One Language

Imagine!

Just dare to imagine every corner of the world being open to you. Imagine travelling from China to Lithuania, and being able to ask for a cup of tea without the need of an interpreter or book. Imagine, travelling from India to Africa and not feel a foreigner lost in a world of unknown sounds, of unintelligible blab, a planet with a common platform of expression.

A common platform of expression. How realistic is that? How will this concept impact interactions between individuals and between individuals and society? The tool to be used is common sense. Since society has at its core individuals and communication a common platform is essential in reversing social fragmentation. Mind  you, we are talking about a unified means of expression rather than replacing core cultural values.

Breaking the strike

Democracy, elections, freedom of speech, individual rights: pillars of a healthy, ideal society. Or, so it is in theory, where one can just a chose the perfect model of democracy, with the perfect model of elections, with the ideal model of a voter/individual. But what do you get when you translate all this in reality, when you remove the faulty premise that all is built around the perfect individual? What do you get when you intersect interest groups and elections? And what do you get when your individual rights are in conflict with the interests of a group?

We are in Cyprus, and the year is 2013. Let us say I am an immigrant worker (just a generic construction worker) somewhere in Paphos. I think I am legally working (though I am not sure – every time I ask my boss about my “asphalia” he goes crazy, calls me names and threatens me with dismissal, and I don’t have the guts to report it since the times are rough and I know I will end up surely being dismissed anyway). I never work only 8 hours/day (even though that was the initial agreement), and every time it rains I do not work and therefore do not get paid for that day. Let us say also that a certain interest group declares a strike in the name of all… construction workers. And slowly I start to get squeezed in a corner: I express solidarity and run the risk of starving my family, or break the strike (which, anyway, is a political game where I am just a pawn, serving somebody else’s interests).
 

“BUILDERS continued their island wide, indefinite strike yesterday with no apparent end in sight as trade unions SEK, PEO and DEOK have threatened that measures may escalate.
In a statement released yesterday, PEO gave its full support to the builders in their fight against their employers.
“For a long time, employers in the construction industry in Cyprus, citing the crisis and difficulties in the industry, have started an attack on the working class. They have systematically dismissed large numbers of workers and replaced them with cheap labor, increasing unemployment and the impoverishment of the families of thousands of workers,” the statement said.
The builders have organized demonstrations for today after the decision to continue their strike was made yesterday during meetings across Cyprus. They criticized their employers for taking advantage of cheap foreign workers, essentially taking the industry back ten years and destroying the trade union movement.
The central council of the Building Contractors' Association in Cyprus will meet today to consider a proposal from the Labor Ministry.”

Source: Cyprus Mail

Let us say that I decided to break the strike. It is my right to do so. It is everyone’s right to protest, as it is mine to pursue my interests. But it is almost impossible. I spoke with friends and acquaintances about it, and no one dares to break it. The amount of threats they received scared them enough to comply, while in some cases violence was used to stop people from working. I tried to search news about it online: nothing! I search the printed press: nothing! In Paphos, Paralimni, Larnaca I can personally count at least 6 events of this nature, with only one incident (in Paphos) being reported in an obscure “property news” website. What is the guardian of democracy – the press doing? Are they sleeping on the job? Yes, the news about the negotiations are interesting, and yes, the workers are entitled to protest, but how about individual rights? Is the syndicate becoming a mafia organization, building itself on intimidation?

Some might argue that there is no connection between syndicates and the threats, but I cannot see it any other way, not when for almost every attempt to break the strike there was a gang showing up at the working site with clubs and metal rods, ready to show they mean business.

We are talking about social dialog, but that is taking place only among government and those affiliated with a movement or syndicate, and that leaves out individuals whose dignity, rights and even physical integrity may be threatened in the process.
I do not defend immigrant workers (on the contrary, the fact that some accepted to work for illegally, for little money is part of the problem; in this way employers learned that abuses -towards the state and workers- are allowed, especially since the control entities are so weak and corruptible), nor the government or the strike, but I do want to point fingers at all groups. As long as you forget the discrete composition of society, you will just argue interests of one organization, and as long as you fail to show solidarity with your peers you cannot expect improvement in you work condition, and you fail to protect one’s right to disagree you cannot claim you have a healthy society, and inalienable rights for its participants. We cannot allow freedom to exist only in historical speeches, we need it to be part of our day to day life, and we need government to protect it, and syndicate to respect it.

Today, in modern Europe, we cannot afford to have such issues, while preaching others over democracy, while advocating pacifism and non violence. We cannot fix problems by creating others. We cannot forget about each one of us.

What Muslims should actually be angry about - The Commentator

"There are many things that could legitimately offend people of the Islamic faith - YouTube videos, teddy bears, and cartoons are not included

Do people have their priorities straight?

In this age of riots, murders, and embassy lynchings over YouTube videos, teddy bears, and cartoons, it is worth highlighting the politicised, selective, and hypocritical nature of such Islamist-inspired fury. There are many things that should offend those who are seemingly shocked by benign and ignorable mockery of religion. These include:
- The systematic destruction of Islam's heritage in the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. Since the Saudi royal family conquered the Hijaz region, mausoleums, mosques, grave yards, and other significant buildings connected to the history of Islam and the Prophet Muhammad and his companions have been bulldozed to make way for motorways, shopping centres and five star hotels.
- The fact that the Tehreek-e-Taliban (TTP) in Pakistan continue to blow up girls’ schools and violently attack young teenage girls for wanting to attend them.
- The systematic persecution of Ahmedis, Shias, Christians, Hindus, and other minorities in Pakistan who, if not being accused of blasphemy, are being hunted down by thugs claiming to be inspired by Islam.
- The destruction and vandalism visited upon the ancient city of Timbukto. Since the al-Qaeda affiliated Ansar al Dine took over the city, mosques have been attacked, mausoleums raided, and other holy sites destroyed, including tombs of great saints.
- The systematic and widespread practise of female genital mutilation (FGM) that Muslim clerics in North and East Africa defend and promote. A practise that is vile, disgusting, inhumane, and recognised as such around the world.
- The hysterical anti-Semitism that emanates from pulpits all over the Middle East. A form of bigotry that is largely accepted and rarely goes challenged.
- The destruction of Buddist temples and Christian churches in Indonesia that has increased since Islamist parties have begun to make gains in South East Asia.
- The destruction of the Bamiyan statues in Afghanistan by the Taliban, statues that stood for hundreds of years and held great significance for Buddhists around the world.
These are the grievances that should inspire protests and anger but alas they are ignored in favour of ones that can be attributed to the evil West and Israel, however fictitious and spurious the linkages.
The selective nature of the outrage thus points to a much deeper malaise infecting the minds of the faithful. A political narrative is at the heart of this and it is a narrative that provides simple answers, deflection, and solace at a time when the faithful should be doing some long overdue soul-searching and confronting their own shortcomings.
Gravitation towards a grievance and victimhood culture is the easy option because it doesn't compel Muslims to ask the difficult questions such as why we preside over some of the most corrupt, unequal, sexist, dysfunctional, and authoritarian societies on earth.
Instead, Islamist parties, seeking to galvanise the masses behind their apocalyptic message, encourage Muslims to look west and seek answers in the foreign policies of the US and the UK. Unfortunately, many Western leftists also encourage this defeatist and self-deprecating trend in the vain hope that it supports their cause.
The primary victims of this phenomenon are Muslims themselves who are left dis-empowered and undermine their own agency by placing all responsibility elsewhere. The winners are Islamists and Jihadists who continue to wage war against art, culture, women, and vulnerable minorities, safe in the knowledge that most Muslims are distracted by their obsession with the next Danish cartoon or American YouTube clip.
It is not easy to initiate rational conversation in such a context – ask those who have tried.
Ghaffar Hussain is a counter terrorism expert and Contributing Editor to The Commentator. Follow him on Twitter @GhaffarH "

Full article can be seen here: What Muslims should actually be angry about - The Commentator:

Tolerating Intolerance

No need to say much, the clip says more about intolerance than I can say in a thousand words.

 It happens in Sweden, the country that offered asylum to many people in suffering (at one point in their life), that became citizens of that country. Now, some of those very people are present in this video, attacking core values of the democratic society that gave them shelter, food, medicine and respect.

LiveLeak.com - Muslim student go crazy in campus showing anti-Islamic amateur film in Sweden 2012

The world is huge, and nobody is forcing you to watch the movie if you find it offensive  You can chose to be a good human being, mind your own business, while others mind theirs, or you can chose to be policing cultural events, like a good fundamentalist muslim.

If you chose to tell me what to say, think or do, than I will say to you "Get over it! Grow up!"
"According to my standards, your prophet, despite his "divine" credentials, is a murderer, pedophile and a rapist. Yelling at me, threatening me, blackmailing me, or attacking me into submission will not work!"

America's nonreligious population on the rise — RT

Well, some are worried, some are not... Some would say it's a bad thing, some would say it was about time. 

"The number of religiously unaffiliated Americans has risen, while Protestants are for the first time ever no longer a majority, a study reveals. The so-called “nones” vote primarily Democratic, giving Obama a boost in the upcoming election.
The survey, conducted by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and released on Tuesday, says one in five Americans describe themselves as atheists and agnostics, or choose not to identify themselves as religiously affiliated when it comes to their faith. The figure is an increase from the 15 per cent reported five years ago.
The number of Protestant adults in America has reached a low of 48 per cent — the first time Pew has reported the share to be under at least one half of the nation. Catholics account for 22 per cent of the adult American population, with the remaining 10 per cent divided between other faiths and those who replied that they were unsure.
Senior Pew researcher Greg Smith says the change comes at a time when older, traditionally more religious generations are being gradually replaced with younger people who are less religious and more likely to question religious institutions. While most of the "nones" believe the church can do good to society by bringing communities together and helping the poor, they also say it is too focused on money, power and politics.
The change may also be attributed to the way people discuss religion, especially those who seldom or never attend religious services. While in a 2007 Pew report some of them still identified with a religious group, the latest findings show people more often speak about their spiritual connection with nature and the Earth – and even pray daily – but still say they are "not religious.” The report says the increase has occurred across all income and education levels and both genders. When it comes to ethnicity, though, the growth is more significant among the country's white population.
The trend has clear political implications. Americans with no religion tend to vote for Democrats, support reproductive rights and marriage equality, while Republicans traditionally rely on more religious voters, according to the survey. John Green, a political science professor at the University of Akron in Ohio, says the rise of the "nones" could reshape the political landscape in the US, with unaffiliated Americans becoming "the single largest faith-based or religious group.”“It may be in the near future that the unaffiliated vote will be as important to the Democratic Party coalition as the traditionally religious are to the Republican Party coalition,” he adds.
The growth in the number of "nones" is not expected to stop, or even slow down. Pew researchers say unaffiliated young adults are not expected to become more religiously active as they age.
Even so, the US remains one of the most religious developed nations. Fifty-eight percent of Americans say religion is very important in their lives – twice as much as in many European states."

For original article, follow the link: America's nonreligious population on the rise — RT

Reuters: Libyan Islamist militia swept out of Benghazi bases | Reuters

It takes courage to stand up for something. It takes even more courage to do it when when you stand up against a group known for its violence, with a fundamentalist understanding of religion and politics, that has the tools, financing and support to enforce its views by way of murder, terror and intimidation. It is one of the first signs of real freedom we actually see. We know that the revolution against Gaddafi was confiscated by fundamentalists, for they had the weapons; no ordinary citizen (without a political agenda) would carry a weapon as they have no use for it. We know that control is exercised through militias (no need to inform you about their allegiance), and those groups influence politics (even if it is not the voice of majority) in a game of veiled blackmail for "security".

It is a sign for the government that they need to rush expansion of its own security services, to minimize its reliance on these (at best) militias, if they want a stable, functioning state as soon as possible. And a stable functioning state exists when law and order is enforced by the general rule of law, not of divided, subject to interpretations, corruption and ones interes, ad-hoc decree.

Full article:

An Islamist militia was driven out of the city of Benghazi early on Saturday in a surge of anger against the armed groups that control large parts of Libya more than a year after the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi.

"A spokesman for Ansar al-Sharia, which some U.S. and Libya officials blame for the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi last week in which the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans were killed, said it had evacuated its bases "to preserve security in the city".
In a dramatic sign of Libya's fragility, after sweeping through Ansar's bases the crowd went on to attack a pro-government militia, believing them to be Islamists, triggering an armed response in which at least 11 people were killed and more than 60 wounded. The invasion of Ansar al-Sharia's compounds, which met little resistance, appeared to be part of a sweep of militia bases by police, troops and activists following a large demonstration against militia units in Benghazi on Friday. Demonstrators pulled down militia flags and set a vehicle on fire inside what was once the base of Gaddafi's security forces. Hundreds of men waving swords and even a meat cleaver chanted "Libya, Libya", "No more al Qaeda!" and "The blood we shed for freedom shall not go in vain!"

"After what happened at the American consulate, the people of Benghazi had enough of the extremists," demonstrator Hassan Ahmed said. "They did not give allegiance to the army. So the people broke in and they fled.
"This place is like the Bastille. This is where Gaddafi controlled Libya from, and then Ansar al-Sharia took it over. This is a turning point for the people of Benghazi."
Adusalam al-Tarhouni, a government worker who arrived with the first wave of protesters, said several pickup trucks with Ansar fighters had initially confronted the protesters and opened fire. Two protesters were shot in the leg, he said. "After that they got into their trucks and drove away," he said. Protesters had freed four prisoners found inside.

Libya's government had promised Washington it would find the perpetrators of what appeared to be a well planned attack on the U.S. consulate, which coincided with protests against an anti-Islam video and the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.

PRESSURE ON OBAMA
The attack and the outrage directed at the United States over the video across the Muslim world raised questions about President Barack Obama's handling of the so-called Arab Spring. Although Ansar al-Sharia denies any role in the consulate attack, the latest events in the cradle of Libya's revolution appeared at least in part to vindicate Obama's faith in Libya's nascent democracy.

"The killing of the ambassador, and a preceding set of serious security incidents, are a wake-up call to the new government to actually start to improve security," said Oliver Miles, former British ambassador to Libya. "And now they've got backing from the street in Benghazi to do just that."
Libyan political scientist Ahmad al-Atrash told Reuters: "People in Benghazi and all over Libya want to get these militias under control ... The overwhelming feeling is against any element that keeps the situation unstable." The second half of Friday night's protest proved his point.
Continuing to chant anti-Ansar slogans, the crowd, swelling into the thousands, moved on to attack a separate compound where the powerful pro-government Rafallah al-Sahati militia, safeguarding a big weapons store, opened fire on the assailants. As looters later tried to leave the scene, vigilantes wielding clubs and machetes tried to prevent them driving off with heavy weapons. Officials at three hospitals told a Reuters correspondent they had a total of five dead and more than 60 wounded from the night's violence. Police found six more dead bodies near the compound on Saturday morning, police officer Ahmed Ali Agouri said. "We came as peaceful protesters. When we got there they started shooting at us," student Sanad al-Barani said. "Five people were wounded beside me. They used 14.5 mm machineguns." Nasser Abdelhaaq, a Rafallah al-Sahati commander, said the brigade had returned to their compound on Saturday morning. He suggested that the crowd had been deliberately manipulated to turn on Rafallah al-Sahati, an officially approved militia that also has Islamist leanings. "Twenty-five percent of those who came were there as saboteurs," he said. "Some of them, we know who they are, they were working with Gaddafi's security brigades." While the compound was being looted, the government texted Benghazi mobile phones asking citizens to go home and "not allow saboteurs to destroy your noble and successful demonstration".

RELIANT ON MILITIAS
Libya's new rulers know that, while militias pose the biggest threat to their authority, the state's weak security forces rely on former rebel units, armed with heavy weapons, that fought in the uprising. Like the rest of Libya, Benghazi is still prowled by dozens of armed groups operating openly, usually with the official permission of a government that is powerless to stop them.
Ansar al-Sharia's overt Benghazi presence was never huge. But it was one of the few groups operating openly without official licence. Its leaders proclaim democratic government to be incompatible with Islam, and the presence on the streets of pickup trucks bearing their Kalashnikov logo was an affront to the government's authority. Ansar al-Sharia and other Islamist militias have bases elsewhere in eastern Libya, notably around the coastal city of Derna, known across the region as a major recruitment centre for fighters who joined the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria.

The attack on the U.S. consulate seems to have provided a strong impetus for local authorities to rally support behind the weak national government. Thousands of Libyans marched in Friday's "Rescue Benghazi Day" in support of democracy and against Islamist militias. "It's obvious that this protest is against the militias. All of them should join the army or security forces as individuals, not as groups," student Ahmed Sanallah said. "Without that, there will be no prosperity and no success for the new Libya."
U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens was well liked, and many Libyans condemned the attack on the consulate despite being angered by the anti-Islamic U.S.-made film that triggered it. Some protesters' placards read: "We demand justice for Stevens" and "Libya lost a friend". Others had mixed views. "I am out today to defend Benghazi. Killing the ambassador is a completely separate thing," said 26-year-old Amjad Mohammed Hassan, a network engineer. "I don't give a damn about the killing of the ambassador because the Americans offended the Prophet. I am just here for Benghazi."


(Additional reporting by Omar al-Mosmary, Mohammed Al-Tommy; Writing by Marie-Louise Gumuchian; Editing by Kevin Liffey)"

Original article can be found here: Libyan Islamist militia swept out of Benghazi bases | Reuters

To Kill or Not to Kill?... (the Video)

Or, learning how to bow before fundamentalism Islam.

    "Sam Bacile" is famous over night. His clip on YouTube is a big hit. I saw it, and it is plain rubbish, artistically speaking. But that doesn't matter, when it is about Islam and its Prophet it is like dropping salt on a wound and the muslim world goes crazy. we should have gotten used with this by now, nothing offends them more then a bit of a mockery. Not the hideous crimes produced in the name of islam, not the injustice it spreads, but a cartoon, a movie or a declaration. Is there a word to express this out of scale hypocrisy? If not, we can call it islamic.

    Some say, it is a calculated attempt to inflame, by an Israeli agency, some say it is the product of a deluded mind, while I say it doesn't even matter who and why made the movie. It's a bad movie, no one would ever see it outside this particular inflamed situation, or give it any particular attention. It's so bad that it feels like kids trying their hand at theater for the first time, at the first rehearsal, in kindergarten. But nobody has the right to call for murder over this, NOBODY!  And one person thought to be involved is investigated, for issues unrelated to the content of the clip (investigating him for bad taste?!... or, maybe a little intimidation?). And this is done not by Syrian authorities, but by American. We claim to be living in a free world, we claim to have free speech, we claim to be the very tip of civilization, and this should not happen, it is an right that defines (or should define) our society. Moreover, freedom of speech gives fundamentalist the freedom to call for murder (a criminal act itself), the very right they want to suppress.We cannot evolve with a fist deep in our mouths.

It gets even more ridiculous.
    Not long ago, one title in the news drew my attention about a possible "help" to Egypt worth around 700 millions euros could come from European Union. Even with the situations developing in Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Italy, Europe has money to spare. Aren't we in a deep crisis? Let's even assume that we can call it a strategic move and Egypt needs the help. But don't we know enough already about the Muslim Brotherhood? Is Europe ready to trust such entity?
How about the United States, Egypt and Libya? Egypt is a lost cause, and America knows it... in Libya, just recently, support was given to groups that now will probably become a new enemy. One ambassador is already down, victim of the first open engagement. Chris Stevens is only the first open, high ranking victim, but he is not the first, nor the last.. Will that chain of victims of fundamentalism ever end?

    Will we ever have reasonable people on that side of the religious wall? Will they be able to stir extremism within the boundaries of reason, universal morality and real desire for peace and understanding? Will we be able to make really bad movies and not get killed? I am laughing while tears fall down my cheeks...