Friday, February 26, 2016
Thursday, February 25, 2016
Hezbollah and the oil sheikhs
Hezbollah has no more no less influence than other parties in Lebanon. The Gulf State leaders have been bankrupt leaders morally and now they are financially even Mossad has kept a distant from them
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
The world of prostitution
If you insist fighting to protect me , or our country , let it be understood soberly and rationally between us that you are fighting to gratify a sex instinct which I cannot share; to procure benefits where I have not shared and probably will not .
Monday, February 22, 2016
Hezbollah's change of DNA!!!
Two years ago this week, this column suggested that US-Iran engagement on Syria, which is now happening in the International Syria Support Group, could, over time, eventually lead to a broader discussion about Hezbollah and its role in the region. Does Hezbollah seek Israel’s elimination? ‘Not so,’ says Nasrallah | |
 Nasrallah maintains deterrence with Israel Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah appeared to signal a possibly pragmatic turn in Hezbollah’s approach to Israel in a speech Feb. 16. “If there is now a consensus in Israel on this characterization of the resistance in Lebanon, does it mean that Hezbollah is opening a front and wants to eliminate Israel from existence?” the Hezbollah chief asked. “The reality now is not so.” The speech, not surprisingly, was otherwise laced with anti-Israeli rhetoric and threats; nothing new there. But Nasrallah this time drew the line at both establishing a new “front” with Israel and threatening Israel’s “existence.” In practical terms, his remarks implied that Hezbollah would keep the Lebanese and Syrian borders quiet. Nasrallah’s approach could be understood as both deeply pragmatic, given the toll of the Syrian war on Hezbollah’s forces, and reflective of a more moderate trend in Iranian foreign policy. It is no exaggeration to suggest that what Nasrallah says in Beirut is approved in Tehran. Al-Monitor columns have traced a mostly steady deterrence between Israel and Hezbollah over the past two years. Ben Caspit wrote in December that the assessment in Jerusalem was that “war with Israel is the last thing that Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei needs right now.” Two years ago this week, this column suggested that US-Iran engagement on Syria, which is now happening in the International Syria Support Group, could, over time, eventually lead to a broader discussion about Hezbollah and its role in the region. A year later, in January 2015, we wrote, “We could, and probably should, imagine a more expansive conversation, somewhere, between the United States and its allies and Iran to defuse the crisis on Israel’s borders. All parties should have an interest in averting a confrontation involving Israel, Lebanon and Syria, which would threaten the hard-fought progress to date in the nuclear talks and the increasing alignment of US, coalition and Iranian actions in battling IS and al-Qaeda affiliates in Syria and Iraq.” Since that column, the nuclear talks are a done deal, and US Secretary of State John Kerry said just last month that Iran’s plan for Syria “needs to be explored” and is “very close to what Geneva has been trying to achieve.” Iran will be subject to sanctions as a “state of sponsor of terrorism” under US law until there are conversations about Hezbollah’s role in the region. Israel, Lebanon and post-war Syria will all benefit from secure and peaceful borders. The trend in that direction may be fragile and precarious, but it is a trend nonetheless, and it depends, ultimately, on Israel and Iran. And it all begins with Syria. Relief worker: Jabhat al-Nusra can cross Turkish border “anytime” Fehim Tastekin reported that “while speculation continues about whether Turkey and Saudi Arabia will march into the Syrian war, Turkey is already fighting on two fronts without even entering Syria.” “In the first [front], Turkey is launching heavy artillery fire at Syrian Democratic Forces advancing toward Azaz in northwestern Syria, while declaring that the objective is to stop the advances of the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG). On the second front, Turkey is allowing militants to cross into Syria, since the Syrian army cut off the Aleppo-Kilis corridor,” Tastekin wrote. Tastekin went on to explain how Jabhat al-Nusra is embedded among many of the Salafi groups operating in these regions: “As for claims that Jabhat al-Nusra is not present at Azaz, we have to realize that since Jabhat al-Nusra was added to the UN terror list, it has not been flying its flag in areas close to the Turkish border. In addition to its concentration in rural Idlib, Jabhat al-Nusra also has a presence north of Aleppo, in the Turkmen regions of Latakia and Azaz. Jabhat al-Nusra has significant mobilization capacity in these areas. Everyone following the developments in the region knows that the group is active not only on the Syrian side of the border but also in Turkey’s Kilis and Hatay. According to a relief worker at Yayladag, ‘Nusra people are considered local residents. They can cross the border anytime.’ Jabhat al-Nusra generally operates with Ahrar al-Sham in these areas.” | |
Sunday, February 21, 2016
 |
7/19/00theagg...@my-deja.com
Please note the following excerpts, keeping in mind;
1-Robert Hussein's accusations of the Kuwaiti Emir's role at destroying
his life once he converted to Christianity.
2-The Kuwaiti Government's role in RH's divorce from his wife and
eventual seperation from his children.
3-The state of affairs in Kuwait, compared to what is commonly known
and stereotyped in the West.
4-Amnesty Int'l's report on the events at that time, compared to what
was written in RH's homepage.
From a ChristianityOnline Article
Truth and consequences
Kuwait, a hot, barren country still rebuilding from the Gulf War, has a
history of moderate religious tolerance, at least when compared to
Saudia Arabia, where tales of the arrest of clandestine Christian
congregations are plentiful. *The Anglican Church has at least two
congregations in Ahmadi, and 3 in central Kuwait.*
The Evangelical Church has a sprawling compound near downtown Kuwait
City. And a large Catholic church meets in the same area. According to
*one source*, some 15 percent of Kuwaiti residents claim a faith other
than Islam.
But, and this is where Robert Hussein's problems begin, Kuwait is a
Muslim state, governed by a mixture of French and Islamic law.
Islamists, strategic players in the resistance movement during the war,
have grown in political strength. Two types of law exist in Kuwait:
constitutional law and Islamic, with the constitution citing Islamic
law as the main source but not the only source of law.
Robert's case is not just about one man's religious preference.
According to Robert Pelletreau, Assistant Secretary of State for Near
Eastern Affairs, his case is "part of a broader political pressure
campaign to change the constitution to establish Islamic law as the
sole source of legislation and jurisprudence in Kuwait." Yet at the
heart remains what Islam sees as Robert's crime: converting to
Christianity.
Born Hussein Qamber Ali, Robert was raised as a typical Muslim, learned
the Qur'an as a child, prayed five times a day, and was taught that
Mohammed was the greatest of all prophets. He became a contractor,
specializing in new home construction, an especially lucrative business
in Kuwait. He traveled a great deal throughout the Middle East,
married, had two children, a boy and girl.
Then in 1984, the story changed.
"I began having visions, dreams," he says. As a culture, Arabs believe
in dreams, especially to predict the future. But Robert's private
dreams concerned the issues of Islam and Christianity. "This was the
first time I began debating the Islamic religion," he explains. "I
found myself asking, 'My Lord, I know you are here; how can I reach
you?'"
Robert began to thoughtfully study the two religions-comparing,
contrasting-until he reached his conclusion. Muslims, Robert explains
eloquently, believe Mohammed is the greatest prophet, but they also
believe "that Mohammed came from earthly parents who are now dead.
Muslims also believe Mohammed is dead. But they believe Jesus is still
alive and he is coming back, and his father is not an earthly father.
They believe that." (Muslims believe Jesus neither was crucified nor
raised from the dead; instead he was taken directly to heaven.)
"I ask other Muslims, 'Which one do you prefer-Mohammed or Jesus? They
say, Mohammed.' This doesn't make sense, I tell them. If you believe
that Jesus is still alive, then he is supernatural. It seems to *me*
that they worship Mohammed, not Allah. But I cannot talk about my
dreams to Muslims because these dreams deal with religious questions.
If I mention them, they will accuse me of having a djin (genie/devil)
inside."
Other Kuwaitis are Christians, he claims, but they remain quiet. "The
government gives you everything-money for children, money for houses,
jobs. Why give that up?"-(Robert Hussein’s words!)
By mid-1995, Robert's Christianity was public. He began having Bible
studies with Western expatriates he met through the Evangelical Church.
He learned more about Christianity. Newspapers reported his conversion
and the change of his name from Hussein Qamber Ali to Robert Hussein-a
name specifically chosen because it means "bright fame."
That fame began to complicate things even more. His wife wasn't willing
to convert. When Robert objected to his children saying "Baber Jaber"
(Father Jaber, a term of *respect* for the Emir), his wife told him
that she wanted the children raised as Muslims.
Then the storm struck, quickly, forcefully. "I don't know why it
happened," he says, shaking his head as a quick breeze snaps at his
hair. Arriving home from church with his children one evening about
9:30 p.m., he found his wife's car, packed with her belongings, parked
in front of their house.
She left, taking the children with her, but Robert arranged a court
order for visitation, *and she allowed him* to visit every Friday. The
estrangement did nothing to weaken his faith.
Under Islamic law, any *sane* Muslim who converts to another faith and
refuses to repent loses many of his rights-marriage to a Muslim,
custody of his Muslim children, and inheritance in accordance with
Islamic law. More importantly, Sharia (Islamic) law offers no penalty
for killing any such convert. "In fact," *according to Robert*, "it's a
shortcut to heaven for the murderer."
******************************
Amnesty Int’l Report
On 29 May 1996, a Kuwaiti Islamic court declared “Robert” Hussein
Qambar 'Ali, a convert to Christianity, an apostate. This is the first
legal case of its kind in Kuwait.
Hussein Qambar 'Ali, a 45-year-old Kuwaiti businessman, converted from
Islam to Christianity more than a year ago. In his interviews with the
news agencies, Reuters and Agence France Presse (AFP), in March 1996,
he said that since reports about his conversion had appeared, he had
received numerous death threats and was in constant fear for his life.
His conversion was also reportedly denounced in Kuwaiti mosques by
preachers and in parliament by some Islamist members of parliament.
According to Reuters he said that he was forced to change his
accommodation often as a security measure and that his marriage had
broken up because of family opposition to his conversion.
A law suit to declare him an apostate and strip him of his civil rights
was brought against him by three independent Islamist lawyers. Hussein
Qambar 'Ali first appeared in an Islamic family court, which has
jurisdiction over personal status and family matters, on 6 March 1996
to answer the case against him. Representing himself, he confirmed that
he had become a Christian and proposed changing his name to “Robert
Hussein”, but he insisted to the three-judge panel that it had no
jurisdiction in the case. He asked for his case to be sent to the
Constitutional Court on the grounds that Article 35 of the Kuwaiti
Constitution allows for freedom of thought and belief.
At a further hearing before the Islamic court on 24 April, the case
against Hussein Qambar 'Ali was led by 'Abd al-Latif al-Saleh and
Mohammad al-Jadai, who called for Hussein Qambar 'Ali to be stripped of
his nationality and civil rights for offending against Islamic Law by
abandoning his Islamic faith. Hussein Qambar 'Ali, conducting his own
defence, reportedly argued again that the charges against him should be
put before the Constitutional Court. He was reported to have said that
he felt he was being punished as if the court had already found him
guilty of apostasy. He added, “...for six months I haven't seen my
kids, my family, my home. I blame the Kuwaiti Government. They do not
come forward and say 'this man is protected by the Constitution'”. He
was also reported to have told AFP that there were few lawyers willing
to defend him and even then they asked for exorbitant fees of up to one
million dollars, which he was unable to pay.
Following a hearing on 29 May, the Islamic court declared Hussein
Qambar 'Ali an apostate and ordered him to pay the costs of the case.
The presiding judge of the Islamic court, Ja'far al-Mazidi, was later
asked by the press if the ruling would be taken as permission to kill
Hussein Qambar 'Ali. He was reported to have replied, “that is
possible” but added that killing an apostate would be a violation of
Kuwaiti criminal law. Judge Mazidi is reported to have explained that
there was no legal penalty for apostasy under criminal law in Kuwait
although there was in Islamic law. Regarding Hussein Qambar 'Ali's
request for the case to be sent to the Constitutional Court, the
Islamic court's verdict reportedly stated the following:
“According to his memorandum, the defendant maintains that the court is
incompetent to decide his case due to Constitutional issues, however,
the court finds that apostasy is covered in the constitution.
*The defendant has a narrow point of view and does not clearly
understand the provision and articles of the constitution which focus
on freedom of religion and its rituals.* These constitutional freedoms
stem from Muhammad's teaching. The constitution respects freedom of
religion without fear of being closely monitored, but *it does not mean
that a Muslim should be allowed to convert from his religion to
another*. Everyone understands that there is a clear difference between
these two points. In fact what the plaintiff said was right, “If the
case is elevated to the constitutional court it will not make any
difference”, because his conversion is absolute, and because he
confessed by his tongue and by his actions. There is no dispute about
it. “The witness is his own testimony”. He did not deny it. He stressed
firmly more than once and he did not produce any new evidence to
contradict the charges”.
The three lawyers who brought the law suit against him were reported to
have said that *they did not want Hussein Qambar 'Ali killed but wanted
him stripped of some civil rights, including his Kuwaiti nationality*.
When asked about this, Judge Mazidi is reported to have replied, “Those
demands can be addressed by a civil court”. Hussein Qambar 'Ali lodged
an appeal against the Islamic court decision to the Court of Appeal.
The first hearing is due to take place on 15 September 1996.
Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(ICCPR), which Kuwait ratified in May 1996, upholds freedom of
religion, including the right to change one's religion.
Amnesty International has noted that, according to its information,
Hussein Qambar 'Ali is not facing any penalty imposed by the Kuwaiti
authorities. It is, however, concerned that a state institution, such
as an Islamic family court, has labelled him an “apostate”, which has
legal consequences in Islamic law, and which may make him a target for
human rights abuses by non-governmental actors. In this regard, Amnesty
International is extremely concerned at the reports that Hussein
Qambar 'Ali has received death threats following statements from
religious figures that apostates from Islam should be punished by
death. It has also been reported that earlier this year, a member of
the National Assembly said, during a speech before that body, that
Hussein Qambar 'Ali should be stoned to death. These threats are all
the more worrying in the light of the court's subsequent verdict
declaring Hussein Qambar 'Ali to be an apostate.
On 8 July 1996, following press coverage of the case in the United
Kingdom, the Embassy of the State of Kuwait issued a press release
which stressed that Hussein Qambar 'Ali had not received a death
sentence by being labelled an “apostate”; that the Kuwaiti Constitution
guarantees freedom of faith; and that Kuwaiti law does not punish a
person in Kuwait who converts from Islam to another faith. It also
stated that the Kuwaiti authorities had not received any complaints
from Hussein Qambar 'Ali regarding his well-being, nor were they aware
of there having been any threats against his life. Should any such
threats be made public, the statement said, the relevant authorities in
the country would take appropriate measures to ensure Hussein
Qambar 'Ali's safety.
According to a Reuters report on 11 July 1996, the English-language
newspaper, Kuwait Times, reported that Hussein Qambar 'Ali's safety was
guaranteed by the Kuwaiti Government, as outlined in a letter to the
Foreign Ministry, dated 3 July, from the government's department of
legal advice and legislation, which said:
“It (the government) protects the freedom of practising the rituals of
the three heavenly religions, Islam, Christianity and Judaism, and does
not prevent individuals from practising other religions, including
Christianity.
As to what has been said about this Kuwaiti citizen being subjected to
persecution and death threats due to his conversion from Islam to
Christianity, this is baseless.”
Amnesty International wrote to the Kuwaiti authorities on 21 March 1996
urging them to take all necessary and appropriate steps to ensure
Hussein Qambar 'Ali's safety. Specifically such steps should include:
. publicly affirming Hussein Qambar 'Ali's right to safety, and
ensuring that he is protected from harm;
. investigating any threats made against Hussein Qambar 'Ali, and
bringing to justice anyone found responsible.
And Now…excerpts from RH’s own Homepage:
In January of 1996, after having converted to the Christian faith
Robert Hussein stood up for his beliefs, and his right to those
beliefs, in a Kuwaiti courtroom while facing the charge of apostasy,
abandoning the Islamic religion. No attorney would defend the case. Mr.
Hussein was not allowed to speak in his own defense.
In the end, his parental rights were stripped, he lost all rights to
his property, his wife was forcibly divorced from him, he lost his
business and was disinherited from his father's estate.
The final verdict, handed down in the name of the Amir of Kuwait,
stated that Mr. Hussein should be killed. His crime was that he became
a Christian.
Kuwait securitymen harrassed Mr. Hussein's mother demanding that she
legally disown her son. Kuwaiti securitymen harrassed his brother,
attempting to coerce and bully him into killing Mr. Hussein in the name
of "restoring the honor of his disgraced family and for the dignity of
the Islamic religion."
Following his conviction and with the influence and assistance of many
foreign statesmen and human rights and religious liberty organizations,
Mr. Hussein escaped to the United States. He now resides there with his
new wife and brand new baby daughter.
..............................
Wednesday, February 17, 2016
I know now
I know enough of the world now,to have almost lost the capacity of being much surprised by anything; but it is matter of some surprise to me,even now,that I can have been so easily thrown away at such an age
Tuesday, February 16, 2016
Constitutinal right of black president
Article II of the Constitution directs the president to nominate and, “by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate,” appoint judges of the Supreme Court. (“He shall,” it says.) It says He and not she,but nothing about the president's color. Nothing in the Constitution stipulates that this power does not apply to the black president.!!!!
Barack Obama "has constitutional and historical precedent on his side and should announce a nominee" for the Supreme Court.
Read more from The New York Times Opinion Section.
Barack Obama "has constitutional and historical precedent on his side and should announce a nominee" for the Supreme Court.
Read more from The New York Times Opinion Section.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)