Muslim blogger Yasmin Amin writes a brilliant (and I mean that in every sense) sequel to her first contribution to our campaign: The Crime of Obeying God! – Part 2.

The Crime of Obeying God! – Part 2

I received many responses and comments after publishing the first article about Kareem Amer and his blog. One of the comments inspired this article. The comment said amongst other things: “But Kareem did write some very explosive articles. In an ideal world that should not have landed him in jail, but by posting them on his blog, he took a huge risk in the current climate in Egypt, where radicalization is on the rise and the government is weak and trying to portray itself as the guardian of religion and morals. In one article he describes the University of Al Azhar – where he was enrolled as a student – as “the other face of Al Qaeda.”

Therefore today I would like to analyse this particular post, which as Kareem Amer’s title tells us was based on “Contents of a mail from another Azharite student – Al Azhar and Al Qaeda – two sides of the same coin.”

His post was about a debate on a discussion forum online between him and another fellow student of Al Azhar whom he sarcastically calls “enlightened”. The debate was about the gender segregation of students in Al Azhar, its effects on them, such as heightened sexual tension leading to violence, discrimination, hate and vindictiveness. The fellow Azharite declared him to be a non-believer or rather an apostate and threatened to kill him. Kareem Amer asks if Sheikh al-Tantawi knew that inside his own university were students adopting the very same line of thinking, which he himself condemned while performing the funeral prayers for the slain Egyptian Ambassador to Iraq. Ihab al-Sherif was killed, according to a statement released in the name of al-Qaeda in Iraq “because he was an apostate, who had betrayed his faith.” Kareem further writes that this line of thinking is not only advocated by many students, but also by a number of faculty members, especially in the departments of fiqh and sharia, using the same arguments like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Kareem concludes that when violence and threats replace logic and reasoning, a solution needs to be found very fast. For Kareem the similarity between Al Azhar and Al Qaeda comes from this fanaticism, parallels in behaviour and outlook, a comparable disregard of life and frankly very little concern towards basic kindness and compassion to other human beings.

Declaring another human to be a kafir or an apostate is an extremely serious theological charge and should never to be carried out lightly. Not only did Al Azhar itself condemn that practice, but a select group of Muslim scholars, representing all eight different mazhabs, of the Sunnis as well as the Shias, denounced the same thing at the end of the recent conference held in Oman.

Given the rather extreme reactions by the almost illiterate fanatics to these accusations (we have seen too many people killed in various Muslim countries after being accused of being apostates), it is surprising that we see this very same behaviour repeatedly coming from the eminent institution itself.

Al Azhar has not only figured as a major player, but has also continually declared many an intellectual as overstepping the lines by using examples of their art, literature, speech or other forms of expression.

In an article titled “Ban.. Ban..” published in French, Tunisian columnist Zyed Krichen condemns the censorship and denial of free speech implemented by most Arab states and Islamist groups since the introduction of printing. In the second part of his article, he lists examples of censorship and persecution in the name of Islam from various Muslim countries, including banned works and artists who have been imprisoned, flogged, and/or killed. He writes: “As for literature the list of banned books is so long that it would be easier to name the ones that are permitted and approved. This is true even in large countries like Egypt, and even for masterpieces of our cultural heritage, like the ‘One Thousand and One Nights’. Works by Abu Nawas, Bashar Ibn Bord, Al-Isfahani, Al-Madari, and hundreds of others were banned from bookstores in the 20th century.”

Sadly Al Azhar has participated in this heavily. In the Name of Islam many books have been banned. Starting in 1925 with ‘Islam and Principles of Government’ by Al Azhar’s very own Sheikh Ali Abdel Raziq, which was termed heretical, because it advocated the separation of religion and state as a principle of proper governance. Ali Abdel Raziq was then expelled from Al-Azhar University. Since then this has happened almost regularly. In 1926, Taha Hussein’s book ‘On Pre-Islamic Poetry’ was banned and he too was later expelled from the university for his rationalist interpretation of pre-Islamic literature and the Qur’an. In 1959 Naguib Mahfouz’s ‘Children of the Alley’ was condemned by Al-Azhar as blasphemous. In 1975 Al-Azhar censored books, including previously published works, by Tawfik Al Hakim and Youssef Idris. In 1981, ‘History of the Arabic Language’ by Fikri Al Aqad was also banned for claiming that certain words in the Qur’an are of Egyptian origin. Four years later in 1985, three thousand copies of ‘One Thousand and One Nights’ were destroyed and the publisher was sentenced to jail for corrupting the morals of the younger generation. In 1990, Nasr Hamed Abu Zeid proposed a reformist approach on reading and interpreting the Qur’an and later received death threats and was declared an apostate. He felt he had to flee the country and settled down in the Netherlands. In that same year Farag Foda’s book “To Be or Not to Be” was banned and he was prosecuted for offending religion.

Book banning increased and in 1992 Al-Azhar scholars demanded the banning of eight books on Islam. In the very same year Farag Foda was shot. Al Azhar’s Sheikh Muhammad al Ghazali had previously declared Foda an apostate and said that Islamic law would condone his killing. Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya accepted responsibility for the murder, saying “al-Azhar issued the sentence and we carried out the execution.” Though Al Azhar scholars later deplored the way in which Foda was murdered, they nevertheless still considered him an apostate who deserved a death sentence.

In 1994, Egyptian Nobel Laureate Naguib Mahfouz was stabbed in the neck and seriously wounded after Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman, the spiritual leader of the fundamentalist group al-Gama’a al Islamiyya, issued a fatwa ‘excommunicating’ him. 196 books were to be banned on moral and religious grounds in 1997, according to a compilation by Al Azhar. However that same year saw the release of author Alaa Hamed after serving a year in prison for writing a novel that ‘insulted Islam’.

The year 2000 sees the writer Haydar Haydar being declared an apostate for writing ‘A Banquet for Seaweed’, in which a character says: ‘The divine Bedouin laws and the teaching of the Qur’ran are all shit.’ Al Azhar University called for a public burning of the book. A year later journalist Salaheddin Mohsen and female preacher Manal Manea are each sentenced to three years in prison for atheism and blasphemy. In 2004, al Azhar’s Islamic Research Council recommended banning Nawal el-Saadawi’s novel ‘The Fall of the Imam’, which had been on sale in Egypt since 1987.

Beginning with Law Number 102 of 1985, President Mubarak’s various governments gave Al Azhar’s Islamic Research Council (IRC) the power to advise on the banning or censoring of any book it judged as heretical. Minister of Culture Farouk Hosni later gave the increasingly potent body a boost when he was quoted as saying, “Al Azhar is the supreme authority; when it states an opinion, we must all fall silent.” Paradoxically Minister Farouk Hosni said recently that “the headscarf is a symbol of backwardness”, which caused him a lot of trouble in Egypt, yet he was not accused by Al Azhar of anything at all.

The IRC at Al Azhar University had the legal authority to censor, but not to confiscate any books, but unfortunately the Center was given the authority to confiscate books and audio and videotapes that they believe violate Islamic teachings by Minister of Justice Faruq Seif al-Nasr. The minister’s order led to the confiscation of hundreds of publications from bookstores.

Not only were books affected by that, but also the range of academic research was rigidly restricted. The case against Nasr Abu Zeid began as a response to his interpretation of the Qur’an and resulted in an implied decision in all Arab language and philosophy departments to ban registrations of any theses involving an interpretation of the Qur’an that might lead to the same problem. Any academic researcher thinking of a thesis on a religious subject no longer has complete freedom to decide the subject. Yet in 2006, Al Azhar not only allowed, but also granted, a doctorate to an obvious fanatic. The thesis listed who all he thought are apostates, with one of Egypt’s first female journalists, Rosa Al-Youssef, in the lead.

What I find very puzzling is that the government clamps down so very hard on Islamists and Muslim Brothers, yet allows their constant meddling in intellectual affairs. This is very strange, because it is exactly this intellectual backwardness disguised as religious zeal, which is the core challenge to President Mubarak’s ostensibly secular state. In the Human Rights Watch Report of 2005 it was noted: “The Egyptian government must create an environment where academic freedom is respected, i.e., restore autonomy to the universities and cease violating the rights of individual members of the community. Such steps would make it harder for those who challenge academic freedom to achieve their goals. The state should also actively oppose intolerant individuals or groups who carry out attacks against academic freedom. For example, it should reject calls to censor books and allow students to choose their own thesis topics. Rather than combating Islamists’ attempts to limit academic freedom, Egypt has allowed them to deprive others of their rights.”

In an explosive interview in September 2004 Nabil Abdel Fattah, a political analyst with Al Ahram Political and Strategic Studies Center wrote about how Politicians have used religion to gain legitimacy, how extremists have used it to condone murder and how religious institutions have been more than happy to play the power game to win some control of their own. Welcoming the reader to twenty five years of religious politics in Egypt, he said: “Al-Azhar has been censoring books and, worse, we’ve become accustomed to reading about one Islamist lawyer or another calling for movies to be banned because the posters were ‘suggestive’. Instead, the state over-used religion in its political war and it over-used Al-Azhar. We can’t ignore the fact that there are extremists inside Al-Azhar itself, which put additional burdens on people and society.” This was published in Egypt Today, a famous Magazine in Cairo. The words are not very much different from Kareem Amer’s conclusion now are they?

Islam is intrinsically a moderate religion. Yet, today the biggest problem it faces is the extremism of its advocates. Al Azhar, as one of the oldest universities and Islamic institutions should be the first to ensure that Muslims stay on the middle path. Islam neither teaches extremism nor rejection, neither arrogance nor ignorance. In fact, it condemns them all. My parents and teachers never taught me this. I do not recognise many aspects of this violent intolerant behaviour. What then does Islam teach? The Islam I learned teaches people to be kind and forgiving, to be open hearted and modest in behaviour. It teaches a beautiful middle way, a critical balance between two unhealthy and unworthy extremes. “And it is thus that We appointed you to be the community of the middle way, so that you might be witnesses before all mankind and the Messenger might be a witness before you.” (Qur’an 2:143)

You can read Part 1 here: The Crime of Obeying God!

The editor-in-chief of Alt.Muslim, an online Muslim news community, discussed the actions governments in the Middle East are taking against bloggers, the complex position the United States would be in if they were to fully support these bloggers, and what Muslim bloggers need to do to support each other: Blogging Your Way Into Prison.

Excerpts:

Blogging Your Way Into Prison
________________________________________
Some bloggers in the Muslim world have put themselves on the front lines in the struggle for open political expression – and are paying a severe price for it.
________________________________________
By Shahed Amanullah, February 4, 2007

It probably was not wise (or productive) for Abdel Kareem Nabil, who goes by the blogger name Karim Amer, to call his alma mater, Cairo’s Al-Azhar University, “the university of terrorism.” But few expected that his blog would land him in an Egyptian jail on charges of “incitement to hate Islam” and “defaming the president of the republic.” His case has sparked international outcry and many say his imprisonment represents an alarming and growing trend in Egypt tostifle [sic] bloggers. In response to a growing movement called “Kifayeh” (“Enough” in Arabic), Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has renewed his Draconian emergency laws which have been in place nearly continuously since 1967. Nabil’s arrest is particularly alarming, says Amnesty International, because Egypt’s blogs provide perhaps the only avenue to document human rights abuses in Egypt and to encourage civic dialogue.

[…]

When speaking of bloggers in the Muslim world, one cannot ignore the larger picture. Many in the US government are looking eagerly at the emerging voices in the Muslim world, hoping to see in them the seeds of a reformist transformation. Some policymakers are even trying to throw the weight of the US behind beleaguered bloggers, a move that will surely backfire. While it is necessary and proper for the US to insist on the right of Muslims to freely express themselves, specific advocacy on behalf of individuals may cause more harm than good. First of all, while these bloggers are certainly challenging the limits of expression in their country, they are not necessarily aligning themselves with America or US foreign policy. In fact, many decry the American role in providing their countries with the equipment and logistics needed to suppress their online activities. Second, the alignment of US political might on behalf of these bloggers will transform any politically liberating thinkers from voices of independence to perceived agents of the US, adding insult to injury (though, to be fair, most people in government circles that I have spoken to recognize that in this case, US hands are indeed tied.)

Organizations such as Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders, and Human Rights Watch are, however, providing the most meaningful support for these bloggers. These organizations must be supported and strengthened by people of conscience in the West. Muslims, too, need to get involved. As has been shown with Iraq, it is difficult to impose freedom from without. The best chance that Muslim bloggers have of cultivating from within an atmosphere of open inquiry and vigorous political debate is through creating links with supportive Muslims around the world. Insightful and compelling blogs from the Muslim world will lead to an international fan base, and this increased exposure can provide an additional degree of protection. While restrictive governments may indeed feel threatened by political debate, they are also fearful of PR debacles in an increasingly globalized world. So while blogging from parts of the Muslim world may get people into prison, reading their blogs just might help keep them out.

Read the entire article here.

The Globe and Mail, Canada’s largest national daily newspaper, weighs in: Young blogger jailed in Egypt; chill envelops online dissent.

Excerpts:

POSTED ON 02/03/07
Young blogger jailed in Egypt; chill envelops online dissent
Four-year prison term given to 22-year-old who attacked radical Islam, Mubarak

CAROLYNNE WHEELER
Special to The Globe and Mail

CAIRO — Abdel Karim Nabil Suleiman’s online diary was not so different from the hundreds of blogs run by the hip, young Egyptian intelligentsia railing against the system: A law student who said his goal was to form a human-rights firm, he posted a pledge to defend Arab and Muslim women against discrimination, alongside song lyrics and advertisements against censorship.

But the 22-year-old, who wrote under the name Karim Amer, also made some enemies for his harsh online criticism of radical Islam, for his attacks on the Egyptian President as a “symbol of tyranny,” and for repeated criticism of Alexandria’s Al-Azhar University, where he studied until his expulsion in March.

The Islamic school is highly respected among devout Sunni Muslims; Mr. Suleiman called it the “other face of the coin of al-Qaeda,” and called for it to become a secular institution.

Detained last November and held until his case finally came to trial last week, Mr. Suleiman got just five minutes in the courtroom — long enough for a judge to read out his sentence of four years in prison, three for incitement and insulting the Prophet Mohammed and Islam, and an extra one for defaming President Hosni Mubarak.

It’s a precedent-setting move that has cast a new fear into an otherwise spirited place of free expression for Egyptians, outside the mainstream of state-run newspapers and television.

“The message is really clear: If that is a window that has opened to freedom of expression in this country, we as a government are going to close it,” said Fadi al-Qadi, a Cairo-based regional adviser for Human Rights Watch, among several international organizations to condemn the prison sentence.

Across the Arab and Muslim world, online weblogs have become an increasingly popular forum for political dissent not normally tolerated among state-censored broadcast or print media. Writers report about demonstrations and political happenings given little attention in state-run media, debate issues of democracy and religion, and pick apart conservative social customs.

In Egypt, though, bloggers have also done groundbreaking work revealing police beatings, torture and arrests without cause, by the meticulous documenting of court hearings, first-hand accounts of torture cases and posting of photographs and video of police beatings and physical wounds left on victims, including autopsy pictures and, last year, a video of a bus driver being sodomized in a police station.

[…]

“I think it is a message from the government to us, to slow down a little,” said Mohammed Khaled, whose blog was among the first to have videos of police torture. “But we’ve already crossed the line until we can’t go back. Nobody is going to slow down from the bloggers.”

Mr. Suleiman’s lawyer, Ahmed Seif el-Islam, has promised to appeal, telling news agencies the ruling will “terrify other bloggers and will [have a] negative impact on the freedom of expression in Egypt.”

[...]

“I am worried it will have a chilling effect,” said Alaa Abd el-Fatah, 25, who with his wife Manal runs the manalaa.net blog.

He was detained for six weeks last year after a demonstration organized in part through blogs, but says he is not deterred and believes there are many others like him.

“Egypt has a very strong record of activists not accepting these limitations and struggling against them. From what I see, the number of people who are willing to engage, who are willing to accept the consequences, is growing.”

Read it all here.

Along with the Syrian blogosphere, bloggers in the Maghreb (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Western Sahara, and Mauritania) stand against the injustice Kareem is facing: Maghreb bloggers condemn the imprisonment of an Egyptian blogger.

Excerpt:

Maghreb bloggers condemn the imprisonment of an Egyptian blogger
28/02/2007
Many bloggers were disheartened by the sentencing of Egyptian blogger Kareem Amer to four years in prison.

Many Maghreb bloggers condemned the recent sentencing of an Egyptian blogger to four years in prison for insulting Islam and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. The blogger, 22-year-old Kareem Amer, is a staunch critic of Mubarak, and has accused al-Azhar University, the most prominent religious establishment in Sunni Islam, of encouraging extremism.

“Four years of imprisonment for Kareem Amer. Three years for insulting Islam and one year for Mubarak … Criticism in our countries is an insult and a crime. Sorry Kareem, [but] talk is useless, my friend … you will grow in status, and they will shrink,” blogged al-Moudawina Attounisia.

His crime is that he blogs, wrote Moroccan blogger Naim. “He was imprisoned for expressing himself on his personal space. This happens in Egypt in the 21st century.”

Under the headline, “Shame on Egypt: Blogging is not a crime!”, Moroccan blogger Larbi addressed Kareem. “You have committed the unforgivable by doubting Islam and criticizing the government … You are only 22-years-old, but you’ve already known prison and interrogations and will surely get out scarred for life. Your mistake is being born in a place characterized by denial of free thinking, persecution, inhumanity and the absence of liberty. Your sole mistake is denouncing the autocratic regime of Hosni Mubarak and the radical and retrograde alternative of Islamists.”

Thysdrus quoted an article by a Saudi blogger about the fast-growing blogging phenomenon in the Arab World. “Governments in the region should stop wasting time and resources cracking down on bloggers, and should focus more on the benefits they can gain from blogging. Blogs can give indications of trends and public opinion regarding pressing issues in every country, and leaders and officials should learn to be more open to criticism: They should realize that being in the public eye does not give them some kind of immunity. On the contrary, it is the other way around,” said the blogger.

Thank you Maghreb!

Syrian blogger Abu Kareem has initiated a solidarity campaign for Kareem with his fellow Syrian bloggers: Syrian Bloggers in Solidarity with Kareem Amer.

Syrian bloggers have posted the following statement in their blogs in solidarity for Kareem Amer:

We, as a community of Syrian bloggers, condemn the arrest and sentencing of Egyptian blogger Abdel Kareem Nabil Soliman for the peaceful expression of his dissenting views. We ask the Egyptian government to reconsider its decision to arrest and prosecute Abdel Kareem. The stated reasons for their action include the preservation of the public peace and state security, and the prevention of incitement against Islam. We contend that his arrest will achieve neither. Silencing such dissenting voices as Abdel Kareem’s, serves only to strengthen the hands of extremists who will not shy away from violence to achieve their goals. Moreover, we remind the Egyptian government that his arrest and prosecution violates at least two articles (see below) of the 1948 United Nations universal declaration of human rights to which Egypt was a signatory.

Relevant United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights articles:

Article 18. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Such rights for freedom of expression are also enshrined in the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam and the 2003 Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the World’s religion.

Thank you, Syria.

The Washington Institute for Near East Policy discusses the harassment and censorship bloggers face in the Middle East, and US policies on supporting free speech in the region: Internet Freedom in the Middle East: Challenges for U.S. Policy

Excerpt:

U.S. Policy and Freedom of Expression

As authoritarian Arab regimes face complex challenges in the way they deal with the explosion of political speech on the internet, U.S. policy should be clear. The Egyptian regime’s recent sentencing of Suleiman, and the censorship of internet speech in Egypt and other allied states, runs contrary to American values and undermines long-term U.S. interests in the region.

U.S. officials are worried about how much political speech in the Arab world is hostile to the United States, as well as the way in which radical Islamists use the internet to spread messages of hate and to celebrate attacks against Western civilians and military targets. These are not empty concerns — the internet is jihadists’ propaganda machine of choice. U.S. enemies in Iraq, for example, have used the web as a weapon to publicize and even coordinate attacks against U.S. forces. The Egyptian government, and others, would claim that complete freedom of political speech on the internet plays into the hands of Islamist parties such as the Muslim Brotherhood.

This claim, however, should ring false in the ears of U.S. policymakers. Egyptian authorities played the “Islam card” themselves in the case against Suleiman. Although al-Azhar University expelled and brought charges against Suleiman (who had claimed that the religious institution stifled freedom of expression), it was the government of Egypt that tried, convicted, and imprisoned him. The state used the excuse of Suleiman’s “insult against Islam” and his criticism of Mubarak to punish him under Article 179 of the Egyptian Penal Code, which allows for the detention of “whoever affronts the President of the Republic.” By using criticism of Islam as a pretext to silence political speech, the government violated the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Egypt ratified in 1982.

The United States is in a difficult position when its support of free speech conflicts with concerns about the radical Islamist message conveyed by some of those speaking freely. This, of course, does not apply to Suleiman’s case. It may be of special concern to the United States that the Egyptian government decided to come down hard on a liberal blogger. Nevertheless, in condemning Suleiman’s treatment, Washington should not make the content of what he wrote its primary concern. U.S. officials — both in condemning such treatment and articulating a policy for internet freedom in the Middle East — should instead uphold the principle attributed to Voltaire: “I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write.”

That principle extends to criticism of Egypt and Jordan’s ties with the United States and Israel, as well as to blogs written by young members of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and articles spreading falsehoods about the U.S. occupation in Iraq. The one exception should be speech that incites violence or is grossly and morally offensive — an exception that exists in U.S. law as well. That exception should not be an excuse that authorities use to stifle any speech they consider offensive to government interests, however.

Conclusion

As President Bush’s democracy agenda in the Middle East falters amid difficulties in Iraq, the American public and U.S. policymakers should not lose sight of the fact that a freer, more open Middle East remains in the long-term interests of the United States. Pan-Arab satellite stations, text messaging, and blogs have gone a long way toward increasing freedom of expression in the Arab world, with little or no encouragement needed from Washington. “The new Arab sphere is a genuine public sphere,” writes American political scientist Marc Lynch, “characterized by self-conscious, open, and contentious political argument before a vast but discrete audience.”

Such argument ultimately benefits the Middle East and the United States alike. When, in fall 2006, Egyptian blogger Wael Abbas posted videos of police officers beating and sodomizing a bus driver, this served U.S. interests by giving diplomats leverage to pressure Cairo on human rights issues. It is equally important to realize that, like the pan-Arab television networks, blogs and bloggers are here to stay. Political speech on the internet will only grow more prominent in the years to come. The United States is better off embracing this trend than joining those regimes engaged in fruitless attempts to reverse the new wave of free speech spreading throughout the region.

Well worth reading. Read it all here.

We hope the White House is reading it too.

We previously announced that Kareem was nominated for one of the Freedom of Expression Awards by Index on Censorship. We were informed of this by an e-mail message from them.

Well, it’s now official: Kareem Amer has been shortlisted for the prestigious Index on Censorship/Hugo Young Award for Journalism 2007: Index Freedom of Expression Awards shortlist announced.

Index on Censorship/Hugo Young Award for Journalism 2007

This award, given in memory of Guardian columnist Hugo Young, goes to a journalist who has shown an outstanding commitment to journalistic integrity in defence of freedom of expression.
• Jayyab Abu Safia (Gaza): Jayyab has received death threats from Islamic fundamentalists for his refusal to stop airing Western music and discussing controversial subjects on his phone-in programme on Gaza FM, the only apolitical station in the region.
• Kareem Amer (Egypt): Kareem Amer is the pseudonym of 22-year old blogger Abdul Kareem Suleiman Amer, who was recently sentenced to four years imprisonment for criticising Islam and President Mubarak.
• Trevor Ncube (Zimbabwe): Ncube’s tireless work in continuing to run the only independent newspapers in Zimbabwe while under constant attack from the government has been described as ‘incredibly inspiring’. Despite a number of personal attacks, the government has been unable to shut down Trevor’s newspapers or otherwise silence him.
• Carlos Lozano (Colombia): Carlos Lozano is the editor of the only opposition newspaper in Colombia, one of the most dangerous places in the world to be a journalist. In May 2005 he received a death threat and had a car bomb placed in front of his offices. Carlos now lives under 24-hour armed guard.

These awards will be presented at LSO St Luke’s, London, on 14 March 2007.

Please visit the Index on Censorship Web site and read the profiles of other soldiers of free speech shortlisted for similar awards.

Highlights:
- Video shows Kareem leaving court room; he was heard being hit in the prisoners’ vehicle. (Quick link)
- Extremist lawyer and others cheer as Kareem enters prisoner vehicle. (Quick link)
- Red beating marks on Kareem’s face. (Quick link) [EDIT: Cannot be verified]
- Remarks made by neighbor. (Quick link)
- Kareem’s father to security officers: Be harsh on Kareem. (Quick link)
- Remarks made by the public outside the court room. (Quick link)


Blogger ‘Ana 7orr’ (‘I am free’), who attended Kareem’s court verdict session, provides a video of Kareem leaving the court room and getting into the prisoners’ vehicle. You can hear him scream after getting hit:

The video is 16 seconds long. Kareem’s face flashes by during the first few seconds. As he is being escorted toward the prisoners’ truck, you can hear people shouting out in Arabic, “Allahu akbar wa li Allah al-hamd!” (English: “Allah is the greatest, and to Allah we praise!”.

This chorus was lead by extremist prosecuting lawyer Mohamed Dawoud, who in a previous court session told The Associated Press: “I am on a jihad here … If we leave the likes of him [Kareem] without punishment, it will be like a fire that consumes everything.” (A ‘fire’ like this one, I suppose).

At 00:09, Kareem disappears into the truck and gets out of sight, and you can then hear him getting hit, which is followed by a painful scream (as was previously confirmed by The Associated Press).

Ana 7orr also confirms noticing that, as Kareem left the court, his face was red with beating marks. [EDIT: Cannot be verified]

Please contact the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and inform them about this violation of human rights. Use the Human Rights Commission address reserved for urgent matters to e-mail them this video: tb-petitions@ohchr.org.

Ana 7orr gives other details and pictures on another blog post: remarks made by Kareem’s father (according to a neighbor of Kareem’s), accusations made against Kareem, and what people outside the court generally thought of the case. Below is a summary of the relevant portions of his post:

The man in the above picture is prosecuting lawyer Mohamed Dawoud, who called for waging jihad against ‘the likes of Kareem’ and lead the cheering chorus when Kareem was entering the prisoners’ vehicle.

The media seemed focused on the man pictured above, Yasser Metwalli, who said he was Kareem’s neighbor. He stated that he engaged in a 45-minute discussion with Kareem, but failed to convince Kareem to abandon his views.

Yasser accused Kareem of being “funded” by people outside the country, and that human rights organizations contributed to his “corruption”.

Yasser also said that Kareem’s father asked security forces to be harsh on him so he can back out of his thoughts. His father also accused human rights organizations that stood by Kareem of corrupting him. He told Yasser that Europeans are sympathizing with Kareem only because he insulted Islam, and that if what Kareem said were pro-Islamic, no one would have sympathized with him, referring to Wafa Constantine as an example of that.

Kareem’s father also proposed to solve such “problems” of “corruption” by blocking Internet Web sites as Saudi Arabia does.


There were people outside the court who said that Kareem committed a crime and that he deserved to face a criminal court, whereas others argued that Kareem’s case is an ideological one, and that the courtroom is not the appropriate place to handle it. This was the opinion of many of Kareem’s sympathizers. However, many of his former sympathizers turned back on supporting him after they read some of his articles on Islam.

Bloggers being interviewed by the media outside the court.

Members of the public engaging in fierce discussions over Kareem Amer and the verdict. Some extremists insisted that Islam has only one interpretation, and some even went as far as calling for executing and stoning Kareem.
(Photo/camera date set incorrectly)

Security officials wait for Kareem to be lead outside the courtroom after having the verdict read out to him.

A couple of other pictures found elsewhere shows Kareem being lead out of the courtroom:

Egyptian blogger Abdel Kareem Nabil in a shirt reading in Arabic: ‘prisoner investigation’ is escorted from court in Alexandria. Photograph: Nasser Nasser/AP

Escorted from court in Alexandria (Reuters)

Again, please contact the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Use the Human Rights Commission address reserved for urgent matters to e-mail them this video: tb-petitions@ohchr.org.

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing” – Edmund Burke

British television station Channel 4 reports on Kareem Amer’s imprisonment, and discusses the struggle between Arab bloggers and their leaders in the Middle East.

Warning: Disturbing scenes of tortured Egyptian prisoners is shown in this video.

(If Internet Explorer acts strangely and crashes, as has happened with myself, try watching with Mozilla Firefox.)

Click here to watch Channel 4 News: Egyptian Blogger Jailed

UPDATE: Now on YouTube as well:

An editorial in The Washington Post criticizes the Bush administration for tolerating the Egyptian government’s imprisonment of Kareem for blogging: Blogger on Ice (hat tip: Billy H.).

Blogger on Ice
Once again Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak shows zero tolerance for a secular democratic dissenter.

Wednesday, February 28, 2007; Page A18

THE BUSH administration has tolerated Egypt’s brutal crackdown on domestic dissent and the broader reversal of its democratic spring of 2005 in part because President Hosni Mubarak argues that his adversaries are dangerous Islamic extremists. It’s true that the largest opposition movement in Egypt is the Muslim Brotherhood; how dangerous it is can be debated. But what is overlooked is that Mr. Mubarak reserves his most relentless repression not for the Islamists — who hold a fifth of the seats in parliament — but for the secular democrats who fight for free elections, a free press, rights for women and religious tolerance.

The latest case in point is a blogger named Abdel Kareem Nabil Soliman, who was sentenced to four years in prison last week on charges of religious incitement, disrupting public order and “insulting the president.” A brave and provocative 22-year-old student, Mr. Soliman first achieved notice with postings that denounced riots in Alexandria directed at Egypt’s Christian Copt minority. He said the brutality he witnessed was the result of extremist Islamic teachings, in part by his own university, Al-Azhar, which he called “the other face of al-Qaeda.” He compared the prophet Muhammad to Israel’s Ariel Sharon. And he said Mr. Mubarak was a “symbol of tyranny

Setting aside the hyperbole, there was considerable truth in many of the blogger’s charges. Right or wrong, he certainly would seem to deserve the same freedom of speech as Egypt’s government-owned newspapers, which regularly publish vile anti-Semitic screeds. But Mr. Soliman was one of several Egyptian bloggers arrested last year. While others were released after being beaten — and in one case, raped — by police, Mr. Soliman was brought to trial by Mr. Mubarak’s prosecutors in what seemed a clear attempt to freeze what had been a growing space for free expression.

“This verdict sets a legal precedent for prosecuting someone for what they write on the Internet, on charges that are not easily defined or defended against,” wrote another Egyptian blogger known as Sandmonkey. “This could be used to prosecute any blogger the government feels like punishing and serves as a huge blow to freedom of speech in Egypt.”

As a political prisoner, Mr. Soliman will join Ayman Nour, who was sentenced a year ago on fabricated charges after he ran for president against Mr. Mubarak on a liberal democratic platform. As many as 800 members of the Muslim Brotherhood have also been jailed in the past year. This by a government that continues to be one of the largest recipients in the world of U.S. aid, collecting more than $2 billion a year. What do American subsidies support? Not least, the elimination of what would otherwise be the strongest secular democratic movement in the Arab Middle East.

Previously by The Washington Post: The ‘Crime’ Of Blogging In Egypt