Saturday, May 18, 2013

When Islamists dominate a country there is no freedom of religion


Egyptians targeted with blasphemy charges


CAIRO (AP) — The pale, young Christian woman sat handcuffed in the courtroom, accused of insulting Islam while teaching history of religions to fourth-graders. A team of Islamist lawyers with long beards sang in unison, "All except the Prophet Muhammad."
The case against Dimyana Abdel-Nour in southern Egypt's ancient city of Luxor began when parents of three of her pupils claimed that their children, aged 10, complained their teacher showed disgust when she spoke of Islam in class. According to the parents, Abdel-Nour, 24, told the children that Pope Shenouda, who led the Egyptian Coptic Church until his death last year, was better than the Prophet Muhammad.
Blasphemy charges were not uncommon in Egypt under the now-ousted autocrat Hosni Mubarak's regime, but there has been a surge in such cases in recent months, according to rights activists. The trend is widely seen as a reflection of the growing power and confidence of Islamists, particularly the ultraconservative Salafis.
"Salafis are the engineers of these stories," said Abdel-Hamid Hassan, a Muslim and the head of the parents' council at the primary school where Abdel-Nour teaches. Hassan's daughter was among several students who denied any wrongdoing by Abdel-Nour.
"If the pope himself came here from the Vatican and tried to spread Christianity among us, he would fail. We learn about our religion starting from the age of 5," he said, alluding to the allegation against Abdel-Nour, since withdrawn, of "spreading Christianity."
Criminalizing blasphemy was enshrined in the country's Islamist-backed constitution that was adopted in December.
Writers, activists and even a famous television comedian have been accused of blasphemy since then. But Christians seem to be the favorite target of Islamist prosecutors. Their fragile cases — the main basis of the case against Abdel-Nour's case the testimony of children — are greeted with sympathy from courtroom judges with their own religious bias or who fear the wrath of Islamists, according to activists.
The result is a growing number of Egyptians, including many Christians, who have been convicted and sent to prison for blasphemy.
In at least one celebrated case, the offense was clearly provocative: Seven Coptic Christians living in the United States received death sentences in absentia for producing an anti-Islam film that sparked waves of protests by ultraconservative Islamists in front of U.S. embassies across the Arab world on Sept. 11, 2012.
But rights groups say the vast majority of blasphemy cases are merely attempts by Islamists to crack down on their opponents.
"Islamists are using the law to hunt down critics to the Muslim Brotherhood, and the Christians are the weakest," said Medhat Klada, a Switzerland-based Coptic Christian activist whose organization Copts United tracks such cases. "The numbers of Christians implicated is unprecedented," he added.
Many believe that restrictions on freedoms are more severe under Mohammed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt's first freely elected president, than during his predecessor's 29-year reign.
Under Mubarak, "you might have had 50 cases, which means a case or two a year on average, but now you have like 10 cases in a year," said Mamdouh Nakhla, who leads The Word Group for Human Rights and focuses on Christian-related persecution.
Freed Tuesday on nearly $3,000 bail after almost a week in detention, Abdel-Nour is due to stand trial on May 21. Her family refused several requests by The Associated Press to speak to her. Her father, Ebid Abdel-Nour, said: "She is innocent. God be with us. She can't talk because she is in very bad condition."
Emil Nazeer, a Christian activist who visited her, says she is suffering a "nervous breakdown."
Rights advocates see cases like Abdel-Nour's as politically motivated persecution. They say the verdicts tend to be harsher in southern Egypt, where Islamists are particularly powerful and Muslims are more conservative.
"Any move or word by a Christian is enough to get the rumor mill working," said Amr Ezzat, a prominent researcher in Islamic groups at the Cairo-based Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR). "Rumors quickly spread in villages or the towns where the radar of Islamist activists detect them and turn them into a rallying cry under the pretext that Islam's supremacy is endangered."
Salafis advocate an uncompromising and literal interpretation of the Quran, believing society must mirror the way the prophet and his immediate successors ruled in the 7th century. Some Salafi-based political groups are at odds with Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist group from which Morsi hails, while others are avid supporters of his government.
Part of the Salafis' antagonism toward Christians is rooted in the belief that they were a protected group under Mubarak's regime while they, the Salafis, were persecuted. Now empowered, they may be out to exact revenge on the Christians, who make up about 10 percent of Egypt's 90 million people.
The Egyptian Federation for Human Rights, led by former judge Naguib Gibrael, detects a trend in the number of lawsuits and court rulings leveled against Christians and school teachers in particular over the past year.
Gibrael, a lawyer who is representing Abdul-Nour, says it's his 18th case defending Christians — several of them teachers — detained over insulting Islam. He says his 17 other clients received three to six years in prison. They go to appeals courts, hoping for retrials or lighter sentences.
Another rights group, the EIPR, said it chronicled at least 36 blasphemy cases in 2011 and 2012, including more than 10 convictions, and that Christian school teachers were frequent targets.
"Teachers are an easy target," said Gibrael. "Any two students can say anything about their teachers. Islamist teachers collect signatures, and quickly Islamists move a case, then terrorize the court by holding protests and besieging the court building until the judge issues a verdict. I have seen it all," he said.
In Cairo, public figures who have lately faced blasphemy accusations or trials like movie star Adel Imam were all cleared, thanks to media attention, lobbying by rights groups and heavy police presence.
In rural areas, according to EIPR researcher Ishak Ibrahim, even those acquitted or otherwise cleared of blasphemy accusations face social or administrative punishment, with some forced by villagers to leave their homes, pay a fine or get demoted or suspended by their state employers.
Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood likes to project itself as a more moderate Islamist group when compared to the ultraconservative Salafis, but they still play a role in the blasphemy cases.
The top Brotherhood leader in Luxor, Abdel-Hamid el-Senoussi, is a lawmaker and the head of the legal team representing the families whose children testified against Abdel-Nour.
He acknowledged that two investigations by the school found no justification for the children's claims, but said he does not trust those findings.
"They just want to avoid discord. But we prefer to get to the bottom of it," he said. "Even if the court clears the teacher and rules that she is innocent, she must be fired from the school."
"There are people who want to mess up with the ship of the nation and this teacher is one of them," he said.
For him, the penalty for contempt of religion is not harsh enough. "I prefer 10 years imprisonment and, in case the judge clears the defendant, a fine that goes toward the upkeep of places of worship."
"Anyone who insults religions must be punished to deter further assaults," he said.
___

Let not reality interfere with the anti gun crowds belief system. Because what they believe is more important then reality


Disarming Realities: As Gun Sales Soar, Gun Crimes Plummet

EAST WINDSOR, CT - DECEMBER 21:  The Riverview...
(Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)
A couple of new studies reveal the gun-control hypesters’ worst nightmare…more people are buying firearms, while firearm-related homicides and suicides are steadily diminishing. What crackpots came up with these conclusions? One set of statistics was compiled by theU.S. Department of Justice. The other was reported by the Pew Research Center.
According to DOJ’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. gun-related homicides dropped 39 percent over the course of 18 years, from 18,253 during 1993, to 11,101 in 2011. During the same period, non-fatal firearm crimes decreased even more, a whopping 69 percent. The majority of those declines in both categories occurred during the first 10 years of that time frame. Firearm homicides declined from 1993 to 1999, rose through 2006, and then declined again through 2011. Non-fatal firearm violence declined from 1993 through 2004, then fluctuated in the mid-to-late 2000s.
And where did the bad people who did the shooting get most of their guns? Were those gun show “loopholes” responsible? Nope. According to surveys DOJ conducted of state prison inmates during 2004 (the most recent year of data available), only two percent who owned a gun at the time of their offense bought it at either a gun show or flea market. About 10 percent said they purchased their gun from a retail shop or pawnshop, 37 percent obtained it from family or friends, and another 40 percent obtained it from an illegal source.
While firearm violence accounted for about 70 percent of all homicides between 1993 and 2011, guns were used in less than 10 percent of all non-fatal violent crimes. Between 70 percent and 80 percent of those firearm homicides involved a handgun, and 90 percent of non-fatal firearm victimizations were committed with a handgun. Males, blacks, and persons aged 18-24 had the highest firearm homicide rates.
The March Pew study, drawn from numbers obtained from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, also found a dramatic drop in gun crime over the past two decades. Their accounting shows a 49 percent decline in the homicide rate, and a 75 percent decline of non-fatal violent crime victimization. More than 8 in 10 gun homicide victims in 2010 were men and boys. Fifty-five percent of the homicide victims were black, far beyond their 13 percent share of the population.
Pew researchers observed that the huge amount of attention devoted to gun violence incidents in the media has caused most Americans to be unaware that gun crime is strikingly down” from 20 years ago. In fact, gun-related homicides in the late 2000s were “equal to those not seen since the early 1960s.”Yet their survey found that 56 percent believed gun-related crime is higher, 26 percent believed it stayed about the same, and 6 percent didn’t know.  Only 12 percent of those polled thought it was lower.
The Pew survey found that while women and elderly were actually less likely to become crime victims, they were more likely to believe gun crime had increased in recent years. On the other hand, men, who were more likely to become victims, were more likely know that the gun rate had dropped.
Those gun crime rates certainly aren’t diminishing for lack of supply…at least not for law-abiding legal buyers. Last December, the FBI recorded a record number of 2.78 million background checks for purchases that month, surpassing a 2.01 million mark set the month before by about 39 percent. That December 2012 figure, in turn, was up 49 percent from a previous record on that month the year before. FBI checks for all of 2012 totaled 19.6 million, an annual record, and an increase of 19 percent over 2011.
Firearms sellers can thank the gun-control legislation lobbies for much of this business windfall. Marked demand increases have been witnessed over the past five years thanks to the 2008 and 2012 elections of U.S. history’s most successful, if unintentional, gun salesman as president. The firearms market got a huge added boost after the tragic shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton, Connecticut activated a renewed legislative frenzy.
If that gun-purchasing fervor has abated with the defeat of several congressional regulation proposals, as I’m sure it has, you surely wouldn’t have known it by witnessing the overwhelmingly enormous annual NRA convention in Houston earlier this month. Attendance was estimated to be more than 70,000 people from all over the country.
Those attendees weren’t all guys either…not by a long shot. Last year, theNational Shooting Sports Foundation reported that participation by women increased both in target shooting (46.5%) and hunting (36.6%) over the past decade. Also, 61% of firearm retailers responding to a NSSF survey reported an increase in female customers. A 2009 NSSF survey indicated that the number of women purchasing guns for personal defense increased a whopping 83 percent.
Is John Lott, the author of “More Guns, Less Crime” right? Does the rapid growth of gun ownership and armed citizens have anything to do with a diminishing gun violence trend? His expansive research concludes that state “shall issue” laws which allow citizens to carry concealed weapons do produce a steady decrease in violent crime. He explains that this is logical because criminals are deterred by the risk of attacking an armed target, so as more citizens arm themselves, danger to the criminals increases.
Whether or not you buy that reasoning, and it does make sense to me, what about the notion that tougher gun laws have or would make any difference? With the toughest gun laws in the nation, Chicago saw homicides jump to 513 in 2012, a 15% hike in a single year. The city’s murder rate is 15.65 per 100,000 people, compared with 4.5 for the Midwest, and 5.6 for Illinois.
Up to 80 percent of Chicago murders and non-fatal shootings are gang- related, primarily young black and Hispanic men killed by other black and Hispanic men. Would tightening gun laws even more, or “requiring” background checks, change these conditions?
Gwainevere Catchings Hess, president of the Black Women’s Agenda (BWA), Inc., an organization that strongly advocates strict gun-control legislation, rightly points out that  “In 2009, black males ages 15-19 were eight times as likely as white males the same age, and 2.5 times as likely as their Hispanic peers to be killed in a gun homicide.”
Those are terrible statistics, but here are some others. Today, 72% of black children are born out of wedlock, as are 53% of Hispanic children and 36% of white children. Back in 1965, 25% of black children were born out of wedlock, nearly one-third fewer. As a result, promiscuous rappers, prosperous dope peddlers and street gang leaders are becoming ever more influential role models. It’s probably no big stretch of imagination to correlate such grossly disproportionate crime and victimization rates with comparably staggering rates of single-parent families, those without fathers in particular.
Yet in the general population, and although the agenda-driven media hasn’t noticed, we can be grateful that gun violence has been trending downward since 1993 when it hit its last peak. Don’t want to credit a rise in gun ownership and concealed carry by law-abiding citizens for this good news? Fine. But then, don’t imagine that gun legislation is the reason or answer either. Leave that illusion to gun-control cheerleaders in the media.

It's worked because so many of our people live by the excuse


A Liberal/Progressive Epiphany

By Jeffrey T. Brown

Now that the low-information/low-knowledge segment of the country is waking up to what conservatives have been pointing out since Barack Obama was first sanctified by the left, we are being treated to the spectacle of a liberal epiphany.  How, they ask themselves, could this have happened?  How could they have been suckered so completely?  After all, liberals/progressives tell us all the time, they are a superior manifestation of the species.  They are always right, and their political opponents are always bad people, motivated by ignorance and stupidity at best, and impure designs at least.

Our progressive masters proclaim that they are not nearly so ignorant, and that those to whom the liberal legions pledge their fealty have "evolved" into more modern, nobler beings.  That they have done so in direct proportion to the demands of political correctness presents a hitherto unknown form of evolution, but science somehow always favors liberals, doesn't it?  And if it is necessary to ignore truth now and then to enhance the evolution, or cook the science, so be it.  Progress demands blindness to all prior lessons, especially those involving human nature and human failings.  Progressives evolve in the opposite direction of history, experience, and evidence.

And yet, at least some of these self-appointed wizards are finally asking themselves how it's possible that those troglodytes, those conservatives, might have been right all along about the pathological dishonesty of the lords of progressivism while they, the ever-evolving, were duped.

Perhaps the answer lies in the modern practice of progressivism.  Progressivism as played out in the last fifty years in America is the belief system of deeply unserious people.  It exists to indulge a complete and utter lack of maturity and responsibility in large enough numbers that it is assured of getting its way.  It celebrates vices.  It must be imposed coercively.  Overt fraud and deceit are admired skills.  Its practitioners wallow in behaviors and beliefs that prior generations recognized as embarrassing character flaws.  It is the belief system of spoiled, antisocial children and misguided enablers, rather than responsible grownups.

Mature adults disapprove of outright deception.  It is a violation of the social code.  Progressives, however, need it like air. 

Indeed, no vice is quite so highly prized and honored in progressivism as lying.  Every achievement attributed to progressivism is a product of pure dishonesty.  Welfare, illegal immigration, gun control, socialized medicine, energy policy, our present concepts of diplomacy and foreign policy -- all are based on lies, as to both the original object and the ultimate progressive claims of success.  They spring from modern liberal concepts of charity, fairness, safety, respect, and cooperation, but those concepts have themselves been redefined to conceal the progressive's immoral interpretation of them from the casual observer.

Progressives have thus brought us Socialism, economic paralysis, rampant unemployment, social division, officially endorsed discrimination, rejection of God and traditional morality, the hyper-sexualization of children, devaluation of all human life, and absolutely no hope of improvement.  Despite their successes in this effort, and do not doubt that they consider these outcomes successes, they lie to Herculean heights to conceal them.  They lie even about their victories lest we see them clearly in time to reverse them.

When one sets about to fundamentally transform a moral country -- that is, one which has adopted a legal code and social structure founded upon traditional morality -- one simply cannot do so transparently.  We have seen that when liars profess their transparency, they are lying.  When liars blame their enemies for events that either did not happen or which the liars themselves brought about, they are lying.  When liars tout their own actions or intentions, they are lying.  One does not create an unjust social structure and replace justice with injustice by telling the truth about what is afoot.

We have never had a more dishonest president than we do at this time in our history.  He is the embodiment of progressivism.  He lies effortlessly.  It is not merely second nature to such a man.  It is his essence.  Every public statement he makes is the perfect opposite of truth.

Thus, however implausibly, we are assured he knows nothing of his own actions.  He has never done anything, approved anything, or been informed of anything that can be held against him.  He is not merely Teflon -- he is invisible.  Those working for the most powerful man in the world also know nothing.  Those in his Cabinet know nothing.  They do nothing.  They see nothing.  They sign nothing.  They produce nothing.  They are responsible for nothing.  And yet, somehow, enormous things keep happening that required someone to do something, and know something, and produce something.   

Everything is the fault of someone else.  When the progressive errs, others are to blame.  Those bad straw people made the progressive do what he did.  It's not his fault.  It is never his fault.  Thus, the unserious child, the one who is never to blame and who is always a victim, emerges to offer his excuses.  His enablers do the same, possessed of the same lack of seriousness and integrity, at least for as long as they can do so without worrying that they are becoming obviously foolish.  That some of them seem to know where that line is speaks volumes about the lies they tell before seeing that it is in their best interests to stop.

One of the problems with this system, however, is that to eventually overwhelm its precursor, the deceptions must be carried out constantly and on a very grand scale, and some of us who have read books know that while there are still serious people contributing to the country, something will eventually give.  It appears that we may finally have reached such a tipping point. 

Those who have shielded and coddled the liars from scrutiny and criticism have themselves been bitten by the spoiled brats.  They have seen briefly what it is to be the target, both of lies and of bad behavior, and they don't like it.  In brief moments of lucidity, despite having such clarity forced upon them, even the enablers begin to grasp that everyone is expendable for the cause.  The question is, are there enough serious people left in this country to see progressivism clearly, as it is being laid bare before them, and punish the liars who have already done so much damage?