Unimagined

The Government of Qatar Banned My Book

The Government of Qatar Banned My Book

 

Okay, maybe “banned “ is too strong a word.  But they did effectively block the Arabic translation.

 

Here’s what happened.

 

I was a guest participant at the Emirates Airline International Festival of Literature in Dubai, as described in this account.

http://www.unimagined.org/eafl2010.html 

 

There, I met a representative of Bloomsbury Qatar, and we shook hands on the Arabic translation deal. 

 

I was so happy!  An Arabic translation of my book.  I had no doubt that many Arabic-speakers would read it with interest.

 

Then, a few weeks later, I was told by e-mail that the deal was off.  The Government of Qatar’s Ministry of Culture had withdrawn support, which was necessary for the translation, because of “unsuitable content.”  And that’s all I was ever told.

 

“Unsuitable content?”

 

What could that be? Well, I’m pretty sure it’s not the foul language, sex, and violence – because there isn’t any (not much, anyway).

 

So I have these thoughts.

 

Could it be the brutal honesty of my thoughts and observations?  Because that is one often-noted characteristic of this book – the compelling honesty, without any attempt to filter, justify or analyze what happens in the narrative.  Because it’s all true, and there’s no point in me trying to sanitize it.

 

Could it be because I wondered as a child how we knew that Islam was true?  How did we know that Muhammad didn’t just make it up?   Surely all children have such thoughts, whenever they are taught to believe their parents’ religion?

 

Could it be because I mentioned the wealthy Arabs coming to London and drinking, gambling, womanizing – and wondered if they knew these were against our Islamic code of conduct?

 

Could it be because I mention throughout the poor treatment of women, and of how this is utterly hypocritical?

 

Could it be because I denounce the vile veil-across-the face as a cultural artifact of utter stupidity and ignorance?

 

Could it be that I suggested that, in order to apply Islam to the modern world, we actually have to think and reason, not blindly follow rules and procedures applicable to a desert environment with no technology?

 

Never mind.  Whatever the “unsuitable content”, I have no doubt that I will get an Arabic publisher in due course.  In case certain people hadn’t noticed, there’s change afoot in the whole region. 

 

They can resist, they can delay it, but ultimately, they cannot stop it. 

 

 

 

 

 

Dr Joel Hayward is a pain-in-the-ass

Dr Joel Hayward is a

pain-in-the-ass

I have a friend called Dr Joel Hayward. He’s a scholar, an academic lecturer, a writer, a poet and a Muslim. He’s also a pain-in-the-ass (but more on that later).

Joel holds various academic posts, including Dean of the Royal Air Force College, Co-Director of the Royal Air Force Centre for Air Power Studies, Head of King’s College London’s Air Power Studies Division and Professor of Strategy (Adjunct) at the Indonesian Defence University.

   

  

      

 

As a writer, Joel is very versatile – short stories, poems and an absolutely brilliant biography of Admiral Lord Nelson, as well as other non-fiction books about air warfare and a great many articles about Islam in its many dimensions. In recent times, he has written extensively to educate Muslim audiences that the Afghanistan and Iraq situations are not part of a deliberate ‘war on Islam’ by the West – even though that is what Al-Qaeda want people to believe. This is very important work on Joel’s part, if we are ever to end the conflicts and stabilise those countries.

 

 

 

 

 "Hayward is a prolific writer on military history, strategy, operational art and command. ... In this exceptionally well written book he answers his own question [Is there anything new and important to be said about Nelson?] with an eloquent 'yes'."

Lt Col Richard Seamon, USMCR (ret.) U.S. Naval Proceedings

 

 

"Stopped at Stalingrad is a first-class publication. It is authoritative ... and an example of how 'new military history' should be written. It should firmly cement Joel Hayward's reputation as a talented writer and a fine historian."

New Zealand Army Journal

 

 

The two things which his many former students consistently have said is that he was one of their best lecturers and that he always taught them to question and challenge everything, especially the teacher. You can find many such comments about him on the Internet.

 

  

 

His hairstyle has always been rubbish, though.

 

Joel is from New Zealand, and has Jewish ancestry. In fact, he became literate in Hebrew, and in his twenties was a member of the New Zealand Friends of Israel. At that time he made several trips to Israel and also founded an organisation called Opposition to Anti-Semitism (OAS), which he headed for its first two years.

 

In 1991, Joel received a BA from the University of Canterbury in Christchurch, specialising in History and Classics. He then went on to do a MA and then a PhD.

 

Joel’s MA thesis was on the subject of Holocaust Revisionism. He was supervised and examined by Professors of History from the universities of Canterbury and Waikato, and given an A+ for his thesis – which was judged the best history thesis of his year and won him the Sir James Hight Memorial Prize, awarded for ‘excellence’.

In his thesis, Joel (a Hebrew-literate ‘Friend of Israel’ of Jewish background) probed the extent to which the Holocaust had been planned and organised, the number of gas chambers used and the numbers of victims involved. In no way, shape or form could this be construed as ‘Holocaust Denial’.

 

Joel’s MA thesis, completed in 1993, was released to public scrutiny in 1999. Unfortunately, certain parties labeled it as ‘Holocaust Denial’ and this spurious claim has haunted him ever since. A committee was formed and the University of Canterbury conducted a lengthy investigation. They concluded that there were errors of research in the thesis, but that Joel Hayward was entirely innocent of any deliberate anti-Semitism or Holocaust Denial. Joel subsequently apologised for the research flaws and even publically apologised to the New Zealand Jewish community who were so up-in-arms about this.

He moved to the UK in 2004, and became Muslim in 2007. (The imam warned him at the time to expect vilification and ridicule, but nothing happened ... until now.)

Joel is the most humble, tolerant, peace-advocating person I know. From a scholarly perspective, he condemns all terrorism perpetrated in the name of Islam – regardless of the justification. He has written extensively on this.

 

Joel’s website gives a hint of the breadth and depth of his interests and talents.

http://www.joelhayward.org/

 

 

Recently, he berated Muslims on Facebook who use foul language. I totally agree with him on this. There are many kinds of so-called ‘Muslim’, and the semi-literate ‘gangsta’ kind I find rather distasteful – these are ethnically ‘Muslim’ rather than through belief and practice.

 Joel gets criticised by some so-called ‘Muslims’, who claim that he isn’t a real Muslim because he doesn’t have a beard. Well, those cave men can go back to the desert. You only have to look at Joel’s writings to see what an outstanding Muslim he is – educated, knowledgeable, balanced, humble, modest, peaceful. If only there were more like him.

 

But Joel is also a pain-in-the ass. (Forgive me for using the American form, but it rolls off the tongue better.) You see, he is too gentle, too tolerant, too peace-loving and too humble. It’s really annoying.

 

Do you remember when Harold Camping -- the American so-called Christian so-called Preacher – predicted that 21st May 2011 would be the Day of Rapture? Well, I posted a joke on my Facebook page about it, on 21st May.

‘I saw my doctor about a pain in my appendix, and he said it could Rupture any time today.’

 

Most of my friends thought it was very funny, but Joel sent me a private message:

“…You are one of the wittiest writers I have ever read, and I thank God for your talent, but -- in private, not on your wall -- I respectfully ask you to reflect on the wisdom of mocking people of faith even for very mistaken beliefs.”

 

But I wasn’t mocking Christians in general, I was only mocking those lunatic end-timers who long for the world to end, and ignore what the Bible actually says. For it is written that no-one, not even Jesus, could know the hour … “but only the Father in Heaven.”

 

But anyway, this just goes to demonstrate that Joel Hayward is just too nice even to have a laugh at end-timers. He totally exudes tolerance, respect, peace and humility. So much so that he disapproves of mocking people of another faith – even Christian end-timers (who I think are an embarrassment even to their own brethren). Because he berates others who do this, this qualifies him as a pain-in-the ass.

 

You really need to understand this to comprehend the importance of what follows.

Joel’s very well-informed and scholarly writings debunk the current popular belief that Islam is inherently violent, and he is a living example of this. He does explain in depth Islam’s position on war – what constitutes a ‘just war’ and how it must be conducted. Obviously, the killing of non-combatants is strictly forbidden. Nonetheless, sometimes war is an unpleasant necessity – as the Second World War was against the Nazis.

 

Joel goes to great lengths to explain the early history of Islam and the conditions under which the Prophet Muhammad was operating. Just as the Romans tried to exterminate the troublesome early Christians, so did the pagan idol-worshipping Arabs try to eradicate the irritating early Muslims, with their extremely annoying ‘there is only one God and He’s not a stone idol’ concept.

There were times when it looked as if the early Muslims were going to be completely wiped out. The Prophet had to motivate them, to make them believe that they could not only survive, but endure – even though hopelessly outnumbered. Here Joel makes a comparison with the motivational speeches of Winston Churchill – giving the British people hope when the future looked dire.

“We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender …”

 

From a Muslim perspective, for Churchill to be compared with Muhammad is a huge compliment to Churchill.

 

In recent times, Joel has written very balanced pieces on Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. On the latter, he totally supports the removal of Gaddafi, but urges caution in NATO’s conduct (and how it may be perceived) and, in particular, the avoidance of ‘mission creep’. For whilst it is obvious that we must protect civilians against attack by policing the ‘no fly’ zone, Joel warns that NATO should not become the de facto air force of the rebels (‘of whom we know very little’). All of these writings are clearly labelled as his own opinion.

 

In summary, Joel Hayward is a scholar, a respected teacher, and he displays exemplary compassion, tolerance, peace and humility.

So it came as something of a shock to see the Mail on Sunday and the Daily Mail both publish a prominent ‘news’ story attacking and totally demonizing Dr Joel Hayward.

  

 

  

 

The article first appeared in the Mail on Sunday on 7th August, and was repeated in the Daily Mail on 8th August.

The article bluntly portrays Joel as a Holocaust-denying, anti-West, anti-NATO-intervention, anti-British, fascist, Islamist fundamentalist bully, who has published with an institution which has extremist/terrorist links.

If it was satire, it would be hilarious -- but it's evil, vicious and cruel, with no interest in the truth.

 This is an utter abomination.

Just when we thought the News of the World had taken British journalism into the gutter, this ‘journalist’ Ian Gallagher has bubbled up from the putrid depths of the sewer with a deliberate and callous attack on a decent human being, using distortion, half-truths and lies.

 

Taking information from Joel’s own website and Wikipedia entry (and even photos from Joel’s website), Ian Gallagher has twisted and distorted and de-contextualised everything to create a shoddy piece of so-called journalism. It is nothing but an attempt to get Mail readers worked-up and angry about a perceived outrage – that a nasty, crazy, hate-filled anti-Semitic, anti-Western, fundamentalist Muslim is Dean of the Royal Air Force College. What a great story! – except that it’s an abominable lie.

 

Let’s take a look at Ian Gallagher’s article.

An Ayatollah is a very senior Shia cleric, virtually at the level of Pope. But Joel is neither Shia nor a cleric. So to refer to him as an ‘Ayatollah’ is like referring to someone as a ‘Pope’ just because he’s Christian (even if he’s Protestant), or a Jewish man as ‘Chief Rabbi’ (just because he’s Jewish).

So a deliberately provocative and spiteful headline, which sets the tone for the rest of the article.

 

Gallagher refers to Joel’s twenty-year-old thesis as if it was contemporary, and strongly portrays Joel as a Holocaust Denier – which is complete nonsense.

 

Gallagher takes isolated passages from Joel’s balanced writings and presents him as opposing NATO’s mission in Libya – when he’s only urging caution and warning against ‘mission creep’.

 

An Islamist bully?  Anyone who's met Joel knows that he is a softly spoken, cordial, gentle man. He never raises his voice in anger -- his own staff would attest to this. For him to be presented as a bully is utterly despicable.

Then there’s that great line thrown in – “In another article recently he likened Churchill to Mohammed” – without any explanation of what this means. From a Muslim, that’s a huge compliment to Churchill. But in this article, it’s just another hot button to work up the Mail reader.

 

There is a mention that Joel wrote something for the Cordoba Foundation, which can be linked to extremism apparently.  But what did he write in that article for the Cordoba Foundation? The Mail doesn't tell us, but here is an extract:

 "The Holocaust of the Jews in the Second World War, one of history’s vilest crimes, involved the organised murder of six million Jews by Germans and others who considered themselves Christians or at least members of the Christian value system."

What makes this particularly sickening is that clearly it's not even a misunderstanding -- it's deliberate, deceitful and callous to link Joel to extremism due to an article he wrote, and not reveal that the content of the article is completely the reverse of what the Mail is trying to portray.

The Mail article itself reveals what triggered this off. Someone with a grudge against Joel wrote a letter to the Mail and (on condition of anonymity, of course) made all these allegations. Gallagher then pulled some isolated facts from Joel’s website, arranged and distorted them to create the worst possible impression and the most devastating character assassination, and created the best story he could.

Joel has been writing and speaking as a Muslim for years, and even very recently told Muslim audiences – in defence of the West – that he had never been attacked for being Muslim, that the fact that he could be Muslim and Dean of the Royal Air Force college proved that there was no concerted, deliberate plan by the West to attack Islam and kill Muslims. That is just propaganda by Al-Qaeda to get Muslims worked up, instead of analysing each complex situation to truly understand what is going on.

But complex, nuanced analysis is too much for Ian Gallagher. It’s all black and white to him.

The 'information' sources for this article appear to be:

- A malicious letter from an anonymous source.

- Joel's Wikepedia entry.

- Joel's own website (very selectively quoted).

What outstanding journalism!

 

I spoke to Joel about this article. He was clearly deeply upset. He said that Gallagher phoned him and spoke to him for about five minutes, but that he had no interest in gaining any perspective. His questions were very perfunctory and accusatory, of the nature of ‘Do you deny that …?’  It was clear that Gallagher had already constructed the article and was just playing lip service to journalistic professionalism.

 

When the first article came out, Joel was stunned and in a state of shock at how he had been portrayed. His wife cried all day. His aged mother called from New Zealand, also crying – the local press had picked up the story.

I told Joel not to take this personally. In the war between truth and falsehood, the latter has only one weapon – lies. Ian Gallagher is a soldier of falsehood and constructing lies is his profession.

 

In recent times, a motley collection of media people, politicians and bloggers have been constructing and propagating a conspiracy theory that Muslims are poised to 'take over' the West and impose Islamic law on everyone. Part of this sinister masterplan is that Muslims (both overt and covert) are assuming positions of significant influence in western society.  (If you actually know any Muslims, you will be aware that they aren't unified and couldn't organise a p***-up in a brewery -- not just for religious reasons.)  

Such dark and frightening prospects create the concept of the sinister 'other' who is a deadly threat to 'our way of life' and must be stopped before it's too late.  Paranoid individuals absorb all this, and get a sense of self-worth by having a cause to fight for and an enemy. Then they blow up buildings and kill people. 

Everyone who participates in this lunacy must bear some responsibility for what happened in Norway.  

 

A few Mail readers have responded predictably, with outraged comments questioning how someone like this could possibly hold such an important post, and berating what this implies about the state of the country (decline and fall). Well, he can hold the post because this is all lies and distortion.

 

But an interesting phenomenon has arisen. I urge you to go the New Zealand web pages and look at the comments left by Joel’s former students. What a different perspective that gives!

Also, go to Joel’s own website and see all the material there. You will find virtually everything that’s written in the Mail article, but in context.

http://www.joelhayward.org/

 

The impression you will get from the website is that Joel Hayward is a decent, scholarly, intelligent, gentle man.  And that impression will be entirely accurate.

Historically, I actually used to have a lot of empathy with the Daily Mail. They published the first newspaper review of my book, and it was absolutely stunning – they gave it a full page with a huge photograph. I was very much aligned with the DM’s views on law and order, uncontrolled immigration, runaway multiculturalism, and the threat to the general ethos of this country. I have written for the Daily Mail in the past and been paid for it.

But this vicious attack and character assassination of a decent human being is totally unacceptable. Ian Gallagher is truly a master at what he does – select some facts and then organise and present them in a way which conveys the opposite of the truth, to make a great 'story' which will outrage readers.  Mission accomplished. 

 

Because he’s a pain-in-the ass, Joel told me that he chooses to forgive those behind this smear.  He says that they are operating out of ignorance, rather than true evil.

 

That is going too far. I think we should hate them. But we don’t need to take revenge, because it will be taken care of. “For as a man soweth, so shall he reap.”  We will each enjoy the fruits of our karma. 

 

Many people who know what Joel is really like wrote to the Comments section in protest, but their comments never appeared.  And the Mail then closed the page to further comments rather abruptly. 

 

I'm not the only one who knows that something is wrong here. 

Minhaj-ul-Quran International -- a prominent, peace-advocating inter-faith organisation -- had this to say:

'We commend Dr Hayward for his extensive efforts on his own time as a volunteer worker with Muslim youth and community groups to teach them about the value of integration, multiculturalism, interfaith dialogue and especially about the evils of terrorism and extremism. Dr Hayward has supported several Minhaj-ul-Quran International de-radicalisation workshops at which he has been very effective at explaining the motives and methods of terrorism as well as developing strategies for de-radicalising youth and hopefully preventing another terrorist atrocity. This is highly valuable work and it is unbelievable that Dr Hayward’s well-known efforts were not included in the character-assassination article.'

Right now, we need to stand up for Joel Hayward ... because the next person they lie about and demonise could be you or me.  Please circulate this as widely as possible.

 

Imran Ahmad

www.unimagined.org

 

 

 

The Economics of MORE

The Economics of MORE

 

http://www.unimagined.org/more.html

 

Leave comments here.

The embarrassment of being 'from Pakistan'

The embarrassment of being 'from Pakistan'

 

Oh Pakistan, land of my birth, what an embarrassment you are!  How I wish I could undo that part of my existence, ‘born in Pakistan’ and erase any connection with your obscene, self-destructive, arrogant stupidity. 

Pakistan – not a coherent country.  Everyone hates each other, based on religious sect, region of origin, language, class or gender.  Being all ‘Muslim’ was not enough to bind them (must I say ‘us’?) all together in brotherly patriotism.  The great British masterplan has failed (or has it?) – our Islam was not strong enough to make us One, to share any rational self-interest that could take us forward for the common good, like any other country.  (Dammit – why am I saying ‘us’; I mean ‘them’.)

Pakistan – a land completely without Love.   Not just the forbidden and immoral ‘romantic love’ which spellbinds all in the Indian movies, but any other kind of Love – ‘Love they neighbour’; ‘Love the socially inferior’; ‘Love thy enemy’ (LOL! Not a chance!).   There’s only family love – but it’s not unconditional; there are heavy strings attached.  Only if you surrender your happiness to self-destructive bloody-minded miserable first-cousin-marrying barbarity.  Then they’ll love you.   But not her.  She must suffer for the audacity of her existence. 

Pakistan – where everything’s a lie and everyone in ‘authority’ is a liar.  Imagine being trained to lie from birth, so that it becomes normal, natural, your first response.  Addicts of lying, even when it doesn’t make sense.  Hold back the truth, don’t give too much away, surely there’s some profit to be made in the lie.

Pakistan – land without compassion.  Someone dying in the street?  Being raped?  There’s nothing we can do.  Don’t call the authorities – they’ll arrest us, for their trouble.  Why else would they come out?  Bargain for our release – the rate keeps going up.  Justice – what’s that?  Must be something to do with white people, not us. 

ISI – Inter-services Stupidity Agency – who do you work for?  Let me guess.  The country?  The people?  The government?   Oh, it’s obvious – yourselves.  What do you fear the most?  Peace with India!  After 60 years, we still haven’t managed that.  But why?  Oh, I see, if there’s peace with India, there’s no need for an ISI – it’s simple self-preservation.  I get it.  So you lie, deceive, cheat, kill, embarrass, shame, confuse, twist and lie some more – everything you can to keep India angry, enrage the world, justify the nukes and preserve your miserable existence.   India doesn’t want to hate us, you stupid bastards.  You make it so.  You make it impossible for peace, with your constant harassment, your plotting, your murder.  You are genetically defective in-bred savages.  You wish you could live in the West, have an apartment of your own and date Jennifer Aniston, but you can’t – so you’re overcome with destructive, bloody-minded jealousy.  You think your sunglasses make you look cool, but you’re an evolutionary dead-end. 

 

Dear President Obama,

I have had some rambling but deep reflection, and I have come to the following conclusion.  

The people of Pakistan, for the most part, are not your enemy. 

The ISI – heavily developed, funded (and now deeply entrenched) as a result of the critical need to drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan – is the problem. 

The ISI is actually an enemy of the country, the people and even the Government (such as it is).  The ISI’s prime objective is to preserve its own existence, by blocking peace with India and maintaining a state of maximum tension with all parties.  It achieves this through terrorism, murder, lies, deceit and betrayal.  The ISI is the single most destructive element in Pakistan today, causing incalculable misery to the country, its people and, indeed, to its neighbours and even Western countries.  The ISI is a cancer which has grown and embedded itself – unchallenged. 

I deeply believe in extending peace and love from my heart to all fellow human beings -- but in this case, we must be more pragmatic, for the greatest good.

There’s no need to contemplate a full-scale invasion of Pakistan—that would just be catastrophic.  A never-ending spiral of global misery would result.

But, like a cancer surgeon, you must take decisive and courageous action. 

Since Pakistan has no functioning Government and no effective democracy, I take it upon myself to authorise you to completely and utterly destroy the ISI, its infrastructure and its operatives. 

Order the immediate destruction of all known ISI headquarters and facilities, and the elimination of every known ISI agent, worldwide.  At the same time, neutralise all Pakistani nuclear weapons.  Act swiftly and decisively, and the entire operation can be over in a matter of hours. 

This will be of enormous benefit to the people of Pakistan, the region and the world.  Peace with India can become a real possibility – it’s a natural equilibrium state which the ISI has worked ferociously and tirelessly and savagely to prevent. 

The alternative is more of the same misery and ineffectiveness, forever. 

I realise that this probably rules out my taking a vacation in Pakistan for a very long time.

But one day I look forward to being able to travel freely between Pakistan and India, visiting my brothers and sisters on each side, as if there was no border.

Sincerely,

Imran

 

 

 

He asked the third man he met to kill his wife?

He asked the third man he met to kill his wife?

 

This is the nonsense we are being asked to believe by the South African so-called 'authorities'. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-11945015

The first man (or woman) would have been the Immigration Officer.

The second man (or woman) would have been the Customs Inspector.

The third was the taxi driver. 

This is what the 'authorities' in South Africa would have us believe.  This couple came off the aircraft and, by the time they reached the hotel, the husband asked the taxi driver to arrange the killing of his wife.

That says a lot about what kind of place South Africa is. 

The South African press has been full of lies and speculation. 

-- That it was an enforced marriage.

-- That he would make money from a life insurance policy taken out on his wife.

It was all lies.

That's why the family had to hire Max Clifford to deal with this crap.

And now this ludicrous allegation made on the basis of testimony of a convicted murderer who plea bargained his sentence from 25 years to 18 years.  What kind of evidence is that?

 

 

Shrien Dewani and Anni Dewani (RIP)

 

I literally have tears in my eyes as I write this.  Look closely at his face.  Does he look like he would ask a taxi driver he'd just met to arrange the killing of his beautiful new wife?

After all he's been through, this is an abomination. 

South Africa is in denial about what kind of a place it actually is. 

What kind of country is South Africa?

-- A place where you can ask any black man you meet to arrange to kill your wife?

or

-- A place where the verbal testimony of a convicted killer in a plea bargain arrangement is enough to throw allegations against a bereaved man.

 

Either way, I'm in no hurry to vacation there. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Citibank - UBUD Writers & Readers Festival 2010: 'Actually, this year I'm here as a R ... R ... (choke) ... Reader.'

Citibank - UBUD Writers & Readers Festival 2010:

'Actually, this year I'm here as a R ... R ... (choke) ... Reader.'

 

 

This is much too ambitious for TypePad, so it's on its own web page, here:

www.unimagined.org/uwrf2010.html

 

Please post your comments here on Typepad.

Bill Shaw is the victim of corruption -- where is the British Government?

Bill Shaw is the victim of corruption -- where is the British Government?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10497673.stm

        
Pictures from BBC News website

Everyone knows that in miserable, medieval countries like Afghanistan, the purpose of attaining any kind of government or administrative office is not to contribute to the country and to help its people, but to use the acquired power to benefit and enrich oneself and one's family, tribe and associates. 

 It's obvious that the low-life who impounded the vehicles from Bill Shaw's company used their 'authority' as an opportunity to enrich themselves, by demanding exorbitant 'release' fees.  

 Bill Shaw paid those fees because, in the anarchy of Kabul, it was the only way to get anything done.  

This does not make him guilty of bribery and corruption.  Everyone who has to operate in these backward hell-holes has to pay these fees.  Everyone.  Otherwise, no wheels will turn.   Your shipment will remain in the dock until it rots.  Your imported medicine will be awaiting clearance until you have died of the condition.  Your passport will remain 'lost'.  It's the way things are and everyone knows it.

In Unilever, where I began my career, we had guidance on this in the Finance Audit Procedures Manual.  These were called 'facilitating payments'.  Facilitating payments were officially okay.  These differed from bribes in that a bribe was a payment made in order to influence someone to do something illegal, whereas a facilitating payment was just to get things done, to pay someone just to do their bloody job.  

Whether Bill Shaw thought he was paying a legitimate fee or making a facilitating payment, the guilt lies with the bastards who impounded the vehicles and demanded the payment.  Bill was just trying to get things done. 

This demonstrates the quagmire that is Afghanistan, and that just because the Taliban are 'bad', it doesn't mean that their opponents are 'good'.  They are all varying degrees of 'bad'.  Ultimately they are all tribalists, who have no concept of human rights, fairness and justice.  I make this statement with deep regret, but all of the empirical evidence suggests that it is true. 

We cannot fix Afghanistan in this respect, but why is Bill Shaw in prison?  This is an outrage.  Where is the British Government in this?  Every day that Bill Shaw spends in prison is completely unacceptable.  I wouldn't be surprised if the Americans are trying to promote the legitimacy of the new 'anti-corruption' courts, but this is a Kafkaesque nightmare and the British Government needs to show some spine.  

Release Bill Shaw now.

Kill your baby, dump your baby ... or make sure s/he is safe and has a future

Kill your baby, dump your baby ... or make sure s/he is safe and has a future

"When the girl-child that was buried alive,

Is asked for what crime she was slain?'

 

Al-Quran  81: 8-9

 

 

The baby Moses was placed in a reed basket and set adrift on the Nile -- to be found and brought up by Pharaoh's daughter.  That was very lucky!

 

 

 

In Islamic countries -- with their strict sexual morality and enforced segregation of unmarried men and women -- there is obviously no sex outside marriage, and therefore no problem of unwanted babies.  Theoretically. 

 

So why is it that, in Malaysia alone, there are scores of babies abandoned every year?  Left in secluded public places, like toilets and rubbish dumps, presumably in the hope and expectation that a kind stranger will find the child and ensure its well-being. 

 

Sadly, many abandoned babies in Malaysia are not so lucky, dying of dehydration or even being eaten by wild dogs.

 

The problem is, of course, the shame of being an unmarried mother.  Many young women hide their pregnancies from their families, perhaps get no support from the baby's father, and for them the only option seems to be to give birth in secret and then dump the child somewhere -- trusting that s/he will be found and looked after. 

 

There is now, at least in Kuala Lumpur, a much better option. 

 

 

Operating out of an innocuous detached house in a leafy cul-de-sac in the suburb of Petaling Jaya, OrphanCARE's mission is to get abandoned and orphaned children into suitable, permanent families as quickly as possible.  It is thus not an orphanage per se, but more of a temporary safe home and adoption centre.  

 

  

 

OrphanCARE works closely with the Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development to expedite the adoption process whereby abandoned and orphaned babies and children are quickly matched up and placed with suitable parents. 

  

OrphanCARE undertakes awareness programmes to make society recognize that orphans should not be left permanently in orphanages or shelter homes.

  

There is a database of interested adoptive parents with complete background profiles and OrphanCARE is working with orphanages, single mother shelter homes, hospitals and clinics to provide suitable families for orphans and unwanted or abandoned babies. 

  

But most innovative is OrphanCARE's solution to secret 'baby-dumping', often conducted at night. 

A state-of-the-art 'baby hatch' has been installed at the facility, allowing anonymous mothers to safely leave their babies, and enabling them to be swiftly and legally processed for adoption. 

The mother leaves the baby inside the air-conditioned baby hatch.  If she signs and leaves the consent form, it means that there is no need for a police report -- the baby can proceed immediately into the adoption process.  (Not signing the form slows the adoption process down a lot, because a police investigation is triggered.) 

 

 

 

Once the hatch is closed, it becomes locked (so that no-one else can steal the baby), an alarm sounds inside and the baby is visible on the television monitor.  If the mother should change her mind, an intercom is available for her to talk to the centre staff. 

 

 

 

The neighbours have all been surprisingly supportive of the OrphanCARE facility, and in the wider community there have been only a few opponents coming from a miserable religious perspective, asserting that this facility will encourage illicit sex. 

 

The OrphanCARE baby hatch does not address the problem of inappropriate and careless sexual relationships, but it surely provides a better option than new-born babies being eaten by wild dogs.  Who could argue against that?

  

    

 

www.orphancare.org.my

 

Pakistan's nukes are safe and secure -- but quite unnecessary

 

Pakistan's nukes are safe and secure -- but quite unnecessary

 

 

 

 

 

Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are quite safe and very difficult for terrorists to get hold of. 

 

 

 You see, they are mobile nuclear missiles, kept on the backs of trucks and disguised as giant beverage bottles. 

  

  

 They are constantly kept on the move, so the terrorists have no idea where they are. 

  

 

 Each nuke can only be operated by use of the special key, which is kept on a chain around the driver’s neck. 

  

  

 

But, in addition to the key, you need the Command Codes.  These are impossible to locate, being hidden behind the sun visor.

 

 

 

 

The instruction books are in English, which most terrorists can’t read, and these are safely locked in the glove-box. 

  

  

  

  

For complete protection, each driver keeps a rifle on the passenger seat. 

  

  

  

For absolute security, the driver has STRICT instructions to LOCK the cab when going to the rest room at freeway service areas. 

  

 

   

So, Pakistan’s nukes are absolutely secure.  But, more importantly, they are completely unnecessary. 

  

 

Pakistan is in a unique position amongst the nuclear powers, in that it doesn’t really need nuclear weapons, and could be a shining example to the whole world by leading the way in unilateral nuclear disarmament. 

  

Here’s the 3-step plan.

   

1.  Pakistan needs to acknowledge that India has nukes because of China, not because of Pakistan. India does not perceive Pakistan as a strategic threat, but only as a persistent and sometimes annoying pain-in-the-butt.  India has moved into the 21^st century, whereas Pakistan is still stuck in a 1947 mentality -- defining itself only by its separateness from India.  It’s a hard pill for macho boys to swallow, that one isn’t perceived as a significant threat, but nothing to be ashamed of. 

  

2.  Pakistan needs to agree with India a no-nuclear-first-strike commitment.  This should take ten minutes; fifteen minutes if they get Obama to witness it. 

  

3.  Pakistan should swiftly dismantle its nuclear weapons, secure in the knowledge that India would never risk global condemnation by launching a nuclear attack against it. 

  

  

In the new world, global prestige comes from demonstrating integrity, trust and a commitment to peace -- not from showing off your destructive capabilities.  The latter was all done in the late nineties, when Pakistan felt it had to prove it could explode nuclear weapons after India successfully tested its own, both countries attracting global condemnation.  

  

Since nuclear weapons do not distinguish between warriors and non-combatants, as well as wreaking hideous destruction on our beloved Earth, they are completely immoral and cannot be used in warfare within Islamic parameters.  So, no genuinely Muslim country should have them in the first place, as a matter of principle.

  

Now, the race should be towards nuclear disarmament -- a race Pakistan could win if it would just grow up.  It has plenty of other priorities to focus on, such as universal education, healthcare and a decent standard of living for all of its citizens. 

  

 

 

Based on the track record of the kinds of men who attain power in Pakistan, I won’t hold my breath. 

 

 But what an opportunity. 

 

 

 

 

  

Emirates Airline Festival of Literature 2010 (Dubai): 'How stupid do you think I am?

Emirates Airline Festival of Literature 2010 (Dubai):
'How stupid do you think I am?'



This one had too much rich content and too many photographs for me to struggle to do it in Typepad, so I did a webpage for it:

http://www.unimagined.org/eafl2010.html

Please post Comments here on TypePad.