While the Prince Is Away . . .Saudi Arabia's religious police crack down.

SINCE MAY 27, THE Saudis have arrested eight Christians from India and seized documents naming others. One of those arrested, Chittirical John Thomas, was pulled away from work and beaten in front of his five-year-old son. He is reportedly in the Shemaissy Detention Center.

This followed the March 22 arrest in the Batha area of Riyadh of Indian pastor Samkutty Varghese by the religious police, the muttawa, for not ending a cell phone conversation when the call for Muslim prayer went out. Rev. Varghese, who went to Saudi Arabia as a tourist in January, was apparently not aware of rules forbidding calls at such times. He is still being held, and there are reports that he has been sentenced to ten months in prison, as well as to a flogging.

The muttawa were unusually busy while Crown Prince Abdullah was away in Texas visiting President Bush. On April 23, they arrested 40 Pakistani Christians who were engaged in a joint Catholic-Protestant meeting in a home. On April 29, they arrested five Christians from an Ethiopian and Eritrean group who had gathered for prayer.

Sources in Saudi Arabia believe that authorities there are using the information they have gathered from these raids in order to organize crackdowns elsewhere in the country. Saudi security officials are busily arresting people whose phone numbers were found in Rev. Varghese's diary.

Despite the Saudis' expressions of concern over press reports that U.S. officials at Guantanamo Bay desecrated Korans, their own security authorities have destroyed Bibles found among the victims' possessions, just as they destroyed religious artifacts found in a raid on a makeshift Hindu shrine found in an apartment in Riyadh on March 24.

Apart from persecution of Christian, Hindu, and other foreign workers, Saudi Arabia continues to persecute Shiites and other Muslims who do not follow the repressive Wahhabi version of Islam that is the state religion of the country. Authorities have arrested migrant workers for "allegedly practicing Sufism." And that's not all.

On May 15, three Saudi men--Ali al-Demaini, Abdullah al-Hamed, and Matruk al-Faleh--were sentenced to between six and nine years in jail for calling for a transition to a constitutional democracy. One of the charges against them was that they used "Western terminology" in seeking reforms. Essentially this was an accusation of blasphemy, with the clear implication that advocating democracy and human rights is somehow "un-Islamic."

The center for Democracy and Human Rights in Saudi Arabia reports that Demaini's wife, Fawzi Al-Ouni, says, "My husband received the harshest sentence because he had claimed that the al Qaeda violence that had been plaguing the country was the result of the dominance of the strict Wahhabi version of Islam in Saudi Arabia, to the exclusion of others." Saudi Arabia's persecution of people peacefully following their own beliefs belies all its claims and advertisements that it is curbing and combating religious hatred and extremism.

In September 2004, the State Department for the first time followed the recommendation of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom that Saudi Arabia be designated a "Country of Particular Concern" under the International Religious Freedom Act. However, despite the fact that the State Department has reported that Religious Freedom "does not exist" in Saudi Arabia, it has so far declined to recommend any sanctions against the regime.

President Bush is currently winning much goodwill among Middle Eastern democracy activists for his continued push for political change, even by longstanding allies such as Egypt's President Mubarak. One reason that there is such ferment and debate is that reformers now believe, or hope, they can no longer be quietly dragged off to a cell while the world ignores them. If America now indicates that oil-producing allies such as Saudi Arabia are just too important to challenge, it will reinforce the region's authoritarians and dampen hopes for further change.

Hence, the United States should--at a minimum--follow the commission's recommendation and deny visas to Saudis who carry out or authorize violations of religious freedom, as well as those who propagate religious hatred. It should redouble investigations of Saudi funding and support for propagating religious hatred in the Muslim world and elsewhere, including in the United States. This would signal a genuine commitment to democracy and curtail one of the strongest threats to political freedom worldwide.

Paul Marshall is a senior fellow at Freedom House's Center for Religious Freedom in Washington, and editor of the just-released Radical Islam's Rules: The Worldwide Spread of Extreme Sharia Law.

Source: http://www.secularislam.org/humanrights/compatible.htm

Is Islam Compatible With Democracy and Human Rights?

" Islam has never favoured democratic tendencies..."
Hurgronje [277]

" The Democratic system that is predominant in the world is not a suitable system for the peoples of our region... The system of free elections is not suitable to our country"
King Fahd of Saudi Arabia

At least King Fahd has had the honesty to admit the incompatibility of Islam and Democracy. Meanwhile Western Islamic apologists and modernising Muslims continue to look for democratic principles in Islam and Islamic history.

[A] Human Rights and Islam

Let us look at the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 and compare it to Islamic law and doctrine.

Article 1 " All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood ".

Article 2 " Everyone is entitled to all rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status ".

Article 3 " Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person "

Article 4 No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms "

Comments: (1) Women are inferior under Islamic law; their testimony in a court of law is worth half that of a man; their movement is strictly restricted, they cannot marry a non-Muslim

(2) Non - Muslims living in Muslim countries have inferior status under Islamic law, they may not testify against a Muslim. In Saudi Arabia, following a tradition of Muhammed who said " Two religions cannot exist in the country of Arabia ", non _ Muslims are forbidden to practice their religion, build churches, possess Bibles etc.

(3) Non-believers -- atheists (surely the most neglected minority in history) -- in Muslim countries do not have "the right to life ". They are to be killed. Muslim doctors of law generally divide sins into great sins and little sins. Of the seventeen great sins, unbelief is the greatest, more heinous than murder, theft, adultery etc..

(4) Slavery is recognised in the Koran. Muslims are allowed to cohabit with any of their female slaves (Sura iv.3); they are allowed to take possession of married women if they are slaves (Sura iv.28); the helpless position of the slave as regard his master illustrates the helpless position of the false gods of Arabia in the presence of their Creator (Sura xvi.77).

Article 5 No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Comments (1) We have seen what punishments are in store for the transgressers of the Holy Law: amputations, crucifixion, stoning to death, floggings. I suppose a Muslim could argue that these were not unusual for a Muslim country, but what of their inhumanity? Again a Muslim could contend that they are of divine origin and must not be judged by human criteria. By human standards, they ARE inhuman.

Article 6 Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

The whole notion of a person who can make choice, and can be held morally responsible is lacking in Islam; as is the entire notion of human rights.

Articles 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 deal with the rights of an accused person to a fair trial.

Comments (1) As Schacht has shown under the Sharia considerations of good faith, fairness, justice, truth, and so on play only a subordinate role. The idea of criminal guilt is lacking.

(2) Revenge for a killing is officially sanctioned, though a money recompense is also possible.

(3) The legal procedure, under Islam, can hardly be called impartial or fair, for in the matter of witnesses all sorts of injustices emerge. A non _Muslim may not testify against a Muslim. For example, a Muslim may rob a non _Muslim in his home with impunity if there are no witnesses except the non_ Muslim himself. The evidence of Muslim women is admitted only very exceptionally and then only from twice the number required of men.

Article 16 deals with the rights of marriage of men and women

Comment (1) As we shall see in our chapter on women, women under Islam do not have equal rights: they are not free to marry whom they wish, the rights of divorce are not equal.

Article 18 " Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance ".

Comments (1) Quite clearly under Islam, one does not have the right to change one's religion, if one is born into a Muslim family. Applying double standards, Muslims are quite happy to accept converts to their religion, but a Muslim may not convert to another religion, this would be apostasy which is punishable by death. Here is how the great commentator Baydawi (c.1291) sees the matter:

" Whosoever turns back from his belief, openly or secretly, take him and kill him wheresoever you find him, like any other infidel. Separate yourself from him altogether. Do not accept intercession in his regard ".

Comment (2) Statistics on conversions from Islam to Christianity, and therefore apostasy, are hard to establish for obvious reasons. There is, however, a myth that Muslims are impossible to convert. On the contrary we do have enough evidence of literally thousands of Muslims abandoning Islam for Christ from the Middle Ages to Modern Times; the most spectacular cases being, amongst others, those of Moroccan and Tunisian princes in the 17th century, of the monk Constantin the African. Count Rudt - Collenberg has found evidence at the Casa dei Catecumeni at Rome of 1087 conversions between 1614 and 1798.According to A.T. Willis and others between two or three million Muslims converted to Christianity after the massacres of the communists in Indonesia, in 1965, described earlier [chapter x] In France alone, in the 1990s, there are two or three hundred converts to Christianity from Islam, EACH YEAR. According to Ann Mayer, in Egypt conversions have been " occurring with enough frequency to anger Muslim clerics and to mobilize conservative Muslim opinion behind proposals to enact a law imposing the death penalty for apostasy "[Mayer177]. Ms. Mayer points out that, in the past, many women have been to tempted to convert from Islam to ameliorate their lot.

Comment (3) Those who convert to Christianity and choose to stay in the Muslim country do so at great personal danger. The convert has most of his rights denied him, identity papers are often refused him, so that he has difficulties leaving his country; his marriage is declared null and void, his children are taken away from him to be brought up by Muslims, and he forfeits his rights of inheritance. Often the family will take matters into their own hands and simply assassinate the apostate; the family are, of course, not punished. [Gaudeul]

Article 19 " Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinion without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers ".

Comments (1) The rights enshrined in articles 18 and 19 have been consistently violated in Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. In all three countries, the rights of their Bahai, Ahmadi and Shia minorities respectively have been denied. All three countries justify their actions by reference to Sharia. Christians in these countries are frequently arrested on charges of blasphemy and their rights denied.

Here is how Amnesty International describes the scene in Saudi Arabia: " Hundreds of Christians, including women and children have been arrested and detained over the past three years, most without charge or trial, solely for the peaceful expression of their religious beliefs. Scores have been tortured, some by flogging, while in detention... The possession of non_ Islamic religious objects - including Bibles, rosary beads, crosses and pictures of Jesus Christ __ is prohibited and such items may be confiscated. " AINO 62 JUly / Aug 1993

Similarly scores of Shia Muslims have been harassed, arrested, tortured and in some cases, beheaded. For example, on September 3, 1992 Sadiq Abdul Karim Malallah was publicly beheaded in al- Qatif after being convicted of apostasy and blasphemy. Sadiq, a Shia Muslim, was arrested in 1988 and charged with throwing stones at a police station, then of smuggling a Bible into the country. He was kept in solitary confinement, where he was tortured.

The situation of Ahmadis in Pakistan is somewhat similar. The Ahmadiyya movement was founded by Mirza Ghulam Ahmed (died 1908), who is regarded as a prophet by his followers Amnesty International [ASA / 33 / 15 / 91] summed up their situation in this manner:

"Ahmadis consider themselves to be Muslims but they are regarded by orthodox Muslims as heretical because they call the founder of the movement al- Masih [the Messiah]: this is taken to imply that Mohammad is not the final seal of the prophets as orthodox Islam holds, i.e. the prophet who carried the final message from God to humanity. According to Ahmadis their faith does not involve the denial of the Prophet Mohammad's status because Mirza Ghulam Ahmed did not claim to bring a new revelation of divine law which could add to, replace or supersede the Koran. Mirza Ghulam Ahmed considered himself a mahdi, a reappearance of the Prophet Mohammad, and thought it his task to revive Islam. As a result of these divergences, Ahmadis have been subjected to discrimination and persecution in some Islamic countries. In the mid- 1970s, the Saudi Arabia-based World Muslim League called on Muslim governments worldwide to take action against Ahmadis. Ahmadis are since then banned in Saudi Arabia."

Throughout Pakistan's history, the Ahmadis have been subjected to harassment, which has, on occasion, led to serious bloodshed. Things got worse for them, when President Zia - ul Haq came to power in 1977 after a military coup. He introduced a policy of Islamization, and imposed severe restrictions on the Ahmadis. In 1984, further legislation was introduced aimed explicitly at these so - called heretics. Henceforth, the Ahmadis could no longer call themselves Muslims. Since then, scores of Ahmadis have been charged and sentenced severely under sections of the Pakistan Penal Code. Thus Ahmadis can be imprisoned and even sentenced to death solely for the exercise of their right to freedom of religion including the right to express their religion. Again, it is important to realise that such attitudes to " heretics " is a logical consequence of the orthodox Muslim position that Muhammad is the seal of the Prophets, that Islam is the most perfect and final expression of God's purpose for all mankind, and that salvation outside Islam is not possible.

Comment (2) Blasphemy towards God and the Prophet are punishable by death under Islam. In modern times, blasphemy has simply become a tool for Muslim governments to silence opposition; or for individuals to settle personal scores; or, as we saw earlier, to seek out and punish " heresy ". A report in the Economist points out the manipulation of "blasphemy " in Pakistan: " A judgment by the High Court in Lahore is worrying Pakistan's Christians. The court decided recently that Pakistan's blasphemy laws are applicable to all the prophets of Islam. Jesus is a prophet in Islamic teaching. By worshipping Jesus as the son of God, Christians are, it could be argued, committing a blasphemy....There are about 1.2 [million] Christians in Pakistan, out of a population of 120 [million]. Many of them are of low caste, doing menial jobs. Some have suffered for their beliefs. Tahir Iqbal, a mechanic in the air force who converted to Christianity and was charged with blasphemy, mysteriously died in prison while awaiting trial. Manzoor Masih was accused of blasphemy, given bail and shot dead in the street.... Human -rights watchers say there is often sectarian and political rivalry, a dispute over property or competition for jobs " [May 7, 1994]

Article 23.1 Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.

Comment (1) Women are not free to choose their work under Islam, certain jobs are forbidden to them, even in so - called liberal Muslim countries. Orthodox Islam forbids women from working outside the home. [see Chapter x]

Comment (2) Non - Muslims are not free to choose their work in Muslim countries, or rather certain posts are not permitted them. A recent example from Saudi Arabia makes the point. A group of Muslims working in a company owned by a Muslim were shocked when the Muslim owner appointed a new manager, who was a Christian. The Muslims demanded a religious ruling asking whether it was permissible under Islam to have a Christian in authority over them. Sheikh Mannaa K. Al Qubtan at the Islamic Law College of Riyadh declared that it was intolerable under Islam that a non - Muslim should wield authority over Muslims. He pointed to two verses from the Koran to back up his argument: Sura iv. 141: " Allah will not give the disbelievers triumph over the believers " Sura lxxiii.8: Force and power belong to God, and to His Prophet, and to believers "

Article 26 deals with the right of education.

Comment (1) Again certain fields of learning are denied to women (see chapter x)

Conclusion: It is clear that Islamic militants are quite aware of the incompatibility of Islam and The 1948 Declaration of Human Rights. For these militants met in Paris in 1981 to draw up an Islamic Declaration of Human Rights which left out all freedoms that contradicted Islamic law. Even more worrying is the fact that under pressure from Muslim countries in November 1981, the United Nations Declaration on the elimination of religious discrimination was revised, and references to the right "to adopt "(Article 18, above) and, therefore to " change " one's religion were deleted, and only the right " to have " a religion was retained [FI Spring 1984 p 22].

(More...)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.