Category Archives: Government Oppression

On August 15, Henaa Salehi, a commercial lawyer and the Director of Procurement Policy and Legal Directorate at the National Procurement Authority of Afghanistan, took the last commercial flight out of Kabul to New York where she is pursuing her Masters degree. During her stopover in Turkey, she was horrified to find that the Taliban had taken over her beloved city.

Do you feel lucky to have escaped, because leaving can be as painful as being stuck?

Everybody has told me Oh, you were so lucky, but how can I even allow myself to be grateful when my family, colleagues and friends, who I met a few days ago, are left behind? I had the opportunity to move to New York for my Masters, having earned the Fulbright Scholarship. Two weeks before the flight on August 15, I received my tickets. The day arrived and I was super emotional. It was normal at the airport. The flight from Kabul to Turkey was five-and-a-half-hour-long. When I landed in Turkey and connected to WiFi at the airport, I was bombarded by messages from family, friends and colleagues. My colleagues had gone to office, which is near the Presidents Office. Some of them were crying, others panicking and walking home. It was a tough situation. They said, We are glad you left. The airport is closed. The messages kept coming. It was a huge shock. I did not know how to feel. Your country holds its own place in your heart. I'm not feeling lucky because every bit of my plan was that I would be studying in New York for the next two years and then returning to my country. I had plans for business and my life there. Theyre all gone!

The Taliban are urging professors to take classes. There were images of a university in Kabul with gender-segregated classrooms. Whats going to become of education, particularly for girls?

Our youths and kids are worried about their future. I have two brothers. One is 18 and the other is entering his teens and they are scared. Girls of the same age dont know what they will be doing even if they finish their higher education. Sit at home? Get married early? Become either a teacher or a doctor, that too under a chadari? I have three cousin sisters who are in their first year of university majoring in tech. I sense their hopelessness.

The picture of the gender-segregated classroom was circulated by Afghan youths as an objection to how pathetically funny their lives are turning out under the Taliban. The university management came up with the idea of a curtain to separate girls and boys because they had to keep classes running. The majority of the universities have remained closed at this stage because they did not have enough resources, both human resources and facilities, to meet the requirements of the Taliban for opening educational institutions or their students were scared to attend class. The Ts (as urban Afghans call the Taliban) require girls classes to be taught only by women teachers/professors. This means educational institutions, especially the private ones need more classrooms, more teachers/professors and specialised women in each area on board. This automatically raises the costs for such institutions. How many women will you find specialised in tech or neurology in Afghanistan? The Ts dont see the need for our girls to be educated in such fields, anyways.

Unlike the last time, the Taliban came to power in 1994-95, this time, women have taken to the streets to protest against their oppression.

A generation born and raised with a lot of freedom -- of going to schools, having private school and university education, shared classes for boys and girls, of choosing their own field, owning businesses, working with the government, working with private sector, travelling to many countries and not being questioned about any of them -- is suddenly told by a group that theyre not allowed to go to their offices, universities, schools and have to stay inside until the next announcement. They are told no woman is going to be a minister or in a leadership position in the government. The women are going to react to that. I don't think the Taliban were ready for that. It's really tough for them.

There was a comment by one Taliban commander that they wanted women to stay at home because the fighters are not trained to face women.

The public is not the same as the public of 1995 who were already oppressed and lived without rights during the many years of Soviet occupation and internal wars. When you live in poverty for years and the economy's down, the first thing which comes to your mind is food. And that's it. It was a shift from one no-rights era to another no-rights era. But the public and citizens that the Taliban group is facing are citizens who have lived with freedom of speech for 20 years. There were no restrictions from the government. Now, journalists have been taken to police stations and beaten for hours. There was gunshot and firing at the site of the protest. The internet connection was restricted and banned in certain areas of Kabul. I couldn't reach my parents for more than 24 hours.

Youve pleaded with the international community to not recognise the Taliban government.

People are feeling suffocated under the Taliban regime, and they will raise their voices. Once the Taliban establish their government and it is recognised internationally, the fight for freedom and rights is going to be a longer fight. The international community is optimistic about the Ts. I urge them to be neutral, if not negative. The Taliban havent changed!

(To receive our E-paper on whatsapp daily, please click here. We permit sharing of the paper's PDF on WhatsApp and other social media platforms.)

Originally posted here:

'The fight for freedom and rights is going to be a long one': Lawyer Henaa Salehi recounts her last flight - Free Press Journal

One of the main pillars of the United Nations, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) is considered as a forum of equal representation. It is also widely known as the main debating chamber of the United Nations (UN).

The UNGA debates are one of the most awaited debates of the world that take place annually in the United States. Last year, for the first time ever, the world leaders were unable to gather face-to-face to discuss on important matters due to the coronavirus pandemic.

However, this is not the only first that has happened in the UNGA. Over the years there have been several instances where people have left their seats for a standing ovation or sometimes to leave the room out of anger. The speeches, well-delivered by experts and world leaders, can make or break relations, bring light and justice to important topics and hope for peaceful mediation of disputesbetween governments and leaders.

Here are five of the most memorable speeches and their impact:

The former Premier of the Soviet Union made it to the history of the UNGA speeches through his actions, and not words.

In 1960, Khrushchev was angered when the head of theFilipinodelegationLorenzo Sumulongreferred to "the peoples of Eastern Europe and elsewhere which have been deprived of the free exercise of their civil and political rights and which have been swallowed up, so to speak, by the Soviet Union".

This statement angered the Soviet leader who then went on to label Sumulong as "a jerk, a stooge, and a lackey". after brushing him off from the spotlight.

The debate got heated and the room burst into murmurs. Khrushchev continued making his point and started banging his fist on the podium to get the room quiet, but when all things failed, at one point, as per several reports, the Soviet leader took off his shoe and banged it on his podium.

Even in his memoir, Khrushchev made mentions of the incident, but till this date there has been no conclusion of whether or not the narrative is true to its happenings.

However, Khrushchevs angered gesture did make it to the history and became a famous gesture of overheated conversations.

Former Venezuela President, Hugo Chavez, took thespotlight when he compared the then-US President George W Bush to Satan.

"The devil came here yesterday, and it smells of sulfur still," Chavez said. "Right here! And it smells of sulfur still today. Yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, from this rostrum, the president of the United States, the gentleman I refer to as the devil came here, talking as if he owned the world."

Chavez has been openly against the United States since the beginning of his days in the office and he made sure he reiteratedthat in front of the world in the UNGA. The Venezuelan leader known for his theatrics took to the stage a day after Bush addressed the assembly and compared the POTUS and his actions to Satan.

The incident took place in 2006 and Chavez referred back to his comment in 2009 when Barack Obama had come to power. Putting himself in the spotlight again, Chavez said it "no longer smells like sulfur" now that Obama is the POTUS.

Popularly known as Colonel Qadhdhf, the Libyan leader made his debut in the UNGA in 2009. Qadhdhf had been in power for nearly 40 years but had not even once addressed the assembly.

However, in 2009 the strongman decided to make up for all the lost time and delivered a 100 minutes-long speech where everyone was shocked as well as surprised, among other emotions.

In his famous 100-minutes-long speech, Qadhdhf raised questions about several issues such as poverty, injustice, racism and more. He also accused the United States of developing the deadly Swine Flu for personal gains, and even questioned the official records of the assassination of John F. Kennedy the 35th President of the US.

He hit the ceiling when he attacked the United Nations by likening it to the notorious and infamous terrorist organisation, al Qaeda. "It should not be called a security council, it should be called a terror council," the Libyan leader said.

The former Israeli leader's name goes down in history of UNGA as the leader who used one of the most controversial virtual aid/props in the assembly.

In 2012, Netanyahu took to the podium to convince the world leaders that Iran was very close to developing a nuclear weapon. In a bid to make leaders understand his point clearly, the controversial Israeli leader took out a white board which had an illustration of a cartoon-style fizzing bomb. This bomb was divided into three parts: 70 per cent, 90 per cent and the 'final stage'. Netanyahu, with a red marking on the drawing, claimed Iran was 90 per cent ready with the nuclear weapon.

However, Tehran has always rubbished Netanyahu's claims and has reiterated time and again that it was never developing a nuclear weapon.

The infamous former President of the United States, Donald Trump, has always managed to stay in the headlines. However, in the 2017 UNGA speech, he attracted eyeballs when he threatened to "totally destroy" North Korea.

Trump started his speech by aiming directly at North Korea. He stressed on the tainted history of the country which is infamous for dictatorships, kidnapping, missile and nuclear tests, limited rights and oppression on citizens.

Reminding the world about the immoral decisions of North Korea, Trump boasted that the US will defend itself if the two countries face each other and "we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea".

The sentence was followed by murmurs around the whole assembly as the leaders looked at each other, shocked by this strong statement of Trump.

However, the former reality TV star did not stop there. Labelling the North Korean leader Kim Jong Un as the 'rocket man', Trump continued, "Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime".

After North Korea, he went to attack Iran by claiming the government had robbed the 'good people of Iran' of their destiny. "The entire world understands that the good people of Iran want change and, other than the vast military power of the United States, that Irans people are what their leaders fear the most," he claimed on behalf of Iran citizens.

Trumps attack was supported by Israels then-Prime Minister, Netanyahu.

More:

From shoe thumping to bomb drawings: Most controversial speeches at UNGA - WION

God cannot be explained, God can only be experienced. Salvation is not taught or acquired from parents, it is experienced personally. The same goes for miracles.

Revelation and Miracles

The secret of your success is divine revelation. Miracles are not obtained by knowledge or confession, they are obtained by revelation. Knowledge is good preparation for revelation. So is worship and praying in tongues. Until your understanding is opened to a particular truth, you cannot enjoy the virtue it is meant to deliver. Information is a function of the mind, but revelation is a function of the spirit. Revelation is what God is saying or revealing now concerning a specific situation, it is called rehma.

Revelation produces faith and faith produces miracles, signs, wonders, healings and breakthroughs. I pray that as I bring the word today, you will receive a revelation that will give you a miracle and a breakthrough, in Jesus Name!

Turn with me to Psalm 125:3, For the rod of the wicked shall not rest upon the lot of the righteous; lest the righteous put forth their hands unto iniquity.

The rod represents:

1. Natural symbol of Authority. Therefore the rod of the wicked represents the authority of the wicked. It is the staff of office of the wicked. Control. Ownership. This is a more serious implication.

2. Limitations. Boundaries. Boundaries and meant to prevent expansion. Satan wants to keep you and confine you within the limits he set for your forefathers. That is the reason most people are not better than their ancestors.

3. The rod of the wicked is the rod of punishment, affliction, oppression, manipulation, destruction, plagues, and instigation. This rod is used to exercise authority to inflict unjust treatment. Judges 6: 2 -6. It releases unexplainable diseases.

Even God uses a rod. Psalm 23:4 talks about the rod and staff of God. Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me. Shepherds use rods to control, direct, discipline, and protect the flock.

Why did Moses need a rod? To overthrow the forces of Egypt and establish a new authority. Here is the mystery; the rod of Moses became the rod of God. God handed His rod to a man! So when Moses arrived Egypt, he was no longer a mere man, he was operating in the God class! This rod, you will recall, swallowed up the rods of the Egyptians.

Before Moses returned to Egypt, Pharaoh and his taskmasters were in control. They ruled the children of Israel with harshness. They treated the people with cruelty. They were oppressive and brutal. They stripped them of every shred of dignity and respect. They left them poor and deprived. God sent Moses to come and put an end to their afflictions.

Your lot represents:

1. Your portion. Your territory.

2. Your fortunes, your finances.

3. Your destiny. Many people have complained to me that they are stuck. If you are not making progress, demonic powers may be at work.

4. Family. Domestic violence is a sign of the presence of a wicked authority. The devil has taken over some families completely with sickness, poverty, quarels, rebellious children, and all sorts of dysfunctions.

5. Your body or physical health. Sickness is a rod of the wicked. It must be removed.

Where the rod of the wicked is there is pain, there is hardship, there is lack, insufficiency, sickness, and all sorts of demonic affliction.

God sent His Son Jesus to come and destroy the rod of the wicked and terminate the oppression of the enemy.

Lets return to this scripture. Psalm 125:3, For the rod of the wicked shall not rest upon the lot of the righteous; lest the righteous put forth their hands unto iniquity.

shall not rest means it is programmed to expire. You see, Satan does not come for a temporary stay, he comes to stay permanently. But he is limited by divine ordinance. Satans tenure in your life has expired. Satans tenure and control over your destiny, finances, health, marriage, etc has expired, in the Name of Jesus!

What to do about the rod

1. Receive the rod of God. Get born again and filled with the Holy Spirit. Acts 1:8. It takes the anointing to destroy the yoke of the enemy. Isaiah 10: 27. Your authroity must derive from the indwelling Spirit. Understand your authority in Christ. If you are filled with the Holy Spirit, you have the anointing, use it! Do not subscribe to the the control and limitations of your ancestors through ancestral festivals, rituals and sinful cultural practices.

2. Break the rod of the wicked! Isaiah 14:5, The LORD hath broken the staff of the wicked, and the sceptre of the rulers. You break the staff of the wicked. You dont just remove it, you break it, you destroy it! And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. Matthew 11:12. You forcefully terminate the rule, the control, the oppression of the enemy. Look at Moses, he did not come to beg Pharaoh to release the children of Israel, he dealt ruthlessly with Egypt until they hastily released thier captives. Confront your problems, challenge your limitations, push boundaries using the Name of Jesus. Plead the Blood of Jesus over you and all that you have. Speak the Word of God!

3. Expel and destroy the wicked demonic powers that are oppressing you. Many Egyptians died in the plagues, their firstborns died, then their military drownd in the Red sea. You have prayed long enough, its time to fight! Not with physical weapons but with spiritual weapons.

God sent His Son Jesus to terminate and overthrow the government of the devil over your life. He came to put an end to the oppression of the wicked.

Hebrews 2:14 says, Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil. The death of Jesus was a divine strategy for destroying the devil. Jesus did not just destroy the works of the devil, He destroyed him!

I struggled for many years even as a Christian until I learnt how to break the staff of the wicked. Life changed. Your life will change today! Even the lawful captives shall be delivered!

So, its time to remove every limit. Its time to remove ancient barriers. Its time to remove ancient boundaries. Its time to end the oppression of the devil. Its time to forcefully remove the hand of the wicked from your property, your home, your body and destiny. Its time to take control!

I command every rod of the enemy in your life to be destroyed. Affliction and plague will seize from your life. Your destiny shall be fulfilled! You will prevail wherever you go in Jesus Name, amen!!

Bishop Dr Charles Olowojoba is the General Overseer of Dayspring Bible Church Worldwide with HQ in Abuja, Nigeria & President, Dayspring Christian Ministries Intl.

Read the rest here:

Destroying the rod of the wicked | Dailytrust - Daily Trust

LAHORE, Sep 15 (APP): Punjab Governor Chaudhry Mohammed Sarwar said on Wednesday the opposition would only waste its time and also of the public by taking to the streets because the government was not going to fall by such protests and elections would be held in 2023.It is not the time for personal interests but to protect national interest, he said and added thatsacrifices of Pak Army against terrorism were praiseworthy.He stated this while talking to the Chairperson Punjab Women Protection Authority Fatima Chadharr,delegates of Pakistan Tehreek e Insaaf and media here.The Governor said that people had given the mandate of five years to the government andcompleting its tenure was the constitutional and democratic right of government, adding thatthe government would complete its legal tenure and elections would be held on time.Chaudhry Mohammed Sarwar said the incumbent government believed in the rule of law andtargeting political opponents was out of the question. He further said that for the first time inthe country, transparency and supremacy of merit had been ensured at every level.He said that Tehreek e Insaaf saved Pakistan from economic crisis by making difficult decisions, and,today, economic stability of Pakistan was being acknowledged by all international institutions.Governor Punjab Chaudhry Mohammed Sarwar said that opposition parties have had protestedagainst the government in the past but the government was not intimidated by such protests.The opposition should understand that the government was stable and strong under the leadershipof Prime Minister Imran Khan and enjoyed the full support of masses.The Governor Punjab said the government would ensure all steps for the protection of womenand any kind of oppression and injustice with women would not be tolerated. An awarenesscampaign for the protection of women was also being launched in universities, he added.

Link:

Opposition protests cannot harm govt: Governor - Associated Press of Pakistan

Pakistan always desired good relations with its neighbours, but India took this wish as a weakness, President Arif Alvi said on Monday as he accused New Delhi of trying to derail Islamabads relations with Beijing.

Alvi made the remarks while addressing a joint session of Parliament to mark the start of the fourth parliamentary year of the National Assembly, the lower chamber of the bicameral parliament, amid protests from the Opposition parties.

Pakistan always desired good relations with its neighbours, but India took this wish as a weakness, Alvi said, recalling the Indian air strike on a terror camp in Pakistan in 2019.

Indias war planes pounded a Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) terrorist training camp deep inside Pakistan on February 26, 2019 in response to the Pulwama terror attack in which 40 CRPF jawans were killed.

India has told Pakistan that it desires normal neighbourly relations with Islamabad in an environment free of terror, hostility and violence. India has said the onus is on Pakistan to create an environment free of terror and hostility.

Alvi also alleged that India was doing immense injustice to the people of Kashmir. I want to make it clear to India to stop the oppression in India and fulfil the promise of self-determination (in Kashmir), he said.

Alvi said Pakistan wants peace in Afghanistan and has been playing a positive role in the war-torn neighbouring country.

Last week, the Taliban announced a hardline interim government led by Mullah Mohammad Hasan Akhund, chief of the Talibans powerful decision-making body Rehbari Shura, in Kabul. At least 14 members of the Cabinet, including acting Prime Minister Mullah Akhund, are listed on the UN Security Councils terrorism blacklist.

The Taliban announced the formation of the government just three days after the visit of Pakistans spy agency Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) chief Lt Gen Faiz Hameed to Kabul where he met the top leadership of the insurgent group.

Alvi also appreciated Chinas significant role in Pakistans progress, adding that the country held its relations with Beijing in great esteem, despite India trying to derail these relations.

We look at relations with China with great respect and want to strengthen them. I want to make it clear to India that it will never be successful in its goals and Pak-China friendship will keep strengthening, he said.

On the domestic front, Alvi said that the government in its three-year tenure put the country on a prosperous and shining future by its performance in economy, social and human development sectors as well as in the foreign policy arena.

Alvi also highlighted that a growing population was a threat and asked the people to pay attention to population control and requested the government to increase funding for this sector.

He also talked about trend of increasing violence against women: In recent days, incidents of sexual violence against women emerged due to which everyone is sad and I think it is a national responsibility to take steps to curb such incidents, he said.

Alvi, who is an ardent member of the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, said that due to the efforts of the government, Pakistans exports increased to USD 25.3 billion in 2020-21 and the national bourse, the Pakistan Stock Exchange, broke all past records and became Asias best-performing market and worlds fourth-best.

When the protest by the Opposition grew louder, Alvi told them: Despite you making noise, you will have to accept the reality.

The Opposition had announced to boycott his address due to various government policies including efforts to introduce electronic voting machines in the next election.

The Opposition lawmakers were also angry as the government had announced to introduce media related laws, including Media Development Authority, which both the media organizations and opposition parties have termed an effort to muzzle free press.

The Opposition leaders staged a walk out of the session and joined a sit-in by the media in front of the parliament building to protest against the government.

View post:

Pakistan desired good relations with neighbours, but India took this wish as weakness: President Arif Alvi - The Indian Express

Rauf Karakocan

One should think of the events of 1961, what is called the "Eyll Revolution". As every year, the Kurdistan Democratic Party, the KDP celebrated its anniversary and it even went even further. It did not see the historical background of the Kurdish people, and linked the history of the Kurds to this revolution only. History was mentioned in empty terms such as unity, inspiration, glory day, and so on. Whatever gains the Kurds have achieved, and whatever they may be, they are among the achievements of the people, and their value is more important and above all. Unfortunately, the truth is not that way.

If it is possible to explain the gains of the war against the Iraqi government, on 11 of September 1961. we must know the nature of this revolution, its historical stage, the social situation, and the form of the government today. The characteristics of the revolution, the reality of the leadership, its ideological perspective and class character, must be researched, in addition to its objectives.

The Kurdish community is a feudal society; in the 1940's when the Kurdistan Democratic Party was founded, based on religious leadership. There was a similar situation in Bar Kurdistan; Sheikh Saeed, Syed Rida, and before them Sheikh Obaidullah Nahr, Sheikh Mahmoud Barzanji, and many others, are considered among the important figures in Kurdish history. because of the character of that era. The chiefs of the clans, the religious scholars, the princes, the bakwas and the agas, were the natural leaders of that historical period; The leaders of many uprisings are clan leaders who have a say in their communities.

When one looks into the leaders of that feudal era, in terms of their leadership approach and goals, one realizes that failure is certain. Their chances of achieving political or military victory were limited. Whether this victory over world powers, or over regional occupation.

In Bar, too, the movement of the mullahs-led KDP, is the same. The Iraqi situation at that time was completely different. In 1958, Abdel Karim Kassem came to power through a military coup. He called for the independence of Iraq. Although he represented the racism of the Baath, he even made some promises in order to get the support of the Kurds and the communists. The interim Iraqi constitution contains some provisions that recognize the Kurds. He even promised autonomy, including Kirkuk. On this basis, Mulla Mustafa Barzani, who was present in the Soviet Union at the time, returned to Iraq and started the meetings.

The racist Kurdish leadership did not gain any benefit from this pervasive situation. Documents in the archives show Mustafa Barzani's reference to the Qur'an in his hand and saying, "We want a system according to this," putting the future of the Kurdish people and Kurdistan in doubt. Nor was Qassem's promises taken advantage of. They were deceived by the tricks of external forces, and the gains were destroyed once, as the method and character of that era is far from the idea of nationalism. This was followed by a major setback in 1975, and a dark page was added to the history of Bar Kurdistan.

In a statement, the KDP leadership presented two options for the people. surrender or emigration, "surrender or emigrate." Hundreds of peshmerga then committed suicide, and thousands of desperate residents left their homes, turning into refugees. The surrender and the process of humiliation paved the way for the complete defeat of Bar.

In 1979 the weapons were brought back inside, and about 700 peshmerga were killed, including Ali Askar. When the latter was arrested, along with his fellow leaders, one of the leaders of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, Sami Abdul Rahman, said: "The big man is killed with a big gun," and he killed them with a missile. The surviving peshmerga were handed over to the Turkish state, where they remained in Turkish prisons for a long time.

During the first Gulf War, which began in 1990, Saddam Hussein's government received a military strike and was subjected to international sanctions. The Bar, Kurdistan, has achieved autonomy. Under the control and protection of America and the coalition forces, the KDP and other Kurdish movements, returned from Iran. They filled the power vacuum, but could not agree on power-sharing.

The 1992 war against the Kurdistan Workers' Party, and the subsequent civil war, between the PKK and the PUK, made the Kurds even more dependent on the occupying forces.

The price of the war of treason was very high. After all these events, national unity was not achieved, and the country was never liberated.

The leader of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, and the leader of the clan, Masoud Barzani, said: "The September revolution is the largest political and military revolution that started from Kurdistan, led by the immortal Barzani, to achieve national and civil rights for the people of Kurdistan.

We have no objection to his saying, but the facts and the things that happened are not like this.

We object to the saying "the decision taken against oppression and occupation has built a strong foundation in the political, intellectual and social struggle of the Kurdistan people." She goes to the side of the occupiers, helps in the occupation of Bar, and thus enters the conflicts. That a person oppresses everyone he sees on one side, and stands against oppression on the other, these two things do not go together. What they are doing today, we do not agree with.

What the Kurds expect from the Kurdistan Democratic Party and the Barzani family, is to act according to the spirit of the so-called "September Revolution".

A

ANHA

Read the original post:

What kind of revolution is "Eyll"? - ANHA

At home, in both Europe and the United States, new counterterrorism policies and measures largely targeted Muslims, who were treated as legitimate objects of suspicion, along with other non-white populations. Building on this otherness and dangerousness, authorities have increased laws and means to monitor Muslims, and constantly ensure their adherence to so called Westen Values or, in France, Republican Values. The implementation of the state of emergency and, more broadly, the anti-terrorism policy active in France since 2015, have led to the emergence of a security Islamophobia, affecting Muslims through an anti-terrorist policy that undermines the rule of law. This is according to the Collective Against Islamophobia, whose role as an association is to provide assistance to victims of Islamophobia.[1] Moreover, the adoption of the anti-separatist law on 16 February 2021, by the French National Assembly, provided more security tools to target Muslim organizations and associations, while other organizations, such as the Collective Against Islamophobia, were dissolved.

Similarly in the UK, the British government also stigmatized Muslims through various so-called security policies such as the Prevent security program, which began to be implemented in 2005. The program allows British authorities to put under surveillance anyone who disagrees with government policy and the actions of the British state, such as opposition to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the bombing of Libya, or support to the Palestinian cause, or even opposition to British core values. Muslim students were particularly targeted in this campaign.[2]

In Europe, over the past two decades, the prohibitions on forms of Muslim veiling in various public spaces have gone from the hijab ban in French schools, and restrictions for teachers in some parts of Germany, to an outright outlawing of the face-covering niqab in public spaces in Denmark, Belgium, France, and more recently in Switzerland. This has been accompanied by rising violence targeting Muslims, mosques and Islamic symbols.[3] These developments demonstrate how anti-Muslim feelings have penetrated far beyond limited sections of society to attract wider acceptance.

Islamophobia has continued to grow in the USA and European countries over the past decade, with governments exploiting the rise of a new jihadist organization, the Islamic State (IS), together with the arrival of millions of refugees from the MENA region, to deepen their racist and repressive policies. Many of these refugees are not only fleeing the deadly repression of authoritarian and despotic regimes, such as that in Syria, but also the effects of foreign intervention. But despite having Islamophobic sentiment directed against them, some segments are also the very people who escaped the rise of the IS in Syria and Iraq, and more recently of the Taliban in Afghanistan. They add to the 20 million Muslims who call the European Union (EU) home. Against this background, increasing numbers of far right and fascistic political parties throughout the continent have scapegoated Muslims and other non-white populations. National Rally (formerly known as the National Front), the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), the English Defense League, Spains Vox Party and the Austrian Freedom Party are some of the political parties that share a common discourse and policy to rid Europe of its Muslim issue.

These far-right political movements, however, are not the ones that have implemented the racist and exclusionary policies against Muslim populations. It is the social liberal and right-wing governments that have done so. Successive center-right political leaders have repeatedly spoken against Islamist terrorism (German Chancellor Angela Merkel) and the incompatibility with European values of so-called Islamist separatism (French President Emmanuel Macron). The continuously growing Islamophobia in Europe over the past two decades is also not limited to a reaction to the terrorist Islamic State attacks or due solely to propaganda of far right groups, as claimed by mainstream media and governments. It is, above all, the result of the increasingly authoritarian and racist policies implemented by European governments. These policies have the objective of consolidating a nationalist imagination by inviting the majority ethno-racial group to unite against invented threats posed by Muslims.

Nevertheless, while leftists agree that racialization of Muslims by the right and political center is an important problem, two influential responses to it have raised tensions and contradictions that call for discussion within anti-racist, anti-imperialist movements. The first problematic response is a left adherence to a crude form of atheism that draws on a misinterpretation of Marxist ideas and negates Marxs own defense of religious rights in the context of state interference with religious freedom (1875) and Jewish civil rights (1843).

The second problematic response, and the one that has received far less examination, is that of an undiscerning support for Islamic fundamentalist movements in the region. This common response to Islamophobia by particular Western leftist figures and organizations presumes to give the people of the MENA region an essentialized Muslim identity and perpetrates a form of reverse Orientalism. Our struggle should be rooted in an internationalist progressive and humanist perspective, without leaving room for a form of orientalism in reverse which affects certain left-wing currents, in the West as in the MENA.

As Sadiq Jalal Al-Azm put it already in 1980, in this reverse orientalist perspective, ideas, beliefs, philosophical systems and ideological superstructures are sufficient to explain the laws of motion of Oriental societies and cultures.[4] Following the success of the Iranian Islamic revolution, the authors adopting this form of orientalism in reverse argued that the Arab Left is to rearrange their priorities in such a way as to stand them on their head: to give ultimate importance to the cultural and ideological factors which move the masses and to proceed to reformulate scientific, economic, and social truths on this basis.

In other words, as Gilbert Achcar explains, Orientalism in reverse shares a common core with traditional Orientalism: the essentialist view according to which religiosity is a permanent and essential phenomenon for Muslim peoples.[5] Its reversal entails that rather than a source of backwardness, Islam is seen as the necessary agent of modernization and political progress in all Muslim regions.

Forms of orientalism in reverse have found followers among some academics as well, albeit a minority view. The perspective is represented in the work of both Western and Arab scholars (for instance: Carr and Grard 1983, Roy 1985, Burgat 1995, Dot Pouillard 2009, Jensen 2009, Saad Ghorayeb 2002, Pearson and Salamey 2007) who claim that Islamic fundamentalism constitutes the Arab expression of cultural and social resistance to Western encroachment. Franois Burgat, for instance, characterises Political Islam as a need for a return to the cultural roots throughout the Muslim world. For him, political Islam is the mode of expression of cultural resistance appropriate to the Arab world the Muslim speech (le parler musulman).[6] While such figures might have correct positions in opposing Islamophobia in the West, they tend to support Islamic fundamentalist movements uncritically in the MENA, and see Islam as the essential language and culture of Muslim peoples. According to this doctrine, the driving force of history in the East is Islam and not, as in the West, economic interests, class struggles and socio-political forces.

As explained by Syrian scholar, Aziz al-Azmeh, regarding this trend of Orientalism in reverse: Islam as a culture explains in itself the affairs of Muslim communities and over-determines economic, social and political factors. It has two main protagonists, who give each other mirror images: one is the Islamic fundamentalist revivalist and politician, the other is the Western writer or actor who shares the essentialist culturalism of the first, and who raises an obscurantist discourse on the present, past and future of Muslims to the status of unquestionable knowledge: that is, the all-too-common procedure by which the essentialist reading of the past, present, and future offered by Islamic (or otherwise apologetic) political discourse is taken as adequate of the past, a diagnosis of the present, and a plan for the future of all Muslims.

Some sectors of the left, also a minority, have also advocated that Islamic fundamentalist movements such as Hamas, Hezbollah or the Muslim Brotherhoods, are anti-imperialists or represent a progressive form of Islam, and have compared them with the south American liberation theology movements that flourished in the 60s and 70s. These considerations are far from any reality, while falling into a destructive logic of the enemy of my enemy is my friend.[7]

Liberation theology and Islamic fundamentalist movements are not the same in nature and their objectives are different: liberation theology is not so much an expression of cultural identity in the sense of self-preservation vis--vis an other Western domination, as claimed by the Islamic fundamentalist movements it is more rooted in a discourse of development and emancipation of the subaltern. It has primarily mobilized the poor and exploited, while Islamic fundamentalist movements tend to target the educated middle classes and petite bourgeoisie as the main agents of political change. Islamic fundamentalist movements aim primarily to Islamize society, politics and the economy, whereas liberation theologians never intended to Christianize society, but rather to change it from the perspective of the oppressed.

It is also a mistake to see fundamentalism as some deflected expression of anti-imperialism. The fundamentalists possess a religious conception of the world, notably the goal of returning to a mythical Golden Age of Islam as a means of explaining the contemporary world and providing a solution to its problems. First of all, we should be critical of the notion that the liberation and development of Arab countries depends firstly upon an assertion of an Islamic identity posited as permanent and eternal. This is reactionary, pure and simple, and stands in stark contrast to the genuine anti-imperialist movements of the past.

Nationalists and socialists look forward to progressive social transformation of the socioeconomic structures of oppression and domination; fundamentalists instead frame the struggle as a battle of cultures and religions. They view imperialism as a conflict between Satan and the oppressed faithful, not as nationalists and socialists traditionally view it as being a conflict between great powers with their capitalist system and oppressed countries/peoples. In this regard, Islamic fundamentalists echo Samuel Huntingtons conception of the world as a clash of civilizations, where the struggle against the West is based upon a rejection of its values and religious system rather than exploitative global relations.

Thus, Islamic fundamentalist movements tend to promote the idea that the liberation and development of MENA countries depend primarily on the affirmation of their Islamic identity, which would be permanent and eternal, rather than by fighting against capitalism and imperialism. Thus, they do not have an anti-imperialist worldview. Indeed, unsurprisingly, both the jihadist and gradualist wings of Islamic fundamentalism have had imperial and regional state sponsors. As noted previously, the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan supported Islamic fundamentalist movements in Afghanistan as a tool in their interimperialist conflict with Russia against the Moscow-backed regime in Kabul. The same is true of other forms of Islamic fundamentalist forces such as the Muslim Brotherhood and/or Hezbollah. Far from consistent anti-imperialism, they have cultivated a relationship with both imperialist and regional powers. The Brotherhood was sponsored by Saudi Arabia until 1991 and more recently by Qatar, and it reached a deal with the United States in its brief period in charge of Egypt. Hezbollah is sponsored by Iran and collaborates with Russian imperialism in the Syrian counterrevolution.

This does not mean that we do not oppose imperialist and Israeli wars and interventions against states and these movements in the region. The right of resistance of the Palestinians, including military, is an inalienable right, as it is for any other population subjected to occupation, colonization, foreign intervention or authoritarian dictatorship. Israel accumulates various forms of oppression against the Palestinian population. Support for the right to Palestinian resistance, which is a matter of principle, should however not be confused by socialists with support for the political ideology of the various Palestinian political parties.

From this perspective, it is important to remember that religious fundamentalism is an international phenomenon, which is not unique to the Middle East or to predominantly Muslim societies. Similarly, a clear distinction must be made between the Islamic religion and fundamentalist groups. Organizations such as the so-called Islamic State (IS), Al Qaeda, the various branches of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hezbollah differ in their formation, development, composition and strategy. Gradualists such as the Muslim Brotherhood and Hezbollah in Lebanon participate in elections and existing state institutions. On the other hand, jihadists such as Al-Qaeda and IS view these institutions as un-Islamic and instead turn to guerrilla or terrorist tactics in the hope of a possible seizure of the state. Among the jihadists, there are also debates and divisions over tactics and strategies to achieve their goal of an Islamic state. In various historical contexts and periods, the various fundamentalist currents have sometimes collaborated and at other times have been in competition and even clashed.

Nevertheless, they defend a common political project, despite significant differences. All variants of Islamic fundamentalism share the goal of establishing a Sharia-based Islamic state that preserves the existing capitalist order. Islamic fundamentalist movements, such as Hezbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, have promoted neoliberal policies by supporting measures such as privatization, market liberalization and openness to foreign capital, while denouncing and attacking social movements below, particularly trade union movements. Islamic fundamentalist movements do not encourage policies to emancipate society, nor do they oppose neoliberal policies. On the contrary, they promote them and repress trade unions and workers. Other issues can also be discussed, such as the struggle for womens rights, the struggle against sectarianism, the role of the state, etc. This can be seen quite starkly in their attitude toward women. All trends of Islamic fundamentalism promote a sexist vision that endorses male domination and restricts women to subordinate roles in society. First and foremost, they define womens primary function as motherhood and, in particular, inculcating the next generation with Islamic principles. They impose clothing and behavior supposed to preserve womens honor and that of the family. Any straying from such norms and restrictions they consider a concession to Western cultural imperialism.

Similarly, Islamic fundamentalists hold reactionary views of LGBTQ populations, accused of destroying societies and as being a foreign import that threatens Islamic society with moral deviance and aberrant lifestyles. These types of accusations have also befallen against Marxism and more generally any actors connected to the left, which are also denounced as being a product of the West and an ideology foreign to the authentic Islamic culture. The Tunisian Islamic leader Rached Ghannouchi, head of al-Nahda, has not hesitated for instance to accuse the Tunisian General Trade Union (UGTT) of being a heritage of the French colonial period and of not being a natural institution of Muslim society.

Moreover, Islamic fundamentalist movements have not hesitated to oppose protest movements in their own countries like Hezbollah and Popular Mobilization Units respectively in Lebanon and in Iraq, while various movements connected to the Muslim Brotherhoods have been enthusiastic supporters of the Turkish authoritarian state headed by Erdogan. The various Islamic fundamentalist forces thus constitute the second wing of the counter-revolution, the first being the existing despotic regimes.

Leftists must therefore oppose Islamophobic discourse developed and maintained by Western elites, governments and media against Islamic fundamentalist movements and denounce their repression by authoritarian regimes when it is the case in certain countries. But this principled position should not prevent us from supporting and fighting for radical change in MENA societies, by developing a materialist analysis of the societal dynamics and the parties of Islamic fundamentalism that oppose by different means the continuation and deepening of revolutionary processes and radical change from below.

Source: Crisis Magazine.

Continue reading here:

Struggling against Islamophobia without lapsing into Orientalism - International Viewpoint

As the nation begins its annual celebration of Latino history, culture and other achievements, it's not too late to ask why we lump together roughly 62 million people with complex identities under a single umbrella. Peter Pencil/Getty Images hide caption

As the nation begins its annual celebration of Latino history, culture and other achievements, it's not too late to ask why we lump together roughly 62 million people with complex identities under a single umbrella.

As the headline unambiguously states, here at NPR we've kicked off Hispanic Heritage Month.

Not Latino Heritage Month. Not Latinx Heritage Month. Not even a compromise or a combination of the three: Hispanic/Latino/Latinx Heritage Month.

To be honest, NPR began to participate in the national event that is called Hispanic Heritage Month with no discussion about existing tensions within Latino communities regarding the use of the word Hispanic, its origins and whether it may be time to swap out the catchall label for something different.

Perhaps that has something to do with the rapid pace of the news recently regarding the end of a 20-year-long war in Afghanistan, another terrifying spike in the COVID-19 pandemic or this week's recall election in California.

Or, in full transparency, it could have something to do with the fact that as of 2020 only 6% of the NPR's newsroom and on-air journalists identify as Hispanic or Latino.

But it's not too late to pose the following thorny questions: What's the harm in lumping together roughly 62 million people with complex identities under a single umbrella? Is a blanket pan-ethnic term necessary to unite and reflect a shared culture that is still largely (infuriatingly) excluded from mainstream popular culture? Or the more basic question: Por que Hispanic?

Hispanic Heritage Month initially began as a weeklong celebration in 1968 under President Lyndon Johnson who, at the time said, "The people of Hispanic descent are the heirs of missionaries, captains, soldiers, and farmers who were motivated by a young spirit of adventure, and a desire to settle freely in a free land."

"This heritage is ours," he proclaimed.

It wasn't until 1988 that President Ronald Reagan extended the week to a full 31 days through Oct. 15 keeping the Sept. 15 start date because it coincides with national independence day of Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica. Similarly, Mexico celebrates on the 16th, Chile on the 18th and Belize on the 21st.

But even before Johnson landed on the term Hispanic, there was a lot of debate within government entities on how to refer to Latinos in the United States, Cristina Mora, a sociologist at the University of California, Berkeley, tells NPR.

Mora, who wrote about the adoption of the term Hispanic in Making Hispanics: How Activists, Bureaucrats, and Media Created a New American, found that use of the umbrella categorization is inextricably linked to the U.S. Census and its attempts to identify and quantify different groups of people.

The Pew Research Center reports that in the 1930s Latinos living in the U.S., regardless of their place of birth or family origin, were all noted as "Mexican" by door-to-door U.S. Census Bureau counters. It wasn't until 1970 that the agency began asking Latinos living in the U.S. to self-identify as either "Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American, Other Spanish" or "No, none of these." This, however, led to a bizarre and unexpected underrepresentation of white Americans who misunderstood the classifications. Apparently, hundreds of thousands of confused people living in the South or central regions of the U.S. mistakenly identified as Central or South American, according to Pew.

But even with the added Latino subgroups, Mora says the 1970 Census once again resulted in a severe undercount of the minority but growing population, which in turn led to a national backlash from activists, academics and civic leaders who demanded fair representation.

New groups were formed to tackle the problem, including the Census Bureau's Spanish Origin Advisory Committee and a group of Spanish-speaking federal employees called the Ad Hoc Committee on Racial and Ethnic Definitions. Mora recalls several of the options being floated at the time included "Brown," "Latin American," "Latino" and Hispanic.

"One of the problems is that Latinos were seen as foreigners, invaders and not inherently American. And one of the jobs of the advisory board was to really show that Latinos were an American minority group, like African-Americans a minority that stretched from coast to coast and that were patriotic, that fought in wars, that contributed to American history, that built American cities. So when a term like Latin American was used, right away, it seemed to strike discord because it was seen as too foreign," Mora explains.

She adds: "Hispanic was never a term that everybody loved, but it was a term that got a lot of support from within Latinos in the Nixon [administration] and, later, the Ford administration." It was eventually added to the 1980 census.

"We hated the term Hispanic because it was a term that we felt was forced upon us by the U.S. government," Paul Ortiz, author of An African American and Latinx History of the United States, tells NPR.

"It wasn't a natural fit for anyone that I knew. I didn't know anyone growing up who said, 'Oh, hey, I'm Hispanic.' It was always either, I'm Mexican, Mexican-American, Chicano or Chicana," says Ortiz, who is also a history professor at the University of Florida.

A large part of that, he says, is based on the origins of the word Hispanic, which is the English translation of the Spanish "Hispano," meaning a person whose cultural traditions originate from Spain.

When that is the starting point, he says, "That immediately erases all of the centuries of pre-Columbian history, culture and civilizations that existed before the European conquest and colonization of the Americas ... and that's understandably upsetting to people who are not white." It alienates indigenous and Afro-Latino communities whose history includes deep resistance to the Spanish invasion and is not necessarily tied to Spain, Ortiz says.

The recent popularity of the word Latinx in the U.S. presents another alternative to the contentious Hispanic label that proponents say also offers gender inclusivity. Ortiz marvels at the way it has so quickly been adapted by young people, academic institutions and corporations alike, though it is not without its own critics.

When naming his book, it was his students who suggested using Latinx in the title. "Originally it was going to be African-American and Latino History in the United States. But my students really impressed upon me the themes of inclusivity and diversity, [saying] we have to be open."

He's also noticed that in the past two years or so, many of the speaking requests he's received from corporations are for Latino or Latinx Heritage Month not Hispanic Heritage Month that includes an invitation to speak at a Deutsche Bank event later this week.

Ortiz suggests that one theory for the shift is that it is being driven by diverse employee organizations within the companies. "Almost all of them the ones that have reached out have taken on the term Latinx."

"I find this fascinating because the stereotype is that the term Latinx is being foisted upon us by academics but that's just not true," he says.

Beyond the dispute over what to name the month-long celebration, there is another concern: that in an effort to make it more palatable or commercially viable, stories of oppression, prejudice and injustice are whitewashed or ignored.

"Too often the focus is on the musical contributions or dancing or other happy artforms," Mario T. Garcia, professor of Chicana and Chicano Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara, tells NPR.

"But we also need programming that reflects historical problems ... because you can't assume that Latinos already know about the lynchings in South Texas in the 1910s," the Zoot Suit Riots, the segregation of Mexican kids in schools, or the Chicano-led high school walkouts of the 1960s that permanently changed higher education enrollment for Latino students.

In his experience, Garcia notes, the U.S. public education system does such a poor job of teaching Latino history in this country, that often Hispanic Heritage Month is the only opportunity for any students to learn about it. "It is a real shame," he says.

But approached in the right way, he adds, even these stories can be ultimately seen as happy. "Because the historic struggles of Chicanos, Mexican-Americans, other Latinos are happy stories ... because only through those struggles have we been able to achieve more social justice in this country, more education."

Read more here:

Yes, We're Calling It Hispanic Heritage Month And We Know It Makes Some Of You Cringe - NPR

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. A federal judge blocked a new Florida law today that sought to dramatically curtail free speech and the right to assembly and slash legal protections for protesters.

U.S. District Judge Mark Walker ruled that the measure is unconstitutional. Its vagueness permits those in power to weaponize its enforcement against any group who wishes to express any message that the government disapproves of, he wrote.

This decision lifts a massive weight off the shoulders of Floridians who stand united against government oppression, said Jaclyn Lopez, Florida director at the Center for Biological Diversity. Its a relief to see this law shut down so decisively thanks to the quick work of amazing advocates representing the Dream Defenders and the other plaintiffs.

Florida Senate Bill 484, filed by newly elected Sen. Danny Burgess (R-Tampa), and its companion bill, House Bill 1, filed by Rep. Juan Fernandez-Barquin (R-Miami), were proposed in January in response to Gov. Ron DeSantis call for lawmakers to limit protesters First Amendment rights to speech and assembly in the wake of Black Lives Matter protests.

The law, which was enjoined by Walker today, would:

See more here:

Federal Judge Blocks New Florida Law That Would Strip First Amendment Rights of Protesters - Center for Biological Diversity

Before declaring independence, our early leaders took their aim with thoughts of liberty. It would be later that the concept of liberty would turn into a revolution against a feudal system that did not tolerate the freedom of knowledge and representative leadership of citizens.

John Adams argued extensively against a monarchy. Along with others, he reasoned that a government holds together best when citizens understand the responsibility of their leaders. He reasoned that Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a rightand a desire to know; but besides this, they have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean of the characters and conduct of their rulers, President Adams, 1765.

The Teaching American History Project, at the Ashbrook Center says it more concisely, wherever a general knowledge and sensibility have prevailed among the people, arbitrary government and every kind of oppression have lessened and disappeared in proportion. You can therefore conclude that a lack of knowledge for the purpose of accountability of leaders leads to oppression.

It appears there is zero accountability after the unfortunate happenstance of Novembers General Election where Democrats gained a majority, albeit a thin one, in each of the branches of the Federal Government. While the Supreme Court becomes a vestige of conservative Constitutional hope, the court itself is narrowly divided and various Constitutionalist justices have on occasion disappointed conservatives. At least its something.

Losing in Afghanistan, losing at the Mexican border, losing on the streets of major cities, losing domestic oil production, losing because of inflation, losing because of tax increases that will be enacted, and in general, losing our liberty as a result. So many losing scenarios with only eight months into the Biden administration and our one-sided Congress. It appears that arbitrary government is what we have inherited, that includes intentional reversals of working policies fostered and developed during the Trump administration.

But now, its a solo show, where many Americans have zero knowledge of what is really going on. The media plays a big part in this for sure. Media bias is troubling, you might say, widespread within our culture, and is saturated in the digital world targeting new generations. Liberal leaning networks and newspapers are plenty.

Positive conservative stories are shrugged off by the major networks and digital channels and give a pass when the news is bad for Democrats. Joe Concha, a conservative commentator on Fox News and a columnist with The Hill, says the top two newspapers in the country have a track record over the past 60 plus years of endorsing Democrats. The New York Times, the paper of record, has not endorsed a Republican presidential candidate since 1956. The Washington Post in its history has never endorsed a Republican presidential candidate.

Concha also shared a recent study by Axios, an online news organization, and Survey Monkey, a polling agency, that found 80% of independents think the new media either reports news that they know to be fake or false sometimes. Is this happening because the GOP is saying it, he concludes.

But its not just the content of a story covered, its stories that highlight Democrat failures or in broader terms actions for which they need to be held accountable. No mention of any challenges, or simply no coverage about a major issue that the people need to know, is the major issue.

In any event, a free society can only police the media by its audience. Turning off liberal channels, unsubscribing from posts and online platforms or cancelling subscriptions is the only form of silencing a media voice. We accept the good and the erroneous. Even though, erroneous reporting has consequences for government, often perpetuating bad behavior by elected officials.

For example, our military prowess and expertise is suffocating at the expense of insecure political leaders. Crime is escalating in major cities; police and prosecutors are turning their backs on those committing felonies; shootings and murder in Chicago are at record levels. Hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants have crossed the Mexican border and the current administration is transporting them to new living place around the nation. Not to mention, refugees from Afghanistan are awaiting home assignments.

Who will hold Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and Chuck Schumer responsible for their actions these few months in office? Will citizens realize the damage they have done for our future? Ill leave that for you.

Editors Note: Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the editorial opinion of the Murray Ledger & Times.

Continued here:

Government holds together best when citizens understand the actions of their leaders - Murray Ledger and Times