Kabul, capital city of Afghanistan on Thursday did not agree to hand over Maulvi Faqir who is a senior Taliban leader in Pakistan. This happened few hours after Islamabad asked for his release. In the beginning of this week, the Afghanistan intelligence captured the Taliban leader in the Afghan’s eastern part.

In the briefing done by the press this week, Moazzam Khan, the spokesperson of the foreign ministry released reports that the capture of Faqir was already informed to the foreign minister Hina Rabbani. Zalmani Rassoul, who is the counterpart of Rabbani, was the one who gave the information on Thursday on a telephone call.

It is our hope that Faqir would bet set free and be given out to the government of Pakistan for trials because he is responsible for shedding of the innocent blood of the citizens. Khan told the press on his released a report about the capture of Faqir.

Unfortunately, the request to release Faqir to Pakistan government was turned down by the foreign ministry in Afghan few hours after the request owing to the claim that there was no legal agreement that would see the exchange of the prisoners by Pakistan and the Afghanistan countries.

Janan Musazai, spokesperson of the foreign ministry in Afghanistan sent an email to Tribune express claiming that, in the tripartite summit which was recently held in London, Islamabad turned down the request by Kabul to hand over a prisoner in Taliban. This clearly depicts that it was a revenge mission by Kabul.

Afghanistan had requested the handing over of this prisoner to its government by the Pakistan government so that the two governments would take part in peace and reconciliation talks. However, Pakistan kept on insisting that there was no agreement that allows the exchange of prisoners between the two countries.

Musazai insisted that it was equally important for the Afghan government to get this prisoner and that it would consider taking the Pakistani government into consideration regarding this issue. He insisted that the exchange of the prisoner was necessary for the purpose of peace and reconciliation.

As this was in progress, Musazai said that the government is doing everything to investigate and release reports about the capturing. He told the media. However, when he was reached over the phone, he refused to give any further details regarding the capture of the citizen.

The former TTP’s deputy chief, Faqir was demoted when there were reports claiming that he was having unauthorized contacts with the government of Pakistan. Through the confirmation on the interview by the Tribune Express, he agreed to having contacted the religious leaders in Pakistan twice on behalf of the top security officials. Officials in Pakistan claim that the former TTP deputy chief fled to Afghanistan in the year 2008 and 2009, in the tribal region.

This is a clear indication that it will be quite hard for Faqir to be handed over to his government. He may face charges in the court of law in the country that he got arrested.

About the author

View the Original article

Last week the Times published a report about a judge's decision to allow a request from an Orthodox Jewish couple that a Beth Din court should be allowed to arbitrate in their divorce proceedings. Although the story concerned Jews rather than Muslims, the paper chose to run the report under the front-page headline "High Court opens way to Sharia divorces".

The Muslim Council of Britain, who took the view that the coverage "was sensationalist and would help fuel Islamopobia", wrote a letter to the Times complaining about the report, which was published in the paper today, albeit in an edited version.

The section of the letter that the Times decided to omit read: "Once again such reporting raises uninformed hackles against our faith, and what British Muslims really want. With a recent YouGov poll highlighting prevailing negative attitudes against British Muslims, there is a responsibility to report such matters fairly."

So the MCB writes a letter to the Times complaining about Islamophobic bias, and the Times publishes it ... minus the section that contains the actual complaint about Islamophobic bias!

Here, via the MCB website, is the full version of the letter:

Dear Sir,

We find it odd that your report of a landmark divorce settlement under Jewish Beth Din Courts should be framed under the narrative of Islamic Sharia courts (High Court opens way to Sharia divorces, 1 February). Once again such reporting raises uninformed hackles against our faith, and what British Muslims really want. With a recent YouGov poll highlighting prevailing negative attitudes against British Muslims, there is a responsibility to report such matters fairly.

Of course, we do welcome any move facilitating choices for those who wish, as Muslims, for their personal relationships to be governed by a Shariah civil code. This legitimate aspiration requires full discussion in an atmosphere of understanding and tolerance. It allows for British Muslims to fulfil their religious obligations under British law. It does not require a change in British law, or a diminution in human rights. We seek parity with other faiths, not special favours.

Yours Sincerely,

Farooq Murad,
Secretary General,
Muslim Council of Britain

View the Original article

The utterly useless Simon CookThe far right English Defence League has been given a clear message by city council leader Simon Cook – "We don't want you in Bristol."

The EDL, which describes itself as an anti-Islamist group, is planning to press ahead on Saturday with its controversial march through the city.

Meanwhile, a group of trade unions, community groups and anti-racist organisations called We Are Bristol will stage a counter demonstration opposite the Bristol Hippodrome at the same time.

Labour councillor Mike Wollacott (Brislington East) wrote to Mr Cook, inviting him to attend the anti-EDL demo. But Mr Cook has turned down the invitation, saying he thought it would send out the wrong message.

Mr Cook added: "We have made absolutely clear that we do not agree with their extremist views and do not want them in Bristol. They are not a proscribed organisation and have a right to march.

"Council officers have worked closely with the police to ensure that the march goes off peacefully. At all times, the police have made it very clear that they do not believe that banning the march would be in the public interest.

"I and other members of the cabinet will respond to the EDL presence in our city by showing solidarity with Pride on the Saturday and the multi-faith event on the Sunday. I do not believe however, that attending a counter demonstration would send out the right message: it would simply give the EDL the oxygen of publicity."

The EDL march and counter demo clashes with the climax of the week-long Pride Festival which celebrates the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender community.

Paul Stephenson, who received an OBE earlier this year for his work with race relations in the city, has urged council leaders to review their decision not to ban the march. A petition was handed in last week asking cabinet councillors to call on Home Secretary Theresa May to stop the march. Cabinet Councillor Gary Hopkins said there was not the slightest chance of winning a ban without a police recommendation.

Policing the EDL march is expected to cost £500,000 and involve about 1,000 police officers.

March organiser Mickey Bayliss expects about 500 EDL members to take part in the march which starts at Redcliffe Wharf at 1pm.

Mr Stephenson, Bristol's first black social worker, founded the West Indian Development Council to campaign against racism in Bristol, and in particular the ban on the employment of black people to work on Bristol buses. Within six months, the ban was lifted.

He told the Post: "I was surprised and deeply disappointed that the city council decided not to ban the proposed march. The decision by the council to allow this march to take place on the spurious grounds of freedom of speech flies in the face of the EDL's members' bid to stir up racial hatred, bigotry and intolerance.

"Despite the assertions the EDL make in denying they support a racist philosophy aimed at attacking Bristol's Muslim communities, they use them as a scapegoat for high youth unemployment and dismantling the welfare state. At a time of economic collapse both locally, nationally and globally, Bristol's citizens do not wish to see racial and religious bigotry promoted on its streets in the name of freedom of expression."

Mr Stephenson said that this year's St Paul's Carnival, which was an expression of peace, love and friendship had to be cancelled because of lack of financial support. Yet the EDL march, which was going to cost so much of council taxpayers' money to police, was going ahead.

Bristol Post, 9 July 2012

View the Original article