By Ibrahim Abdil-Mu'id Ramey
MAS Freedom Civil and Human Rights Director
WASHINGTON, D.C. (MASNET) Nov. 6, 2007 - As I write this commentary, Pakistan is imploding.
General/President/Dictator, Pervez Musharraf, has suspended the constitution of the nation. The supreme court, and parliament, have both been dissolved. Martial law has been declared, and more than 1,500 political opposition leaders, lawyers, and judges have been arrested. Thousands of citizens are battling police in the streets of Islamabad, and other cities across the country.
The chaos of constitutional crisis and autocracy now verge on catastrophe – a catastrophe in an unstable nuclear weapons state that, if left unaddressed, could spiral into the virtual disintegration of the nation itself.
All dictators have their own made-for-mass-consumption reasons for attempting to squash the fundamental democratic rights of their own people.
In the case of General Musharraf, the big, public card in his geopolitical hand is the (alleged) war against Islamic 'extremists' in Pakistan's remote northwest region. This is, of course, the primary glue that binds Pakistan to the global "war against terror", led and orchestrated by the United States.
The 'war against terror' is also the single most important factor in maintaining the personal relationship between General Musharraf and the ruling circles of the U.S. government, including his personal relationships with President Bush and Vice-President Cheyney, who guarantee the unrestricted flow of money and weapons to their Pakistani 'ally'.
But this time, the General may have overplayed his 'anti-terrorism' hand in his brutal attempt to end any semblance of real democratic rule in Pakistan.
By dismantling Pakistan's national judiciary, and throwing hundreds of political opponents in jail, Musharraf is saying, in effect, that any challenge to his autocratic rule only emboldens the supporters of Al Queda and the Taliban.
Is it in the national interest of the United States to tolerate Musharraf's attempt to destroy his opposition, and the democratic institutions of his country? The answer is an emphatic NO.
If left unchecked, the current crackdown will only result in a bloody civil conflict in Pakistan - possibly even civil war. If this happens, there is no guarantee that the entire Pakistani military will remain loyal to Gen. Musharraf. And any internal rebellion will leave open the unthinkable possibility that the control of Pakistan's small atomic arsenal might become compromised.
But a more probable scenario is the diminished possibility of an open, democratic electoral transition to a representative civilian government that is capable of addressing the myriad of divisions and contradictions in Pakistan. And that would leave the business of government to those political elements in Pakistan with the most guns - and the most money behind them.
It is unthinkable that Muslims, and real democrats of any description, would allow Pakistan to devolve into becoming another Somalia - and in this case, a Somalia with nuclear weapons.
The United States, which has supplied Musharraf with weapons, foreign aid, and international political cover, must not be allowed to remain on the sidelines while things in Pakistan become more bloody and desperate.
If America truly means what it proclaims to the world about respect for democracy and human rights, it must do now what is absolutely necessary to safeguard both.
The United States must immediately halt all military and foreign assistance to the government of Gen. Musharraf, and use all its power and prestige to persuade Gen. Musharraf to resign from office, thereby ending his personal onslaught against popular rule in Pakistan.
As I have stated previously, it is time for Gen. Musharraf to go. And that time is now more urgent than ever.
RELATED
NEW: Thousands Face Down Pakistani Police
Musharraf Imposes Emergency Rule
Text of Emergency Declaration
Timeline: Pakistan Emergency Rule
General Moves Deeper Into Labyrinth
World Leaders Respond (Quotes)
Musharraf Targets Key Opponents
UK Urges Restraint
Showing posts with label Democracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Democracy. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
For U.S. Muslims, More Surveillance Could Mean More Intimidation
By Ibrahim Abdil-Mu'id Ramey
MAS Freedom Civil and Human Rights Director
WASHINGTON, DC (MASNET) Aug. 7, 2007 − The next time you have a telephone conversation with your brother Hassan in Cairo, be aware. Be very aware.
It doesn't matter if you're a law abiding U.S. citizen, or if Hassan is a medical student who plans to open a clinic one day to serve needy patients in the Washington, D.C. area. And frankly, it doesn't matter if both you and Ali have deep convictions about the immorality of terror attacks on civilians.
What does matter, at least for the intelligence services of the United States, is that both you and Hassan are Muslims, and that your call from the United States to him in Cairo is being electronically routed through telecommunications equipment in the U.S. Under the expanded provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) signed by President Bush this week, your call can be secretly monitored by the U.S. government without an order from a U.S. court.
In a fair and functional democracy, of course, you should have nothing to fear, because neither you, nor your brother, harbor any malicious or criminal intent to violate American law or cause harm to people in this nation. After all, you are a registered voter, a law-abiding citizen, and this country is your home, too.
There are people in the Muslim world who have taken and harmed innocent American lives, and who are conjuring up plots to create even more acts of brazen, illegitimate violence. These Muslims do not represent your understanding of the Qur'an or the traditions of our Prophet (Peace be Unto Him). You want these people to be stopped by any and all legitimate means of law enforcement, including the inevitable part of law enforcement that requires gathering intelligence from human and electronic sources.
Fair enough. But who polices the intelligence gatherers? And who guarantees that completely innocent people, like you and Hassan, won't be falsely accused of involvement in some sinister plot against the U.S. government or its people? The answer is: no one.
Already, there is clear evidence that the prosecutorial power of the U.S. court system is willing and able to stretch, and even distort, the law when it comes to Muslims.
Professor Sami Al-Arian languishes in a prison, suffering from diabetes and severe deprivation and cruelty, without being convicted of any crime.
Our young and courageous brother Sabri Benkhala, was convicted last month of perjury before a grand jury and is now serving ten years in prison, simply because the government prosecutor believed that he knew more than he was willing to tell the court about alleged terrorist recruitment.
And let's not forget the attack on the Holy land Trust, and the vast list of "un-indicted co-conspirators" that includes practically every Muslim imaginable except for you and Muhammad Ali. For some, it is (and has been) time for a legal hunt directed against the wider Muslim community, with, all too often no real regard for the innocence of most of the victims of this aggression.
Each one of us, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, wants to enjoy a sense of safety from violence. But those of us who are Muslim have reason for justifiable suspicion of this unprecedented expansion of the power of the state when it comes to the invasion of our private telephone conversations, our personal associations, our choices for charitable giving, and even our places of worship. This wide net of espionage against Muslims is framed by hidden, and not so hidden, attitudes of fear, and even animosity, directed by a political establishment that all too often projects Islam and Muslims as adversaries.
FISA is simply the most recent manifestation of the expansion of the net.
MAS Freedom will continue to struggle for the civil liberties that are rightfully ours because we know that dissent from injustice is not a crime, and that our community must be protected from those forces that have little regard for real justice or the hallowed concept of equal protection-for all-under the law.
But in the mean time, when you speak again with your brother in Cairo, be very aware that the two of you may not be the only people listening to the conversation.
MAS Freedom Civil and Human Rights Director
WASHINGTON, DC (MASNET) Aug. 7, 2007 − The next time you have a telephone conversation with your brother Hassan in Cairo, be aware. Be very aware.
It doesn't matter if you're a law abiding U.S. citizen, or if Hassan is a medical student who plans to open a clinic one day to serve needy patients in the Washington, D.C. area. And frankly, it doesn't matter if both you and Ali have deep convictions about the immorality of terror attacks on civilians.
What does matter, at least for the intelligence services of the United States, is that both you and Hassan are Muslims, and that your call from the United States to him in Cairo is being electronically routed through telecommunications equipment in the U.S. Under the expanded provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) signed by President Bush this week, your call can be secretly monitored by the U.S. government without an order from a U.S. court.
In a fair and functional democracy, of course, you should have nothing to fear, because neither you, nor your brother, harbor any malicious or criminal intent to violate American law or cause harm to people in this nation. After all, you are a registered voter, a law-abiding citizen, and this country is your home, too.
There are people in the Muslim world who have taken and harmed innocent American lives, and who are conjuring up plots to create even more acts of brazen, illegitimate violence. These Muslims do not represent your understanding of the Qur'an or the traditions of our Prophet (Peace be Unto Him). You want these people to be stopped by any and all legitimate means of law enforcement, including the inevitable part of law enforcement that requires gathering intelligence from human and electronic sources.
Fair enough. But who polices the intelligence gatherers? And who guarantees that completely innocent people, like you and Hassan, won't be falsely accused of involvement in some sinister plot against the U.S. government or its people? The answer is: no one.
Already, there is clear evidence that the prosecutorial power of the U.S. court system is willing and able to stretch, and even distort, the law when it comes to Muslims.
Professor Sami Al-Arian languishes in a prison, suffering from diabetes and severe deprivation and cruelty, without being convicted of any crime.
Our young and courageous brother Sabri Benkhala, was convicted last month of perjury before a grand jury and is now serving ten years in prison, simply because the government prosecutor believed that he knew more than he was willing to tell the court about alleged terrorist recruitment.
And let's not forget the attack on the Holy land Trust, and the vast list of "un-indicted co-conspirators" that includes practically every Muslim imaginable except for you and Muhammad Ali. For some, it is (and has been) time for a legal hunt directed against the wider Muslim community, with, all too often no real regard for the innocence of most of the victims of this aggression.
Each one of us, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, wants to enjoy a sense of safety from violence. But those of us who are Muslim have reason for justifiable suspicion of this unprecedented expansion of the power of the state when it comes to the invasion of our private telephone conversations, our personal associations, our choices for charitable giving, and even our places of worship. This wide net of espionage against Muslims is framed by hidden, and not so hidden, attitudes of fear, and even animosity, directed by a political establishment that all too often projects Islam and Muslims as adversaries.
FISA is simply the most recent manifestation of the expansion of the net.
MAS Freedom will continue to struggle for the civil liberties that are rightfully ours because we know that dissent from injustice is not a crime, and that our community must be protected from those forces that have little regard for real justice or the hallowed concept of equal protection-for all-under the law.
But in the mean time, when you speak again with your brother in Cairo, be very aware that the two of you may not be the only people listening to the conversation.
Friday, August 3, 2007
Darfur Peacekeepers: A Positive Sign for Sudan's Future
By Ibrahim Abdil-Mu'id Ramey
MAS Freedom Civil and Human Rights Director
WASHINGTON, DC (MASNET) Aug. 3, 2007 − The long and terribly complex road to genuine peace in Darfur took an optimistic turn this week when Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir agreed − after long negotiations and serious international pressure − to the deployment in Darfur of a joint African Union/United Nations peacekeeping force of some 27,000 troops. These soldiers, who will likely form a Pan-African protective contingent, will most likely come from Nigeria, Ethiopia, Cameroon, Burkina Faso, Egypt, and South Africa, and they will mark the first ever peacekeeping collaboration between the UN and the African Union.
A substantial on-the-ground protective force in Darfur is necessary, of course, for the safekeeping of the victims of the internal war and violence, who now number perhaps 200,000 killed, and more than twice that number suffering from internal displacement. The current African Union force in Darfur, numbering about 7,000 beleaguered troops, is badly under-manned and under-equipped for the protection of human life in a land area the size of France. This larger contingent is scheduled for deployment at the earliest possible time.
Later this week, about a dozen Darfur rebel factions will meet at a conference in Arusha, Tanzania to attempt, once again, to hammer out a collective agreement for starting another round of peace negotiations with the government of Sudan. These negotiations, which have failed since the original round of talks began in Nigeria (2005), will take place without the approval of at least one major rebel faction.
But Sudan faces other challenges as well.
A recent report from the United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in Sudan, indicates that security forces within the country still have the power to arrest individuals without formal charges, and to hold them in detention for as long as six months. A number of such persons, including former military commanders, police officials, security agents, and the leaders of two major political opposition parties in northern Sudan, have recently been detained under this national security provision for alleged plots against the current national government.
There is also the ongoing question of whether Sudan will agree to the extradition of suspected war criminals to the International Criminal Court, which Khartoum has adamantly refused to do since earlier this year. And the equitable sharing of resources throughout the country, coupled with the internal displacement of some 4 million people in southern Sudan and the massive poverty of the region (where some 90 percent of southern Sudanese people subsist on less than $1 U.S. a day), present equally formidable problems for the leadership and the people of Sudan.
Sudan may well have accepted the peacekeeping troop deployment as the only way to avoid international sanctions, but this agreement is nonetheless a necessary one, not only for the sake of the people of Darfur but equally for the sake of the integrity of the nation-state as well. We applaud the government of Sudan for finally agreeing to the deployment of this force.
Finally, there is real hope that the end to the violence in Darfur is in sight. And when the killing is stopped, the possibility for national reconciliation, reconstruction, and the building of real democracy in Sudan can truly begin.
MAS Freedom Civil and Human Rights Director
WASHINGTON, DC (MASNET) Aug. 3, 2007 − The long and terribly complex road to genuine peace in Darfur took an optimistic turn this week when Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir agreed − after long negotiations and serious international pressure − to the deployment in Darfur of a joint African Union/United Nations peacekeeping force of some 27,000 troops. These soldiers, who will likely form a Pan-African protective contingent, will most likely come from Nigeria, Ethiopia, Cameroon, Burkina Faso, Egypt, and South Africa, and they will mark the first ever peacekeeping collaboration between the UN and the African Union.
A substantial on-the-ground protective force in Darfur is necessary, of course, for the safekeeping of the victims of the internal war and violence, who now number perhaps 200,000 killed, and more than twice that number suffering from internal displacement. The current African Union force in Darfur, numbering about 7,000 beleaguered troops, is badly under-manned and under-equipped for the protection of human life in a land area the size of France. This larger contingent is scheduled for deployment at the earliest possible time.
Later this week, about a dozen Darfur rebel factions will meet at a conference in Arusha, Tanzania to attempt, once again, to hammer out a collective agreement for starting another round of peace negotiations with the government of Sudan. These negotiations, which have failed since the original round of talks began in Nigeria (2005), will take place without the approval of at least one major rebel faction.
But Sudan faces other challenges as well.
A recent report from the United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in Sudan, indicates that security forces within the country still have the power to arrest individuals without formal charges, and to hold them in detention for as long as six months. A number of such persons, including former military commanders, police officials, security agents, and the leaders of two major political opposition parties in northern Sudan, have recently been detained under this national security provision for alleged plots against the current national government.
There is also the ongoing question of whether Sudan will agree to the extradition of suspected war criminals to the International Criminal Court, which Khartoum has adamantly refused to do since earlier this year. And the equitable sharing of resources throughout the country, coupled with the internal displacement of some 4 million people in southern Sudan and the massive poverty of the region (where some 90 percent of southern Sudanese people subsist on less than $1 U.S. a day), present equally formidable problems for the leadership and the people of Sudan.
Sudan may well have accepted the peacekeeping troop deployment as the only way to avoid international sanctions, but this agreement is nonetheless a necessary one, not only for the sake of the people of Darfur but equally for the sake of the integrity of the nation-state as well. We applaud the government of Sudan for finally agreeing to the deployment of this force.
Finally, there is real hope that the end to the violence in Darfur is in sight. And when the killing is stopped, the possibility for national reconciliation, reconstruction, and the building of real democracy in Sudan can truly begin.
Monday, April 16, 2007
The Incredible Persistence of a Proven Lie
By Ibrahim Abdil-Mu'id Ramey
MAS Freedom Civil and Human Rights Director
Yet Another Unprincipled Attack on the Muslim American Society and our President, Dr. Esam Omeish
WASHINGTON, D.C. (MASNET) April 16, 2007 - When Dr. Esam Omeish, the President of the Muslim American Society, spoke at the mass rally against the U.S. war in Iraq on March 17th March, he put his remarks in the context of a patriotic response to a war that he, and MAS, both believe to be unjust and illegal. He called for an end to the war and the withdrawal of U.S. military forces from Iraq.
More than 30,000 demonstrators that day, and a majority of the population of the United States, apparently agree with him.
Dr. Omeish, for the record, is a highly acclaimed surgeon and activist for justice and community service. He is also a naturalized American citizen, an honors graduate of Georgetown University and the Georgetown Medical School, and a man who has devoted his professional time and resources selflessly to both Muslims and his non-Muslim neighbors. In fact, he was one of the doctors who offered treatment to the casualties of the September 11th, 2001 attack on the Pentagon.
Yet Dr. Omeish, according to a diatribe written by Paul Sperry for FrontPageMagazine.com on April 9th, is nothing more than a closeted terror supporter in league with Al-Queda, the Muslim Brotherhood, and assorted other domestic and international individuals and organizations whom the writer claims to be agents of violence directed against the United States and the West.
To quote the late African American singer Marvin Gaye, it’s enough to make you want to holler and throw up both your hands.
It’s no secret that Muslim activist organizations have numerous detractors, especially on the political right, who are never reluctant to express their disdain, and even hatred, for Muslims and the religion of Islam. That comes with the territory of simply being who we are, regardless of our ideological professions or actual deeds, in a national atmosphere polluted with both Islamophobia and racism.
But the often-repeated slur that MAS (and many of our associates) are fronting for “Jihadists” or other violent opponents of the United States has become, once again, the central, and provocative, untruth upon which many of our opponents base their excoriations.
Never mind that Dr. Omeish is, quite openly and publicly, both a respected physician and a man celebrated for both his professional brilliance and his commitment to humanity. Never mind that the Muslim American Society (and the MAS Freedom Foundation) are both above-board, transparent, and certified tax-exempt organizations doing charitable and service work throughout the United States and the world. Never mind that, as an example of our “extremism”, we have organized food drives, Boy and Girl Scout troops, provided emergency relief for the victims of Hurricane Katrina, and registered thousands of Muslim voters.
All that matters for the opponents of MAS, and Muslim haters, is the baseless claim that we are simply associated with the “terrorist” Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt (with whom, by the way, the Democratic House Majority leader met last week on an official congressional delegation to the Middle East), and a laundry list of many others on the hit list of the U.S. security agencies.
No “proof” of our guilt is necessary for them, of course. All that is required is for them to say that “terrorist X met with suspect Y in the vicinity of of Masjid Z, which is in the same town as the MAS office and the home of Dr. Esam Omeish. And presto! The Muslim American Society is transmogrified, by specious association, into a violent organization fronting for the “Death to America” crowd.
MAS has stated, repeatedly, that we oppose all forms of violence and extremism, including violence committed in the name of our faith. And we are an indigenous Muslim American movement, with organized chapters in 35 states. We take no marching orders or directives from anyone outside the country, despite the international scope of our concerns and our work.
But we are also quite open in our support for the democratic right of Muslim citizens to organize, politically empower ourselves, and speak out against any and all forms of injustice, racism, and violence committed in the name of the people of the United States. And we are, indeed, part of the American people.
In a democratic society, or at least one professing democratic principles, freedom of the press is a sacred right. We support that right, even for those who vehemently disagree with us, or who even oppose the religion of Islam.
But we will not be silent when confronted with blatant lies, distortions, and false claims about unproven linkages between the Muslim American Society, or our leaders, and other opponents of the policies of the United States.
MAS welcomes open and honest discourse with our detractors about our faith, our works, and our organizational vision. Such a discourse, we believe, is in the best tradition of American democracy. Our participation in numerous national and global interfaith (and trans-political) dialogues underscores this commitment. We are quite prepared to discuss, with anyone, both who we are and who we are not.
But we also believe that there is a critical difference between the expression of free speech and honest disagreement, on one hand, and vicious, unsupported slander on the other.
Mr. Don Imus learned that painful lesson last week. And we pray that Allah (Most Exalted and Glorified), who is the Knower of all Truth, will help Mr. Paul Sperry and FrontPageMagazine.com to learn this important lesson as well.
MAS Freedom Civil and Human Rights Director
Yet Another Unprincipled Attack on the Muslim American Society and our President, Dr. Esam Omeish
WASHINGTON, D.C. (MASNET) April 16, 2007 - When Dr. Esam Omeish, the President of the Muslim American Society, spoke at the mass rally against the U.S. war in Iraq on March 17th March, he put his remarks in the context of a patriotic response to a war that he, and MAS, both believe to be unjust and illegal. He called for an end to the war and the withdrawal of U.S. military forces from Iraq.
More than 30,000 demonstrators that day, and a majority of the population of the United States, apparently agree with him.
Dr. Omeish, for the record, is a highly acclaimed surgeon and activist for justice and community service. He is also a naturalized American citizen, an honors graduate of Georgetown University and the Georgetown Medical School, and a man who has devoted his professional time and resources selflessly to both Muslims and his non-Muslim neighbors. In fact, he was one of the doctors who offered treatment to the casualties of the September 11th, 2001 attack on the Pentagon.
Yet Dr. Omeish, according to a diatribe written by Paul Sperry for FrontPageMagazine.com on April 9th, is nothing more than a closeted terror supporter in league with Al-Queda, the Muslim Brotherhood, and assorted other domestic and international individuals and organizations whom the writer claims to be agents of violence directed against the United States and the West.
To quote the late African American singer Marvin Gaye, it’s enough to make you want to holler and throw up both your hands.
It’s no secret that Muslim activist organizations have numerous detractors, especially on the political right, who are never reluctant to express their disdain, and even hatred, for Muslims and the religion of Islam. That comes with the territory of simply being who we are, regardless of our ideological professions or actual deeds, in a national atmosphere polluted with both Islamophobia and racism.
But the often-repeated slur that MAS (and many of our associates) are fronting for “Jihadists” or other violent opponents of the United States has become, once again, the central, and provocative, untruth upon which many of our opponents base their excoriations.
Never mind that Dr. Omeish is, quite openly and publicly, both a respected physician and a man celebrated for both his professional brilliance and his commitment to humanity. Never mind that the Muslim American Society (and the MAS Freedom Foundation) are both above-board, transparent, and certified tax-exempt organizations doing charitable and service work throughout the United States and the world. Never mind that, as an example of our “extremism”, we have organized food drives, Boy and Girl Scout troops, provided emergency relief for the victims of Hurricane Katrina, and registered thousands of Muslim voters.
All that matters for the opponents of MAS, and Muslim haters, is the baseless claim that we are simply associated with the “terrorist” Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt (with whom, by the way, the Democratic House Majority leader met last week on an official congressional delegation to the Middle East), and a laundry list of many others on the hit list of the U.S. security agencies.
No “proof” of our guilt is necessary for them, of course. All that is required is for them to say that “terrorist X met with suspect Y in the vicinity of of Masjid Z, which is in the same town as the MAS office and the home of Dr. Esam Omeish. And presto! The Muslim American Society is transmogrified, by specious association, into a violent organization fronting for the “Death to America” crowd.
MAS has stated, repeatedly, that we oppose all forms of violence and extremism, including violence committed in the name of our faith. And we are an indigenous Muslim American movement, with organized chapters in 35 states. We take no marching orders or directives from anyone outside the country, despite the international scope of our concerns and our work.
But we are also quite open in our support for the democratic right of Muslim citizens to organize, politically empower ourselves, and speak out against any and all forms of injustice, racism, and violence committed in the name of the people of the United States. And we are, indeed, part of the American people.
In a democratic society, or at least one professing democratic principles, freedom of the press is a sacred right. We support that right, even for those who vehemently disagree with us, or who even oppose the religion of Islam.
But we will not be silent when confronted with blatant lies, distortions, and false claims about unproven linkages between the Muslim American Society, or our leaders, and other opponents of the policies of the United States.
MAS welcomes open and honest discourse with our detractors about our faith, our works, and our organizational vision. Such a discourse, we believe, is in the best tradition of American democracy. Our participation in numerous national and global interfaith (and trans-political) dialogues underscores this commitment. We are quite prepared to discuss, with anyone, both who we are and who we are not.
But we also believe that there is a critical difference between the expression of free speech and honest disagreement, on one hand, and vicious, unsupported slander on the other.
Mr. Don Imus learned that painful lesson last week. And we pray that Allah (Most Exalted and Glorified), who is the Knower of all Truth, will help Mr. Paul Sperry and FrontPageMagazine.com to learn this important lesson as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
