of finishing the job off under cover of darkness.

CFP and others, who know, await the outcome.

 

 

US top Iraq and Afghanistan commander quits, reportedly over policy disagreements

From The Times
March 12, 2008

Admiral William Fallon quits over Iran policy

 

Tim Reid in Washington
The top US military commander for Iraq and Afghanistan resigned last night after weeks of behind-the-scenes disagreements with the White House over the direction of American foreign policy.

 

Admiral William Fallon, the head of US Central Command, left his post a week after a profile in Esquire magazine portrayed him as a dove opposed to President's Bush's Iran policy.

 

The article, entitled The Man Between War and Peace, described Admiral Fallon as as a lone voice against taking military action to stop the Iranian nuclear programme.

 

Announcing the resignation, Robert Gates, the US Defence Secretary, dismissed as "ridiculous" any notion that the departure signalled that the US was planning to go to war with Iran. He said there was a "misperception" that Admiral Fallon disagreed with the Bush Administration's approach to Iran. "I don't think there were any differences at all," Mr Gates insisted.

 

Pentagon insiders said that Admiral Fallon's departure was more the result of a turf battle between him and General David Petraeus, the US ground commander in Iraq. Admiral Fallon was General Petraeus's commanding officer but for months Mr Bush has deferred to General Petraeus, against the objections of Admiral Fallon, who is believed to have been advocating a speedier withdrawal of US troops from Iraq.

 

Admiral Fallon is also understood to have been pressing for a greater allocation of troops to Afghanistan, but has been frustrated at the reluctance of the Administration — and General Petraeus — to withdraw significant numbers from Iraq in the short term.

 

In a resignation statement from Admiral Fallon read out by Mr Gates, he said: "Recent press reports suggesting a disconnect between my views and the President's policy objectives have become a distraction at a critical time and hamper efforts in the Centcom region."

 

Admiral Fallon added: "And although I don't believe there have ever been any differences about the objectives of our policy in the Central Command area of responsibility, the simple perception that there is makes it difficult for me to effectively serve America's interests there."

 

Mr Gates said that he had reluctantly agreed to the resignation but that it was "the right thing to do". Admiral Fallon, the first naval officer to head Central Command, took up the post in March 2007, succeeding General John Abizaid.

 

Until a permanent replacement is nominated and confirmed by the Senate, Admiral Fallon's deputy, Lieutenant-General Martin Dempsey, of the US Army, would take over Centcom.