On Religions

Template

Template

Muslim Rage Spreads Worldwide: First They Provoke Muslims then Demonize Reaction

14 September 2012, 23:27  

Protests against the US film Innocence of Muslims have begun to spread all over the world. There have been attacks on US Embassies worldwide as Muslim anger against US policies and meddling has continued to fuel the anger. The protests involving hundreds of thousands have remained for the most part peaceful with most of the most serious violence directed at US Embassies, businesses and in one case an American school was burnt down. Since the murders in Benghazi (Libya) there have been no reports of violence against Americans.

Mass protests by Muslims continue to spread to more and more countries as outrage in the Islamic words escalates due to the trailer of a US film ridiculing the Prophet Mohammed called the Innocence of Muslims which appeared on the Internet.

Although the film was the spark that lit the flames of the violence, massive longstanding grievances and anger against the US and their attempts to force their policies on countries worldwide as well as the US’ constant meddling into affairs in Muslim world are now serving to feed the escalating violence. The deep socioeconomic problems in Arab Spring countries, something that has not been addressed is also playing into the hands of Islamists and adding more fuel to the crisis.

All over the world governments are asking Muslims to show restraint and not to escalate the level of violence.

On Friday the protests spread from Egypt and Libya to other countries including Israel, Sudan, Tunisia and Yemen. There were also widespread protests in countries outside the Middle East region, including but not limited to: Bangladesh, Kashmir, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines, and Qatar.

Israel

In Jerusalem a protest near the Damascus Gate turned violent when protesters began throwing rocks at police. Apparently the protesters began to head in the direction of the US Consulate and were stopped by police using shock grenades.

According to Ynet news there were protests in Akko, in the Wadi Ara region and in the towns of Baqa al-Gharbia and Umm al-Fahmm, which were for the most part peaceful.

Yemen

Yemen saw some of the most violent protests with reports saying that security forces killed four protesters who were rioting near the US embassy in Yemen.

Sudan

In Khartoum hundreds of protesters stormed the German Embassy and set it on fire. Police used teargas to dispel the protesters who then began protesting outside the British Embassy nearby.

Kashmir

In Kashmir, in some of the largest anti-American demonstrations so far, at least 15,000 people took part in dozens of protests, chanting "Down with America," "Down with Israel" and calling US president Barack Obama a "terrorist." The country’s top cleric has demanded Americans leave the region immediately.

India

In Chennai, protesters threw stones at the US consulate, shattering some windows and burned an effigy of Obama. Police arrested more than 100 protesters.

Bangladesh

In Bangladesh, about 5,000 people marched in Dhaka burning US and Israeli flags and calling for the death of the film-maker. Police stopped them from reaching the US Embassy.

Indonesia

In Indonesia, the most populous Muslim nation in the world, protests were extremely peaceful as only about 200 protesters held a peaceful protest outside the heavily guarded US embassy in Jakarta.

Iran

There were more protests in Tehran including demonstrations outside the Swiss embassy (which represents US interests in Iran). Reports say Ayatollah Jannati, the head of the Guardian Council, denounced the anti-Muslim film during Friday prayers.

Tunisia

Three protesters were killed outside the US embassy in Tunis, where demonstrators attempted to enter the compound. The demonstrators included ordinary Tunisians and Salafist activists. An American school was also set on fire.

Lebanon

One demonstrator was killed by security forces in Tripoli as protesters attempted to storm a government building. An American Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant was also burned down.

Syria

In Damascus hundreds of protesters gathered outside US embassy holding a peaceful demonstration. Protesters carried images of President Bashar al-Assad and chanted anti-American slogans.

Pakistan

Hundreds of protesters attempted to march towards the US embassy in Islamabad and were stopped by police far from the city’s diplomatic quarter where the embassy is located.

Qatar

Protesters filled the streets of Doha and lined the city’s main highway. No violence has been reported.

In closing I would personally like to ask all Muslims to show restraint and demonstrate peacefully as this was another provocation. Those who made the film want to see violence and want you to over-react. If you react violently you will be playing into their hands.

The ‘Biased-Media’ and Its Desecration of Church: Targeting Russian Orthodoxy

5 September 2012, 16:07  

Continuing this week’s look at the biased media we look at the Japan Times Online, the UK’s Independent and the Guardian as well as the New York Times.

In a piece titled Pawns of the neo-Putin era the author, Andrey Borodaevskiy, wastes no time in launching his attack on Putin although the piece turns into an article parroting views on the group Pussy Riot. In the first paragraph he assumes to know President Vladimir Putin’s state of mind, as many critics and politicians in the West love to do, stating as fact that the president felt “anxiety” due to certain people’s actions, who exactly cause such anxiety he does not say but of course we are to assume the writer means the “opposition”.

The author then states that the president began taking “revenge” and calls the president’s staff or supporters, “henchmen”. Again he does not state exactly who the henchmen are or the objects of said revenge, but for this writer it is not important who, neither are the facts, the whole idea is to attack.

I don’t pretend to know the president or his mind but I imagine if the president were to take “revenge” on everyone who caused him “anxiety” he would not have time to eat or sleep, let alone run the country and would have to go after everyone who ran against him or ever questioned him. If what the author were writing was to be believed, in particular that the president of the largest country in the world spends time getting revenge on everyone, and it is clear he himself does not believe what he is writing, then he would have been a bit more careful in what he says. Otherwise the KGB, which does not exist anymore, might get him!

As if to back up his already thin argument based on air, the writer then continues by citing a law that increased the fine for illegal public events which he has obviously not read and then taking it out of context makes it seem like the security services are just itching to arrest people. The law in question regards fines for illegal public activities which cause a danger to the public and society and was written to prevent the further abuse and non-adherence to the law that was starting to spread in Russia. A law made necessary by the actions of groups such as P-Riot, but that is not important either I guess. The reason for the changing of the law was brought about by the aforementioned group and the Western funded and backed, so-called “opposition”, after their events became more and more violent and scores of innocent people were injured and adversely affected.

Of course painting the picture of people who gathered to cause public discontent and throw rocks and spit at police, as innocent victims of oppression is to the writer’s advantage. The fact that the “opposition’s” leaders and many of the organizers receive instructions and money from a certain ambassador who specializes in organizing color revolutions as well as the fact that many of the “activists” were paid to attend events and provoke the state and police is something the author fails to say anything about, also not important since it does not serve his purpose.

The writer continues as an apologist for the greatest provocateurs of recent history, the group P-Riot. Calling their costumes “luminous”, obviously he forgot to check his dictionary before publication, and their “song”, filled with obscene language disguised as a religious hymn making a mockery of the church and the Orthodox faith, an “irreverent number”, he proceeds to attempt to paint a picture of the Russian judiciary as being politically motivated and the “girls” (women with kids) as innocent victims.

Calling the desecration of the holiest part of the holiest church of the Orthodox faith “regretful” and an “artistic carnival-like performance of a kind that can be widely seen around the world” and pretending to know better than the judge in the case how to deal with such an unprecedented case, the writer continues to attempt to make this into some conspiracy against the people by the “evil” state.

As with all of these apologists and detractors, I wonder why they never bring up, for example California’s three-strikes law that has people serving life sentences for things like shoplifting, or Islamic law which would have probably had every one of these “girls” executed. Well the answer is rhetorical, as always any opportunity to deride Russia is something they rarely miss.

I have asked many Western supporters of P-Riot what would have happened if the event took place in the Vatican or in the church where Barrack Obama worships and no one has answered yet. Perhaps we could ask Mr. Borodaevskiy what he would do if the “girls” barged into his mother’s house and gave a “performance”, after all, according to him it was not a hate crime but just good fun. Would he agree? Fat chance.

Another publication, the Independent, published an article by Roland Oliphant, which also wastes no time in painting a very dark picture of Russia for the reader by stating “investigators tried to link a double murder to the group”, the problem with this is obvious. He implies the investigators had some interest in doing something so illegal and beyond any accepted norms.

Just to mention it since no else is, the words "Free Pussy Riot" were scrawled in blood on the wall, in English. Remember this is Russia, why would the killers write in English? For the Western press perhaps? As no one has made a point of this fact perhaps it is something we could use to paint an even darker picture of how far Western forces would go, but we won’t go there will we?

The writer calls the P-Riot provocation a simple “punk prayer” (Perhaps the Western media should take the time to find and translate the “lyrics” before they write about it?), the Christ the Savior Cathedral he calls simply “a Moscow cathedral” again diminishing the importance of the event and says, in an attempt to show some connection with the authorities, that the photos were published by a “tabloid website known to have close links to the authorities”. Known by whom? I politely ask.

Near the end of the article the writer quotes Nikolay Polozov a lawyer for the (now he calls them) “art collective”, as questioning when the slogan was written. Maybe he should seek an answer from the authorities? But even though this is an unsolved double murder investigation since it is Russia I suppose for the writer it is enough to quote people not even close to the case.

The Guardian did quote the authorities, in a piece by Miriam Elder , published alongside an offer to buy the book “Mafia State” (another attack on Russia), yet makes the inference that unknown Kremlin supporters who say the group “… encourages dangerous radicalism” accuse the group of involvement. No such accusation was made.

Almost every piece in the Western press regarding the group takes the same sympathetic slant with very few if any presenting the view held by a majority of the Russian population and those of the Russian Orthodox Faith. The attack and provocation, which they claimed was an attack on President Putin, and the coverage of it in the West has now taken a much darker and wholly different nature and appears to have changed into perhaps what it was from the very beginning, an attack on the faith of most of the Russian people.

In seeking articles presenting Orthodox opinions I did come across one in the Western press that mentions the position of people holding Orthodox views in the New York Times. At first I was pleasantly surprised, but the pleasantness ended in a matter of seconds as unfortunately it was another unbalanced smear job, this time by oneRobert Mackey. The completely unbalanced and totally biased article wins my “most biased anti-Russian report of the week award”. Starting with the misleading headline, “After Pussy Riot Verdict, Christian Culture Warriors Run Riot in Moscow” it immediately paints an extremely negative picture of activists who defend the Orthodox Church.

“Running Riot” is the term the writer has chosen to describe 2 young men who have chosen to confront those who are openly blaspheming their faith, the term would better describe what the group P-Riot was doing in the lead up to the previous presidential elections, jumping on roofs, on top of trolley busses, the insides of metro stations, Red Square and other improper locations, a rampage which ended in one of the holiest places for the Orthodox faith.

The writer does call the P-Riot “song”, which was staged in the cathedral a “profane anthem” but calls the activities of the “conservative” Orthodox activists “audacious attacks” on “liberal” Muscovites. He tries to transpose internal American culture warfare parameters onto Russian Society. I am sorry to have to inform him but there are not “conservative” and “liberal” sides in Russia, that division in American society does not exist in Russia and to use this case in particular to attempt to instill a social divide is as stupid as the antics of P-Riot. Almost every Russian would agree the Christ the Savior desecration was a stupid attack. Many might argue as to the sentence or other points in the case, but the act itself is not supported by an almost absolute majority of Russians of all faiths and leanings.

Can one really be said to “barge into” a sex museum? Apparently for Mr. Mackey such a place of “reverence” deserves quiet respectful behavior, unlike a cathedral in the middle of a service I suppose.

The bias and derision of the Orthodox activists, whose actions were filmed by a television channel, continues for the rest of the article with the writer quoting the “moral icon of society”, sex museum director Alexander Donskoy, who makes wild exaggerations of the quiet Orthodox young men saying: they are; “…threatening our lives and tearing clothes off simple passers-by, and tomorrow they’ll go raid churches of other confessions and stab atheists.”

The writer attempts to paint a picture of the P-Riot attack as not being an attack on the Orthodox Religion, which is beyond the pale. If it were in fact something political they should have attempted to stage their provocation in a more “political” location. Red Square for example, as they already had, and were not locked up (a fact the Western Press has conveniently forgotten). After they “performed” on Red Square they were emboldened by the leniency of the authorities and they attacked the Church.

Freedom of expression, dissent, opposition, demonstrations, the right to be heard and represented are all natural aspects of a democracy, but you don’t attack the holy religious places of the people, no matter what the faith. No one could be so stupid to do so “accidently” and barring insanity, logically anyone who does so must hold a hatred for the religion they attack.

The hypocrisy is staggering.