Entries Tagged 'injustice' ↓
February 19th, 2008 — Jihad Watch, Atlas Shrugs, blog censorship, al Qaeda, leftist-jihadist convergence, corruption, YouTube, Balkans, U.S. State Department, injustice, Islam, anti-Semitism, Israel, Europe, military, Serbia, Clinton, littlegreenfootballs, counterjihad, Kosovo, video
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe.
Caliphate News Networx & Al BeBeeCeera report LIVE:
Young ethnic Albanians (Muslims) celebrate Kosovo’s coming independence in Pristina yesterday. Check out the keffiyeh on the right.
Atlas Shrugs has more
Too Late: EURABIA is happening right now!
Thanx to the despicable Willie Cl*tman, who bombed the Christan Serbs in order to curry favor with Arab-Muhammedans, the Balkan-Mujaheddin will now move towards the final solution For now, we run these articles again:
Bin Laden Mosque in Kosovo:
Why are the Serbs - whom apart from the Jews were the major victims of the Holocaust during World War 2 - being cast as the perpetrators of genocide while the real perpetrators of genocide - the Islamofascists loyal to Alija Izetbegovic - are being cast by the corporate media, the US, NATO and EU governments as “the victims”?
Why was Naser Oric - the Islamofascist commander of Srebrenica and perpetrator of a massive genocide against Serbian men, women and children in Srebrenica from 1992 to 1995 - given only a 2 year sentence for this monumental crime against humanity and allowed to walk free from NATO’s Scheveningen ICTY prison: the former Nazi SS dungeon for patriotic Dutch resistance fighters against the Germans during World War 2 in The Hague, Holland?
Israpundit has more.
History of Jihad against the Serbs, Croats, and Albanians
[1389 to 1920]
Update:
The “morally superior” Lizard King will never know where it’s at
Kosovo Serb Migration before Ottomans, 18th c.
Lost in Lala-land:
Charles Johnson:
‘I’m not sure whose side to root for in the ethnic Albanian, Kosovo-Serbia morass—there are killers on all sides—and today’s news from Kosovo leaves me with mixed feelings: Kosovo declares independence from Serbia.’
May as well join the Koz Kidz, Charles, what’s the difference?
If the Lizard King doesn’t know which way to root that means the Lizard Army is rooted, no?
A Lizard comment:
‘They seem to be very pro-America.’
America enabled them. Just because they wave American flags means exactly nothing. Now just go there and wave some Muhammad cartoons, and watch them love you…
Another one:
‘Can’t be all that bad. Very few cultures that don’t have blood on their hands…. ‘
Right. that makes us all equal. Forrest Gump has spoken!
Killgore Trout, chief of the Lizard brain police, has the right spirit:
‘Can we start recommending deletion of comments denying Serbian war crimes?’
Fleeing Serbs
Looting Muslim Female
Bush is no better. But this was torture:
Dancing with terrorists. Not too bright…
(Thanx to Zip)
Sucking up to terrorists:
Photo above: Secretary Alb***h greets Hashim Thaci, UCK leader August 1999, after the war
Strong American support for the independence of Kosovo is detrimental to Israeli interests. The US position is based on the view that a solution to long-standing conflict can and should be imposed on the parties by outside powers. In addition, the new state’s creation seeks to award part of a nation’s territory to a violent ethno-religious minority; futilely hopes to curry favor with the Islamic world through appeasement; effectively gives a fresh impetus to the ongoing growth of Islamic influence in Europe; and denies the fact that the putative state’s leaders are tainted by terrorism, criminality, and well-documented links with global jihad. Most importantly, it betrays a cynically postmodern contempt for all claims based on the historical rights and spiritual significance of a land to a nation. (More…)
More:
February 4th, 2008 — injustice, treason, terrorism, Islam, counterjihad, security, fraud, military
Update:
Maj. Steve Coughlin, the expert on terrorism who was fired from the Pentagon at the behest of a jihadist mole, is back to work, and with a well-deserved promotion. Great news!
But we still have some work to do - we need to hold our officials’ feet to the fire, so that they do a thorough housecleaning at the Pentagon to remove Hesham Islam and other jihadist moles, along with those who aid and abet their careers.
The firing of Maj. Steve Coughlin was an act of treason.
“Isn’t that a strong word to use?”
Yes, treason is a strong word, but it is also an accurate word to use in this context. His firing - officially, the nonrenewal of his contract - took place at the behest of Hesham Islam, who is both a special assistant to Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England and a jihadist mole. For more on that, see Where are we going, and why are we in this handbasket?
“Why is it treason to fire Maj. Coughlin?”
Because the firing of Maj. Coughlin deprives the U.S. military of vital information about enemy motives and intentions that it is getting from nowhere else. Firing Maj. Coughlin gives aid and comfort to the enemies of the U.S. by crippling the ability of the U.S. military to make sense out of the evidence it gathers of enemy activities.
“What was Maj. Coughlin trying to tell the U.S. government that was so important?”
His most important point is that the U.S. government is unwise to take Muslims at their word with regard to whether Islamic law and doctrine represent a danger to non-Muslim societies. Nor can we safely assume that terrorism and aggression committed in the name of Islam proceeds merely from a small minority of extremists who have hijacked and misinterpreted Islam, rather than from something inherent in Islamic law and doctrine that gives rise to such aggression.
Here I defer to columnist Jeffrey Breinholt to explain the details. Emphasis is mine.
Maj. Steve Coughlin has been in the news lately. Little of the attention has focused on his ideas – rather, it’s the intrigue surrounding the non-renewal of his contact as a briefer for the Joint Chiefs of Staffs that has been the focus, supposedly because he violated the sensibilities of the current climate. Meanwhile, his 300-page master’s thesis is posted on the website of the International Strategy and Assessment Center, where Maj. Coughlin and I are fellows. What does his thesis say?
My goal here is to summarize Coughlin’s main ideas. As in my “Muslim Brotherhood for Beginners” article from a few months ago, I am going to fight the temptation here to offer my own opinions, and instead just offer the facts, free of analysis, except on one issue. Coughlin has been characterized by some as a “Christian zealot with a pen.” I know Steve Coughlin. I occasionally have a drink with him. I know Christian zealots. H—, I was born in Provo, Utah. He is not one.
Maj. Couglin’s thesis, “To Our Great Detriment: Ignoring What Extremists Say About Jihad” was written in partial satisfaction for the requirements of his master’s degree. Coughlin is also a lawyer, though the thesis was written in the language of military strategy. To understand his argument, I find it helpful to view it through an American legal analogy.
Let’s say someone in the U.S. is accused of a serious crime. In addition to being innocent of the charges, the defendant also believes the crime itself is unconstitutional. This would raise the prospect of a two-pronged defense, and – because American law is so specialized – perhaps two types of lawyers on the defense team: (1) a trial lawyer who can mount a good defense on the factual allegations, and (2) a constitutional lawyer, who could prepare the appropriate motion to dismiss based on the theory that the crime violates the U.S. Constitution.
Each lawyer will focus on a different thing. Success by either could emancipate their client. Nothing stops the defendant from using both skill sets. If the defendant cares about his freedom and has adequate financial means, he would be remiss not to try both strategies.
Let’s now assume that the prosecutor, at the arraignment, assures defendant that the crime he is charged with is indeed constitutional. Should the defendant neglect to hire the constitutional lawyer? Clearly, the defendant should not take the prosecutor’s word for it. Instead, he would find someone more credible who understands the U.S. Constitution – not just what it says, but how it has been interpreted, to determine whether he has a constitutional defense.
Coughlin’s thesis makes a similar argument about Islamic doctrine, as it relates to how the U.S. military should fight the War on Terror. It is based on the notion that we must understand what motivates Islamic terrorists, in doctrinal terms. He describes this need through what is known as the Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield (IPB): the systematic, continuous process of analyzing the threat and environment in a specific geographic area. The IPB is designed to support the military staff estimates and decision-making.
The key step in the IPB is to align the enemy’s courses of action (COA) to its doctrine – that is, what motivates the enemy. Knowing the enemy’s doctrine is not the entire answer, because enemy COAs can be constrained by environmental factors. To predict how the enemy will act sufficiently for proper military planning, its pure doctrine needs to be “templated” (evaluated in light of constraining environmental factors). It is only through this IPB process of sizing up the enemy, and discerning between its pure doctrine and what is likely to do through “templating” to account for environmental factors, can proper military action – a collection of “friendly COAs” – be undertaken. It all starts, however, will knowledge of the enemy’s doctrine.
To Coughlin, the IPB in the War on Terror is being thrown off by what he describes as the “Current Approach”: the view that Islamic-based extremism is aberrant and that Islam has become a “religion hijacked.” To Coughlin, this view is pernicious in part because it is being pushed by those who claim that Westerners should rely solely on Muslims to tell us what Islam is, much like how the late Professor Edward Said attacked the notion that Westerners could ever understand what people in the “Orient” thought and how they behaved. Coughlin argues that the Current Approach represents an outsourcing of the information requirements that the IPB process is not structured to answer, much like a defendant taking the prosecutor’s word that the statute is constitutional. In American litigation, the resulting strategy will be based on input from people not aligned with the interests of the defendant. Applying this problem to the military challenge and the IPB, “Inputs into the decision-making process from the Current Approach are the product of borrowed knowledge from individuals and entities that may be either unknown or unbeholden to American national security interests.”
The consequences of uncritically accepting the Current Approach is the unstated corollary that because extremists do not represent “true” Islam, Islamic law itself should be excluded from analytical processes that support threat development. This tendency is culturally enticing to us, for we come from a tradition where arguments over the merits of particular religions are considered impolite (and impolitic) dinner party conversation. This tradition undoubtedly reinforces our inability to look closely at Islamic religious doctrine, and to look elsewhere for help. To add to this, we have Muslim intellectuals like Tariq Ramadan telling us (as he wrote a few weeks ago in the New York Times Book Review) that one cannot truly understand the Koran unless one goes at it with faith (“the language of the heart”). For this task, we must trust people like him. No wonder Ramadan is in such high demand.
Coughlin uses the IPB methodology to ask why we are not bothering to ask, “What if?” It is a powerful argument, if one accepts the IPB process itself, since there is no harm in asking the question – just as there is no harm in the criminal defendant considering the constitutionality of the crime while simultaneously planning a full defense on the factual merits. If, in planning military action, intelligence analysts limit their focus to factors that contribute to understanding the enemy’s doctrine, then the result of a rigorous inquiry that supports the Current Approach would ultimately be neutral to the threat assessment. If, on the other hand, the result is a finding against the Current Approach, we ignore the result at our peril since the IPB-driven process will not based on the proper inputs.
Coughlin’s thesis would be powerful if he just ended there, but he it does not. Instead, he searches through the prevailing views of all major schools of Islamic thought to argue “true” Islam – the type taught in the U.S. to 7th grade Muslim-Americans – requires its adherents to engage in violent struggle for worldwide domination, a state of affairs that cannot be adequately explained by the Current Approach. To get there, Coughlin considers the most definitive sources of Islamic law, including what they say about how Islamic doctrine is to be interpreted. It seems that much is settled in Islam, including what the faithful are required to do in the face of non-Muslims with whom they interact. He concludes that the purveyors of the Current Approach are selling us a bill of goods.
No wonder Maj. Coughlin found himself a disliked character in the halls of the Pentagon among the Muslim advisors who have the monopoly on telling us what Islam represents. He threatens their authority, as well as their livelihood.
Coughlin’s arguments about Islamic mandates make up the bulk of his thesis, but are ultimately unnecessary if one accepts his premise – that we owe it to the system to question whether the Current Approach is supported in Islamic law. What are the stakes? Even if the “true” Islam is a religion of peace, we would still need to know the doctrinal basis for the actions of those who have hijacked it, as long as they in fact exist and are able to motivate fellow Muslims to act at their direction. Consider this argument:
For the “extremist” argument to succeed, it simply has to assert a claim that has some doctrinal basis that survives the ideological screen because any surviving portion of the claim still leaves the “extremist” with a validated argument in support of the jihadis’ agenda. Hence, exclusivity is not an essential requirement for the “extremists.” The Current Approach, however, must be able to demonstrate exclusive correctness to the exclusion of the “extremist” position because the success of their argument can only be measured by the extent to which it constrains the “extremist” doctrine.
The problem, as Coughlin describes it, is that when the purveyors of the Current Approach respond to inconvenient Islamic law doctrines by claiming that there are “thousands of different interpretations to Islamic law,” they are saying there is no point to looking to Islamic law for solutions. In their oft-repeated claims that “Islam does not stand for this,” they are necessarily agreeing with Coughlin that there exists such a thing as Islamic doctrine, which necessitates our rigorous examination of it. For Current Approach arguments to succeed at neutralizing “extremist” positions, they must establish that “Islam does not stand for this” in every situation ranging through all interpretations. What are the prospects of that?
So in the end, it does not matter whether Coughlin is right about Islamic doctrine, as much as that the questions are being asked by people who are practicing the appropriate professional standards (another one of Coughlin’s key points). The U.S. government needs to ask these questions, rather than blithely concluding that Islam is a religion of peace that has been hijacked by al Qaeda. Even if Coughlin is wrong about the big issues of Islam, he is certainly correct that military planners should be asking about the religious basis for al Qaeda’s actions, so we can better predict how the adherents of “radical Islam” can be expected to act. That is really what matters.
The consequences are failing to do so is illustrated by my legal analogy. The prosecutor has assured the defendant that the crime he is charged with violating is constitutional, presumably because he wants to focus on the facts of the case. For the defendant to not suffer a lost opportunity by taking the prosecutor’s word for it, the prosecutor must be legally correct about what the constitution says. Just as many prosecutors are not constitutional law experts, many Muslims are not experts in Islamic law. Even if the prosecutor is fortuitously correct on this particular constitutional question, few people would argue that the defendant should not hire someone to undertake the necessary research for him, since that is the essence of the adversarial process.
By the same token, for the IPB to deny the need for close examination of the religious doctrinal basis for al Qaeda’s actions is to throw the process itself off. The cost of this decision likely exceeds the benefits of claiming that Islam has been hijacked to win over those who may be susceptible to embracing a more extreme version of the religion. Even by articulating this benefit of the Current Approach, we acknowledge the existence of a radical strain of Islam that can get a hold of people and cause them to act in ways that threaten innocent lives. For us not to then consider the doctrinal basis for this view of Islamic law, and to take it on faith that Islam does not drive their actions, would be malpractice.
# #
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Jeff Breinholt is a Senior Fellow and Director of National Security Law at the International Assessment and Strategy Center (www.strategycenter.net.) Jeff blogs on the Counterterrorism Blog.
February 1st, 2008 — activism, Sharia, blog censorship, injustice, censorship, Islam, blogging
Put your email and your blog to work for freedom!
From a Letter from Esra’a Al Shafei:
…Also, I wish to let you know that I’m the Director of the Free Kareem Coalition. Kareem Amer is an Egyptian blogger who was sentenced to 4 years in prison for writing posts critical of Islam and the Egyptian government. This coming Feb 22nd, it will be a full first year since he was officially sentenced, even though he was in prison for a year and 3 months now (3 of these months, he was imprisoned with no official charge or trial.)
On this date, we are organizing a worldwide op-ed day. Basically, this means that many people around the globe will be writing about Kareem’s case in order to increase awareness on it and making the Egyptian government realize that we have not forgotten this brave, young, innocent man whose only crime is free speech.
Also on this date, 2 rallies will be taking place: One in France and the other in Washington DC. Last year, we organized 3 worldwide rallies which took place everywhere from Brazil to India to Romania. Over 20 cities were involved and thousands wrote about it on their blogs.
This year however, since our last rally just took place in November, we are trying to take another approach and directly target the media to help keep Kareem in people’s minds and prayers.
I hope you can get involved in any way, at least by posting something about it on your blog. We could really use the help in spreading the word.
Thanks a lot,
Esra’a
Visit Free Kareem! to learn what else you can do.
You can put this badge on your blog. Here’s how:
- Right-click on the badge image above.
- Save the image as 180-200-kareem.jpg on your computer.
- Upload the image file to a directory on your host.
- On your blog, create a link to this URL:
http://www.freekareem.org/
- In place of the anchor text, insert the link to the image file that you have uploaded on your host.
- Example:
February 1st, 2008 — litigation jihad, Afghanistan, Perwiz Kambakhsh, Sharia, activism, Islam, injustice, censorship
Update:
Another blogosphere victory - keep the pressure on!
KABUL, Afghanistan, Feb. 6 (UPI) — A student journalist convicted of violating Islamic law in Afghanistan may escape the death penalty, a senior official in the Afghan government said.
An Afghan court found Sayed Pervez Kambaksh guilty of violating Islamic law for distributing information regarding women’s rights. Afghan law holds violations of Islamic law a federal offense and a court imposed a death penalty.
The Independent Wednesday quoted Najib Manalai with the Afghanistan Culture Ministry saying of the case, “I am not worried for his life. I’m sure Afghanistan’s justice system will find the best way to avoid this sentence.”
Mounting criticism of young journalist’s death sentence
By: IFEX
Posted on: 1/25/2008
SOURCE: Reporters sans frontières (RSF), Paris
**Updates IFEX alerts of 23, 17 and 15 January 2008**
(RSF/IFEX) - Reporters Without Borders has appealed to President Hamid Karzai, currently attending the World Economic Forum in the Swiss resort of Davos, to quickly respond to the many appeals for clemency for Sayed Perwiz Kambakhsh, the young journalist who has been sentenced to death by a court in Mazar-i-Sharif, capital of the northern province of Balkh.
“Kambakhsh’s death sentence was the outcome of an unfair trial orchestrated by local officials and extremist religious leaders,” the organisation said. “We urge President Karzai to take a swift and clear decision in this case, which threatens press freedom in his country.”
A petition for Kambakhsh’s release can be signed on the Reporters Without Borders website at: http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=25199
The United Nations, many European countries and the European parliament’s president have all condemned Kambakhsh’s arrest and death sentence.
Balkh provincial state prosecutor Hafizullah Khaliqyar has nonetheless dismissed the charges that the court violated human rights and press freedom, insisting that the verdict was given “in accordance with Islam’s values.”
The case is now supposed to go before an appeal court, but Balkh provincial judge Fazel Wahab said “only President Hamid Karzai is in a position to pardon Kambakhsh because he confessed to his crime.”
Sayed Yaqub Ibrahimi, Kambakhsh’s brother, said the verdict was “unjust.” Kambakhsh was not represented by a lawyer and was forbidden to defend himself. It appears that Ibrahimi is the real target in this case. A respected journalist who has covered the political situation in the north for International War and Peace Reporting, an NGO, he has been getting death threats for months from the henchmen of local officials and the security forces have searched his home several times, warning him of more reprisals to come.
The culture and information ministry said it had no authority over the case because “neither Kambakhsh’s arrest nor conviction was linked to his journalistic activities” and therefore “it is not a press freedom violation.” The ministry nonetheless added that it was “confident that the Afghan judicial system will handle the issue of the death penalty with the utmost care and will render justice, especially as the lower court’s sentence is not final.”
Rahimullah Samandar, the head of the Afghanistan Independent Journalists Association, firmly condemned the trial and verdict on the grounds that they violated the constitutional rights to a legal defence and to free speech. He vowed to appeal to national and international courts, and called on President Karzai to overturn the verdict.
The French foreign ministry has expressed outrage at the verdict. “France stresses that it is completely opposed to the death penalty,” the ministry said. “Freedom of expression must be guaranteed, respecting the principles and values enshrined in the Afghan constitution.”
The president of the European parliament called on the Afghan authorities on 18 January 2008 to release Kambakhsh.
For further information, contact Vincent Brossel, RSF, 47, rue Vivienne, 75002 Paris, France, tel: +33 1 44 83 84 70, fax: +33 1 45 23 11 51, e-mail: asia@rsf.org, Internet: http://www.rsf.org
The information contained in this update is the sole responsibility of RSF. In citing this material for broadcast or publication, please credit RSF.
DISTRIBUTED BY THE INTERNATIONAL FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
EXCHANGE (IFEX) CLEARING HOUSE
555 Richmond St. West, # 1101, PO Box 407
Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5V 3B1
tel: +1 416 515 9622 fax: +1 416 515 7879
alerts e-mail:
alerts@ifex.org general e-mail:
ifex@ifex.org
Internet site:
http://www.ifex.org/
Copyright
mediaforfreedom.com
Save Sayed Kambakhsh
Sentenced to death for reading about women’s rights
A young man, a student of journalism, is sentenced to death by an Islamic court for downloading a report from the internet. The sentence is then upheld by the country’s rulers. This is Afghanistan – not in Taliban times but six years after “liberation” and under the democratic rule of the West’s ally Hamid Karzai.
The fate of Sayed Pervez Kambaksh has led to domestic and international protests, and deepening concern about erosion of civil liberties in Afghanistan. He was accused of blasphemy after he downloaded a report from a Farsi website which stated that Muslim fundamentalists who claimed the Koran justified the oppression of women had misrepresented the views of the prophet Mohamed.
That is terrible. We need to support Sayed Kambaksh - it is unthinkable that he should be executed merely for reading something.
Please sign the Independent petition for his release.
Posted by Yvonne
(h/t: Esra’a)
Petition for Afghan Journalist Perwiz Kambakhsh (Bumped)
Updated/Bumped 02/01/08: Come on now. Only 154 200 sigs [as of 12:30pm CST 2/1/08] and we’re the only blog running this? A man’s life hangs in the balance.
So sign the petition.
Call your public officials. Write about it.
Thanks to all those who have already signed or ran the petition. To the rest of you, Get with it people!
Who Is Perwiz Kambaksh?
Sayed Perwiz Kambakhsh has been sentenced to death by the moderate regime in Afghanistan for blasphemy.
The Afghan Senate has just endorsed his death sentence.
Via AFP: KABUL (AFP) — Afghanistan’s senate has endorsed a death sentence handed down by a court to a reporter and journalism student accused of blasphemy, the parliament media office said.
The senate, called the Meshrano Jirga (House of Elders), issued a statement Tuesday backing last week’s decision by the Balkh province primary court and criticising international pressure over the case, an official told AFP.
The court sentenced Perwiz Kambakhsh, 23, to death for distributing articles downloaded from the Internet that were said to question the Koran and the role of women in Islam.
“The Meshrano Jirga endorses the Balkh primary court’s verdict on sentencing to death Sayed Perwiz Kambakhsh who has been sentenced over insulting Islam and misinterpretation of Koran verses,” said the statement read to AFP.
The house also “strongly criticises those domestic and international organisations which are pressurising Afghanistan’s government and legal authorities when pursuing such people,” it said.
Remember, death sentences are often carried out very quickly in these countries. So time is very short and its critical that we act as quickly as possible. There are only a few legal steps left before he is executed
The death sentence must pass through various higher courts and be approved by Karzai, who has been called on by international and Afghan media rights organisations to intervene in the case.
The extremist Taliban movement that is waging an insurgency against Karzai’s administration has also called for “severe punishment” for Kambakhsh, whom they called the “new Salman Rushdie”….
A petition to try and help Mr. Kambakhsh has been started here. Please sign it and spread it as far as you can. Hopefully we can help get Mr. Kambakhsh a pardon or a reduced sentence.
Never mind the absolute idiocy of allowing Afghanistan to enact a constitution based on Sharia law. If our soldiers fought and died to liberate Afghanistan we should have required they enact a better constitution like we did with Japan. I’ve been very disappointed with the new constitutions for both Iraq and Afghanistan.
More on that here.
More:
January 31st, 2008 — Sharia, Iran, activism, injustice, counterjihad, Islam, censorship
Shari’a in action - see it for yourself
This is what shari’a - Islamic law - is all about. Both in theory and in practice, shari’a is inimical to the US Constitution. Shari’a is inimical to the freedoms that are valued and treasured in every civilized part of the world. Among other things, shari’a means no freedom of speech, assembly, or the press.
Posted by Kamangir on January 28th, 2008
As mentioned before (see: January 30th, Solidarity of Bloggers with the Imprisoned Iranian Students), this blog, and its Persian counterpart, proudly support bloggers’ solidarity with Iranian imprisoned students. Join in! Spread the news!
Solidarity of Bloggers with the Imprisoned Iranian Students
“There is no doubt winter will have an end
And, the post of spring will come to our land
With thousands of flowers in his hand
Certainty it will come,
That other should be passed”
The spring is coming while many Iranian students are still behind the bars. Here is the names of some of them,
- Arash Paknejad (m), Mozandaran University
- Saeid Habibi (m), as member of student’s human rights reporters
- Anoshe Azadbar (f), Tehran University
- Elinaz Jamshidi (f), Azad University of central Tehran student of communication
- Mehdi Gerilo (m), Tehran geophysics center
- Nader Ahseni (m), Mazandaran University
- Behroz karimizade (m), Tehran University
- Nasim Soltan-beigi (f), Alame Communication University
- Ali Sa`lem (m), Polytechnic University, student of Master degree in polymer
- Mohsen Qanim (m), Polytechnic University
- Rozbeh Saf-Shekan (m), Tehran University
- Yaser (Sadra) Pirhaiaty (m), Shahed University
- Saeid Aqam-Ali (m), Yazd University
- Ali Kolaee` (m), Azad University of Shahriar City
- Amir Mehrzad (m), (high School Student)
- Hadi Salary (m), Rajaey University
- Farshid Ahangaran(m), Rajaey University
- Amir Aqai (m), Rajaey University
- Milad Omrani (m), Rajaey University
- Keivan Amir Eliasy (m), Master of industrial engineer
- Soroush Hashem-poor (m), Ahvaz University
- Farshad Doosti-poor (m)
- Sohrab Karimi (m)
- Javad Alizade (m)
- Mohammad Salleh Auman (m)
- Mehdi al-lahyari (m), Sharif industrial University, student of master degree
- Rozbehan Amiri (m), Tehran University, Student of computer sciences
- Bahram Shojaee (m), Tehran-south Azad University, Student of Chemistry engineer
- Saied Aqakhani (m)
- Majid Ashraf Nejad (m)
- Peiman Piran (m), by other student report about him*
- Aabed Tavanche (m), Polytechnic University
- Soroosh Dastestany (m)
- Amin Qazaei (m)
- Bijan Sabaq (m), Mazandaran University
- Anahita hosini (f), Tehran University
- Morteza Khedmatlo (m)
- Mohamad Pour Abdol-lah (m), Tehran University
- Bita Samimi-zad (f), Polytechnic University
- Behzad Baqery (m), Mazandaran University
- Soroosh Sabet (m), Sharif University
- Morteza Eslahchi (m), Allame University
- Mostafa Shirvani (m)
In the past month and half, many students from different cities and universities have been arrested, on charges related to holding peaceful ceremonies for the celebration of the 7th of November, the National Day for Students. They have been behind the bars since. During these days, their families have not been able to visit them and only some of them have been given the chance to have short phone calls with the inmates. This has caused a lot of anxiety and tension for the families and has resulted in their many protests in order to pressure the government to release the students, to no avail.
We honor the freedom-loving students of Iran, some of whom are also bloggers, and thus on January 30th we rename our blogs to “Bloggers’ Solidarity with Imprisoned Iranian Students”.
We wish the release of our friends.
International bloggers who joined in:
Got a blog? Spread the word!
(h/t: Blazing Cat Fur)
More:
December 27th, 2007 — flame war, Nazism, incivility, injustice, trolls, smiley, Serbia, comment policy, spam, wikis, forum, Israel, anti-Semitism, hate, blogging
To our readers, and other bloggers and admins:
As we all know, some people in the world are angry and destructive, and many of those are on the Internet. These angry people exert a negative effect on anyone who has the misfortune to encounter them, even if it is only a feeling of fatigue and disgust. Some angry and destructive persons are genuinely dangerous.
The Internet is a tool that can be used for good or ill. The team at 1389 Blog is working hard to do some good: to use the Internet to confront and curb jihadism and expansionist Islam, and to provide knowledge and tools to others who are working to accomplish the same goals. We will never allow anyone to abuse the comments on this blog for the purpose of undermining this effort.
False accusations, mudslinging, and editorial discretion
We have grown especially weary and disgusted with haters who use blogs, comments, forums, Wikis, social news sites, or email to circulate false allegations against others - whether it be public figures, other bloggers, entire groups of people, or whomever else they hate. Despite claims of “fairness” and “impartiality,” disinformation has been planted throughout Wikipedia and other social media, where it becomes fuel for flame wars, mudslinging, and propaganda.
Typically, one or more responders will put in hours or days of unpaid effort to refute those accusations, but then, the malicious accuser simply goes elsewhere and starts the same process all over again.
We have other things to do besides responding to the same falsehoods again and again. If these miscreants can’t win the argument on facts and logic, they hope to win by shouting us down and wasting our time.
Yes - these haters have the right to post what they want - on their own blogs - and to face whatever consequences accrue. When haters commit libel, their victims may sue. When haters incite violence against the persons or groups that they hate, they have passed the boundaries of protected political speech, and we will do what we can to shut them down.
No one has the right to take advantage of other people’s blogs and websites to spew false accusations, obscenities, and bile in front of the readership that reputable bloggers and admins have worked so hard to earn. No one has the right to spam the comments or forum threads on someone else’s website for the purpose of interfering with that website or harassing its owners and participants.
Excluding malicious comments is not censorship - it is vital editorial discretion. No blog or forum administrator - or for that matter, no publisher or media producer - can, or should, publicize every response that comes in. Bigoted ranting, name-calling, bullying and threats, spam, obscenity, incoherent rambles, libel and slander, and ad hominem attacks, attract a lynch-mob mentality, drive away decent readers and participants, and expose the website or organization to repercussions, legal or otherwise. And the endlessly misused argumentum ad Nazium, a/k/a reductio ad Hitlerum, is a signal to readers that the argument has worn itself out, and that intelligent life has departed from that venue.
Oh, and by the way…
If you want to argue with us, you’d better be loaded for bear. We expect to see verifiable evidence and valid logic, presented in a clear and civil manner. Just for starters:
- Calling us liars, racists, Nazis, or whatever else is evidence only of your incivility. Accusing us of being “racists” or “Holocaust deniers” or “fascists” merely because we do not accept your accusations against Jews, Israelis, Serbs, European conservatives, white Americans, or whomever it is you happen to hate, doesn’t cut it either.
- Hearsay, rumors, innuendo, or unconfirmed urban legends, or something you thought you heard from a “friend of a friend,” does not make for sufficient evidence to back up an allegation.
- Articles in Wikipedia are acceptable only for noncontroversial matters, such as technical background, computer and Internet history, and definitions of words and phrases (as shown here in the previous item). But when it comes to controversial political, religious, or historical issues, Wikipedia is far too vulnerable to vandalism, flame wars, and spin, and we generally cannot accept it as evidence. (See our Reference Material resource page, and Byzantine Sacred Art: Wikipedia, the Source of Disinformation, for more on Wikipedia spin jobs.)
- For that matter, we roundly condemn Wikipedia’s self-righteous pretense of enforcing a neutral point of view. It is senseless to make a virtue out of amorality! When we write or blog, we do our best to gather and publish the whole truth and nothing but. There is no neutral ground between right and wrong, between good and evil, between truth and error. There is no room for diluting the truth by presenting falsehood alongside it, in an effort to appear “fair and balanced.” The devil has too many spokesmen already, and too many spokeswomen too!
- Making patronizing remarks, such as claiming that you “pity” us, is nothing more than mudslinging disguised behind a false sense of moral superiority, and it will get your remarks flushed into the spam bucket without a second thought.
- If you, or any of your sources have a vested interest in the issue that could affect credibility, we expect you to disclose it.
- Just because you saw something in the mainstream media does not automatically mean it is true. Many stories, photos, and videos have appeared in the mainstream media and have later been shown to be planted by untrustworthy sources, staged, mislabeled, Photoshopped, or otherwise falsified. Check it first!
In particular, we will not post comments that contain racist or bigoted ranting, especially the anti-Semitic ranting and the Serb-bashing that seems to be plaguing the blogosphere these days. We don’t care how many times you have seen or heard the same piece of Serb-bashing or Jew-bashing or Israel-bashing in the blogosphere or even in the mainstream media. As we have just pointed out, this does NOT make it true, nor does it give you any right to repeat it here.
What’s a blogger or admin to do?
1389 Blog posts a comments policy and we enforce it consistently. Anyone with a modicum of common sense should already be aware of what is acceptable on this and most other blogs. But if you have any doubts, read it before you send us email or comment on this, or any other, post on this blog.
We encourage people to post comments or use the Contact Us form in our blog to expose injustice or other wrongdoing. We have no objection to leveling verifiable accusations against public officials or other culpable individuals, organizations, or governments. We have no objection to polemics or to strong opinions. We encourage readers to engage in vigorous debate and to point out any factual errors that we or other commenters might make. We also encourage readers to investigate and report suspicious incidents and criminal or terrorist activity, and to keep us up to date with that information. But if the accusations cannot be substantiated, the communication in question will be either refuted or deleted.
It is up to us, as bloggers and admins, to maintain civility in our part of the blogosphere. If we fail to make this effort, the better part (in both senses of the word) of our audience will leave. I suggest that it is time for each of us to set up and enforce our comment policies to stop that from happening. And when it comes to dealing with haters, I suggest that we take care neither to let malicious commenters spew their bile until everyone else gives up and lets the haters have the last word, nor to allow false accusations to stand unanswered in any of our comment or forum threads.
Also see:
Technorati : Israel, Nazism, Serbia, anti-Semitism, blogging, comment policy, forum, hate, incivility, injustice, spam, troll, wikis
August 28th, 2007 — injustice, Islam, political correctness, media, CAIR, MSM corruption, flame war, Florida, censorship, culture wars, hate, counterjihad, Christianity
CBS has no room for Christians or for American Southerners.
For those who are not aware of this, it’s part of the Christian faith that believers are required - yes, REQUIRED - to tell the truth about our beliefs, and to bring the Good News to everyone we can reach. Taqiyya has NO place in Christianity. Florida televangelist Bill Keller was simply doing what a good Christian should do on a Christian talk show. But CAIR, a Muslim pressure group affiliated with Hamas, bullied CBS into dropping Keller’s show.
Here are two accounts of the disgraceful way CBS Corporation treated Florida televangelist Bill Keller:
But that’s not all. The CBS website has been providing a forum for over-the-top hate comments. CBS has allowed random crazies to spew filth and venom on the CBS website, particularly against American Southerners. After they got enough complaints, they eventually deleted the comments and, in effect, pretended the comments had never existed.
A high-traffic mainstream media site such as CBS has no business ever allowing unmoderated comments to appear in the first place. They should publish a comment policy with enough moderators to enforce it. They refuse to take any responsibility for what happens on their site, and they have no respect for Southerners or for anybody with traditional values. With that corporate mindset, it’s no wonder that the networks and the mainstream media have been steadily losing their audience!
Now let CBS know what you think of this!
Address of CBS Headquarters:
51 West 52 Street, New York, New York 10019-6188
Technorati : American South, CAIR, CBS, Christianity, Islam, censorship, flame war, hate, incivility, jihadism
Del.icio.us : American South, CAIR, CBS, Christianity, Islam, censorship, flame war, hate, incivility, jihadism
Ice Rocket : American South, CAIR, CBS, Christianity, Islam, censorship, flame war, hate, incivility, jihadism
Powered by Zoundry
Also on FHK and on JennSierra.
August 10th, 2007 — MSM corruption, Islam, injustice, crime, Ahtisaari, counterjihad, current events, Serbia, Kosovo, military
Here’s the truth that Danny Pearl was trying to reveal… Courageous blogger Julia Gorin has a blog article, The Balkan Liar of Liars, that quotes a piece by reporter Daniel Pearl, who was murdered by al Qaeda terrorists in 1999. I read the excerpt, and it got me to thinking. It turns out that Danny Pearl had been exposing the elaborate hoaxes that were being used to rationalize the 1999 Kosovo War.
(For more evidence to back up the fact that this war was completely unjustified, see Julia Gorin’s other article, Ending the Balkan Quagmire at American Thinker.)
Another strong motive for al Qaeda to kill Danny… Now, if the public had gotten wind of the fact that Bill Clinton and his collaborators in both parties were inducing the U.S. and NATO to fight on the wrong side in the Balkans - on the side of the local branches of al Qaeda - then that would’ve been the end of their cozy little deal. The public would have demanded we stop fighting a war on behalf of the Balkans jihadists, and the public might even have demanded that we switch sides in the war! Danny Pearl had been working to tell the public the truth about jihadism in the Balkans and elsewhere. So of course al Qaeda had to kill Danny Pearl to shut him up as quickly as possible.
Rope, tree, Clinton Administration, U.S. Constitutional definition of treason - some assembly required! You understood me correctly when I said that the Clinton Administration and its collaborators in both parties aided and abetted the avowed enemies of the U.S.
(If you have any further doubts about their culpability, the article When the Government Fails to Protect its Citizens gives specifics on some of the laws that they violated.)
Keep in mind that the Clinton Administration continued to support Balkans jihadists affiliated with al Qaeda, even after Osama bin Laden had issued his fatwa (i.e., declaration of war and mobilization order) against the U.S, and after he had led al Qaeda to perpetrate armed attacks against American assets. By any definition, this makes Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda an enemy of the U.S.
When the public finally understands all of the implications, and all of the consequences, of what the Clinton Administration led us into in the Balkans - not if, but when - there will be a public outcry to indict all major participants in this evil debacle on charges of having violated the U.S. Constitutional definition of treason. They are well aware that treason is a capital offense!
That’s another reason why so many people don’t want the truth to come out, even now. Danny Pearl wasn’t the first person murdered for trying to tell the public the truth about this matter, and he’s unlikely to be the last. The same thing could happen to any of us bloggers, too, not that we care! But the more voices that clamor for an investigation, the less likely it is that anybody can shut it down by getting rid of me or anybody else!
There’s something YOU can do right now!
Honor Danny’s memory by seeking the truth about the Balkans, and not accepting propaganda and spin at face value. Add your own voice to the demand to get the truth out about the corruption and jihadism in the Balkans!
There are two petitions on this site:
- Demand an investigation of the Martti Ahtisaari/UN corruption scandal in Kosovo.
(More about this here: Petition to Demand Investigation of UN Bribery Scandal).
- Say NO to Kosovo independence. Granting “independence” to Kosovo would mean nothing more than turning Kosovo over to the local branch of al Qaeda.
Please read both petitions and sign them!
Subscribe to 1389 Blog!
Technorati : Daniel Pearl, Islam, Kosovo, Serbia, WSJ, al Qaeda, counterterrorism, crime, current events, jihadis, jihadism, politics
Del.icio.us : Daniel Pearl, Islam, Kosovo, Serbia, WSJ, al Qaeda, counterterrorism, crime, current events, jihadis, jihadism, politics
Ice Rocket : Daniel Pearl, Islam, Kosovo, Serbia, WSJ, al Qaeda, counterterrorism, crime, current events, jihadis, jihadism, politics
Powered by Zoundry
