Feast of the Most Precious Blood

The Roman Catholic Church, celebrated on July 1 is the Solemnity of the "Most Precious Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ." This feast, celebrated in Spain in the 16th century, was later introduced to Italy by Saint Gaspar del Bufalo and extended to the whole Church by Pope Pius IX in 1849.

Meaning of the Feast Day

In Catholic belief, the Blood of Christ is precious because it is Christ's own great ransom paid for the redemption of mankind. As there was to be no remission of sin without the shedding of blood, Catholics hold that the "Incarnate Word" not only offered his life for the salvation of the world, but he offered to give up his life by a bloody death, and to hang bloodless, soulless and dead upon the Cross for the salvation of humanity. Jesus is said to have given his life - his blood - for the sake of all humanity, regardless of any religious division or difference in belief, atoning for every form of human sin. The Feast of the Precious Blood is a call to repentance and reparation.

The special reason underlying devotion to the Most Precious Blood of Christ is the fact that we were redeemed with the Precious Blood. The Precious Blood of Christ, shed unto the last drop during the Passion, is the price He paid for our salvation.

The Blood of Christ is true sacrificial Blood shed to ratify the New Covenant. As the Covenant on Mount Sinai was ratified by sprinkling the people with the blood of the Covenant (Ex. 24:8), so by the will of God and according to His Divine plan, the New Covenant required dedication by the blood of a victim, Jesus Christ. His Blood was far more excellent than the blood of sacrificial victims of the Old Covenant to cleanse and purify the tabernacle and its vessels. St. Paul says: "For Jesus has not entered into a Holy of Holies made by hands, a mere copy of the true, but into Heaven itself, to appear now before the Face of God on our behalf; ...once for all at the end of the ages, He has appeared for the destruction of sin by the Sacrifice of Himself... Christ was offered once to take away the sins of many." (Heb. 9:24-28)

Our Lord's words of Consecration over the chalice were: "Take ye all and drink of this; for this is the Chalice of My Blood, of the New and eternal Covenant, which shall be shed for you and for many, unto the remission of sins, in remembrance of Me."

The Precious Body and Blood of Christ is offered in the Mass as the Sacrifice of Christ's Mystical Body, a sacrifice in which each of us participates in virtue of our membership in His Mystical Body, the Holy Catholic Church. The Precious Body and Blood of Christ received in Holy Communion gives food, drink, refreshment and health to the life of the soul. The Lamb of God, slain for the sins of mankind, is the sacrifice and the banquet of the Christian soul, the very strength and inspiration for Christian living. Thus devotion to the Most Precious Blood encourages a greater love for the Mass.

This Blood of Christ is real drink (2), and, together with His Flesh, is food for our eternal life. () Jesus promised the Eucharist in these words: "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the Flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His Blood, you shall not have life in you. He who eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood has life everlasting and I will raise him up on the last day. For My Flesh is food indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed. He who eats My Flesh, and drinks My Blood, abides in Me and I in him." (John 6:54-57).

And St. Paul says, "For as often as you shall eat this Bread and drink the Chalice, you proclaim the death of the Lord, until He comes. Therefore, whoever eats this Bread or drinks the Chalice of the Lord unworthily, will be guilty of the Body and the Blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself, and so let him eat of that Bread and drink of the Chalice; for he who eats and drinks unworthily, without distinguishing the Body, eats and drinks judgment to himself." (1 Cor. 11:26-30) "The Chalice of blessing that we bless, is it not the sharing of the Blood of Christ?" (1 Cor. 10:16)

The Effects of Christ's Blood

Devotion to the Most Precious Blood rests on basic truths of Christianity. Mankind's fall from supernatural life in the Garden of Eden; man's utter inability to reinstate himself in God's friendship and grace; Christ's superabundant satisfaction for the sins of all men through the shedding of His Most Precious Blood; mankind's opportunity of reunion with God, both in this life and particularly in the next, through the application of the merits of the Precious Blood to souls - such fundamental truths should be emphasized in our age when men tend to glory in their material successes, unmindful of their total dependence upon God.

In the New Testament, and especially in the Epistles of St. Paul, there are many effects ascribed to Christ's true and bloody sacrifice.

By or through His Blood we have the forgiveness of sins. "In Him we have redemption through His Blood, the remission of sins, according to the riches of His grace." (Eph. 1:7) "For if the blood of goats and bulls and the sprinkled ashes of a heifer sanctify the unclean unto the cleansing of the flesh, how much more will the Blood of Christ, Who through the Holy Ghost offered Himself unblemished unto God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" (Heb. 9:13-14)

And St. John says, "And they overcame Him through the Blood of the Lamb and through the word of their witness, for they did not love their lives, even in the face of death." (Apoc. 12:11) "...the Blood of Jesus Christ, His Son, cleanses us from all sin." (1 John 1:7) "These are they who have come out of the great tribulation, and have washed their robes and made them white in the Blood of the Lamb." (Apoc. 7:14) "To Him Who has loved us, and washed us from our sins in His own Blood, and made us to be a kingdom, and priests to God His Father--to Him belong glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen." (Apoc. 1:5-6)

By and through the Blood of Christ we have eternal redemption. "But when Christ appeared as High Priest of the good things to come, He entered once for all through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made by hands (that is, not of this creation), nor again by virtue of blood of goats and calves, but by virtue of His own Blood, into the Holy of Holies, having obtained eternal redemption." (Heb. 9:11-12). (While this redemption applies to all men without distinction, it must be remembered that all men do not thereby automatically attain salvation.)

We are justified and saved from the Divine wrath through the Blood of Christ. "Christ died for us. Much more now that we are justified by His Blood shall we be saved through Him from the wrath. For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved by His life." (Rom. 5:9-10) (Here it is important to recall that salvation applies only to those men who cooperate with the graces of Christ's redemption, by living according to His teachings, and thus saving their souls.)

The Church was purchased by the Blood of the Savior. "Take heed to yourselves and to the whole flock in which the Holy Ghost has placed you as Bishops, to rule the Church of God, which He has purchased with His own Blood." (Acts 20:28)

People are sanctified through the Blood of Christ. "And so Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people by His Blood suffered outside the gate." (Hebr. 13:12) This sanctification refers, of course, to the constant growth in virtue which is the sure vocation of every true child of God: "Be ye perfect, even as your Father in Heaven is perfect."

By the Blood of the Cross of Christ reconciliation and peace were effected with the Father. "For it has pleased God the Father that in Him all His fullness should dwell, and that through Him He should reconcile to Himself all things, whether on the earth or in the heavens, making peace through the Blood of His Cross." (Col. 1:19-20)

In the Blood of Jesus we are incorporated in Christ by membership in His Church. "But now in Christ Jesus you, who were once afar off, have been brought near through the Blood of Christ." (Eph. 2:13)

Prayer

"Almighty and everlasting God, Who didst appoint Thine only-begotten Son the Redeemer of the world, and hast willed to be appeased by His Blood; grant unto us, we beseech Thee, so to venerate (with solemn worship) the price of our redemption, and by its power be so defended against the evils of this life, that we may enjoy the fruit thereof forevermore in Heaven. Through the same Our Lord Jesus Christ, Thy Son, Who liveth and reigneth with Thee in the unity of the Holy Ghost, God, world without end. --Amen."

CENSORING COMMENT ON THE INTERNATIONAL WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL IN BANGLADESH

Mukti Bahini attack Pakistani militiamen in 1971

Eric Avebury At an ICJ academic meeting on June 23 , attempts were made to silence Toby Cadman, and the President of the ICJ decided, without any consultation with the attendees, to strike Mr Cadman's speech from the record. If there is to be a published account of the proceedings at this meeting, Dr Aggarwala must be overruled, and the ICJ should consider whether it is appropriate to have a President who would censor a speech made at one of the organisation's own meetings at the behest of a small but vociferous section of the audience. I am drawing this to the attention of Helena Kennedy (Baroness Kennedy of the Shaws QC) who is head of Justice, the UK section of the ICJ. The statement by Toby Cadman follows:Statements Made by Toby Cadman of 9 Bedford Row International “ expunged” by the International Council of Jurists On 21 June 2011 I attended a conference hosted by the International Council of Jurists upon the invitation of its President, Dr. Aggarwala. The conference was on the rule of law and judicial reform - ( http://www.internationaljurists/org/schedule.php ). I was asked to present a paper. I offered to speak about the International Crimes Tribunal in Bangladesh and international standards as this subject inevitably concerns matters of judicial reform and human rights. I provided the organizers of the conference with full notice of the topic that I intended to address. In the alternative, I offered to speak about three further topics involving defence rights and international criminal justice. No issue was taken at this stage by the President of the International Council of Jurists of the chosen topic and I was appointed to the Terrorism and Human Rights panel discussion. The conference was attended by the newly appointed Bangladesh Chief Justice, Muzammel Hossain, and another Justice of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh, Justice Shamsuddin Chowdhury Manik. 

I introduced myself to the Honourable Chief Justice in the morning and informed him that I would be speaking about the International Crimes Tribunal. I started my brief address by congratulating the Honourable Chief Justice on his recent appointment and I applauded him for his presentation earlier in the day. I stated that it was encouraging to hear his strong words on ensuring the judiciary in Bangladesh remained truly independent. Shortly after commencing my presentation the Honourable Chief Justice left the conference room. As far as I recall neither the Honourable Chief Justice nor Justice Shamsuddin Chowdhury Manik were present during my address. I spoke for no more than 10 minutes and covered the First Constitutional Amendment, the need for proper definitions of the crimes, the exportation of fundamental rights in the Constitution and the exclusion of the Criminal Procedure Act and the Criminal Evidence Act. I then spoke about the criticisms aimed by various international organizations. The point I made was that the discussions during the conference focused on human rights protection and the rule of law. There were also discussions that focused on bringing an end to impunity. I echoed these concerns and stated that none of the rights raised by the other speakers were being provided to accused in proceedings before the International Crimes Tribunal. I listed some of the rights that had been systematically removed by the Act and the Constitution. I concluded by stating that it was crucial to ensure the independence of the judiciary was maintained. At the end of my speech, a member of the audience, whom I now know to be Mr. Anis Rahman OBE, a Bangladeshi barrister based in London, made the point that I should not be making such statements in circumstances where the Government was not in a position to respond and clearly the Chief Justice could not respond. At this point I must state that I never intended to put anything to which the Honourable Chief Justice would be required to respond. Mr. Rahman stated that a number of accusations had been made against the Tribunal. He called for a point of order that my remarks be stricken or expunged from the record. The chair of the session, Justice Hassan B. Jallow, the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda Chief Prosecutor, after some conferring with the other members of the panel refused to make such a point of order and stated that there was nothing inappropriate with what I presented. At the end of the panel session, the audience were invited to ask questions. However, Mr. Rahman rather than ask a question directed abuse at me personally and professionally. This was followed by Ms. Sonia Zaman Khan, a British-Bangladeshi solicitor, directing a number of remarks rather than questions. I was told that I should be ashamed of myself as these people “committed genocide, rape, murder, torture” and the small group of about 10- 12 Bangladeshi members of the audience started to chant repeatedly “shame, shame, shame” and bang the table repeatedly. This was all conducted in a very aggressive and provocative manner. I asked to be able to respond and reluctantly, the Chair of the Panel, Justice Jallow, permitted me to respond. I stated in reply that I had not attacked the Tribunal nor had I attacked any individual judge; I had criticized the procedures. Further, I had not opposed the establishment of the Tribunal but I had criticized the manner in which proceedings were being conducted. I further criticized the fact that despite widespread criticisms being made, including the recommendations by the US Ambassador-at-large for War Crimes Issues, Stephen Rapp, to date no changes had been made to the Act, the Constitution or the Rules of Procedure. I used this opportunity to call the Government to bring the procedures in line with international standards. The small group of antagonists, and I must say this represented a very small segment of the audience, refused to listen to anything further and dismissed my answers out of hand. They continued to direct unsolicited abuse. Of particular note, Ms. Sonia Zaman Khan defended the legislation by stating that the international community, in particular the Canadian Government.had heralded the legislative framework. At the end of the session, a number of individuals approached me to commend me on my presentation and expressed their dismay as to how I was treated. I replied that this is a very emotive subject and therefore emotional statements are to be expected. I expressed some surprise; however, that at a gathering of distinguished jurists, there would be a complete disregard for a judicial process that met recognized fair trial standards. I was also taken aback by the suppression of any form of criticism of what is ostensibly a democratic nation. I left the conference shortly after my address. 

The following day I learned of a number of statements that had been made by members of the Bangladeshi community in the audience. In particular it was stated that Justice Shamsuddin Chowdhury Manik explained in detail the procedures of the International Crimes Tribunal and made it clear that all steps had been taken towards ensuring a trial process based on internationally accepted standards. It was also stated that I had made “grave insinuations against the legal process in Bangladesh but had also chosen the wrong forum to express views on the war crimes trial in the country”. In response to these statements the following remarks are made. First, I made it quite clear in my presentation that no offence was intended towards any member of the Bangladesh judiciary. Absolutely no accusations were addressed towards any judge or judicial institution of Bangladesh. I openly criticized the Act, the Rules of Procedures and the First Constitutional Amendment. I echoed the concerns of a number of international organizations, including Human Rights Watch, the International Center for Transitional Justice, Amnesty International, and importantly, the International Bar Association. In relation to Ms. Khan’s statements that the Act is heralded by the international community this is quite simply misleading and not supported by any credible facts. Second, I am not in a position to respond to Justice Shamsuddin Chowdhury Manik’s comments due to the fact that none of these comments were made in my presence. However, I will state once again that, in my opinion, which is shared by the vast majority of international observers of the legislative framework at the Tribunal, that the laws and procedures fall woefully short of what is understood to be recognized international standards. Third, as to the suggestion that my remarks were “expunged” I am not in a position to comment on what may or may not have occurred after I left the conference. What I am able to state with absolute certainty is that when the request was made in my presence, the Chair of the Panel, Justice Jallow, refused to dismiss my remarks. He made it quite clear that my remarks were not inappropriate nor were they directed to cause offence. I have also been subsequently informed that Sir Gavin Lightman, formerly Mr. Justice Lightman of the High Court of England and Wales, in summarizing the conclusions of the conference, adopted the same position. 

The article that appeared in The Daily Star on 22 June 2011 entitled “Judiciary Ensures Rule of Law in Bangladesh” ( http://www.thedailystar.net/ newDesign/news-details.php? nid=191143 ) is quite misleading and does not represent what actually transpired. For example, it conveniently fails to mention that one of the dignitaries attending the conference, Sir Gavin Lightman, made the point that there was no malice intended in my address. It also fails to address the point above that Justice Jallow refused to expunge my remarks when requested to do so by Mr. Rahman. Following the publication of the article in The Daily Star I sought to ascertain whether my remarks had in fact been expunged after my departure. Regrettably, I was informed that the President of the International Council of Jurists, Dr. Adish Aggarwala, had expunged my remarks from the proceedings. I immediately made contact with the International Council of Jurists and was informed by Dr. Aggarwala that if I submitted my paper the International Council of Jurists would take a final decision as to whether my controversial statement was relevant. By his own admission, the President of the International Council of Jurists confirmed that he was not present during my speech. What I now find particularly worrying is that my remarks were expunged by the President of the International Council of Jurists even though he had not heard them. He had concluded that my remarks were controversial again without hearing them. It is clear that my remarks were expunged at the request of those persons who had sought to suppress my criticisms of the legislative framework of the International Crimes Tribunal. It is also of concern that the conference was organized with the “academic support” of the General Council of the Bar of England and Wales and the reputation of this organization may lend support to a process which now appears to be quite flawed. It is of course the cornerstone of any democratic process that there is free debate on the issues and that the administration must be called to account for any process it seeks to implement. The rule of law and free speech is what distinguishes a democratic nation. Expunging remarks due to the fact that they are considered to be controversial or against the interest of the State does not represent a democratic process. My concluding remarks are as follows. I do not oppose the establishment of the International Crimes Tribunal as the State is under an obligation to bring an end to impunity. I have no desire to criticize the Government of Bangladesh nor do I have any desire to criticize the Tribunal or the Judges. I do consider; however, as I stated in my remarks on 21 June 2011 , that the legislative framework of the International Crimes Tribunal requires urgent reform. I do not consider it sufficient to amend the Rules of Procedure, as has been suggested. In my view the First Constitutional Amendment that removes the protection of fundamental rights must be amended. The Act and the Rules of Procedure must also be brought in line with Bangladesh’s responsibilities under international law. Finally, the legislative framework must be brought in line with Bangladesh’s responsibilities as a State Party to the Rome Statute. It is difficult to see where the controversy lies. 

Toby M. Cadman London , 26 June 2011

Peter and Paul: Two Early Martyrs

The New Testament tells a great deal about two of the most important Apostles: Peter and Paul. Contained in the book of Acts are stories of their travels, their actions, and their words. But one aspect of Peter and Paul is missing from Acts and, in fact, from the whole New Testament: how they died.

In order to find out about the deaths of Peter and Paul, we have to look outside the New Testament. A number of letters and other literary works were written within the Christian community of the First Century, but only twenty-seven made it into the New Testament. Books which did not make it into the New Testament are known as "Apocrypha." Among the New Testament Apocrypha is a book entitled "The Acts of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul." In this book we find a description of the deaths of Peter and Paul. Toward the end we find Peter and Paul in front of Nero, and we pick up the story there:

"Both Peter and Paul were led away from the presence of Nero. And Paul was beheaded on the Ostesian road. And Peter, having come to the cross, said: ‘Since my Lord Jesus Christ, who came down from the heaven upon the earth, was raised upon the cross upright, and He was deigned to call to heaven me, who am of the earth, my cross ought to be fixed head down most, so as to direct my feet towards heaven; for I am not worthy to be crucified like my Lord.’ Then having reversed the cross, they nailed his feet up."

So, Peter was crucified upside down and Paul was beheaded by Nero. Or were they? Earlier in the story we find Peter and Paul in front of Nero with a magician named Simon. To make a long story short, Simon claimed to be the son of God. Nero was inclined to believe Simon, and so Peter and Simon engage in a discussion of whether Simon or Jesus was the son of God. Finally Simon says that he will prove he is the son of God. He stands on a high place and begins to fly. Nero looks at Peter and says (and I paraphrase), if you can do better than that I will believe in Jesus. Peter closes his eyes and prays "In the name of Jesus, I command the angels of Satan who are holding Simon up to be removed." Simon came crashing down and died. At that point Nero orders the death of Peter and Paul.

So, did Simon really fly? We would all say no. So, was Peter crucified upside down and Paul beheaded? Maybe. It is easy to see why this book was not included in the New Testament because people do not fly, but the death stories may be true.
The Apocrypha books were not excluded from the New Testament because they were total lies but because they were not inspired and had some falsehoods. Many New Testament scholars believe that the New Testament Apocrypha probably contain truthful accounts scattered here and there amidst the fabricated stories. But which are truthful and which are made up? In this book it is obvious that Simon’s flight was the product of someone’s imagination. But Peter crucified upside down and Paul beheaded? That could have happened. And it is easy to believe that Peter would have made the request to be crucified upside down for the reason he did.

Therefore the deaths of Peter and Paul are said to be "according to tradition." This means that we do not know for certain if it happened that way, but it is the best we have to go on.

Pope may go online to launch Vatican news portal

The Vatican, whose communications problems are no secret, is taking a leap into the world of new media with the launch next week of a news information portal that Pope Benedict XVI himself may put online with a papal click. Vatican officials said Saturday that Pope Benedict has been following the development of the portal which will for the first time aggregate information from the Vatican’s various print, online, radio and television media in a one-stop-shop for Holy See news. The portal is being launched Wednesday, the 60^th anniversary of Pope Benedict’s ordination as a priest. Monsignor Caludio Maria Celli who leads the Vatican office that developed the portal and will maintain it, said the Pope may put the site online himself with a click from the Apostolic Palace. It’s the latest effort by the Vatican to bring its evangelizing message to a greater, Internet-savvy audience. It’s also a significant step for the 84 year old Benedict, who has been bedeviled by communications woes during much of his six year papacy, much of it the fault of a large Vatican bureaucracy that doesn’t always communicate well internally. While the portal is designed mostly to provide Vatican news in an easy to use setting for the outside world, Celli said he hoped it would also improve the Vatican’s own internal communications by letting various departments know what one another are up to and help provide a more coherent message. The portal is outfitted for live streaming of papal events, audio feeds from Vatican Radio, photographs from L’Osservatore Romano and printed texts of Papal homilies, statements and speeches. It’s also designed to be social- media friendly, with Twitter feeds and Facebook links – part of the Vatican’s recent realization that it can reach a wide new audience by interacting witht eh outside world rather than merely preaching from afar.

Pope appeals for refugees, Middle East Christians

(June 24, 2011) Pope Benedict XVI on Friday appealed for those fleeing the turbulent situation in the Middle East and Northern Africa urging they be offered every possible help needed. Pope Benedict made the appeal while addressing some 80 participants in the meeting of the Reunion of Aid Agencies for the Oriental Churches, known by its Italian acronym ROACO. Created by the Vatican's Congregation for Eastern Churches in 1968, ROACO coordinates nearly 20 U.S. and European agencies and organizations that provide assistance to Eastern Catholic communities in Asia, Northern Africa, Eastern Europe and the Middle East. Addressing the group in four languages, the Pope expressed his closeness to “those who are suffering and to those who are trying desperately to escape, thereby increasing the flow of migration that often remains without hope.” The Holy Father hoped that “necessary emergency assistance will be forthcoming,” and that “every possible form of mediation will be explored, so that violence may cease and social harmony and peaceful coexistence may everywhere be restored, with respect for the rights of individuals as well as communities.” Speaking in French the Pope specifically addressed the situation of Christians in the Holy Land and the Middle East. He urged ROACO to do everything possible through their local as well as international contacts to ensure that native Christian pastors and faithful be able live in their homeland not as foreigners but as co-citizens who witness to Jesus Christ, just as the saints of the oriental Churches have done before them in the past.

BANGLADESH ETHNIC COMMUNITIES PROTEST ISLAMIZATION OF CONSTITUTION

The Bangladesh government’s dramatic turn around from secularism to Islamism has enraged the indigenous population, who are demanding to be recognized in a proposed re- draft of the country's constitution. The nation is poised to amend the constitution, which is likely to be tabled in the parliament on Thursday. The move has been vehemently protested by The Bangladesh government’s dramatic turn around from secularism to Islamism has enraged the indigenous population, who are demanding to be recognized in a proposed re- draft of the country's constitution. The nation is poised to amend the constitution, which is likely to be tabled in the parliament on Thursday. The move has been vehemently protested by independence war veterans, the pro-secularist lobby and social justice activists. Dissent is also being heard from within the ruling party and its pro- left alliance partners. The superior court, in a landmark judgment last July, asked the government to restore secularism in the spirit of the bloody war of independence of 1971. Secular activists charge the government has deliberately adopted dilly-dally tactics while the charter changes are considered. Former guerrilla leader Jyotirindra Bodhipriya Larma a. k.a. Shantu Larma, chairman of the Chittagong Hill Tracts Regional Council, on Thursday rejected the proposed Islamization of the constitution and demanded constitutional recognition of the indigenous or Adivasi community, who have resided in the country for centuries.

The guerrilla leader, who fought a bush war for two decades, demanded the government drop a proposal to keep a Koranic verse in the preamble of the constitution -- "Bismillah ir-Rahman ir-Rahim (in the name of Allah, most gracious, most merciful)" and Islam as the state religion. "A state can't have a religion," said Larma, who signed the historic peace accord between guerillas and the government 13 years ago. The treaty recognizes the inhabitants of hill forest as indigenous communities, acknowledges its traditional governance system and established regional autonomy. However, the constitution does not acknowledge them as Adivasis. The matter of recognition of the indigenous people came to the fore recently following denial by a Bangladesh diplomat in the United Nations that there were no indigenous people in the country. The statement has been construed as another step by the government to further erode the already limited rights of indigenous people. Since Bangladesh gained independence four decades ago, the 35 ethnic groups that represent nearly 2 percent of the total 158 million majoritarian Sunni Muslims have demanded to be recognized as indigenous communities.

Arguments for Agnosticism

Agnosticism is the position that it is impossible to know many things especially questions surrounding the ultimate reality behind our existence, what happens to us when we die and the ontology (or intrinsic nature) of God. The question: ‘what is God’ must be a prerequisite to the question ‘does God exist’, because it makes no sense for one to try and prove the existence of something without defining what it is that one is trying to prove exists. The moment that the theist admits that they do not know what God is or what the nature of God is they have entered into the realm of Agnosticism. Gnosis is a Greek term that means ‘knowledge’ and for example Christian Gnostics claimed to have Esoteric Gnosis. The opposite is Agnosticism, or to claim to be without knowledge.  

In order to understand the position of the agnostic one has to begin with the branch of philosophy called epistemology. Epistemology is simply the study of knowledge, how we know what we know and distinguishing what we know to be true from what we believe to be true. It is my firm perspective that anyone who humbles themselves and deciphers what they know compared to what they believe that they will inevitably arrive at agnosticism (the position that it is impossible to know many things) and hopefully as a result they will abandon organized religion.

In short knowledge should not be seen as simply the accumilation and memorization of information by the the cognitive processes of the brain. Rather knowledge in an epistemic context has more to do with concrete data that is justifiable, falsifiable, verifiable, repeatable and thus the data translates to a warranted belief through a rational and empirical methodology. In short we know what we know because we can observe and test what we know through the scientific method. Anything that cannot be tested, observed and rationalized through our individual and collective efforts is not knowedge rather unjustified belief.

What we would want the followers of any organized religion to focus on is what they do NOT know even if they have beliefs about the unknown. Metaphysical claims such as the existence of God, Angels, Demons, Jinn, Heaven and Hell should be categorized as unknowns. No one truely knows what they are. Hence they are outside of the scope of rationality. Beliefs in the occurance of supernatural miracles however, such as Jesus walking on water or Muhammad splitting the moon, would be deemed irrational due to the fact that the claims are not metaphysical claims rather these are claims that directly have to do with the laws of physics that we do know. So there is rational, irrational and simply outside of the scope of rationality. While Theists can believe in a metaphysical reality the specific beliefs they have about metaphysical entities must be categorized as unknowns, unjustified beliefs, philisophical conjecture, and theorhetical possbilities based on imagination. Beliefs in supernatural miracles however are different than beliefs in metaphysical realities and are irrational because the claim is made that the laws of physics as we know them are defied and there is no rational basis for this.

So allow me to demonstrate that Muslims and Christians are actually closet agnostics. In Islam there is this notion of Ilm al Ghayb (knowledge of the unseen). This knowledge of the unseen in a nutshell is the ultimate reality of all things and only God posseses this knowledge. God reveals this ‘ilm-al-ghayb’ to special individuals, namely the Prophets of God, however even the Prophets of God are limited in their capacity at truely knowing what the mystical things they have come to experience are. Generally through esotericism and mysticism individuals have claimed to have had experiences that gave them spiritual knowledge not otherwise known to collective humanity. However even if an individual claims such Esoteric Gnosis they still do not know what it is they have experienced. The experience is a mystery and therefore the only real Gnosis they have come upon is that there is a mystery beyond the biology, chemistry and physics of all that appears on the surface. In reality their inability to know what it is that they have experienced brings them right back to Agnosticism. 

The moment the Muslim and Christian admits that they do not know what God is, what Angels are, what Jinn are etc. their beliefs collapse into agnosticism. There is a common discussion between the Purist/Literalist Salafi Muslims and the Ashari-Maturidi-Sufi Muslims. The purists will argue for example when the Qur’an describes the Divine in anthropomorphic terms that the true nature of the HANDS or FACE of God is unknown. Likewise, when the Qur’an mentions the ARSH or Throne of the Divine, which the Divine has ISTAWA or risen above (7:54), Muslims agree that the nature of the throne is simply unknown to collective humanity. The Ashari-Maturidi-Mu’tazili-Sufi types of Muslims will try and apply a metaphorical interpretation, but in the end agree with the Purists that the true nature of the Throne or Hands of God are unknown. Again, when one breaks down the theological perspective of Muslims and Christians not really knowing something, especially about what God is, what we find is that they are falling into the category of agnosticism. Therefore their agnosticism cannot be superior to anyone elses agnosticism. 

Epistemology totally recognizes that people have beliefs about unknown. In effect there are three types of Agnostics. Agnostic Theists, Agnostic Atheists and Agnostics who don’t care. Agnostic Theists have beliefs about God but ultimately admit that they don’t know what God is or what God ‘wants’ (if God wants anything at all). Agnostic Atheists admit that they cannot prove a negative or prove that God (or any metaphysical entity) does not exist but they believe that most of the evidence points to there not being a God (at least the gods that organized religions describe). The third category is self explained. 

Two beautiful sources for agnosticism in past human civilizations include Greek philosopher Socrates and Chinese philosopher Laotzi. The latter is known as the Father of Daosim and author of the Daodejing where he writes as follows:

The Dao that can be described is not the absolute Dao;

the name that can be given is not the absolute name.

Nameless it is the source of heaven and earth;

From Laotzi comes the approach of an unknowable God. The idea that any description that any one gives about God simply cannot really be what God is. However the notion that one can interact with oneself and the environment spiritually (i.e. interact with God) and not knowing the ontology or nature of that spiritual experience are two different issues. 

The story of Socrates is a bit more inspirational. Here you have an individual who goes to an Oracle that makes a bold statement: no one is as wise as Socrates. Now pay attention to the fact that the Oracle did not say that Socrates is the WISEST, rather the statement was that no one is as wise as Socrates. This message from the Oracle is something that Socrates himself struggled with because Socrates himself believed that he had no wisdom at all. He claimed that he had no knowledge. Eventually he came to realize what was meant by that statement. Socrates was taken to court for “corrupting the youth” and for denying the religion/gods of the Greeks. Socrates went to the people regarded as wise in the community, namely the politicians, artisans and poets in order to prove the Oracle wrong. What Socrates realized from his experiences was that while each individual he encountered had some wisdom in terms of their trade that they actually did not know more than him in terms of life’s big questions. Finally Socrates had come to realize what the Oracle meant. Socrates admitted that he knew nothing. Admitting to ignorance is in fact the ultimate wisdom that he had and therefore no one was wiser than Socrates. Socrates was sentenced to death due to his “blasphemy”. This story of Socrates being killed for standing up for Philosophy is far more intellectually and spiritually inspirational than that of Jesus who was killed for making erroneous metaphysical claims. 

In any event we hope from the bottom of my heart that Muslims and Christians seriously reflect, humbly admit, openly embrace and effectively grow from their inevtiable position of not knowing. Once they do that they will have renounced their position of wanting to implement and force their religion on others and especially their position that they have arrived at some type of exclusive understanding and absolutism concerning reality and existence.

Journalist Lisa Daftari : Her Conversation

Introduction: Since the fraudulent June 12th, 2009 Presidential Election in the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI), an increasingly emboldened opposition, the Green Movement, has arisen to demand the overthrow of the IRI. The Green Movement refuses to desist from launching massive street protests in Tehran, and other major Iranian cities. All this is occurring despite violence wreaked upon thousands of valiant regime opponents by the ruling Mullahs and President Ahmadinejad.

To explore these emerging revolutionary prospects in Iran and turned to Lisa Daftari, an Iranian-American award-winning journalist with expertise in counterterrorism and the Middle East, particularly in Iranian affairs. Daftari has been in the forefront of communicating the important views of the Iranian opposition via her brilliant writing and commentary, as well as facilitating communications from within Iran to the world media.

Born in a suburb of New York City, she moved to Los Angeles, where she received a Masters degree in Broadcast Journalism from the University of Southern California.

Lisa has a gift for spotting an intriguing human story, luring the reader in, then gradually revealing her passion for the written word in lucid displays of prose. She is highly professional in her line of work. Lisa is a multifaceted, multitalented artist. She is a phenomenally gifted pianist who has the same control over the keyboard and the range of dynamics and finesse of touch as she has with written word. She is also a trained vocalist and has perfect pitch, which is the rare ability of a person to identify or re-create a given musical note without the benefit of an external reference.

Lisa recognizes the importance of keeping people informed. “Democracy does not work without a truly vibrant press. We, as journalists, have an obligation to sort it all out and supply quality news. Although many of the MSM report some stories well, like hurricanes and sporting events, thousands of exposés never get written because of the lack of investigative journalism. I feel this deprives the public of critical information they need to be intelligently informed,” says Lisa.

Her extensive stories have appeared on CBS, NBC, PBS, NPR, the Washington Post and Voice of America. Lisa is a syndicated columnist and frequently appears on numerous radio and television programs. She has her own column in Front Page Magazine where she serves as the publication’s Iran analyst. Currently, Lisa is a Middle East commentator on the Fox News Channel.

The opposition Green Movement emerged spontaneously two years ago to challenge the results of the disputed 2009 presidential election. With the Green Movement in Iran, which began before the uprising in Tunisia at the beginning of this year, how is the so-called Arab Spring, the revolutions in Syria and elsewhere, impacting the freedom movement in Iran?

Daftari: The Freedom Movement was then, as it is now, an enduring democratic movement that started long before the 2009 Presidential Election in Iran. It was only triggered by the Election. According to most Middle East experts, Iran’s Green (Freedom) Movement inspired and triggered the Arab Spring. Iran has had the distinction of resisting assimilation by Arab invaders for over 14-centuries. Iran is the pacesetter in the region and radical Islam is only a passing aberration in its history. The millions who bravely filled the streets all over Iran protesting what they were convinced was the mullahs’ fraudulent re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, are still determined to defeat the Islamists and once again make Iran a beacon of democracy for other nations to emulate. The regime is rapidly collapsing and the Freedom Movement is distancing itself from any religious connections. Far from being defeated or dispirited, the secularists of Iran are battling on every front and by all means at their disposal to dislodge the mullahs from power.

Based on your contacts inside Iran, in what ways do you see the regime losing its grip on power?

Daftari: The mullahs’ government is not about governing through Islam. On the contrary, it is about usurping unlimited funds and regional power in the name of Islam, Shiite Islam to be exact.  But the seeds for the auto-destruction of the Islamic system were implanted within from its very inception. The system is a hybrid concoction of fanatic religionists who aimed to establish a fantasized Caliphate-like society. To begin with, there never was an ideal Caliphate society to be reborn. Even at Muhammad’s deathbed the various contenders for power began their infighting. The envisioned system is part democratic and part authoritarian. The two are like water and oil and do not mix. Therefore, the Islamic Republic’s system leaves considerable fissures that are bound to bring the entire structure down. At a practical level, the various factions within the system vie for a greater and greater share of power and resources. And this infighting, coupled with inner greed, corruption and incompetence assure the system’s demise.

How might the U.S. jump-start a SUCCESSFUL grassroots revolution in Iran?

Daftari: The Obama administration has been completely unhelpful to the grassroots revolution in Iran. The administration, and Obama in particular, failed to speak in support of the Movement, much less aid it in any significant material way. I have repeatedly proposed ways and means of supporting the Iranian people to remove the Islamists and their influence. I firmly believe that the valiant Iranian secularists will eventually prevail over the mullahs’ regime. What the U.S. can do is to strongly side with them to expedite the mullahs’ demise. It is indeed in the U.S.’s best and vital interests to come to the aid of the Iranian people who can be of the best friends they can have in the region.

What are your thoughts about the recent overture by Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton regarding extending multi-entry visas to Iranian students?

Daftari: I hope this is an indication that the Obama administration is finally waking up to the existing reality in Iran.  Regretfully, there has been only a partial awakening of our government concerning international diplomacy, particularly where the Middle East and counterterrorism are involved. Instead of befriending and supporting the people of Iran, President Obama finds himself on the losing side with the Islamists. The people of Iran question Obama’s quick and zealous public support of the people of Egypt yet appeared untouched by the valiant attempt the Iranians made in 2009 to overthrow their government. Recall that it was the Iranian people’s massive movement against the re-election of Ahmadinejad that inspired the “Arab Spring.”

So, in essence, extending multi-entry visas may be a feeble attempt by the Obama Administration to placate the Iranian people. This token action, although long overdue, is welcome. It shouldn’t stop here. The Obama administration needs to abandon its heavily pro-Islamic policy that is buy the Islamic regime ample time to further develop its nuclear weapons and will assuredly bring disaster to America. If we are to stand and defend American ideals, we must align ourselves as great champions of democracy and human rights with the freedom-seeking secular forces of the Middle East.

It would behoove all freedom-loving individuals to call on President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton to proclaim unequivocal support for the Iranian people and to back that claim with concrete effective peaceful actions. It is the best investment that the U.S. can make in attracting the powerful nation of Iran as a vital ally.

Do you think the deadly confrontation between the U.S. and the Islamic Republic of Iran is inevitable if the mullahs are allowed to make the bomb?

Daftari: For the past 32-years, thousands of dissident students, intellectuals and journalists have been systematically arrested, imprisoned and tortured for the sole crime of speaking up against repressive rule. Many are still languishing in prisons, some have died, and some have simply vanished with no record of what happened to them. Not only has the regime terrorized its own people, but they have also demonstrated a high priority for supporting global terrorism. Their support of extremist terrorist groups has extended far beyond neighboring countries but also as far away as Latin America. Hezbollah in Lebanon has been generously nurtured with funds, weapons and training. Hamas and the Islamic Jihad were assisted in numerous ways, and a professional army of Shiite Iraqis was trained and armed to be used in the present Iraqi theatre. Separately, Muqtada al-Sadr and his militia—the Mahdi Army—is directly funded, armed and controlled by the present Islamic regime, a gift of the former president Khatami to his successor—Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Stealth work on the nuclear program, in clear and defiant violation of the non-proliferation treaty to which the Islamic Republic is a signatory, proceeded ahead at full speed and with generous funding. It is obvious that the intention of the mullahs is not and has never been to protect the Iranian people or their nationalist interests.  The mullahs have proved that their most critical objective is to spread terrorism and radical Islam, at the cost of the Iranian people and the rest of humanity.

At the moment, I would not count on the U.S. Administration to do anything. We have a musical chairs type of government. Democrats out, Republicans in. Republicans in, Democrats out. They are more intent on fighting each other than taking on radical ideologies, and that will cost Americans and the people of the Middle East in the long run. The American public won’t support a war either. They have been burned by the misadventure in Iraq and they are plenty upset about being bogged down in Afghanistan.

Recently, the former president of the Islamic Republic, President Mohammad Khatami, asked for national reconciliation. What are your thoughts about the former president?

Daftari: Well, it was on Khatami’s watch that many students’ lives were extinguished solely for speaking out against the regime. Shamelessly, during the July 9, 1999 university uprising in Tehran, Khatami called the students, “A bunch of hooligans,” while his guards and police brutally attacked students in their dormitories, even throwing some students out of third floor windows. I find it very ironic that he was welcomed at Harvard University to lecture students of the same age and faculty on practicing tolerance. It was during President Khatami’s term that prisoners of conscience were routinely tortured to extract confessions about the crimes they did not commit. Some of the victims were permanently incapacitated while others died under brutal torture. Regretfully, no human rights organizations were allowed to inspect the prisons.

What are your final thoughts about where is Iran headed?

Daftari: Despite everything, I am rather optimistic about the future of Iran. This is indeed the dawn of a new day.  There are many factors that point to an imminent coming of age for the Iranian people and the end of a bloody and brutal era for the regime.  A nation of 70 million, an overwhelming, zealous youth population, a distancing from and despising of oppressive Islam and a multitude of educated, savvy, technologically advanced Iranians will not tolerate or endure the yolk of this repressive regime much longer. The conditions for a perfect storm are in place. It is up to the international community, and in particular, the American administration, who has been the hesitant, halfhearted, unconvincing leader of the free world, to nurture, support and encourage significant changes in Iran and the region.

Court theatrics sees Islam rear its ugly head again

Supporters rally outside court. Herald Sun

The preposterous excuses and Pythonesque theatrics of Carnita Matthews and her very vocal supporters outside a Sydney court this week would be comic, if they weren’t so threatening.

The 46-year-old mother of seven, wearing a full black niqab showing just her eyes, has successfully tied the justice system up in knots for the past year, simply to avoid paying a $197 traffic fine.

Described as being “deliberately malicious and … ruthless” by the magistrate who convicted her last November of falsely claiming a “racist” police highway patrol officer tried to tear off her veil during a random breath test, Matthews escaped her six-month jail sentence on appeal before the NSW District Court on Monday.

Ironically, appeal judge Clive Jeffreys could not be certain beyond reasonable doubt that it was Matthews who had lodged the complaint against Sen-Constable Paul Fogarty, because (drum roll) a person alleged to be her was wearing the niqab when she arrived at Campbelltown police station last June.

“All we know is that a person with a black burqa came in with a man in a brown suit with an envelope and that’s it,” said Judge Jeffreys.

But somebody lied about Sen-Constable Fogarty, whose innocence and gentlemanly restraint in the face of Matthews’ persistent provocation were evident on the 20-minute in-car police video recording, without which his career would certainly have been in jeopardy.

The prosecution was unable to satisfy Judge Jeffreys that the liar was Matthews, despite the fact her friend, former Guantanamo Bay detainee Mamdouh Habib, alleged to radio 2GB’s Chris Smith on Tuesday that he had accompanied her to the police station to lodge the complaint.

Moreover, Channel 7 has footage of Matthews allegedly signing a statutory declaration and driving to Campbelltown police station with Habib.

Neither Habib nor anyone from Channel 7 was asked to give evidence, which makes you wonder if the prosecution’s heart was really in it.

Maybe the case was too hot to handle. It has grown from a simple traffic fine for a woman with a string of driving offences, to a core test of political Islam: whether a veiled Muslim woman has the right to refuse a police officer’s lawful request that she identify herself.

The answer is no. That right does not exist under our law. But that doesn’t stop some Islamist activists pushing for it, as if it is their due.

Regardless of who signed the false complaint against Sen-Constable Fogarty, it was the intimidating behaviour of some of Matthews’ male supporters outside court this week that was most offensive.

The bearded men who chanted “Allah akbar” (Allah is great) as they marched roughshod on cameramen weren’t behaving normally.

Their theatrics were a declaration of war – on Australia, on the media, on police.

Linking arms and striding down the street, chanting the phrase we have heard terrorists utter when they plough a plane into a building or commit some other appalling crime, was a show of power by people who only seem to want to obey their god.

It looked like a direct challenge to Australian law and order.

We increasingly see the same challenge whenever a hardline Islamist appears in court, as the call goes out for “brothers” to run “protection” for the accused.

Matthews’ husband, Hamdi Abu Ibrahim, sent out the call on his Facebook page this week and later thanked: “All the hero’s (sic) and lions of Allah whom (sic) had the chance to come to the court and fight for the sake of Allah . . . Allah has granted your oppressed sister victory over his enemies and he granted us a judge that from the word go he was defending your sister where everyone else was determined to see her jailed, but Allah had other plans. They plot, but Allah is the best of plotters.”

His Facebook page, which had the profile picture of a bloodied fist replaced yesterday by a handcuffed figure in a burqa, contains messages from supporters such as: “Allah akbar, may all the pigs burn in hell inshallah”.

It also features videos of Osama bin Laden, slurs against infidels and “Kufaars” (non-Muslims), “American pig savages” and “Zionist dogs”.

For example, last weekend Ibrahim wrote: “Ya zionist dogs there will be a day very soon that youll find no sheltr nor a wall to hind behind and we will eat your flesh and spit it to our dogs to chew off.”

And this: “How long are we going to stay weak, no more Mr Nice Guy, we will defend our Islam and our sisters with our blood, blood, blood.”

A video also appears with the title “8 US soldiers killed in Iraq” and the message from Ibrahim: “Keep them Comming”.

Another video, since removed, has the message: “Watch the American pigs the Aussie pigs the British pigs soldiers raping your Muslim sister.”

There is also, ominously, talk on the page about disrupting a coming rally in Sydney by the Australian Defence League, an anti-Islamist group. A similar protest against shariah law in Melbourne last month had to be shut down by police after violent clashes.

On Ibrahim’s website there is a lone brave voice of reason, from a woman he refers to as his “sister”, “Philosopha Phatoom”.

“The way u men handled this is very wrong … may Allah take away this hated and anger from ur hearts,” she wrote yesterday. “I’m not judging … i can only assure u that setting an example of Islam is not that way …Remember Islam was never spread by the sword, it caught peoples Hearts.”

The vast majority of moderate Muslims in Australia want no truck with Islamist ideology. Many know all too well the turmoil it has caused in their countries of origin.

It is for them, as much as for the rest of the community, that NSW Premier Barry O’Farrell and his Police Minister Mike Gallagher need to send a firm message that no one is above the law.

The burqa or niqab, as several Muslims have pointed out, is not a requirement of the Koran, which advises women only to dress modestly. But it has become a potent symbol of political Islam.

Gallagher has flagged a law change to allow Muslim women to use fingerprints to verify their identity instead of lifting their veils, but he must avoid creating special laws for any particular group.

Australia is one of the most successful immigrant nations on earth, and it would be a pity to follow the European path of banning Islamic face coverings, because the result would be further repression of women.

In order to safeguard freedom, not least of Muslim women to wear the veil, then every challenge to authority must be countered when it arises

Hostile Rhetoric Turns Up Heat on Iranian Christians

Increased public statements against Christianity in Iran have intensified pressures on Christians, sources said, but at their core they reflect Islamic leaders’ dismay with the growth of house churches and may signal dissension within Iran’s leadership.

“The reality is most of the house churches are so hidden that the government can’t do anything, and they know it,” said a regional expert who requested anonymity. “They just see how the house churches are still growing.”

 

The source said that since mass arrests at the beginning of this year, Christians have been more cautious.
 
Another Iranian Christian, a pastor, said the comments likely foretell more arrests.
 
“I believe that a new wave of persecution is underway,” he said. “The authorities are in the process of evaluating the situation.”
 
Some sources told Compass the comments of Islamic leaders may indicate a power struggle between Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. This bodes ill for Christians and minorities in general, they said.
 
“When there is conflict in the government and division, then all the minorities will have a hard time,” said another Christian Iranian who requested anonymity. “If, for example, Ayatollah     [Mohammad Taghi Mesbah] Yazdi says ‘We have to end the Christian movement,’ as he said a few weeks ago, that is enough for his followers in the government to go and arrest Christians.”
 
In May Yazdi said authorities have not done enough to quench the growth of Christian house churches, considering the “massive funding” the government has spent toward that end. Yazdi made his statement in a meeting with the heads of the Islamic Propagation Center of Qom. His statement was originally publicized on the Iranian Student News Agency website, according to Iranian Christian news agency Mohabat News.
 
Given the “the growth of Christianity in some of the provinces, the actions taken by the government and the judicial authorities, and the massive funding of such programs, the desired results have not been achieved, and this is partly due to the undisciplined attitude and lack of proper supervision of these programs,” Yazdi reportedly said.
 
Yazdi suggested that the government set up a central system to monitor and coordinate the suppression of churches.
 
Another Christian source said the political situation in Iran is too complicated to predict future arrests on the basis of religious leaders’ public statements. The source, who requested anonymity, said that Yazdi is one of Iran’s most influential clerics and receives government funds to carry out his work. This year he has received a fraction of the funds he has in the past. His public statement could be a request for more money, the source said.
 
“Maybe he’s just asking for more money,” said the source. “There are elements that indicate there could be another wave of arrests, but maybe he’s saying something different: ‘We should be changing our tactics [against Christians], so I need more money.’”
 
Today Mohabat reported that a faculty member of Mehdi Seminary in Qom claimed that “the enemies of Islam” are providing US$50,000 a year to some house churches. The general director of comparative religious studies, Hojatoleslam Tarashioon, was speaking at the seminary in Qom, the country’s Shiite center and breeding ground for Iran’s Islamic clerics and leaders.
 
“This cult in recent years has become active, and today they work under the pretext of cultural and educational centers and have expanded their activities in several provinces,” Tarashioon said, according to Mohabat.
 
Religious leaders also publicly attacked the country’s underground house church movement last fall. In October, Khamenei said Iran’s enemies wanted to shake the country’s religious and societal values through the spread of Baha’ism and a network of Christian house churches.
 
Experts believe these public attacks on Christians, and particularly Khamenei’s, resulted in authorities arresting over 120 Iranian Christians between December and January. Most of those detained were converts from Islam.
 
Still in Prison
Of those arrested at the beginning of this year, all but three were released, according to a recent report from the Elam Ministries.
 
Farshid Fathi, 32, has been incarcerated since Dec. 26, 2010 at the notorious Evin prison in Tehran. Authorities refuse to release him and have pressed no formal charges. They have kept Fathi in solitary confinement for months and have used psychological torture methods on him to extract more information on Christian networks in Iran. They have allowed him to speak to his family only once a week, according to Mohabat. Fathi is married and has two children.
 
Authorities have kept Abrahim Firuzi in prison at Robat Karim near Tehran since Jan. 8, according to Elam. They charged him with evangelizing, keeping many copies of the Bible and apostasy, or leaving Islam, reported the ministry. His family is unable to pay bail.
 
Another Christian, Noorollah Ghabitizadeh, has been in prison since Dec. 24, 2010, in Defzul in western Iran, according to Elam.
 
A fourth Christian, Masoud Delijani, was arrested on March 17 in Kermanshah and remains in prison.
 
Ethnic Armenian Christian Vahik Abrahamian has been in prison since Sept. 4, 2010. On May 1 authorities released his wife, Sonia Keshish-Avanesian, who was imprisoned with him, according to Elam. Abrahamian also spent two months in prison between February and April of last year. He was released on bail and re-arrested in September.
 
Yousef Naderkhani, a Christian from Rasht, has been in prison since October 2009. Authorities found him guilty of apostasy on Nov. 13, 2010, and handed him the death penalty. His lawyer has filed an appeal with the Supreme Court, and Nadarkhani is awaiting a trial date. Authorities have allegedly treated Nadarkhani harshly, both physically and mentally.  
 
On May 31, authorities arrested another Christian, Behnam Irani of Karaj, according to a reliable source.
 
Iran’s Constitution gives Christians “protected” religious minority status, but in practice they face substantial societal discrimination, according to the U.S. Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report 2010.

Draft laws for mosques and churches face criticism in EGYPT

Although new laws regulating the construction of houses of worship have been sought by politicians and human rights advocates long before the Jan. 25 revolution, there has been little progress toward passing such regulations.

A draft law proposes that building permit applications for houses of worship should go through the public engineering office in the governorate where the church or mosque would be built. It sets a maximum period of two months for approval or rejection of an application, and stipulates that no house of worship can built closer than a kilometer to another church or mosque.

A spokesman for the Egyptian Evangelical Church, Akram Lamei, said he believes that the draft law has a number of flaws, including the "strange" condition of setting two or more houses of worship apart by at least a kilometer.

"We have three Christian sects in Egypt. Such a large space of one kilometer could be accepted when implemented on two churches of one sect, but it's too much for two churches from different sects," he said. "In some towns and villages with high density, we have churches very close to each other to serve a number of communities in one area."

On Sunday, the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies sent a memo to Prime Minister Essam Sharaf  asking the Cabinet to withdraw its proposal for a unified law for houses of worship.

"The provisions of the bill are directed explicitly at recognized religions in Egypt, which means that no consideration is given to the exercise of these rights by followers of religions or sects unrecognized by Islamic jurisprudence or representatives of the Coptic church," according to the memo.

Egyptian Coptic Christians, who make up about 10% of the country's population, have long complained of what they call "crippling procedures" in order to construct new churches, while Muslims faced no obstacles in building new mosques. Prior to Jan. 25, Christians had to obtain special permission for new construction from the Interior Ministry's State Security Services. In many cases, approval was never granted.

This often resulted in Copts trying to get around the rule by turning residential blocks and social services buildings into churches, resulting in many deadly clashes with neighboring Muslims over the last few years.

EGYPT: Muslim Brotherhood youth break away to form new political party

The Muslim Brotherhood is struggling with more dissent in its ranks after a group of young members broke away from the Islamist organization's political party to form a secular party that is more inclusive of other cultures and religions.

The new party, known as the Egyptian Current, is a direct challenge to the Brotherhood and follows the expulsion this week of Dr. Abdul Monem aboul Fotouh, a prominent member who defied the organization by running for president.  Fatouh has the support of thousands of young members, many of whom reportedly have had their memberships in the organization frozen. 

“We are convinced that Egypt is currently in need of political parties that rise beyond specific ideologies. The Egyptian mainstream political current should have a real voice in the country’s politics,” Mohammed Abbas told the Los Angeles Times. Abbas said he suspects he and others will also be expelled from the Brotherhood.  

Abbas said the Egyptian Current will be a secular party with Islamic and Arabic roots but will represent Egyptians belonging to different cultural and religious backgrounds: “We need a party which will look after the interests of all Egyptians," he said. Founding members announced that the party will take the slogan of “freedom, building and pioneering.”

Young Brotherhood members have often voiced their dismay at the policies of the Brotherhood's senior members, most notably after leaders of the organization's Justice and Freedom political party were appointed by the group’s politburo rather than being elected by a committee of party members.

Abbas, who represented the Brotherhood at the Jan. 25 Youth Coalition during the revolution that overthrew President Hosni Mubarak, was also angered by the group's decision to ban its members from taking part in “the second revolution” protests in Tahrir Square in May.

The announcement of the Egyptian Current comes days after the Brotherhood officially axed Fotouh. The group announced that Fotouh violated its regulations by launching a presidential bid despite the Brotherhood’s decision not to field a candidate. The dissension comes as the Brotherhood -- free from the persecution of Mubarak's police state -- has emerged as the country's top political player. It is poised to win as many as 25% of the seats in Parliament in September elections.

But it is increasingly unable to mend the differences between the aspirations of its youth and its conservative Islamic tenets. While members of the Egyptian Current expressed willingness to remain in the Brotherhood, many officials in the organization's guidance bureau demanded their dismissal from the group Wednesday. No decisions were made but Abbas believes that they are likely to be expelled.

CAIR Loses IRS Status

Donations to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) no longer are tax deductible after the organization was among 275,000 tax-exempt organizations purged earlier this month by the Internal Revenue Service.
The groups failed to file required annual reports, known as form 990s, detailing their revenues and expenses, for three consecutive years. CAIR had been a non-profit on its own, but in 2007, the IRS approved a separate tax-exempt CAIR Foundation. The foundation never filed any subsequent reports. Both the foundation and CAIR national are on the purge list.
CAIR has 30 state chapters throughout the country, many of which have their own non-profit designations which remain active.

While the IRS believes most of the organizations stripped of status have shut down, those still operating can apply for reinstatement. Meanwhile, CAIR's web site continues to solicit donations by touting them as tax deductible two weeks after the IRS issued the list and notifications were sent to all 275,000 purged groups.
Donors still could deduct the money on their tax returns if CAIR is reinstated between now and April 15. All the purged organizations have 15 months to seek reinstatement. But it is unclear whether CAIR will file the required papers or whether their explanation about past reporting failures will be enough to satisfy the IRS.
"This listing should have little, if any, impact on donors who previously made deductible contributions to auto-revoked organizations because donations made prior to the publication of an organization's name on the list remain tax-deductible," an IRS statement said. "Going forward, however, organizations that are on the auto-revocation list that do not receive reinstatement are no longer eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions, and any income they receive may be taxable."

To regain its exempt status, CAIR must file the missing three annual reports, along with a new application for exempt status. Finally, it must explain why it failed to file the 990s for three consecutive years and explain any new procedures which will ensure future compliance.
The annual reports include financial information on donations and other sources of income, operating expenses and names and payments given to directors and key staff members.

The CAIR Foundation won exempt status in 2007 and then never filed any annual reports. That year, the Washington Times reported that CAIR's membership plummeted by 90 percent, from a high of 29,000 people in 2000 to less than 1,700 in 2006. CAIR vehemently denied the report when it was issued. But a year later, when the organization sought to have its name removed from a list of unindicted co-conspirators in a Hamas-financing prosecution, CAIR attorneys tied the diminishing support to the 2007 co-conspirator list.
"Furthermore, the amount of donations that they have been receiving has dwindled well below their monthly budget, and as their associational activity necessarily relies upon donations from the public, the government's labeling of them as an unindicted co-conspirator has chilled their associational activity."

Anecdotal information indicates the group increasingly has turned to foreign donors for operating revenue. In 2006, State Department records obtained by the Investigative Project on Terrorism show, CAIR sent delegations to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates seeking millions of dollars in support.
The delegation included CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad, spokesman Ibrahim Hooper, then-board chairman Parvez Ahmed, and current chairman Larry Shaw.
In 2009, Awad solicited Libyan Dictator Muammar Gaddafi to help underwrite a program to distribute 1 million copies of the Quran to government officials and the general public in America and to help start up a new foundation Awad was trying to launch.

When it applied for exempt status, the CAIR Foundation told the IRS that it would solicit "nationwide, although it is expected that the largest support will come from Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia, where CAIR-Foundation's visibility is most prominent to potential donors."

Read more at: http://www.investigativeproject.org/2990/cair-loses-irs-status