Showing posts with label Kaukab Siddique. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kaukab Siddique. Show all posts

Sunday, June 3, 2018

Dr. Aafia Siddiqui Supporters Hold Iftar, Pray for Her Release


By Nadrat Siddique

June 1, 2018

Baltimore, MD – Very nearly half way through Ramadan, supporters of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui held an iftar in her honor.  Close to 30 committed Muslim activists from DC, Maryland, and Philadelphia discussed her case, made du’ah for her (and for other Muslim political prisoners), performed maghrib prayers, and shared dates and a Middle Eastern meal.

Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, a petite Pakistani Muslimah, is a political prisoner of the U.S. government. By all accounts, she has been raped, tortured, and separated from her school age children—who were also detained for years—in the course of her incarceration. Aafia is a neuroscientist with degrees from Brandeis University and MIT. She is being held as if she is a dangerous criminal in Carswell, TX, on trumped up charges which include attacking U.S. servicemen in Afghanistan. But supporters, like the ones gathered at the Baltimore iftar tonight, say the charges are preposterous, and that even the U.S. government knows it erred in its dealings with her, but is too arrogant or stubborn to reverse its actions.

Dr. Kaukab Siddique, an independent Pakistani journalist, who also teaches journalism at Lincoln University, was at the iftar. He had been writing about Aafia’s case almost since its inception. In opening remarks to the iftar, Dr. Siddique referred to the Muslim organization he helped found decades ago: “Jamaat al-Muslimeen has always been in the forefront of fighting for Muslim women’s rights under the rubric of Islam, and women have often been at the helm of the organization.”

He recognized Ashira Na’im, Masjid Jamaat al-Muslimeen administrator; Sr. Chekisha El-Amin, a long-time Baltimore-based Jamaat al-Muslimeen activist; Nadrat Siddique, a DC-based Jamaat al-Muslimeen activist and political prisoner advocate; and Sr. Fatima Abdullah, a founding member of the organization, who, along with her husband Amin Abdullah, had come to the iftar from Philadelphia, PA.

“And Jamaat al-Muslimeen has always supported political prisoners, those who are imprisoned unjustly or because of their beliefs. So, when we learned of the plight of Dr. Aafia, it was only natural for us to support her case,” he concluded.

Mauri Saalakhan, a long time DC-based human rights activist and head of the Aafia Foundation (formerly known as the Peace and Justice Foundation) was the guest speaker at the iftar gathering. He had travelled to several continents to raise awareness of the Aafia case, and organized rallies for Aafia outside the Carswell, Texas prison where she is being held—on very hostile turf, as well as at the Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons, and other key locations.

Saalakhan said that it was the Islamic responsibility of Muslims to speak out against injustice, particularly during Ramadan. The organizer-activist, who is also known as El-Hajj Mauri Saalakhan because he has completed the Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca, had worked on a litany of political prisoner cases. But—Aafia’s case, he said, was one of the worst cases of injustice he had seen. She was alive, he said, negating the recently circulating rumor that she had passed away. But she was not well. She was held under sordid conditions, a travesty of justice, he said.

Saalakhan said he was very disappointed by the lack of action on the part of most Muslims to come forward. Muslims who could have done something to help Aafia, but didn’t—would be held accountable for their inaction in the Hereafter, he told iftar attendees. He pointed out the Pakistani government’s insidious role in first aiding Aafia’s kidnapping, and then subverting efforts to release her.

Imam Ali Siddiqui, a lifelong peace and justice activist currently based in DC, attended the iftar along with his family. His organization, the Muslim Institute of Interfaith Studies and Understanding, has effectively dialogued with churches and synagogues in the DC area. Addressing the iftar gathering briefly, he mentioned recent work with the DC Poor Peoples Campaign, a rekindling of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s movement for social justice. Imam Siddiqui has long protested Aafia’s detention as well as that of other political prisoners, and participated in rallies and meetings to free her.

This writer, DC-based blogger, runner, and activist Nadrat Siddique organized the iftar. Siddique, who has run three marathons to call attention to Aafia’s case, said that as Muslims were eating and praying, praying and eating—at many, many iftars throughout Ramadan, they ought also think about the Muslim prisoners and political prisoners, being held under horrendous conditions in American prisons and secret prisons. What were the prisoners eating for iftar? Were they even conscious and able to fast? If they were fasting, did they have access to halal (Islamically permissible) food with which to open their fast?

“Muslims ought to ask the imams of their respective masajid to mention the political prisoners in their khutbas. We should write letters raising concern for the welfare of the political prisoners to corporate media, and on the social media sites of these corporate media. Give zakat to the families of the political prisoners. And make du'ah for them. There is added barakat in doing this during Ramadan,” she concluded.

Dr. Kaukab Siddique closed out the evening with a du’ah asking for the acceptance of the fasts of the iftar attendees, and remembering all the political prisoners, including Dr. Aafia Siddiqui.

© 2018 Nadrat Siddique

Thursday, December 23, 2010

Whose Hate Speech?

Recently, my father, Dr. Kaukab Siddique, came under assault by the Zionists, after he gave a speech calling for the peaceful dismantling of Israel at the annual Quds Day rally in Washington, DC. The Zionist campaign reminded me of similar assaults on Dr. Tony Martin, Prof. Ward Churchill, Dr. Mazin Qumsiyeh, Prof. Francis Boyle, Prof. Norm Finkelstein and many others. The primary distinction was that unlike the others, my father is a Muslim and a Semite. This makes him even more a thorn in the side of the Zionists, who view him as one of those they would prefer to beat to a pulp with the butt of their Tavors (Israeli assault rifles), or torture in Israeli prison, but not debate.

In other words, to be a Muslim and outspoken against Israel magnifies the Thought Crime. One analogy which comes to mind: During slavery, the white power structure exhibited a degree of tolerance for the white abolitionists who quietly and theoretically challenged slavery. The same power structure screamed for a manhunt followed by public hanging for a Denmark Vesey calling for a slave rebellion. Hence the obscene response to my father’s speech by the Zionists.

My father did not advocate violence. He did not violate the law. He merely challenged prevailing paradigms, which say it is okay to allocate $2.55 billion dollars each year (one million dollars per day in military aid alone) of U.S. taxpayer money to a colonial settler state which oppresses its original inhabits. A firm believer in Freedom of Speech, he spoke out on his time, at his own expense, about an issue he felt strongly about.

This was not the first time my father has been in the Zionist crosshairs, as the ADL, AJC, JDL, and the Wiesenthal Center scrutinizing his writings, placed him on their McCarthy-style blacklist, and attempted to have him removed from his position at Lincoln in 2006.

This time, however, they appeared far more determined, launching their supporters to write letters to LU President Ivory Nelson, suggesting my father’s classes be monitored, and questioning the process that led to his tenure--all with the implication that he should be removed. In a campaign of harassment and intimidation, they and their supporters sent hate-filled emails and letters (including threats of violence and even death) to him. They galvanized a dozen state senators to visit the university. The threat of firing alone would have been enough to convince many academics, particularly immigrants, to abdicate their heartfelt political stance. In such a climate, how could one possibly claim that free speech is extant?

My father, who believes that Authority belongs to Allah alone, did not succumb to the Zionist pressure. It made me intensely proud to have him as a father.

He draws a salary from Lincoln University, which, while not a state school, receives partial funding from the state of Pennsylvania. In an action reminiscent of mafia-style blackmail of the historically black college, a group of state senators visited my Dad's boss at the behest of the Zionist lobby. They were concerned, they told the LU President, about state funds going (indirectly) to the salary of an individual engaging in what they claimed was hate speech. In other words, fire this professor who dares speak out of line with the Zionist lobby, otherwise we’ll yank your funds.

The issue that arises from all this is the allocation of free speech.

To call for the peaceful dismantling of a colonial-settler state on par with Apartheid South Africa, Rhodesia, French-occupied Algeria, or British-occupied Kenya is hate speech.

But saying, "that there’s not enough troops in the Army to force the Southern people to break down segregation and admit the nigger race into our theatres, into our swimming pools, into our homes and into our churches,” (Strom Thurmond, then presidential nominee for the States' Rights Party) is not hate speech.

Saying that poor blacks fail to acquire wealth partly because of their "habits;" that bilingual education teaches "the language of living in a ghetto;" that building an Islamic center near Ground Zero is like Nazis erecting a sign near the Holocaust Museum; or that Obama is engaged in "Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior" (Newt Gingrich)--all these are not hate speech.

Praising Strom Thurmond, an overtly racist politician, and saying the country would have been better off if they'd followed his agenda (i.e. of racial segregation, and hence complete exclusion of Black people from the mainstream) (Trent Lott) is not hate speech.

Telling a 15-year old black teen “You don’t f---ing belong here. Get out of here,” while beating him in the head with a radio (Eliyahu Eliezer Werdesheim, Shomrin Jewish patrol in Baltimore) is not hate speech.

Assessing the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children as "worth it" (Madeleine Albright) is not hate speech.

Saying that all Taliban should be annihilated (many U.S. politicians), neverminding that a vast majority of Afghan Pashtoons support the Taliban as the only force effectively opposing the U.S. occupation of their country, and that Pashtoons make up the vast majority of the Afghan population, hence equivalent to saying tens of thousands of people should be annihilated--that is not hate speech.

Joking about an assassination attempt on (then Senator) Obama (Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee)--as long as one quickly apologizes--is not hate speech.

Calling for the assassination of U.S. citizen and cleric Anwar Awlaki, because he opposes the U.S. military presence in the Middle East and Africa (Obama administration)--is not hate speech.

Calling for the assassination of Julian Assange because he exposed the hate speech of various and sundry U.S. statesmen and their toadies (Tom Flanagan, former aid to the Canadian Prime Minister)--is not hate speech.

The cases of hate speech against Muslims, people of color, and anyone who stands up for us, are too numerous to mention. The small subset I mentioned are those who were on U.S. federal or state government payroll (or in the case of Tom Flanagan, teaching at a public Canadian university, on Canadian government payroll) at the time they made their hate-filled comments. It is okay for them to launch hateful, threatening, demeaning diatribes against people of color and Muslims while sopping up your and my tax dollars.

The Doublespeak dictionary says that hate speech is only hate speech if it is directed against certain select populations, and not others.
----
Postscript: Want to see hate speech? Look at the youtube comments, following the posts of the video of my father's Al-Quds Day speech (link is below). Writer after writer--primarily racist Zionists, hurl obscenities and death threats at him—all for calling for the peaceful dismantling of Israel, in effect, an entirely new look at a failed U.S. foreign policy. It is something U.S. policy makers, if they care about their constituents more than they care about the European settlers in Israel, ought, in a time of economic depression, to be considering anyway.

----
Dr. Siddique’s Quds Day speech is here.

Background on the Zionist assault on Dr. Siddique's free speech rights, as covered by the Philadelphia Inquirer is here and here. Coverage of the case by the Lincolnian (Lincoln University’s student newspaper) is here, here, and here.

Dr. Siddique’s response to the Zionist onslaught, aired on South African radio is here.