A topic close to my heart.



Egyptian blogger offline after 'harassment'
From correspondents in Cairo
April 29, 2007 07:42pm
Article from: AAP
Font size: + -
Send this article: Print Email
ONE of Egypt's most prominent political bloggers has decided to call it a day, citing harassment by security services as his main reason to quit.
The Egypt-based blogger, known only as “Sandmonkey” – a derogatory term for people of Arab descent – posted his last entry on Saturday.
“One of the chief reasons (for quitting) is the fact that there has been too much heat around me lately,” he said.
Sandmonkey – who describes himself as “extremely cynical, snarky, pro-US, secular, libertarian” – started posting two years ago and has since been one of the main animators of Egypt's vibrant blogosphere.
The blog offered stinging commentary on the Islamisation of Egyptian society as well as virulent criticism of President Hosni Mubarak's 26-year-old regime.
Sandmonkey regularly reported on the arrests of political activists, police brutality and videos recently posted on the internet of alleged vote-rigging in a referendum for constitutional amendments, which critics say curb civil liberties.
“I no longer believe that my anonymity is kept, especially with state security agents lurking around my street and asking questions about me, since that day,” he said, referring to anti-referendum protests last month in which he participated and several demonstrators were detained.
Egypt's bloggers came to public attention during the political ferment surrounding elections in 2005 and have since been targeted by the regime, drawing international condemnation.
In April, security forces detained blogger Abdel Moneim Mahmud for criticising the government's human rights record.
In February, an Egyptian court sentenced blogger Abdel Karim Suleiman to four years in prison for insulting religion and defaming the president, a verdict condemned by rights groups as an attack on free speech.
     



Thousands protest Turkish Government
From correspondents in Istanbul
April 29, 2007 10:25pm
Article from: Agence France-Presse
Font size: + -
Send this article: Print Email
AT least 300,000 secular Turks waving the red national flag flooded central Istanbul to demand the resignation of the pro-Islamic government.
The second large anti-government demonstration in two weeks, it followed a sharp rise in tension between Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the country's powerful pro-secular military, which accuses the government of tolerating the activities of radical Islamic circles.
“Turkey is secular and will remain secular,” shouted thousands of flag-waving protesters, who travelled to Istanbul from across the country overnight.
The demonstrators sang nationalist songs and demanded the resignation of the government, calling Mr Erdogan a traitor




Iran cracks down on offbeat Western hairdos
From correspondents in Tehran
April 29, 2007 07:39pm
Article from: AAP
Font size: + -
Send this article: Print Email
TEHRAN barbers are to stop offering Iranian men unconventional Western hairstyles amid a nationwide crackdown on dressing deemed to be unIslamic, the Etemad newspaper reported today.
The paper quoted the head of the Tehran barbers' association as saying police had issued a directive forbidding its members from giving men offbeat hairstyles that are all the rage in more affluent parts of the capital.
“Currently some salons use Western grooming methods to create styles that are in line with the European and American ones,” said the association's head, Mohammad Eftekhari-Fard.
“The union has repeatedly announced the restrictions against unconventional grooming when issuing permits to each of the barber shops. Hence barbers, knowing these rules, should not pursue the wrong methods.”
“The union will withdraw its support from those barbers who cut hairstyles that are out of line with the norms of the system,” he said.
Eftekhari-Fard did not specify which hairstyles were being targeted, but conservatives in Iran have long been upset by the heavy use of styling gel, shoulder-length hair and the spiky “big hair” styles sported by some of Tehran's young males.
The directive also banned the use of “facial cosmetics, plucking of eyebrows and applying special make-up in male salons,” he said.
Iran has handed out thousands of warnings over the past week to women found to have infringed Islamic dress rules in the latest police crackdown.
However, the authorities have emphasised that men are not excluded from the drive, and males whose T-shirts were found to be too short or tight and hair excessively groomed have also found themselves apprehended.
Eftekhari-Fard told Etemad that while only 5 per cent of Tehran hair salons were deviating from the laws, they would be strictly monitored and if necessary their permits taken away for at least a month.
Customers would also not be allowed to wear ties and bow-ties – frowned upon in Iran as a symbol of Western imperialism – in barber shops, he said.

"Thousands protest Turkish Government"

I don't get it, why are people protesting against the government that was elected into office?
surely, the protestors must be the minority of the total population.  

Quote:

"Thousands protest Turkish Government" I don't get it, why are people protesting against the government that was elected into office? surely, the protestors must be the minority of the total population.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/658282.cms

According to the link above, JJJ, only 28.5% of Egyptians vote. Despite the fact that voting in Egypt is 'compulsory.'  :)

Bloggers sued for political comment

http://ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1169165417

ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:22pm:

According to the link above, JJJ, only 28.5% of Egyptians vote. Despite the fact that voting in Egypt is 'compulsory.'  :)

the protest was in Turkey and was run by people opposed to the Turkish government that was elected into office.

what does that have to do with Egypt?

Hi, here is some more info on the rits in Turkey. It did sound strange didn't it ?
Why riot against an elected govt ?


"Turkish riot police have arrested hundreds of demonstrators in Istanbul as they marched to commemorate a massacre in the city 30 years ago.

Tear gas and water cannon were used to disrupt the protest, which came ahead of an official march held each year.
City authorities said that 580 people were arrested after clashes with police.
The government is anxious not to see a repeat of the mass protest on Sunday at which up to a million people marched in opposition to the imposition of a new president who they suspect of having an Islamist agenda.
The ruling AK party denies that it is seeking to end the country’s modern secular tradition, which the military has promised to protect.


•  Authorities have enforced a strict security clampdown in the centre of Istanbul. As many as 17,000 police have been stationed across the city.
Metro stations, ferries and bus routes have been closed and travel across the Bosphorus straits that divides the city curtailed.
The clampdown has caused traffic jams and forced the Istanbul stock exchange to start trading later than usual.
Thirty years ago, 34 people were shot or trampled to death when an unidentified gunman opened fire on a May Day march in the city’s Taksim Square.
The city authorities today allowed a handful of union leaders to lay red carnations at the site of the killings.
Later hundreds of people gathered at the square to protest before police moved in to make the arrests.
The country’s constitutional court is due to rule today on whether the presidential election can proceed.
The foreign minister, Abdullah Gul, is the only candidate. The former Islamist denies that he plans to Islamicise Turkey’s key institutions. "


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/05/01/nturkey101.xml


Salient points being :  "marched in opposition to the imposition of a new president who they suspect of having an Islamist agenda."  - imposition - ie, not elected.  
"foreign minister, Abdullah Gul, is the only candidate. The former Islamist " , so, it is not really an election.  Why is no one else standing ? fear ?

Sprintcyclist wrote on May 2^nd, 2007 at 11:03am:

Salient points being :  "marched in opposition to the imposition of a new president who they suspect of having an Islamist agenda."  - imposition - ie, not elected.   "foreign minister, Abdullah Gul, is the only candidate. The former Islamist " , so, it is not really an election.  Why is no one else standing ? fear ?

from what i read in the paper, the pro-Islamic party wasn't imposed, it was elected.

also, why is it u assume that no one else stood for the election because of fear, but all of a sudden there isn't any fear about protesting in the streets? it sounds like sour grapes to me, people who don't support the pro-Islamic party just aren't happy that they got elected.

basically, the pro-Islamic party won the election this time around, so they should still rule. there is talk of them being removed from office, but to remove them is to make a mockery of the democratic process and the message it sends out to the rest of the world is "democracy is okay, provided an Islamic party isn't elected". that wouldn't go down well with the world's muslim population.

Yes, seems odd to protest against an elected politicial.
Here is a profile of Gul.
Seems turkey is a wild place, power rests in various arenas, including the military.

They have had a seperation of religion and politics since 1923. this threatens that, hence the protest. Seems a just cause to protest to me.





Profile: Abdullah Gul  
The nomination of Turkey's Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul as the governing AK party's candidate for the country's presidency has been widely seen as a compromise amid a contentious debate about the role of religion in national politics.

Abdullah Gul - seen as moderate and non-confrontational

Staunch secularists feared that if Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, regarded as having strong Islamic links, had stood for the job it would have challenged the strict separation of religion and politics in place since Turkey became a republic in 1923.

The nomination of Abdullah Gul, 56, a soft-spoken politician with a far less confrontational approach than Mr Erdogan's, has received more support, even though his political background is very similar to the prime minister's.

Mr Gul is certainly an experienced politician.

He has steered Turkey's European Union accession talks since becoming foreign minister in 2003.

He also served as prime minister in late 2002 and early 2003, but was always a stop-gap for Mr Erdogan.

Mr Erdogan had a criminal conviction for reading an Islamist poem at a political rally and was barred from the 2002 election.


Mr Gul served to oversee changes to the constitution and, after a by-election allowed Mr Erdogan back into parliament, Mr Gul quickly stepped aside.

It was such Islamist roots that led 400,000 people to protest against the presidential candidacy of Mr Erdogan this year.

However, Mr Gul is no stranger to the secular-religious controversy and some analysts say he is as close, if not closer, to his religious roots as Mr Erdogan.

Certainly, if Mr Gul is elected president by parliament, his wife would be the first First Lady to cover her head with a scarf - a deeply divisive issue in Turkey.


Cyprus


The Turkish president has a veto on all laws and appoints some key figures within the establishment.


Secularists fear that if AK controls both parliament and presidency it may push an "Islamic agenda".


Hayrunisa Gul would be the first First Lady to wear a headscarf


Mr Gul has sounded conciliatory since his nomination, with phrases such as "If I am elected I will act accordingly" and a pledge to adhere to secular principles.

On the headscarf issue, he stood by his support for them, but avoided being contentious, saying "these are individual preferences and everybody should respect them".

The issue of Cyprus has remained a constant thorn for Mr Gul.

During his brief stint as prime minister he pinpointed it as one of his key priorities. But four years later Cyprus remains a key stumbling block to Turkey's EU membership.

Last year, Mr Gul said Cyprus was "poisoning" Turkey's EU accession process.

Mr Gul has also criticised US policies in the Middle East, saying Washington's support for Israel in its conflict in Lebanon last year had caused a backlash in Turkey.

He said moderate Turks were in danger of becoming anti-American.


Other key issues on his agenda have been Syrian relations and Kurdish separatists.

Narrow defeat

Abdullah Gul was born in Kayseri on 10 October 1950.

He graduated in economics from Istanbul University in 1971 and received a PhD there in 1983. He also studied in the UK.

Mr Gul, an English and Arabic speaker, joined parliament in 1991 as a member of the Welfare Party.

In 1999, he was re-elected as a member of the Virtue Party, Welfare's successor, but in 2000 he narrowly lost a bid to replace Recai Kutan as Virtue's leader.

Mr Gul then became a founder member of AK in 2001.

He married Hayrunisa Ozyurt in 1980 and the couple have two sons and a daughter.

Sprintcyclist wrote on May 2^nd, 2007 at 12:46pm:

Yes, seems odd to protest against an elected politicial. They have had a seperation of religion and politics since 1923. this threatens that, hence the protest. Seems a just cause to protest to me.

i think protesting against the result of a democratic election is a threat to democracy.

JJJ, yes, protesting against a democratic election result is undemocratic !

I am unsure of the political method in turkey. Seems a bit weird situation from what i read just now on net.
Military has some political power  also.

Assuming the AK party was elected democratically, that is fine.  perhaps the party is elected, then a PM selected from there ?
The initial PM selection was seen by the secularists as threatening their freedom.
1 millin people do have to have a valid reason to protest.

Protesting against an election result is not undemocratic. The right to protest is important to a functioning democracy. For starters, it is necessary in cases where the public suspects electoral fraud.

freediver wrote on May 2^nd, 2007 at 1:39pm:

Protesting against an election result is not undemocratic. The right to protest is important to a functioning democracy. For starters, it is necessary in cases where the public suspects electoral fraud.

yes freediver, i get that, but in this case there isn't any evidence of electoral fraud.

the pro-Islamic party won the democratic election fair & square, so protesting against the result of a democratic election would be un-democratic. the majority of people have spoken (via the election result), so why do people who disagree with the majority feel the need to protest?

Also, military in Turkey is siding with the secular protestors and are threatening to overthrow the democratically elected pro-Islamic government if they don't step down.

So, at the moment, Turkey may end up having a military leadership rather than a democratically elected government.

What a blow for democracy!!

yes freediver, i get that, but in this case there isn't any evidence of electoral fraud.

There are many other reasons. That was just the most obvious.

the pro-Islamic party won the democratic election fair & square, so protesting against the result of a democratic election would be un-democratic. the majority of people have spoken (via the election result), so why do people who disagree with the majority feel the need to protest?

You are oversimplifying the situation. The portestors are not protesting the outcome of the election. They are protesting on a specific issue.

Was the president directly elected?

Also, military in Turkey is siding with the secular protestors and are threatening to overthrow the democratically elected pro-Islamic government if they don't step down.

That would be undemocratic.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Overhaul-Aussie-internet-laws-expert/2007/05/02/1177788215921.html

Australian laws must be drastically updated to protect consumers' rights to access information on the internet, says a legal expert.

The Copyright Act covers personal media like iPods, but has limited provisions for the protection of legitimate copyright information on the internet - classified as news, satire and parody.

He uses the current infringement case against the popular video sharing site YouTube (by entertainment corporation Viacom in the US) as a test case that could have major implications for internet users in Australia.

Viacom has filed a law suit demanding all of its content, such as clips from MTV and Comedy Central, be removed from the online video sharing website YouTube.

It is seeking more than one billion dollars in damages and an injunction prohibiting Google and YouTube from further copyright infringement.

In a legal response by Google this week it claims that Viacom's complaint threatens the way hundreds of millions of people legitimately exchange information, news, entertainment, and political and artistic expression.

Dr Rimmer says if Viacom wins its action it could have a detrimental effect on how the internet functions.

"All that material will be taken down and YouTube would have to clamp down on its open access that it operates under, it would be much more restrictive," he said.

"There is a need to ensure that the internet works efficiently, and it's not going to be efficient if YouTube and Google spend all their time searching for copyright infringing material, rather than innovating and creating new things.

"I guess the fundamental problem here is the need to recast additional copyright laws so they are better adapted for the evolution of the internet."

---

Ruddock wants terror material ban soon

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Ruddock-wants-terror-material-ban-soon/2007/05/03/1177788279724.html

Attorney-General Philip Ruddock hopes changes to censorship rules banning the publication of material that advocates terrorist acts will come into force next month.

"The proposal is to put beyond doubt that publications, films and computer games that advocate terrorist acts are refused classification."

Mr Ruddock said if state attorneys-general failed to agree by the beginning of June to the proposed changes to the classification process he would consider introducing legislation to implement them.