Bartholomew's Notes

A thundering rebuke on WorldNetDaily:

A counter-terrorism specialist is defending TV evangelist Pat Robertson against a charge of bigotry toward Muslims by Anti-Defamation League boss Abraham Foxman.

Robertson, founder of the Christian Broadcasting Network and Regent University, was criticized by Foxman for expressing concern on CBN’s “The 700 Club” show about the growing construction of mosques in Europe. Foxman called Robertson’s statements “troubling,” based on “hateful stereotypes of Islam.”

In an open letter, Jeffrey M. Epstein, president of America’s Truth Forum, pushed back at Foxman for defending “a seditious enemy that’s not only sworn to the death and destruction of the Jewish People but one that is determined to undermine the very fabric of western society – and you have the chutzpah to do so with Jewish funding.”

And on what basis is Epstein a “counter-terror specialist”? The America’s Truth Forum website gives his background:

He accumulated over thirty-five years experience in mortgage banking, marketing and business management.  Mr. Epstein was promoted to Senior Vice President of the nation’s largest portfolio-lending institution following his initiation of an FBI/OTS fraud investigation that led to the conviction and incarceration of several real estate professionals for their roles in committing mortgage fraud.

That may not seem like much, but his website has the obligatory white-font against black background, and there’s a dramatic logo showing the earth encircled by a target. From what I’ve seen over the past couple of years (e.g. here), that seems to be enough to qualify as a  “counter-terror specialist” to the satisfaction of most people.

Epstein (better-known as “Jeff Epstein”, see Sourcewatch) was formerly part of Vietnam Vets for Truth, in which capacity he suggested that “Vietnamese communists clearly recognize John Kerry’s contributions to their victory” due to the fact that Kerry appears in a photo from a 1993 delegation to the country that is now on display in a Vietnamese museum.

America’s Truth Forum has held several events: “Understanding the Threat of Radical Islamist Terrorism” (2006), which was followed by the imaginatively named “Exposing the Threat of Islamist Terrorism” (2008) – both were graced by the usual speakers. Epstein also promotes the conspiracy theory that Muslims were behind the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, and he has worked with Paul L. Williams; Williams’ own conspiracy-mongering about McMaster University led to some legal difficulties for WorldNetDaily in 2007.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a comment »

From the Guardian:

Islamic courts would be forced to acknowledge the primacy of English law under a bill being introduced in the House of Lords.

The bill, proposed by Lady Cox and backed by women’s rights groups and the National Secular Society, was drawn up because of “deep concerns” that Muslim women are suffering discrimination within closed sharia law councils.

The Arbitration and Mediation Services (Equality) Bill will introduce an offence carrying a five-year jail sentence for anyone falsely claiming or implying that sharia courts or councils have legal jurisdiction over family or criminal law. The bill, which will apply to all arbitration tribunals if passed, aims to tackle discrimination, which its supporters say is inherent in the courts, by banning the sharia practice of giving woman’s testimony only half the weight of men’s.

The 1996 Arbitration Act allows for private arbitration or private  third-party arrangements in civil disputes; as has been widely reported, a number of Muslim groups have taken advantage of this provision to establish private shariah courts, leading to reports of inheritances doled out unequally between male and female relatives, and of women “persuaded” to drop complaints to the police about domestic violence. The obvious – and reasonable – fear is that some women are agreeing to be bound by the courts’ decisions as a result of community and family pressure rather than giving true consent. I noted this here, and suggested that the 1996 act ought to be amended so that civil courts will not enforce decisions where there is evidence of gender bias.

Given that there is a genuine problem, the bill’s approach could provide a useful contrast to the posturing and pointless “anti-Shariah” bills that are being proposed in various US states. Cox’s bill can be seen here; it includes the following:

…After section 6 (definition of arbitration agreement) insert—

“6A Discriminatory terms of arbitration

No part of an arbitration agreement or process shall expressly or implicitly provide—
(a) that the evidence of a man is worth more than the evidence of a woman, or vice versa,
(b) that the division of an estate between male and female children on intestacy must be unequal,
(c) that women should have fewer property rights than men, or vice versa, or
(d) for any other term that constitutes discrimination on the grounds of sex.

It should be noted that the bill – correctly, in my opinion – deals in general principles; it does not anywhere mention Islam or shariah. This is in contrast to a website set up by Cox’s supporters promote the bill, which seems designed to alienate Muslims: the site’s banner headline features a woman in a niqab, and it is concerned exclusively with shariah. The site was created by David Clark of the British Christian Right lobby-group Christian Concern; Christian Concern’s own website has a triumphant report on the subject:

New Bill to Stop Shariah Law Operating in the UK

On 7 June 2011 Baroness Cox introduced a new Bill in the House of Lords intended to outlaw the use of Sharia law where it conflicts with English law…

“Through these proposals, I want to make it perfectly clear in the law that discrimination against women shall not be allowed within arbitration. I am deeply concerned about the treatment of Muslim women by Sharia Courts. We must do all that we can to make sure they are free from any coercion, intimidation or unfairness. Many women say, ‘we came to this country to escape these practices only to find the situation is worse here’.”

The headline is obviously misleading; one wonders whether it is deliberately so.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 6 Comments »

Last week, the World Public Forum Dialogue of Religions held a conference in Berlin, on “Integration and Identity in the Global Society”. According to a pre-conference blurb:

The President and Founder of the World Public Forum “Dialogue of Civilization” Vladimir Ivanovich Yakunin, the Prime Minister of GDR (retired) Dr. Lothar de Mezier, German Bundestag (Parliament) deputy Franz Thunnes, Chairman of the Youth Association of the ruling CDU Party in Germany Philipp Missfelder, and other top level experts will give speeches as a part of the conference in Berlin.

I’ve blogged on the WPF previously; it  arranges high-level international conferences on inter-religious dialogue and has links to a Russian Orthodox organisation. There are three co-chairmen:

The Forum is headed by the Council of Co-chairmen, which consists of the WPF Founder and President Vladimir Yakunin (Russia), President of Titan Capital Corporation Nicholas Papanicolaou(USA/Greece), and former federal Chancellor of Austria Alfred Gusenbauer. The late Jagdish Kapur(1920– 2010), President of the Kapur Surya Foundation (India), was the Co-chairman and Founder of the WPF.

Yakunin is a close ally of Vladimir Putin, and back in March he was described by the Moscow Times as “the Kremlin’s model ‘Orthodox businessman'”. Papanicolaou is a curious figure: while in Europe he hob-nobs with elite mainstream politicians, back in the USA he identifies with the neo-Pentecostal Christian Right, in particular Rick Joyner and William “Jerry” Boykin. He is also the author of a book, published by Joyner, entitled Islam vs the United States, and Joyner and Boykin are both members of a chivalric order of which Papanicolaou is the “Grand Master”.  I surveyed this rather odd association – which Joyner uses to boast of links to Europe – here.

Gusenbauer, meanwhile, received an award from the WPF back in 2008; in March, the same award was presented by Yakunin to the president of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, ahead of elections that saw Nazarbayev re-elected with 95.5% of the vote (Nazarbayev had been due to step down due to constitutional term limits, but he reluctantly bowed a petition from “ordinary citizens” to stay on for a third decade). As the WPF website explains:

The Award is given to political, intellectual and spiritual leaders who follow the ideas of justice and unity, to people who strongly contribute to the strengthening of peace and consent among the nations. Among the laureates of the Award there are such outstanding leaders as former Chancellor of Austria Alfred Gusenbauer and the President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev.

Gusenbauer and Nazarbayev also have other links: in 2010 the Austrian business magazine Format reported that Gusenbauser had become a “consultant” to the Kazakh leader:

Wie FORMAT aus hochrangigen Brüsseler Kreisen erfuhr, ist Gusenbauer Teil ­eines neuen Beraterstabs rund um den 70-jährigen Nasarbajew, zu dem auch Deutschlands ehemaliger Bundeskanzler Gerhard Schröder, Italiens früherer Ministerpräsident Romano Prodi und Polens Expräsident Aleksander Kwasniewski zählen. „Ja, ich stehe der kasachischen Regierung und somit dem Präsidenten als Berater zur Verfügung“, bestätigt Gusenbauer. Über seine neuen Kollegen will er aber lieber nicht reden, nur so viel: „Präsident Nasarbajew holt sich sicher nicht irgendwelche Leute in sein Team.“

Just last month, Gusenbauer was a “guest of honour” (alongside former Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski, Tony Blair, and Romano Prodi) at a Foreign Investors Council (FIC) meeting in Astana. The meeting took place at the inevitably-named Nazarbayev University.

Another link goes back to 2007, when Gusenbauer was chancellor and the Kazakh ambassador to Austria was Nazarbayev’s then son-in-law Rahat Aliyev. Aliyev now lives in Austria in exile; while in office, he was accused of criminal activity in Kazakhstan and his wife divorced him. Nazarbayev telephoned Gusenbauer to facilitate his extradition, but Gusenbauer “informed the caller that he had no jurisdiction over Austrian courts.” Aliyev was accused of abducting two bankers, and the bankers’ bodies were discovered “stuffed into metal barrels and covered with quicklime” just last month. Aliyev “denies any connection with the men’s deaths”.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 4 Comments »

At the American Thinker and Big Peace, Andrew Bostom discusses  “Sharia and Violence in American Mosques”, a new article  by Mordechai Kedar and David Yerushalmi published the Middle East Quarterly (Summer 2011, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 59-72). The somewhat inflammatory title is par for the course: Yerushalmi (perhaps best-known as Pamela Geller’s lawyer) is the brains behind the ideologically-driven “Mapping Shariah” project, which has a number of methodological problems that I outlined here. The paper is being published today; it appears that Bostom has been given an advance copy.

According to quotes in Bostom’s post (itself a diatribe entitled “Mosques as Barracks in America”), a number of US mosques were chosen at random,

(a) to observe and record 12 Sharia-adherent behaviors of the worshipers and the imam (or lay leader); (b) to observe whether the mosque contained the selected materials rated as moderate and severe; (c) to observe whether the mosque contained materials promoting, praising, or supporting violence or violent jihad; and (d) to observe whether the mosque contained materials indicating the mosque had invited guest speakers known to have promoted violent jihad.

Findings:

51 percent of mosques had texts that either advocated the use of violence in the pursuit of a Shari’a-based political order or advocated violent jihad as a duty that should be of paramount importance to a Muslim; 30 percent had only texts that were moderately supportive of violence like the Tafsir Ibn Kathir and Fiqh as-Sunna; 19 percent had no violent texts at all.

…The survey found a strong correlation between the presence of severe violence-promoting literature and mosques featuring written, audio, and video materials that actually promoted such acts. By promotion of jihad, the study included literature encouraging worshipers to engage in terrorist activity, to provide financial support to jihadists, and to promote the establishment of a caliphate in the United States. These materials also explicitly praised acts of terror against the West; praised symbols or role models of violent jihad; promoted the use of force, terror, war, and violence to implement the [strange gap here – RB] Sharia; emphasized the inferiority of non-Muslim life; promoted hatred and intolerance toward non-Muslims or notional Muslims; and endorsed inflammatory materials with anti-U.S. views… [O]f the 51 mosques that contained severe materials, 100 percent were led by imams who recommended that worshipers study texts that promote violence.

 [M]osques containing violence positive materials were substantially more likely to include materials promoting financial support of terror than mosques that did not contain such texts. A disturbing 98 percent of mosques with severe texts included materials promoting financial support of terror. Those with only moderate rated materials on site were not markedly different, with 97 percent providing such materials.

These results were comparable when using other indicators of jihad promotion. Thus, 98 percent of mosques that contained severe-rated literature included materials promoting establishing an Islamic caliphate in the United States as did 97 percent of mosques containing only moderate rated materials.

Further details on methodology are provided in an Appendix, which has been posted on-line here. The list of “Sharia Adherent Behaviors” includes: “gender segregation during prayer service”, “alignment of men’s prayer lines”, the imam’s beard style, whether the imam has a head covering or not or is wearing Western-style clothing, and whether the imam wears a watch on his right wrist. Also significant is the percentage of men wearing beards or hats, whether boys have head-coverings, and whether girls and women are wearing hijabs or niqabs – “Non-Shari’a-adherent behavior”, we are told, “is to wear the modern hijab (a scarf that does not completely cover the hair) or to not wear any hair”.

For reasons that are not immediately clear, we then segue into the issue of violence, as the list continues:

If the surveyor found the Fiqh as-Sunna or Tafsir Ibn Kathir, but not more extreme materials, then the mosque was categorized as containing moderate-rated material. If the surveyor found the Riyadh as-Salaheen, works by Qutb or Mawdudi, or similar materials, then the mosque was categorized as containing severe-rated materials.

If the surveyor found no violence-positive materials or if the violence-positive materials constituted less than 10% of all available materials, then the mosque was categorized as containing no materials.

…Following the prayer service, the surveyor asked the following question: “Do you recommend the study of: (a) only the Quran and/or Sunna; (b) Tafsir Ibn Kathir; (c) Fiqh as-Sunna; (e) Reliance of the Traveller; or (f) the works of Qutb, such as Milestones, and Maududi, such as The Meaning of the Qur’an?”

If the imam or lay leader recommended studying any of the materials mentioned above except the Qur’an and/or Sunna, then the imam or lay leader was recorded as having recommended the study of texts promoting the rated material.

The “10%” principle here is a welcome nod towards proportionality, but it’s undermined by what follows. The Reliance of the Traveller and the Tafsir Ibn Kathir are both pre-modern compendiums of Islamic law; of course they contain some troubling material, like many other pre-modern texts. But they also contain a lot else: we need to understand why the imams recommend these texts, not just note that they do and therefore chalk up one more extremist. It’s also unclear whether the imams are being asked about their general recommendation practices in relation to these texts or whether they are simply advising the questioner.

Further:

If materials available on mosque premises promoted joining a known terrorist organization, such as “mujahideen” engaged in jihad abroad, then the mosque was recorded as having promoted joining a terrorist organization.

That may seems reasonable so far as it goes, but again it begs a lot of questions. Some general sympathy for a mujahideen group involved in military conflict in somewhere in central Asia is a very different proposition from supporting al-Qaeda, so we need more than just a broad-brush “terrorism” label if we are to understand what is going on and why. And we need to know more about how the materials are made available, and in what ways they are promoted. Are leaflets given out to attendees, or is “promotion” simply an obscure poster pinned to an unmoderated noticeboard somewhere on the premises? There’s scope for various interpretations there.

If materials available on mosque premises indicated that speakers came to the mosque to raise money for specific terrorist organizations, then the mosque was recorded as having openly collected money at the mosque for a known terrorist organization.

…If any of the materials featured on mosque property promoted engaging in terrorist activity; promoted the financial support of terrorism or jihadists; promoted the use of force, terror, war, and violence to implement Shari‘a; promoted the idea that oppression and subversion of Islam should be changed by deed first, then by speech, then by faith; praised acts of terrorism against the West; or praised suicide bombers against Israelis, then the mosque was recorded as having promoted violent jihad.

This raises further questions: are we talking about organisations which are banned under US law, or organisations around which there are suspicions (reasonable or contrived) of links to terrorism?

We all know that some mosques in the USA and elsewhere promote radicalisation and extremism. We also know that others need to do more to ensure that radical elements do not gain a toe-hold. But this kind of inquisitorial and quantitative approach is of very limited value and is probably even misleading. If one wants to know whether a mosque “promotes jihad”, one needs to get a sense of the overall teaching and the general perspectives of those who attend. Simply totting up whether an undercover visitor can spot or elicit something troubling is an insufficient methodology. And what purpose is served by mixing all this in with a list “Sharia Adherent Behaviors”, other than to give Muslim cultural practices a sinister hue?

The Middle East Quarterly has a note on its peer-review process here. Previously, it rejected peer-review on the grounds that most specialists were not interested in “American interests” or were hostile to USA; however:

…In 2009, circumstances have begun to change. This journal finds itself part of a growing community of specialists not hostile to the United States and its allies. As other journals and organizations have joined our ranks, they increased the circle of those with professional and expert knowledge of the Middle East and created a larger pool of reviewers to engage in a constructive process of refereeing.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 7 Comments »

From the Daily Mail:

Did a pork-coated bullet kill Bin Laden? Yes, says firm who claim its pig fat gun oil is bought by U.S. military personnel

Was Osama bin Laden shot with a bullet soaked in pork fat, denying him a place in paradise?

The makers of Silver Bullet Gun Oil claim it contains 13 per cent USDA liquefied pig fat thus making the product ‘a highly effective counter-Islamic terrorist force multiplier.’

…A promotional YouTube video for the oil shows a picture of Bin Laden and the claim: ‘Killed with a weapon using Silver Bullet Gun Oil’.

The “firm” claims to have made private sales of the gun oil to numerous US military personnel, but there is absolutely no evidence that its product was used in the Bin Laden operation or that the the producer knows anything more about the operation than the rest of us.

The Mail goes on to add that:

In Islam consumption of pork is forbidden, but the Quran also states that if one is forced to consume the meat then they are guiltless and therefore not disqualified from paradise.

The relevant verses are 2:173, 5:3,  6:145, and 16:115, all of which have variations on the phrase “whoever is driven to necessity, not desiring nor exceeding the limit, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful”.

The people behind SBGO, by contrast, tell us that:

According to the Koran, Allah states, “Any of my followers contaminated by swine at the time of his death will be denied entry to my paradise forever, I HATE THE STENCH OF SWINE.”

No reference is given, and I can’t find anything even remotely along these lines in the Koran (or in any other Islamic source, for that matter). SBGO also makes much of General Pershing’s supposed use of pork products to spread terror among Muslim rebels in the Philippines, but Snopes points out that the story appears to be apocryphal. In short, there is no properly documented evidence of Muslim terrorists abandoning their ways or aborting a mission out of fear of porcine contamination, and there’s no reason why they would. The product is useless for its stated purpose.

However, the product does have other purposes (aside from raising money, of course): its existence helps to give the impression that US soldiers are involved in a war against Islam, and to spread the notion that the Islamic taboo against pork is an exceptionally absurd aspect of Islam. It’s also useful to suggest that a superstition, rather than any ethical principle, would be the only reason that Muslims might reject the notion of Bin Laden enjoying “a place in paradise”.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has further details:

The oil’s manufacturer goes by the nom de guerre, “Midnite Rider – Servant of Yahweh,” an Old Testament name for God, but his real identity is unknown.

…Hatewatch recently purchased several bottles of the gun oil to determine if the company was real. The gun oil arrived in a box postmarked from Courtland, Va., a town of about 1,300 people 50 miles southwest of Norfolk…

The Daily Mail article is currently being headlined at WorldNetDaily; the UK tabloid appears to be making increasing efforts to get traffic from right-wing American websites.

In late September 2001, WND ran a column by Paul Sperry which suggested dropping leaflets over Afghanistan warning that “that we’ve enlisted Afghani moles to contaminate their water supplies with pig’s blood”. WND editor Joseph Farah later announced that the column had been “satire”.

UPDATE: The Mail article was partly lifted from a Mother Jones blog post by Adam Weinstein of 31 May, which begins with:

Did a Navy SEAL kill Osama Bin Laden with a pork-coated bullet, thus denying him entrance to paradise? That’s the highly unlikely claim coming from a shady website selling gun lubricants that it guarantees to be “13% USDA liquefied pig fat.”

Compare with the Mail on 2 June:

Was Osama bin Laden shot with a bullet soaked in pork fat, denying him a place in paradise?

Yes, if one rather shady website, that peddles gun oil containing liquefied pig fat, is to be believed.

The Mail‘s plagiarist took out the “highly unlikely” part, and ignored most of Weinstein’s assessment:

At best, Silver Bullet Gun Oil seems like snake oil for Islamophobes. At worst, it’s putting forth an image of American soldiers as crusading anti-Muslim killers… Most Muslims, devout and secular, simply see pork as gross, and they don’t consider incidental (or forced) contact with porcine products to disqualify one from entrance to heaven.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 5 Comments »

Once more, I find myself obliged to write something on the unhappy subject of Dominic Wightman, the former self-proclaimed “terror-tracker” who appeared on Newsnight in 2006 and who has enjoyed friendly links with Patrick Mercer MP. To recap in brief: in 2009 Wightman attempted to manipulate myself and the blogger Tim Ireland into “exposing” a former associate of his as the creator of fake evidence about extremist plots. In the course of events, we discovered that this associate was in fact innocent, and that Wightman was a serial liar who had himself concocted evidence.

Wightman’s response to being found out was to engage in a campaign of on-line harassment, aimed for the most part at Tim and using multiple sockpuppet identities through which he made false accusations and posted taunting and abusive messages. While the details are perhaps not of wider interest, the fact that someone who at one time enjoyed media and political endorsements as an expert on Islamic terrorism would conduct himself in such a self-debasing, immature, and disreputable fashion is a cause for serious concern.

Wightman has also manipulated other people into joining in with his attacks: in September 2009, a collaborator helped Wightman to create a particularly juvenile and abusive audio message which appeared anonymously on YouTube. With a bit of Googling, I was recently able to work out the likely identity of this collaborator, and I sought to make email contact with a polite query. I trod carefully – knowing how Wightman operates, I was well aware that this person was probably non-malign and might be amenable once he had been made aware of the true facts.

Also recently, several anonymous one-post blogs attacking me were submitted to a number of SEO optimization engines – and it just so happens that Wightman has recently become involved with an SEO business (1). The websites associated with this new business all bore Wightman’s trademark of absurdly grandiose rhetoric which went beyond honest advertising; I emailed the business’s director – not Wightman  – to ask for an assurance that the attempt to optimise attacks on me had nothing to do with his company, and pointing out the problems with how the company was presenting itself.

Naturally, Wightman’s response to all this has been extremely aggressive and abusive, and has come in the predictable form of lengthy diatribes published on his website. His writings and accusations are so luridly excessive that there is little need to respond in any detail, but for the record, the following should be clarified: contrary to what Wightman is asserting, I have never hacked his emails. I have never published anything about him under a pseudonym, or ever impersonated him. I have never had any contact with his wife, let alone sent her “poison pen letters”. Wightman, by contrast, has a long track record of hiding behind fake identities to inflate his ego or to abuse others (when not attacking Tim or me, his favourite target is a former employee who won an industrial tribunal against him – Wightman has expressed open contempt for the tribunal process and for his creditor, whom he avoided paying by declaring bankruptcy in 2009). Further,  I have never done anything to artificially inflate my blog’s presence (or that of my Twitter feed), and this blog is not paid for by Islamic extremists (or anyone else).

More seriously, however, Wightman is still playing the manipulation game, although this time with particular callousness. Wightman’s probable YouTube collaborator reportedly has a disability, and so Wightman now accuses me of “harassing a vulnerable adult” by daring to enquire into the creation of the abusive audio. Further, Wightman claims that my enquiry has terrified this man’s mother, who is herself dealing with a serious illness. It seems likely that Wightman has indeed attempted to make her fearful, for his own selfish purposes, although the fact that the YouTube audio and related channel were taken down just yesterday is a good indication of where the truth lies here.

Distastefully, Wightman is also now claiming “vulnerable adult” status for himself, purporting to be suffering from an illness which means that any undue stress – such as pointing out his dishonesty – will be a police matter.

Wightman’s new attacks also contain sinister elements: he claims to know people who could “behead” Tim and me, and he expresses a wish to run us down with his car. He also writes of a disturbing fantasy in which Tim and I come to his house to threaten his family, so that he could “fight” us. Given his habit of projecting his own obvious dysfunctions onto others, this is particularly alarming.

Note (26 June)

(1) The blogs were created by Charlie Flowers, who regards himself as some sort of vigilante against Islamic extremists. Flowers hates Tim and me, and, like Wightman, he sees the internet as being a place to act out a fantasy of self-empowerment by seeking to harm or distress others. He runs a Twitter feed called “blackeyedgirls”, and he advertised the blogs there today.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 3 Comments »

In 2006, the crypt of the convent of St Melanie of Rome in Zrenjanin was excavated. The convent had been founded in 1935, and the first prioress, Petronije, was buried there fifty years ago. As ever in these cases, it was announced that the body had supposedly been found miraculously still intact, and the remains were reburied in a special ceremony conducted by the Bishop of Banat. That’s according to what can be gleaned from Google Translate from a report here.

However, it now appears that something else was going on: as has been widely reported, the Serbian newspaper Blic has revealed that the convent was secretly harbouring Ratko Mladic, who at that time was dangerously ill. It was thought that Mladic was likely to die, and the plan was that his body would be secretly placed in the crypt alongside the prioress and some nuns.

Details in English about the convent are scarce; this site has some pictures.

(Name variations: Melania, Melanija).

Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a comment »

Interfax has an interview with the ubiquitous Vsevolod Chaplin, spokesman for the Russian Orthodox Church:

The Russian Orthodox Church is grateful to the Moscow city authorities and law enforcers for preventing a gay parade attempted in the city last Saturday.

…He found the beatings on Saturday regrettable.

Moreover, he admitted that he had never heard of the Orthodox Brotherhood blamed for the beatings. “It is the first time that I have heard about such an organization. I wonder whether it was set up for provocative purposes,” Father Vsevolod assumed.

Chaplin’s ignorance of the Orthodox Brotherhood is hard to swallow, given the Brotherhood’s high media profile and links with the church. As was reported prior to the rally in the Moscow News:

“We will drive them off,” Yury Ageshchev, coordinator of the Orthodox Brotherhood of the Russian Orthodox Church told Kommersant. “True, last year we had some issues with the police and there were arrests, but this time we will not give up. It’s going to get hot,” he threatened.

Would that be the same Ageshchev who in 2004 was introduced to the American Orthodox leader, Metropolitan Laurus, when Laurus came to Moscow? According to a press release by the Union of Orthodox Brotherhoods and the Union of Orthodox Gonfalon-bearers:

The visit concluded with a discussion…[with] Protopriest Sergei Konobas of the Moscow Diocese, A.A. Senin, editor of Russkiy Vestnik, the writer D.N. Merkulov, the head of the Russian National Culture Center of Moscow, the famous Orthodox publicist Yu. N. Ageshchev, members of the SPB, the Union of Gonfalon-Bearers and other patriotic Orthodox groups. 

Ageshchev is a veteran fanatic: back in 1992 he denounced an Orthodox priest for taking part in a Billy Graham rally; in 2007 he led a cleansing of the Moscow River to counter “the filth that filled the river after the trip of a big company of homosexuals”. He has also been involved in skirmishes between Slavs and Caucasian nationals.

The Orthodox Brotherhoods and the Gonfalon-bearers have also staged a number of stunts, including impaling a toy monkey as a protest against the theory of evolution and doing the same to a photo of Madonna. According to a scholar named Stella Rock, writing in 2002, the Union of Orthodox Brotherhoods was actually “instigated by the Patriarchate to coordinate the activities of flourishing lay organisations”. She adds:

Despite a promising beginning, the movement has been plagued by the xenophobia, antisemitism, intolerance and political conservatism visible in many areas of the Russian Orthodox Church, and the Union of Orthodox Brotherhoods has arguably become a symbol of the worst aspects of post-Communist Orthodoxy.

How could Chaplin have missed all this?

Filed under: Uncategorized | 3 Comments »

Boing Boing‘s science editor Maggie Koerth-Baker ponders recent tornadoes in the USA:

In just five months, the United States has experienced more tornadoes than we often get in an entire year. And far, far more people have died. 2011 is already the deadliest year for tornadoes since 1953. As of May 23rd, 498 people have been killed. That’s a big jump from normal. I was born in 1981. In my entire lifetime, annual tornado deaths in the United States have only broken the 100-person mark three other years–1984, 1998, and 2008. Clearly, there is something different about this year. …The big question–Are tornadoes caused by climate change?–is made up of lots of little questions. And we don’t know all the answers to the little questions yet.

…The future of human life depends on how we respond to the risks of climate change. How we respond to those risks depends on how well the general public understands the messy world of real science.

But is Koerth-Baker missing something? WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah has taken time off from his Birther-mongering to proffer an alternative explanation:

Once again, we’ve seen the U.S. hit with a series of deadly superstorms following Barack Obama’s pledge to return Israel to pre-1967 borders.

Just days after Obama insisted Israel must give up lands it won through military victory with its enemies, some 200 people were killed by a tornado in Joplin, Mo.

There’s a pattern here.

We saw it in Katrina, when George Bush forced Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza. In fact, as everyone from Israeli rabbis to U.S. senators have noted, it seems to happen every single time the U.S. pressures Israel to divide the land.

…It goes right back to Genesis and God’s pledge to bless those who bless the children of Israel and curse those who curse them.

I blogged on the “Israeli rabbis” who linked Katrina to Gaza here.

Obama’s speech was on 19 May, and the Joplin tornado was on 23 May; although Joplin had the highest number of fatalities in a single incident, the “series of deadly superstorms” actually began in February. I can think of better ways for an omnipotent deity to convey geopolitical preferences.

As for the possible role of climate change, Farah believes (or, rather, purports to believe – he’s essentially an opportunist) that scientists working in the field are embarked on a conspiracy to promote a “false religion“.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 4 Comments »

Child-witch stigmatisation continues in Akwa Ibom state in Nigeria:

…The Akwa Ibom State government has concluded plans to rehabilitate 21 abandoned children who were discovered taking refuge at two locations in Eket local government Area.

The commissioner for Women Affairs and Social welfare, Mrs. Eunice Thomas disclosed this when she visited the children at the premises of the Eket Sports Stadium and the moribund Qua River Hotel.

…Interacting with the commissioner, the some of the children said they were chased out by their parents and relatives who alleged that they were witches, while some of them said they were forced out on allegations of pilfering and truancy.

Most of them alleged that their ordeals were caused by their step mothers. Master Godswill Felix Okon said he was about taking his Common Entrance Examination when her aunt took her to a church where the pastor alleged that he was a witch, culminating in his being sent out of the house by his aunt.

Back in September, state governor Godswill Akpabio had assured CNN that the problem of children being accused of witchcraft was “under control”.

The Akwa Ibom authorities have been quick to find someone else to blame for the children’s plight: some of the children had been receiving support from Stepping Stones Nigeria Child Empowerment Foundation, an affiliate of the UK-based charity Stepping Stones Nigeria. Back in March I noted that SSN, which brought the problem of “child-witches” in Nigeria to international attention in 2008, was recently forced to terminate its link to CRARN, a hostel for stigmatised children in Akwa Ibom, over a child protection issue. According to Thomas and to Aniakan Umanah (Commissioner of Information and Social Reorientation), this means that SSN, rather than the government, is responsible for the abandoned children:

… Umanah… described the activities of Stepping Stones Nigeria as a scam. “All the money they have used Akwa Ibom children to make is not commensurate with what they claimed to do for the children; they have nothing to show for it. £2m is not a small amount of money. Stepping Stones Nigeria and its team of blackmailers should not use tar brush to paint Akwa Ibom black in the eyes of the world. They should stop advertising our children to the global media to make money. It’s a ruse; and we are tired of them.”

I dealt with accusations against SSN here, and SSN’s accounts and reports can be seen on the website of the UK Charity Commission here (total income since 2007 in fact comes to less than £1 million). I should also add that last week I attended a public event organised by SSN in London, and I have confidence in the organisation’s probity and competence.

Sadly, the politically-motivated attacks on SSN appear to have the support of CRARN, which was angered by the termination of the relationship. Last month, it was reported that:

A High Court Judge in Akwa Ibom State, Justice Joy Unwana has commended the Child’s Right and Rehabilitation Network (CRARN) for initiating the campaign against branding, torturing or killing of children as witches and wizards in the State. Justice Unwana made the commendation while answering questions in the Commission of Inquiry into Witchcraft Accusation and Child Abuse having submitted a memorandum to the commission.

…”I have children and know what it takes to maintain them. I have been to CRARN several times even when UNICEF commissioned a complex recently. I have been talking to the Director, Sam Itauma, to know what is happening there. If people like these decide to shoulder the responsibility of others and the society, I think they should be encouraged. I learnt in the news that the UK organisation, Stepping Stones pulled out their support with phoney excuses after using CRARN and Akwa Ibom children to make a lot of money. Government should really check the recurrence of this and avoid unnecessary touting by such foreign NGOs.”

However, Unwara’s recommendation for CRARN appears to have been at least partly unheeded, and Thomas has recently removed a number of children from CRARN to a “Security Village”. This site says 200 children were removed, although other sources give a much lower figure. One of those involved in the removal, Ata Ikiddeh, had previously worked with CRARN and has left a comment on this critical article (link added):

I am Ata Ikiddeh. I am the one who has been accused in an earlier article by Sahara Reporters of kidnapping and abducting these children from CRARN center in Esit Eket to Uyo. If you feel i abducted these children, you can walk into a police station and ask for a warrant for my arrest.

Listen, no child was coerced or forced. I negotiated and spoke to the children, knowing that any form of duress or coercion would have been a scandal both in the national and the international press. We have captured the whole process on video.

In the end 19 children willingly agreed to come with us and about 70 children chose to stay behind.

The Honorable Commissioner has done a lot to rescue abandoned children in the State…

In contrast, CRARN’s counsel, James Ibor, claims that 100 children were taken, and that the “Security Village” is unsuitable:

On May 16, 2011, a mere six days later, Mrs. Eunice Thomas, Akwa Ibom State’s infamous Commissioner for Women Affairs, together with her team, stormed the premises of Child’s Rights and Rehabilitation Network (CRARN), a non-governmental organisation (NGO), with a centre at Esit Eket, abducted over one hundred of its children, forced them into Akwa Ibom Transport Company (AKTC) coaster buses and drove them to Akwa Ibom State Special Children Centre, Uyo.

Interestingly, the Commission of Inquiry into Witchcraft Accusations and Child Rights Abuses made a finding on the said centre to the effect that it is understaffed and lacks adequate facilities to cater for as few as fifty children. Moreover, even its few staffers are ill-trained; and they freely profess belief in witchcraft, and that the children under their charge are indeed witches as charged.

The National Mirror, meanwhile, raises a question about the removal team’s authority:

The team claimed to be executing an order made by the Witchcraft Panel currently investigating the “Child Witch syndrome”  in the state which alledgedly ordered that the centre be closed down. But, investigations carried out by National Mirror at the Judicial Commission of Inquiry headed by Justice Abraham showed that the commission is yet to submit its report to the government, neither did it make any such order as claimed.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 2 Comments »