Arab brutality in the name of Islam

The brutal Friday beheading was carried out according to the Shariah law of Arab kingdom but the accused Bangladeshis were denied the right of their defense.

Ironically, this same Shariah law has been seen to be flexible in case of allegations against US, UK or Canadian citizens, in which case such capital offences are usually settled with blood money, connection or diplomacy. Many such reported and recorded incidents prove that the so-called Shariah law is not exercised in a neutral manner and is quite susceptible to nepotism. In the name of Islam the Saudi royal elite enjoys this kind of cannibalism even in the 21st century, while the rest of the world turns a blind eye to it. This also explains why the wave of Arab Spring has not been able to hit the (In) Justice square of Riyadh.

Such human slaughtering can be seen replicated by Islamic radicals in other countries. When the western society is shifting from capital to humane punishment, the Muslim holy land continues with its biased justice system that denies the poor their right to legal defense.

Conservative Muslim elites of Arab justify this primitive behavior as a necessary deterrence against rampant crime. But statistics in Arab countries show no decline in the rate of crimes; and all this while citizens of rich countries easily circumvent the Arab law by means of wealth and influence. Any interpretation of the Shariah law that presents itself as biased and capitalist must be challenged as a crime against humanity.

The weakness of Bangladeshi diplomats has once again been exposed for they failed to defend the case of their eight beheaded countrymen. The ambassador should be asked to clarify this failure.

Almost two million workers are earning remittance for Bangladesh with their hard work in Arab countries. Our embassy is there to look after the welfare of our workers. If they fail to perform, then why should we sign their salary cheques with the blood of eight ordinary citizens of Bangladesh?

Riyadh has appeared hostile towards Dhaka ever since the liberation war of ‘71. It only recognized Dhaka after the killing of Bangabandhu, and has been providing refuge to our war criminals till date. UAE is known to sponsor Moududi and Wahabi radicals in Bangladesh, only so that it can retain its free-port crown.

In these countries themselves, domestic violence against women is kept hidden under the garb of male chauvinistic interpretation of religion. Workers from poor countries are treated as slaves, while female migrant workers are often abused by the rich natives. The sanctity of Arab land has been repeatedly abused by its feudal rulers and their crimes against humanity have come to over-shadow the glory of Islam. They are nothing but a bunch of exploiters who run private harems, but try to teach ethics to the world by beheading the poor.

Which Islam would approve of such uncouth discrimination between a rich Canadian and eight poor Bangladeshis? Beheading poor people publicly and releasing rich people secretly, portrays double standards even in the practice of religion. That too in a country of the Holy Kaaba, where Muslims from across the world go for Hajj. This is the very state that earns millions from religious pilgrimages every year.

Poster Of Tibet Photography Exhibition

Students for a Free Tibet, Bangladesh (SFTBD), the Bangladesh chapter of the Students for a Free Tibet organization, in partnership with Drik Bangladesh, has organized a photography exhibition on Tibet named “Into Exile | Tibet 1949-2009” at Drik Gallery in Dhaka which was scheduled to start today and run for a week. Drik Bangladesh is an internationally acclaimed photo agency which is led by renowned photo journalist and blogger Shahidul Alam.

Phayul.com reports quoting a spokesperson from SFTBD:

“On 29th October 2009, Qian Kaifu, Cultural Counselor, and Cao Yanhua, Cultural Attache, from the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in Bangladesh visited Dr Shahidul Alam to ask him to cancel the exhibition.”

“They brought Chinese gifts along with their request,” [..]

Unheard Voice Blog reported on 31st of October, 2009:

It seems like China is surely paying attention. Tomorrow’s exhibition in Tibet seems to be in jeopardy with the organizers under serious pressure to cancel the event.

Yesterday a delegation from Chinese embassy came to meet the Shahidul Alam, director of Drik and ‘requested’ him to cancel the event.

An email from an activist reached us here: ‘They also wandered around Drik and asked employees number of questions….

Alam bhai told them not to advise him what to do on his own property. So the exhibition is going on, but we are expecting huge lines of dgfi (military intelligence) and what not on the opening day on Sunday.

Not only was the exhibition targeted, but also the activists as the post continues:

As of 6 pm tonight, Special Branch officers reached Drik under the operatives of a certain SI Mijan and demanded to know the name of the contact person for the exhibition. The movement leaders also previously reported various visits to the home of the activists over the past three weeks by the same SI.

Shahidul Alam posted this message in Twitter:

7:04 PM Oct 31st: khairul kabir and palash from special branch currently at Drik. want to know names of organisers of Tibet show. I’ve refused to give it.

And today (Sunday) the inevitable happened. Shahidul Alam tweeted this afternoon:

The heat is on. OC Shah Alam just phoned me again telling me to stop the show. Threatened to send police if we refuse.

Shahidul Alam being questioned. Image copyright Drik

Later reports came in that police finally prevented the event:

An hour before the launch, scheduled for 5pm, police shut the gates preventing public from entering the gallery, said Drik authorities.

Drik managing director Shahidul Alam said Bangladesh Police Special Branch spoke with him and asked him to stop the exhibition citing a “government order”.

Alam said, although the police officers could not produce any document of the order, they threatened to shut down the show by force if the organisers did not do so willingly.

Now let us learn about the turn of events from Shahidul Alam’s blog post:

When Mr. Kaifu, instead of showing interest in our sole Chinese member Jessica Lim in the library, insisted that we find a quiet place to talk, I realized it was more than a courtesy call.

He got straight to the point. “We would like you to cancel the Tibet exhibition” he said. Reminding me that Tibet was a part of China, he went on to explain how the Bangladesh China relationship would be affected if the show went on. He also spoke of the many things we could do together, the exhibitions we could bring. About how such a famous organisation like Drik would find many partners in China. It seemed churlish to remind him that my recent application for a visa when I was to judge the TOPS photojournalism contest in China, had been rejected.

As politely as I could, I reminded Mr. Kaifu that ours was an independent gallery. I asked him how he felt he had the right to tell us, what we could show. I invited him to the show and assured him that he would be free to present his own opinion at the opening. We would be happy to show a Chinese exhibition, if the quality was right. He wanted to see the gallery and a colleague showed him around as I went back to the meeting.

It was evening before the phone call from the ministry of culture came in. “China was a friend, you mustn’t show pictures of Dalai Lama” the high ranking official went on. “No no we are not talking of censorship, but…” This was followed by some artist who spoke as if he was a friend. I couldn’t place either of the callers, though I could place the ministry official by his rank. I could see it was to be a multi-pronged attack.

Shahisul Alam commentates on the images in a live web stream after the exhibition had been closed. Image courtesy Media Helping Media

The Special Branch do like me. They came to visit again. [..] The initial cordial conversation, turned sharp when I refused to divulge the contact details of the organizers. They reminded me of how it would become difficult for Drik to operate in the future if we didn’t take the side of the government. I reminded them that I was siding with the law. That the law applied to the police, was an unknown concept to Shah Alam.

Pictures of the turnout of events are available on the DrikNews site which appears to reported at as an attack site. You can ignore the sign (its safe) and see the pictures.

Rob Godden at The Rights Exposure protest writes:

The Chinese government’s increasing interference into other states is a worrying trend. Not satisfied with running their own complex censorship system they are attempting to make it transnational. These tactics work best on small countries such as Bangladesh, or Nepal where I am now, and smacks of bullying. [..]

The Chinese government obviously thinks that it has jurisdiction over any content that relates to China where ever in the world it may be displayed. If pressure from the embassy does not work an unofficial cyber attack will be on its way.

Bangladeshi netizens have already started protesting. Habibullah Mizan wrote in the Facebook page of the event:

Are WE living in BANGLADESH or CHINA??? WHO runs our elected government??? WE or the CHINESE???? We can’t even allow any exhibition? Really shame, shame, shame.

Shada Kalo Blog is also not happy with the government’s decision and asks it to show a little spine:

Comrades, why are you kow-towing to China and repressing freedom of speech in Dhaka? Yes, I know the old jokes about it raining in Peking and opening umbrellas in Dhaka. But seriously, this was not a government sponsored event. The worst Beijing could have done if you said sorry, we can not intervene, was NOT sell you some more lead-tainted toys.

We thought you took an oath to protect and follow the constitution of Bangladesh first (which includes protecting the freedom of speech of its citizens), not the geopolitical aspirations of China when this really does not matter to Bangladesh.

Sorry, now we know better.

This post was also published in Global Voices Online.