Doc's Talk: Where is the outrage? More Christians killed in Northern Nigerian jihad last year than in the rest of the world combined

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

Where is the outrage? More Christians killed in Northern Nigerian jihad last year than in the rest of the world combined

Jihad Watch
No one cares about this. Tell us more about "Islamophobia." "More Christians Killed in Northern Nigeria Last Year Than in the Rest of the World Combined," by Ann Buwalda for the Jubilee Campaign via AINA, May 20:

Two weeks ago I informed Nigerian Congressmen and women about this deplorable disrepute during my lecture to the Nigerian House of Representatives, Committee on Human Rights. Invited by the Chairman of the Committee, the Hon. Beni Lar, to address the topic of Ethnicity, Conflict, and Human Rights, I pointed out that the Nigerian Constitution reflects the broadest range of religious freedom exercise recognized within international law. I asked, "What good is this right in principle when in practice there is a societal actor, namely the Boko Haram, which strikes fear with bomb blasting of churches during worship services?" I called for an end to impunity because the predictable and certain result of impunity is more violence. I explained what it means within U.S. law that the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), a U.S. government funded agency, had just submitted its recommendation that Nigeria receive US Department of State designation as a "country of particular concern" under the 1998 International Religious Freedom Act which would trigger a menu of remedies for engagement.

The discussant to my lecture, Professor Muhammed Tabiu from the Faculty of Law, Bayero University, emphasized that the religious freedom called for in the Nigerian Constitution is even broader then the freedoms articulated within the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. He stated that the legal framework has done all that it can do and that the improvement must take place "on the ground." With respect to religious extremism, he noted that "lack of respect for human rights are a daily occurrence." Prof. Tabiu also agreed with my criticism of the US Department of State's surprising endorsement of a federal Sharia court of appeal. Jubilee Campaign has yet to find anyone other than the Boko Haram terror group calling for more sharia. I had noted that this illustrates how the US Department of State fundamentally misunderstands and misrepresents the constitution of Nigeria. Prof. Tabiu clarified that there are state courts of appeals for the Sharia courts and that the Constitution of Nigeria reflects a "reasonable compromise" accommodating Muslims as well as Christians in the context of state level Sharia and customary courts.
I also pointed out that in addition to mistakes about Nigerian law, there are also mistakes as to facts. USCIRF for instance reported that only Muslims had been convicted of religious violence. This is however not accurate. Jubilee is involved in a case where Christians, arrested for curfew violation were wrongly convicted of terrorism. The attorney general of Plateau State also has previously provided updates of prosecutions which included a number of Christians arrested and charged in relation to incidents of violence.
Following the close of the Congressional Human Rights Committee session, four Northern Nigeria Congressmen pulled me aside to dialogue about how dangerous and "explosive" my factual statement about the religious identity of the victims in the death toll was. One of the Congressmen insisted that more Muslims have been killed by Boko Haram, and that mosques in the north were also bombed by Boko Haram affiliated actors. When I told him that my data consisting of specific incidents researched from Nigerian media and NGO sources can be found at http://factsnigeriaviolence.wordpress.com/, he could only provide anecdotal claims to support his contention that more Muslims were killed. Ironically, neither the U.S. Department of State's human rights report on Nigeria nor recent Human Rights Watch reports have provided more than anecdotal references for the same unsupported proposition that more Muslims have been killed by Boko Haram. Moreover, the fact that moderate Muslims have been killed by Boko Haram should be the real "explosive" cause for all of Nigerians to unite and seek the arrest and prosecution of those responsible for the violence.
Coincidentally, the next evening of May 3 I caught an interview on Al Jazeera entitled, "Jailed Boko Haram rebels seek pardon." Imprisoned since last August, Ibrahim Mohammed told the interviewer, "Yes my belief is that there should be Islamic law, and we have chosen to take up arms against people who do not want Sharia." Another fighter detailed the attacks he perpetrated which he prefaced with the statement, "Between me and God I took up arms to fight." When asked about the death of innocent bystanders, the third militant explained that such a death would be by a "mistake" and that "if he dies he is innocent and we don't worry at all. We are forgiven by God." Chilling. Without any hint of remorse from them concerning their actions on victims or victims' families, their lawyer and the interviewer described their efforts to obtain amnesty and prompt release. Amnesty would be a travesty and injustice of the worst kind to innocent victims. Nothing indicates these three men would not resume their jihad to impose Sharia law, as they so clearly stated on camera was the reason why they took up arms.
It seems that following a plea from the governor of Borno State, Kassim Shettima, that his state was on the brink of a takeover by the Boko Haram, President Goodluck Jonathan responded with a declaration of a state of emergency as well as sending military troops to Maiduguri, known to be Boko Haram's stronghold. After the militants again attacked the government, killed civilians, and seized property, Nigeria's military sent several thousand troops and imposed a 24 hour curfew in Maiduguri. The military seized stock piles of weapons, including sophisticated rocket-propelled grenades, killed 10 militants, and arrested 63, according to Al Jazeera. Al Jazeera reported yesterday that the blockade of supply routes to Boko Haram seems to achieving the goal of causing militants to flee their bases.
The predictable response from the U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry cautioned, "We are also deeply concerned by credible allegations that Nigerian security forces are committing gross human rights violations, which, in turn, only escalate the violence and fuel extremism. The United States condemns Boko Haram's campaign of terror in the strongest terms. We urge Nigeria's security forces to apply disciplined use of force in all operations, protect civilians in any security response, and respect human rights and the rule of law." The U.S. Department of State's response once again could not be more convoluted and confused as to who the perpetrators of human rights violations and spread of carnage are. In fact, as reported by Al Jazeera and others, the violent takeover of Borno state and other territories by the Boko Haram are being contained as per the state of emergency.
For example, as reported by The Independent on May 8 "The Nigerian Islamist sect Boko Haram is thought to have been behind a deadly siege on the northeastern town of Bama on Tuesday that left 55 people dead...Boko Haram is a terror group that wants to carve out an Islamic state in a country split roughly equally between Christians and Muslims." This article goes on to explain that its more recent tactics have resulted from "the help Boko Haram has received from al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), a branch of the international terrorist network based in the Saharan states of Mali, Niger and Algeria."
It seems that the Nigerian government is seeking to contain known militants responsible for weekly incidents of carnage and destruction on civilians. We continue to encourage the end to impunity and the restoration of peace for all civilians in the north of Nigeria.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk