SAVE This Woman, Please!

An urgent petition has been launched to save the life of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, the Iranian woman sentenced to death by stoning, after reports that she was to be hanged for murder TODAY!

Mohammadi Ashtiani was convicted of the double charge of adultery and conspiring to kill her husband, and received 99 lashes. Her case provoked an international outcry when it first came to light earlier this year. Iran suspended her sentence to be stoned to death in September, but the country’s judiciary chief made it clear she could still face execution by hanging for an alleged role in the plot to kill her former husband.

In August, Iranian television aired an interview in which she admitted to a relationship with a man accused of murdering her husband, but rights groups have said the confession was coerced. Mohammadi Ashtiani is awaiting her fate in a prison in Tabriz, a city in north-west Iran. Her lawyer was arrested in October.

Even though the 43-year-old mother of two's sentence was suspended in the face of an international outcry the International Committee against Stoning said on its website that Mohammadi Ashtiani "is to be executed this Wednesday 3 November."

I, along with most other bloggers, have reported on this tragic case since it first came to the attention of the international community, adding my voice to thousands of others urging her to be spared.

A spokeswoman for the German-based organization said this morning that it now understood Mohammadi Ashtiani would not be executed today, but said Iran was still planning to go ahead with the execution, which could take place in the next few days.

"The International Committees against Stoning and Execution call on international bodies and the people of the world to come out in full force against the state-sponsored murder of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani," she said.

In addition, governments here and abroad also appealed to Iran to spare Mohammadi Ashtiani.

The global civic advocacy network Avaaz.org responded to the reports by launching an online petition urging people "to send an emergency message directly to the leaders of Turkey, Brazil and key UN nations who could sway Iran to halt the execution."

The goal is to reach 500,000 names. When I signed the petition, the total number of names was almost at 450,000. It's no wonder that "Ashtiani" has become one of the most widely discussed subjects on Twitter.

The boiler plate language of the petition follows, but anyone signing it can change the wording to reflect their own views:

“To leaders who can influence Iran:

I urge you to do all you can to save the life of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani.

Reports state she could be executed on November 3rd. Your help could sway the government of Iran to halt her execution, just as it did this July and August.

Please take immediate action today to persuade Iran to spare her life.

Sincerely...”

In the U.S., Canada and in Great Britain leaders spoke out against the threatened execution.

The White House condemned the planned execution and called on Tehran to "provide Ms. Ashtiani with the due process and fair treatment she deserves."

In a separate statement, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Iran's leaders "have failed once again to protect the fundamental rights of their own citizens, particularly women."

"Ms. Ashtiani's case has not proceeded with the transparency and due process guaranteed under Iranian law, and we are concerned about reports of coerced confessions and other mistreatment," Secretary Clinton said.

British Foreign Office Minister for the Middle East Alistair Burt echoed those views yesterday, saying "I am deeply disturbed by suggestions that Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani could be executed imminently. Any move to execute her would be utterly unacceptable and would be condemned widely and in the strongest terms. The world watches and waits."

Minister Burt later spoke to the charge d'affaires at the Iranian embassy in London, who was unable to confirm or deny reports of Mohammadi Ashtiani's imminent execution. He told the diplomat that her death would be condemned throughout Europe.

A letter signed by 119 British MPs, calling on Iran to live up to its commitments as a signatory of the International Declaration of Human Rights, was delivered to the Iranian embassy in London.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague warned Iranian authorities against going ahead with the punishment, saying it would hurt Iran's international relations.

"This is a barbaric punishment and it will damage Iran in the eyes of the world. It will be much better not to proceed with it," Hague told reporters in the West Bank city of Ramallah, during a visit to Israel and the Palestinian Territories.

The EU high representative, Lady Ashton, was said to be "deeply concerned" about the reports. "She demands that Iran halts the execution and converts her sentence," a spokesman said.

The U.K. Foreign and Commonwealth Office said it had also been unable to confirm whether the reports of Mohammadi Ashtiani's imminent execution were true.

The Canadian government too was “deeply troubled” by these reports. Addressing Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad directly, Laureen Harper, the wife of Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper wrote: "We urge you to take a progressive step towards improving the lives of Iranian women, mothers, daughters and sisters by unconditionally releasing Sakineh Mohammadi-Ashtiani. Certainly, this would be welcomed by women around the world as seen as a deeply symbolic gesture toward the betterment of all Iranian women."

Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon responded to the news in the House of Commons yesterday.

“Our government is deeply troubled by reports that Iran may be moving forward with its plans to execute this woman,” Cannon said. “The appalling treatment of her is completely out of line with international standards and the rule of law.”

Marina Nemat, an Iranian-Canadian author who was tortured in Iran and has campaigned with Indigo Books and Music CEO Heather Reisman to save Mohammadi Ashtiani, said the execution may or may not be imminent, as little is clear when dealing with Iran.

“I’m keeping my hopes up because the question is what the Iranian regime would gain from killing this woman,” Nemat said. “The world would be outraged.”

Canada has imposed several rounds of sanctions on Iran stemming from United Nations Security Council resolutions, and in July announced unilateral sanctions that, among other things, ban Canadian investment in Iranian oil and gas projects. Canada has also issued several statements condemning Iran, and for the last seven years presented an Iran resolution at the U.N. General Assembly that highlights the country’s record of human-rights failures.

Payam Akhavan, an Iranian-born international law professor at McGill University, said the stoning case reflects a broader conflict in Iran, as a hard-line regime under threat from a democracy movement tries to maintain its hold on power. He said Mohammadi Ashtiani is one of more than 30 women threatened by stoning in a country that now has the world’s highest per-capita rate of executions.

“This is part of the terrorization of the people,” Prof. Akhavan said. “When you start executing large numbers of people in heinous ways, you’re sending a message to the public at large.”

Prof. Akhavan said Canada should follow the lead of the United States, which in September issued an executive order against eight senior members of the Iranian regime, including the commander of the Revolutionary Guard, which allows the U.S. to seize their assets, block their travel to the U.S. and prevent Americans from doing business with them.

“The signal that it sends is that we’re not just issuing a U.N. resolution condemning the government,” Prof. Akhavan said. “We are blaming you, individually, and your name has now been carved in stone and one day when you’re not in power everyone will know who you are.”

As could be predicted, Tehran accused the West of trying to pressure it over the case, while a judiciary official said she was in "perfect health" and her case was still being reviewed.

"They (Western nations) have become so shameless that they have turned the case of Sakineh Mohammadi-Ashtiani, who has committed crime and treason, into a human rights case against our nation," foreign ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said.

"It has become a symbol of women's freedom in Western nations and with impudence they want to free her. Thus, they are trying to use this ordinary case as a pressure lever against our nation," the ISNA news agency quoted him as saying.

"The other side is only looking for pretexts against the Islamic establishment and if...we give into their demands they will assert, so there will be nothing left of the revolution and the establishment," state news agency IRNA quoted him as saying.

The sentence of death by stoning was suspended after it was condemned by the U.S., Britain and international human rights groups. The outgoing Brazilian president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, an ally of Iran, offered asylum to Mohammadi Ashtiani but was rebuffed by the Tehran regime.

Human Rights Watch says Mohammadi Ashtiani was first convicted in May 2006 of having an "illicit relationship" with two men following the death of her husband and was sentenced by a court to 99 lashes. She was later sentenced to death by stoning.

In August, Mohammadi Ashtiani was put on state-run TV where she "confessed" to adultery and involvement in the murder of her husband, but her lawyer, Houtan Kian, said she had been tortured beforehand.

At the end of August she was subjected to a mock execution, according to her 22-year-old son, Sajad Ghaderzadeh. The following month, she was allegedly given 99 lashes after a British newspaper ran a picture of an unveiled woman mistakenly identified as her, Kian said at the time.

Ghaderzadeh, who launched the international campaign to save his mother in June, was arrested in Iran last month with two German journalists who had interviewed him about his mother's case. The International Committee against Stoning is also demanding their release and that of Kian, who is also believed to have been detained.

This account remains shocking, and beyond tragic. I deeply respect Islamic law, but this decision appears to be purely a political reaction to the furor that the initial sentence caused.

When I began this blog, I created my alter ego, “The Curator,” who would lead readers through the amazing and varied world of sexual behavior and beliefs without judgment, with as much neutrality as possible.

Not this time.

I had done this because I felt there were too many loud opinions about anything and everything and not enough information conveyed in markedly egocentric blogs. I wanted readers to decide how they felt, working hard to make The Curator as unobtrusive as possible, even invisible rather than a part of the process.

Not this time.

Enough! Enough fear. Enough pain. Enough agony. Enough torture. Enough death. E-NOUGH misery imposed by cowardly dictators hiding behind the safety net of blind religious tradition and the faithful.

I am a tolerant person. I believe that all countries have the right of autonomy, that religion is personal and should be left to believers to choose or reject, and that WEST does not always equal BEST.

I am not a Christian; I am not a Jew; I am not a Muslim. I do not follow any of the Abrahamic faith paths. I am not speaking out as an American, or a proponent of any political ideology. I am speaking simply as a human being, reaching out to other human beings. I am literally on my knees. I beg Iran and all Iranians to spare this woman as was promised. Please. Please.

— The Curator

BUY a Qu’ran (Koran), Don’t BURN One!

Each person’s deep, profound spiritual connection to their God is a sacred relationship that should never be belittled or disrespected.

I am breaking my blog’s theme to comment on an important controversy that has been tearing this county apart, and continues to generate international attention and condemnation.

A small town pastor, Terry Jones, has collected 200 copies of the Qu’ran (Koran), the holy book of Islam, that he has threatened to deliberately burn on Saturday – the 10th Anniversary of the terrorist attacks on 9-11, which plunged our nation into two on-going wars.

Ironically, Jones’ church, Dove World Outreach Centre in Gainesville, Fla., has only 30 members, but because of news coverage and the Internet, his outrageous plan has been transmitted globally.

Thus far, the openly gun-toting Jones has rejected calls by a multi-religious coalition, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, U.S. General David Petraeus, the Obama administration, and the world-wide community to abandon his offensive plan to burn the copies of the Muslim sacred text.

Let me add my small voice to the outrage to this proposed book-burning. The upcoming 10th Anniversary of the worst terror attacks on U.S. soil should be commemorated with healing, not hate; insight, not instigation; and with unification, not ugliness. Just imagine how Christians would feel if an Islamic Imam planned to burn 200 Holy Bibles outside a mosque on 9/11 to protest the U.S. war efforts?

The church has been denied a permit to set a bonfire but has vowed to proceed with the burning. Apparently, Jones has dug in his hateful heels.

I have a genuine proposal. Why don’t a few of us Americans who support religious freedom and the absolute right of Muslims to practice their faith, replace each and every Qu’ran (Koran) that is burned? I suggest we, as individuals, each buy one of the holy books and donate it directly to a mosque, or give it to a practicing Muslim along with a heart-felt apology for the grave insult! The Qu’ran (Koran) is inexpensive in most book stores, so we simply need 200 people of an open heart to do the right thing. This is not an idle suggestion. I have already ordered a Qu’ran (Koran) and will send it to the nearest Mosque.

I am not a Christian, but let me take a moment to quote the Holy Bible. As King Solomon so wisely noted in Ecclesiastes 3:1-8:

To everything there is a season,
and a time to every purpose under the heaven:
A time to be born, and a time to die;
A time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;
A time to kill, and a time to heal;
A time to break down, and a time to build up;
A time to weep, and a time to laugh;
A time to mourn, and a time to dance;
A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together;
A time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;
A time to get, and a time to lose;
A time to keep, and a time to cast away;
A time to rend, and a time to sew;
A time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
A time to love, and a time to hate;
A time of war, and a time of peace.

If we have learned anything in the past decade it is that we need to better understand each other, to abandon the ways of war and adopt the ways of peace. Our country was founded on religious freedom and the respect for each other’s spiritual beliefs. That extends to all faiths, all religions, not just the ones we understand, or agree with.

Gen. Petraeus, who is the U.S. and Nato commander in Afghanistan, warned of retaliatory action against U.S. troops after protests took place when the news of what Jones was planning was reported in the capital Kabul. Effigies of Jones were burned alongside the American flag.

Asked by a news agency what Jesus would do if he was alive, Jones said he believed Jesus would burn the Qu’rans (Korans.) I do not, cannot, will not believe that is true. While I do not believe that Jesus was the Son of God, I do believe that his was a teaching of love, tolerance and acceptance. Christ would not have burned any sacred text.

Jones says he is determined to go ahead in the face of fierce condemnations, as well as 100 death threats.

"If we don't do it, when do we stop backing down?" he told the media. "It's something we need to do, it's a message we need to send...Instead of us backing down, maybe it's time to stand up. Maybe it's time to send a message to radical Islam that we will not tolerate their behavior," he told news agencies. Jones confirmed he would be armed during the event. "We are prepared to give our lives for this," he said.

But just what is that message? If it’s that he’s a religious bigot, then he’s more than accomplished his goal.

Secretary of State Clinton led the condemnation of the planned burning, describing it as a "disrespectful, disgraceful act." Others in the Obama administration weighed in, including Eric Holder, the attorney general, who called it idiotic and dangerous. A state department spokesman called the planned protest "un-American."

The plans have been greeted with alarm in the Middle Eastern press. Lebanon's Daily Star said they were "likely to ignite a fire of rage that could consume swathes of the globe," while United Arab Emirates paper the Khaleej Times describe the planned burning as "rabid and insane."

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs echoed the concerns raised by Petraeus. "Any type of activity like that puts our troops in harm's way would be a concern to this administration," Gibbs said.

At a meal last night ironically marking the breaking of the Ramadan fast, Clinton said, "We sit down together for this meal on a day when the news is carrying reports that a pastor down in Gainesville, Florida, plans to burn the holy Qur'an on September 11. I am heartened by the clear, unequivocal condemnation of this disrespectful, disgraceful act that has come from American religious leaders of all faiths, from evangelical Christians to Jewish rabbis as well as secular U.S. leaders and opinion-makers.

"Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. Many of you know that in 1790, George Washington wrote to a synagogue in Newport, Rhode Island, that this country will give 'to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance.' The real story of Islam in America can be found in this room, and rooms across America. We write it tonight in the spirit of fellowship and the celebration of goodwill that is a hallmark of Ramadan. We will write it in the months and years to come as we continue to reach out to engage people around the world in a search for common ground, common understanding and common respect."

This week, hundreds of Afghans protested outside a Kabul mosque and chanted "Death to America." Members of the crowd pelted a passing U.S. military convoy with stones before being ordered to stop by protest organizers.

Last Saturday thousands of Indonesian Muslims demonstrated outside the U.S. embassy in Jakarta and in five other cities to protest against the church's plan. Dove World made headlines last year after distributing T-shirts that read, "Islam is of the Devil."

In a joint statement U.S. religious leaders condemned what they described as an "anti-Muslim frenzy" in America. They said this had been whipped up in part by "misinformation and outright bigotry" in response to plans to build an Islamic community center and mosque close to the site of the 9/11 attacks in New York.

On the plans to burn the Qu'ran (Koran), the leaders, including Washington Roman Catholic archbishop emeritus Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, Rabbi David Saperstein, head of the Union for Reform Judaism, and Dr. Michael Kinnamon of the National Council of Churches said they were "appalled by such disrespect for a sacred text."

I repeat: If these Qu’rans (Korans) are truly burned, then it is up to us to replace each and every one of them – isn’t that the responsible, ethical behavior that Jesus himself might urge people of all faiths to do?

— The Curator

Her Crime: Adultery; Her Punishment: DEATH

They will wrap the bulk of her body in a white shroud; bind her arms and legs; bury her upright to her waist; then STONE her until she DIES as slowly and painfully as possible – after telling the swelling, eager crowd to select the rocks they will hurl with the utmost care, so that they will not kill her immediately.

Just where and in what barbaric era would this have happened? July 2010, Iran.

When I began this blog, I created my alter ego, “The Curator,” who would lead readers through the amazing and varied world of sexual behavior and beliefs without judgment, with as much neutrality as possible.

Not this time.

I had done this because I felt there were too many loud opinions about anything and everything and not enough information conveyed in markedly egocentric blogs. I wanted readers to decide how they felt, working hard to make The Curator as unobtrusive as possible, even invisible rather than a part of the process.

Not this time.

Here are the facts:

Sakineh Mohammadi-Ashtiani, a 43-year-old mother of two, was convicted on May 15, 2006 of having an "illicit relationship" with two men, according to Amnesty International and her lawyer.

She has now been sentenced to death by stoning.

Her lawyer, Mohommad Mostafaei, said Mohammadi-Ashtiani confessed to the crime after being subjected to 99 lashes. She later recanted that confession and has denied wrongdoing, he said.

Her conviction was based not on evidence but on the determination of three out of five judges, he added. She has asked forgiveness from the court but the judges refused to grant clemency. Iran's supreme court upheld the death conviction in 2007.

Apparently, Iran was reviewing that sentence of stoning, a rights official said, but her lawyer warned today that there was no guarantee the execution would be halted.

Mohammad Javad Larijani, Iran's top human rights official, said late Friday that the verdict of death by stoning against Mohammadi-Ashtiani is being reviewed by the judiciary.

"She was sentenced to 90 lashes by one court and stoning by another. The verdict is under revision," Larijani was quoted as saying by state news agency Islamic Republic News Agency.

He said the chief of Iran's judiciary, Ayatollah Sadegh Larijani, was of the opinion that it was preferable to use another penalty instead of stoning, "and that is true for Ms. Mohammadi-Ashtiani."

Larijani did not say what penalty she could face instead, but added: "The penalty of stoning exists under the law but the judges rarely use it."

Mostafai told news agencies today that he had yet to receive any official confirmation that the stoning sentence had been revised.

"There is no guarantee that it will be halted," he said.

"Sentences such as stoning will be closely reviewed and probably changed," Larijani told Iran's Islamic Republic News Agency.

[Above: Protesters in London demonstrate against the planned stoning, and to mark the 11th Anniversary of the July 9th Iranian student uprising.]

In London today protesters waved flags and chanted anti-government slogans to the beat of a drum in front of the Iranian Embassy. They condemned executions in Iran – by stoning and hanging.

But Larijani said protests from outside Iran will not affect Mohammadi-Ashtiani's case.

"The Western attacks have no effect on the opinion of our judges," he told the news agency.

Larijani's comments seemed to contradict Iran's public statements made Thursday from its embassy in London that strongly suggested Mohammadi-Ashtiani would not be stoned.

The public statement said, "this mission denies the false news aired in this respect and...according to information from the relevant judicial authorities in Iran, she will not be executed by stoning punishment.

"It is notable that this kind of punishment has rarely been implemented in Iran and various means and remedies must be probed and exhausted to finally come up with such a punishment," the embassy statement concluded.

Mohammadi-Ashtiani's son, Sajjad Mohammedie Ashtiani, who appealed Wednesday to Iran's courts to spare his mother's life and also appealed to the world for help via Twitter, said he won't accept any decision short of his mother's freedom.

Through human rights activist Mina Ahadi, the son said he would be satisfied only when Iran's judiciary officially drops the charges against her.

Ahadi has said that only an international campaign designed to pressure the Islamic regime in Tehran could save Mohammadi-Ashtiani's life.

"Legally, it's all over," said Ahadi, who heads the International Committee Against Stoning and the Death Penalty, earlier this week.

Ashtiani's son wrote in an open letter to government officials that there was neither evidence nor legal grounds for his mother's conviction and sentence. He said the family has traveled six times from their home in Tabriz to Tehran to speak with Iranian officials, but in vain.

Amnesty said she received flogging of 99 lashes as per her sentence but was subsequently accused of "adultery while being married" in September 2006 during the trial of a man accused of murdering her husband.

Mostafai said his client knew the man who, "killed her husband and because she was at home when the murder took place, she was accused as accomplice."

She was pardoned on the murder charges, but then accused of adultery with that man, Mostafai said.

Mostafai added that such cases involving women in Iran arise due to difficulties in getting divorces with husbands despite, "having troubled marriages."

Enough! Enough fear. Enough pain. Enough agony. Enough torture. Enough death. E-NOUGH misery imposed by cowardly dictators hiding behind the safety net of blind religious tradition and the faithful.

I am a tolerant person. I believe that all countries have the right of autonomy, that religion is personal and should be left to believers to choose or reject, and that WEST does not always equal BEST.

I am not a Christian; I am not a Jew; I am not a Muslim. I do not follow any of the Abrahamic faith paths. I am not speaking out as an American, or a proponent of any political ideology. I am speaking simply as a human being, reaching out to other human beings. I am literally on my knees. I beg Iran and all Iranians to spare this woman, and to abolish this horrific practice. Please. Please.

— The Curator

Saudi Woman Defies Death Threats to Finish Third in Poetry Contest

Dubai — A mother of four from Saudi Arabia who recently shot to fame by using her poems to criticize religious extremism has failed to win the Arab world's biggest poetry competition, but instead captured third place and $800,000.

Wearing the Saudi traditional head-to-toe black abaya cloak, with a veil masking her face, Hissa Hillal recited her last poem in the contest, a defense of the freedom of thought.

The sole woman among five finalists, she rose to stardom after a series of poems blasting "evil" extremist fatwas (edicts) by Muslim clerics, a challenge which resulted in death threats being made against her on the internet.

Mrs. Hillal said that through her poems, she wants to "fight extremism, which has become a worrying phenomenon."

"A few years ago, society was more open. Now, things have become heavier. Some men do not even shake hands with female family members as they did in the past," she said.

In her poem entitled "The Chaos of Fatwas," which she has recited late last month during the popular televised competition putting her into last week’s finals, she boldly charged that the "evil comes from those fatwas."

She compared their authors to "monsters wearing belts," an apparent reference to explosive belts worn by suicide bombers.

The contest's panel praised Mrs. Hillal's courage for expressing her opinion "honestly and powerfully," giving her the highest score of at 47 out of 50.

The poem was seen as hitting out at Saudi cleric Abdul Rahman al-Barrak, who issued a fatwa in February calling for those promoting a mixing of the sexes in education and at the workplace to be put to death.

Mrs. Hillal said, however, that she was not referring to Barrak's fatwa in particular, but said that she was "against the idea of killing a human being because of his beliefs."

She considers the mixing of men and women at work "a necessity for daily life."

"We are always told: haram," or prohibited, she lamented. "This dangerous extremism is no longer limited to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf, but has spread to other countries like Egypt, Jordan and Syria."

Radical Saudi clerics were infuriated when the reform-minded King Abdullah inaugurated in September the kingdom's first mixed-gender university, the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, on the Red Sea coast.

"Saudi Arabia has made great strides over the past five years" to improve women's status, Mrs. Hillal said, praising the "courage" of the Saudi monarch.

In an attempt to prove his commitment to improving the status of women, the king appointed Norah al-Fayez deputy minister of education for women's education in 2009, the first appointment of a woman to a ministerial post.

Women in Saudi Arabia must cover from head to toe in public. They are also forbidden to drive and can not travel without a male guardian, while segregation rules severely restrict work opportunities for women.

Mrs. Hillal is already challenging convention by being at once a journalist, in addition to her role as wife and mother.

Using a traditional verse form native to the Arab Peninsula's nomadic tribes, she writes critically about the country's hard-line Muslim clerics, calling them: "vicious in voice, barbaric, angry and blind."

Condemning the violence that she says lies beneath their religious messages, her poems speak of some of the clerics "wearing death as a robe cinched with a belt" – an apparent reference to suicide bombers' explosives belt.

Her poems rail against what she sees as a dangerous and excessively conservative shift in Arab society and mores, from within a country where women cannot travel without a male guardian and are forbidden from driving.

“Most of the people loved what I said, from their hearts”
Hissa Hillal

"What made me so angry is seeing the Arab society becoming more and more kept to itself, not like before – loving and caring and sharing and open and welcoming everyone," she said.

"Now, even if you want to be simple and nice with others, people are asking themselves whether it is haram [forbidden] to say hello to strangers," she said, adding: "I blame those who have led the people, and directed them this way."

Mrs. Hillal's words were delivered from beneath a spotlight and televised across the Arab world from the capital of UAE, Abu Dhabi, on The Million Poets.

She describes the experience of reaching the competition's final as "amazing," but her poetry has also sparked death threats on Arab websites, with some outraged commentators saying she is acting shamefully.

Her voice quiets when she describes how some have posted messages asking for her home address – with the underlying threat that they would track her down and kill her.

“ I know the world is a small village – from my heart I wish peace and love for everybody ”
Hissa Hillal

But, she says, many more have expressed support for her poems. She told the media that women especially have said they are rooting for her.

"Even old ladies, young ladies, they all said: 'You are our hope.'"

"Most of the people loved what I said, from their hearts. They think I am very brave to say so, and that I said what they feel in their hearts."

She explains the apparent contradiction in the fact that she advocates women's rights while wearing the full veil – which some suggest is a symbol of female oppression: "Covering my face is not because I am afraid of people. We live in a tribal society and otherwise my husband, my brother will be criticized by other men."

While her poetry is intended for a wide audience, the act of covering herself, she says, is out of understanding for her male relatives.

"I know they love me and they support me. It's a big sacrifice for them in such a society to let me go to the TV and talk to the media. I am hoping my daughters won't have to cover their faces and they'll live a better life," she said.

A published poet, Mrs. Hillal – who is reported not to have studied at university – held the position of poetry editor for the Arab daily newspaper, al-Hayat.

A fan of Victorian writer Charles Dickens and US author Ernest Hemingway, Mrs. Hillal says her fundamental message is one of peace and understanding: "I know the world is a small village. From my heart I wish peace and love for everybody."

Despite not winning the overall contest which concluded last Wednesday night to enormous ratings, analysts say Mrs. Hillal's participation in this year's The Million's Poet contest will continue to have an impact on the art form, which is increasingly being used to highlight social problems and inequalities.

Mrs. Hillal has been, without question, the biggest story of the televised tournament's fourth season.

In the weeks leading up to last Wednesday night's final she wrote and recited poetry condemning the strict laws in her country that separate men and women and also spoke out against Islamic clerics who issue hard-line religious decrees.

Her work was applauded by many who labeled her "brave," but it was also met with resentment from conservative members of Saudi society, some of whom issued death threats against her. Despite the dangers, Mrs. Hillal refused to back out of the tournament, saying she had a message to get across.

"I'm trying to say maybe poetry can do what other things couldn't do – to make people more close and to feel all over the world that we have to share and care and that to have a nice human relationship is the most important thing," Mrs. Hillal said.

Mrs. Hillal was the first woman to ever reach the final of the competition, which features five contestants. She said she hopes her experience will inspire others.

"I was famous for about 20 years and I was always a very strong poet, but when I came here the people saw it. It was direct from my heart to them," Mrs. Hillal said. "Maybe this is a new stage of Arabic life, especially for Arab women. Maybe it says something to the world."

The Million's Poet competition was launched in 2006 and was designed to promote the native poetry of the Arabian Peninsula, known an Nabati.

Broadcast live every Wednesday at 10 p.m. on Abu Dhabi TV, it blends the competitive tension, audience participation and big-money prizes of a western-style reality TV show with a culture and tradition that is uniquely Arab.

Contestants are judged using a mixture of jury votes, live audience votes via the in-theatre voting pods, and SMS voting by TV viewers. The show, which has been compared to the American Idol talent competition series in the United States, gets its name from the $1.3 million prize awarded to the winner.

The show, sponsored and produced by Abu Dhabi Authority for Culture and Heritage presents 48 poets, carefully selected by a panel of experts on Nabati poetry (dialect poetry), from thousands of applicants after a six-week tour of the Arabian Gulf countries and Jordan with contestants from all over the Arab world.

Contestants are required to recite their own works of Nabati poetry, a native Bedouin style of poetry similar to the classical ode and recited in colloquial Arabic. The art dates to fourth-century Arabia, where poets were revered as people inspired by God who elevated their tribe's sense of pride.

The poets battle it out, seeking to impress the jury and the audience with their poetic skills, in the hope of making it through to the grand final.

The show, watched by more than 20 million each week, aims to revive one of the ancient forms of poetry known in the region fore thousand years.

This year, contestants came from 12 countries including the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait and Jordan. One of the show's three judges, Sultan al-Amini, says it has been the most successful season to date.

"All the people: small people, young, women, men… you'll find all levels watch this program and they know even the smallest things in this program," Amimi said. "They follow it and ask about it."

This year's runner up, Falah al-Mowraqi from Kuwait, says the popularity of Million's Poet can be attributed to the fact that people in the Gulf region consider poetry a vital part of their culture.

"Poetry is very, very important in Kuwait or the Emirates or Saudi Arabia. In the Middle East it's very important," Mowraqi said.

The Minister of Higher Education and Scientific Research crowned the winners at Al Raha Beach Theater in the capital during last Wednesday night’s live broadcast.

The Abu Dhabi Authority for Culture and Heritage spokesman Eman Turki says tradition is shifting. And, she says the poems of Mrs. Hillal and Mowraqi, who touched on terrorism, prove this.

"You can see that the trend in poetry is changing. It's not anymore about praising officials or sheikhs or the pride of the country or belonging," Turki said. "Poets now are more interested in people's lives, in daily life issues, in social change, even in political life."

Thirty-year-old Nasser al-Ajami of Kuwait was named this year's Million's Poet champion, earning the $1.3 million prize.

Mowraqi secured $1 million for his second-place finish.

Note: I found this fascinating and extremely important. While researching what the event, I came upon a brilliant and insightful commentary by renowned doctor-author Qanta Ahmed, in the Huffington Post. I have reposted it in full below, or you can read it directly at the Huffington Post website.

Qanta Ahmed, MD
Huffington Post
Posted: March 29, 2010 12:12 PM

“Hissa Hillal is the voice for countless 'Invisible Women." She is the Saudi woman who has captured the Arab world's attention through her poetry on Abu Dhabi's televised poetry competition broadcast by Emirati. Watched by millions, analogies to American Idol readily follow. Her poetry focuses on the abuse of Islam as it is wielded by extremist clerics. Her public challenge to established theocracy has garnered breathtaking attention in the region where women like Hissa, Saudi Arabian stay-at-home moms, are usually neither seen nor heard.

There is however a far more arresting aspect to Hissa's accomplishment. By thrusting her powerful verses into orbit through satellite television, she has thrown dawn a gauntlet in a way that newspapers, bloggers or network media segments cannot begin to compete. Her public poetry contains the latent power that will ignite a new dimension of dialogue in the Arab and wider Muslim world, a power derived of an ancient cultural currency.

Poetry, which speaks to the Arabian Peninsula's heritage of oral poetry as a means of cultural dialogue, invites much more attention than news commentary or opinion editorials. Traditionally, the true forebears of the modern day Saudi Arabia recorded their history and tradition through the medium of poetry, largely unwritten, but instead committed to memory and recited with elaborate, ceremonial oratory. This was the medium through which they preserved feats of arms and celebrated events in their history. Similar oral poetic history is also evident elsewhere in the Middle East including Israel, where fears for the preservation of this fading culture are growing.

Considering the geographic environment and the sparse population comprising pre-Twentieth Century Arabia, preserving cultural memory through transmitted and treasured poetry makes perfect sense. Ornate poetry traveled across the sandstorm-swept nascent Saudi steppe, immortalizing cultural yearnings, history and opinion in a pulsing ebb and flow across barely inhabited land. Vital to the survival of this art across generations, over desiccated Wadis and desolate escarpments was the role of the poet: his dedication, his imagination and his willingness to dialogue with other poets.

I learned this not through extensive studies of central Najd poetry but rather while teaching class one day in the post graduate medical center of the King Abdul Aziz Medical Center in Riyadh, last winter. I was teaching a class on scientific medical writing to a group of animated Saudi men and women. Yes, it was a co-ed class and my students were physicians, surgeons and masters candidates enrolled in various degree programs (contrary to popular belief, postgraduate medicine in the Kingdom is desegregated). We were enjoying an intense debate on the use of references, citations and sources. During the hour we examined how to correctly attribute authorship following accepted rules concerning plagiarism as defined in Western academia. The topic was a surprisingly disturbing one for my accomplished Saudi students. The class discussion was growing heated and edgy. We had evidently touched a nerve. As I struggled to understand the implications, one of my class, a board certified gastroenterologist demystified our growing distress. Rising from the too-small classroom chair in his crisp white thobe, Abdullah gathered his portly figure and stood up to make his point. He spoke in soft, accented English.

"‘In our culture, an author is esteemed, as are his values and his creativity. Readers who want to cite an author here often believe they can only devalue his work, and dishonor the author, by rephrasing it into their own words. They simply don't believe their words do the author justice,’" my eyes widened in comprehension realizing why what is taken as bald plagiarism in Western academe might be interpreted here as according an author the highest honor.

"I am a poet, when I don't practice medicine, Doctora Qanta," he continued, "‘in fact, I have won several prizes for my skills in Arabic poetry, which is an ancient art form. To be truly appreciated and recognized as creative, one poet must dialogue with another. In the process of dialogue one poet incorporates another's words into his or her own poetry, to continue the conversation. We make new stanzas using each others words, and the poetry unfolds, back and forth in a rhythm between poets. So while you may think this is plagiarism – to take another poet's words and incorporate them into our own – this is an ancient and fundamental part of our culture.’"

Suddenly everything made sense. In a culture where a teacher is accorded high respect, and the written word, beginning with the revealed Quran has traditionally been preserved by rote repetition and painstaking memorization, the repetition of unattributed words did not constitute plagiarism. Of course, Abdullah was referring to non-scientific writing. (Saudi Arabia has a robust and rapidly evolving medical academe where standard rules guarding against scientific plagiarism are upheld). But Abdullah taught me something new: interacting culturally at the highest level involved listening astutely to the poet, and responding in kind.

This is why Hissa Hillal's poetry is such a colossal cultural moment: not merely because one Saudi woman has had the courage to speak out, but because of the cascading, tumultuous conversation this will certainly uncork. Like a gathering storm, a cloudburst of cultural rebellion is mounting. Seen in this light, a woman shrouded in store-bought polyester presents a brazen, dangerous agent provocateur to challenge the crumbling status quo. Her very 'everywoman' qualities – of being a homemaker, wife and mother in Saudi Arabia (one who evidently doesn't shop at Lamsa for a $500 Swarovski encrusted veil) – is precisely what makes her an unmistakable force. Nor did she have to attend a costly Chicago Dental School to say what Riyadh or Jeddah is thinking. This woman is the real deal. She is from within the world that we dumbly insist on characterizing as 'invisible' while every reality constantly reveals it is we, the viewers from here, who are truly unseeing.

Hissa's Nabati poetry, a genre particularly beloved to the Arab Gulf world, exposes witless, misogynistic and unIslamic fatwas in their true light: as crude tools for mass oppression exercised by an increasingly calcified theocratic autocracy on the irreversible threshold of rigor mortis.

The woman calls a spade a spade, as we like to say in England. Her breathtaking condemnation of the abuse and misuse of Islam as evil incarnate, expressed in the most ancient art form predating modern day petrochemical Wahabiism contains the power to free a world increasingly mired in Petronia, antiSemitism, Islamophobia and polarization. The key to such freedom is nothing other than authentic Islam.

She grabs the bull by the horns, as this line shows:

"I have seen evil in the eyes of fatwas, at a time when the permitted is being twisted into the forbidden."

Reading the above reminds me very much of a particular Hadith (saying attributed to the Prophet Mohamed). Let me share it with you. When the Prophet was leading prayer, a member of the congregation asked him what he feared for his people and followers.

After careful thought, the Prophet responded, revealing he feared most those who would come from within his flock and recite the Qu'ran but that the Qu'ran would go 'no further than their throats' (sparing their hearts and souls). Using the cover of religion, he foretold they would do the exact opposite of what Islam intended purely for their own gain while claiming to exalt God. These people, he predicted, would come from within us (the Muslim Ummah), filleting our community to the innards very much 'like an arrow passes through its quarry.'

I read this Hadith shortly after 9-11 and immediately recognized the references to modern day terrorism executed by imposter Muslims in pursuit of their sick fallacies of serving Islam, when they do exactly the opposite by desecrating everything sacred and humane.

But words are weapons too, and can slay whole societies and cultures. Hostile clerical theocrats can do just as much damage as a demented Mumbai bomber, 9-11 hijacker, or British-born 7-11 plotter.

Hissa becomes even more explicit. Her descriptions, which speak to suicide bombing, capture exactly how such seditious and deceptive rhetoric directly leads to bloodshed, and indeed the voices and forces inciting such destruction are exactly what the Prophet foretold. She writes these instigators of evil, in the form of distorted clerical leaders and suicide bombers:

"are vicious in voice, barbaric, angry and blind, wearing death as a robe cinched with a belt"

I thought of this as I caught today's GPS. Fareed Zakaria mentioned Hissa on his show this morning. Briefly he played tapes of Hissa reading her poetry as a panel looked on, noting she has reached further in the competition than any other woman ever. Some believe that she may perhaps even win. In my eyes she has won already, by articulating what countless Muslims fear expressing irrespective of the political environment within which they must function. Speaking negatively of a Muslim is detested in Islamic culture, yet if we are to be true, principled Muslims we must speak up in the exposure of injustices.This is what Hissa is doing and why she is so brave. She risks becoming pariah.

I was about to switch off when I caught Fareed's closing comment on the segment, which couldn't end without the de rigueur comment about Saudi Arabia where 'women cannot drive'. This remains true and certainly impedes womens' liberties, as well as the liberties of their men folk buckling under the economic pressure of providing a vehicle and chauffeur for every independent woman in the Kingdom. So while it may be ironic to Fareed that that a woman is taking on the rigors of the established and often punitive theocracy, his implication that men are absent from such dialogue and positive insurrection is myopic.

Certainly Hissa's womanhood – concealed and yet therefore for the same reason so extremely revealed – augments her power. Indeed, speaking at a Perspex podium in her traditional veiling of the niqab which covers her face and her stark, undecorated abbayah which covers her body is indeed intensely arresting – much more so than if a Saudi man was composing the same invective. Aye, I am with you on this Fareed.

But we must make an important, further deduction. For every Hissa objecting to the stultifying restrictions of a fundamentalist theocracy on women, lets not forget these restrictions weigh heavily on Saudi men too. Many, many Saudi men share the objections and pain that is expressed by her verse. In some ways, while one can easily construct a metaphor for Saudi womanhood to be invisible, in my experience, Saudi men are just as invisible and in the rising climate of scrutiny for all aspects of Saudi, and in fact Muslim, feminism, the male voice is even more often obliterated, quashed. Try reading about Islamic masculinities to understand this double-edged sword.

Behind Hissa are supportive male family members, a husband who is not emasculated by her intensely public stance and controversial views, and a growing number influential men (alongside influential women) who have helped her find a means of expression in a culture which vehemently shies away from individualism and the bald glare of public attention. She speaks for these men too. She assumes the role of leader. And agreed, while unlicensed to drive a stick shift, she does however, drive the charged climate for cultural change forward. She does so, in keeping with historical mores defining Islam at its birth.

If we look at early Islam, history records the first Muslim women to be strong, effective and indomitable advocates for social change, even during the lifetime of our beloved Prophet Mohamed. Islam gives women many rights: the right to choose one's life partner, and the right to divorce him, the right to hold wealth and property, the right to a valid vote so that a woman can be heard equally to any man. Muslim women are required to fulfill exactly the same obligations in religious duty as are Muslim men, and so too are their rights to earn equivalent blessings.

Hissa Hillal is merely exercising her right to voice what millions have feared to do so: the right to return to meaningful Islam, which is benevolent, just, honorable and devoid of compulsion and oppression. She does so at the grave risk of being accused of a particularly offensive moniker recently leveled at me: to speak out in criticism of Islamic poses the risk of being type cast as Islamophobic, as a critic prejudiced against Muslims, when in fact such actions of bravery are the very mettle of being a functioning Muslim.

While Hissa is heavily veiled, she has seized, and indeed very much owns, the spotlight. Once embodied by able horsewomen in the field of battle, now these Islamic feminist wage war in air-conditioned studios beaming into millions of households. Hissa emulates our first female forebears who lent their voice to justice for Muslim women, and men, through the centuries: her message is clear.

For Muslim women, and Muslim Men everywhere, Hissa demands Poetic Justice.

And, once demands begin, justice has a habit of following.”

Dr. Ahmed is currently an assistant professor of medicine at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston, and Assistant Director of the MUSC Sleep Disorders Laboratory. She is a quadruple boarded in internal medicine, pulmonary disease, critical care medicine, and sleep disorders medicine. She continues to practice intensive care medicine. She became a fellow of the American College of Chest Physicians, a Diplomat and member of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine.

She is also the author of the acclaimed, In the Land of Invisible Women: A Female Doctor's Journey in the Saudi Kingdom, an award-winning and powerful memoir. I was extremely moved when I read this book, so I have included information about it below.

In the Land of Invisible Women: A Female Doctor's Journey in the Saudi Kingdom

From Publisher’s Weekly:

This memoir is a journey into a complex world readers will find fascinating and at times repugnant. After being denied a visa to remain in the U.S., British-born Ahmed, a Muslim woman of Pakistani origin, takes advantage of an opportunity, before 9/11, to practice medicine in Saudi Arabia. She discovers her new environment is defined by schizophrenic contrasts that create an absurd clamorous clash of modern and medieval.... It never became less arresting to behold. Ahmed's introduction to her new environment is shocking. Her first patient is an elderly Bedouin woman. Though naked on the operating table, she still is required by custom to have her face concealed with a veil under which numerous hoses snake their way to hissing machines. Everyday life is laced with bizarre situations created by the rabid puritanical orthodoxy that among other requirements forbids women to wear seat belts because it results in their breasts being more defined, and oppresses Saudi men as much as women by its archaic rules. At times the narrative is burdened with Ahmed's descriptions of the physical characteristics of individuals and the luxurious adornments of their homes but this minor flaw is easily overlooked in exchange for the intimate introduction to a world most readers will never know.

Following Book Excerpt, © Reprinted by permission, All rights reserved:

“I returned to Khalaa Tarfa, my first patient in the Kingdom. She was a Bedouin Saudi well into her seventies, though no one could be sure of her age (female births were not certified in Saudi Arabia when she had been born). She was on a respirator for a pneumonia which had been slow to resolve. Comatose, she was oblivious to my studying gaze. A colleague prepared her for the placement of a central line (a major intravenous line into a deep vein).

Her torso was uncovered in anticipation.. Another physician sterilized the berry brown skin with swathes of iodine. A mundane procedure I had performed countless times, in Saudi Arabia it made for a starling scene. I looked up from the sterilized field which was quickly submerging the Bedouin body under a disposable sea of blue. Her face remained enshrouded in a black scarf, as if she was out in a market scurrying through a crowd of loitering men. I was astounded.

Behind the curtain, a family member hovered, the dutiful son. Intermittently, he peered at us . He was obviously worrying, I decided, as I watched his slim brown fingers rapidly manipulating a rosary. He was probably concerned about the insertion of the central line, I thought, just like any other caring family member.

Every now and again, he signaled vigorously, rapidly talking in Arabic to instruct the nurse. I wondered what he was asking about and how he could know if we were at a crucial step in the procedure. Everything was going smoothly; in fact soon the jugular would be cannulated. We were almost finished. What could be troubling him?

Through my dullness, eventually, I noticed a clue. Each time the physician's sleeve touched the patient's veil, and the veil slipped, the son burst out in a flurry of anxiety. Perhaps all of nineteen, the son was instructing the nurse to cover the patient's face, all the while painfully averting his uninitiated gaze away from his mother's fully exposed torso, revealing possibly the first breasts he may have seen.

I wondered about the lengths to which the son continued to veil his mother, even when she was gravely ill. Couldn't he see it was the least important thing for her now at this time, when her life could ebb away at any point? Didn't he know God was Merciful, tolerant and understanding and would never quibble over the wearing of a veil in such circumstances, or I doubted, any circumstances?

Somehow I assumed the veil was mandated by the son, but perhaps I was wrong about that as well. Already, I was finding myself wildly ignorant in this country. Perhaps the patient herself would be furious if her modesty was unveiled when she was powerless to resist. Nothing was clear to me other than veiling was essential, inescapable, even for a dying woman. This was the way of the new world in which I was now confined. For now, and the next two years, I would see many things I couldn't understand. I was now a stranger in the Kingdom.”

This wonderful book is available at Amazon in paperback, but is also available for it’s Kindle e-reader.

— The Curator

Muslim Women Caned for Illicit Sex Defend Penalty

Three Muslim women who were the first in Malaysia to be caned for illicit sex feel the penalty was an opportunity for them to repent, according to media reports.

Legal commentators have said that the Islamic courts – which operate in parallel to the civil system in Malaysia – are becoming increasingly confident, threatening Malaysia's status as a secular nation.

The Sharia courts have been clamping down on rarely enforced religious laws that apply to Muslim Malays who dominate the population – including a ban alcohol and sex between unmarried couples.

The caning has outraged civil and human rights groups and revived speculation that conservative Islamists, who advocate harsh punishment, are gaining influence.

Prison authorities caned the women on Feb. 9 after an Islamic Shariah court issued the penalty. The three women, aged 17-25, said they turned themselves in after feeling guilty for sleeping with their boyfriends before marriage and getting pregnant, The Star and the New Straits Times newspapers reported.

Malaysian Deputy Premier Muhyiddin Yassin said many, including Malaysians, were horrified at the idea of a woman being caned because they did not know how it was done.

"The caning punishment meted out by the Shariah court is legal and how the international community looks at it, is up to them. But I believe it is important that authorities make an effort to explain the procedure because it is far different from the impression many have," he said.

"While the caning sentence meted out by civil courts can cause hurt and sometimes even death, caning according to Shariah law is light. It is more to educate and remind Muslims to honor and abide by their religion," he said after chairing the Cabinet committee on human capital development.

Yassin defended the caning saying it was "far lighter" than what some people might imagine. "The punishment is legitimate and in accordance with the law," he said.

Human rights groups have condemned the caning, saying it is a cruel and degrading punishment and discriminates against Muslim women because Malaysian civil law – which applies to non-Muslims – bans the caning of women.

The women were fully clothed and sitting on a stool. Two of them received six strokes and the third was given four strokes on their backs from a thin rattan cane administered at Kajang Prison.

Caning of men for such offences as rape, drug smuggling and staying illegally in the country is common. It is administered with a thick rattan stick on bare buttocks, causing severe pain and leaving scars.

The three became the first women in the country to be flogged for committing Shariah offences.

A Shariah court had recently also sentenced a Muslim model, Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno, to be caned for being caught drinking beer in a hotel nightclub in July last year. The sentence of six cane strokes against the 33-year-old mother-of-two has not yet been executed.

Her case, which was to have been the first time a woman was caned under Islamic law in Malaysia, is still under review after she was given a last-minute reprieve amid intense worldwide media and public outcry.

Malaysia's Bar Council has said it was "shocking" that the caning of the three women went ahead while the Kartika case was unresolved.

Hamidah Marican, Executive Director of an NGO called Sisters in Islam (SIS), said the case of the three women constituted further discrimination against Muslim women in Malaysia.

"It violates Constitutional guarantees of equality and non-discrimination as the whipping of women under Shariah Criminal Offences legislation contradicts civil law where women are not punishable by caning under Section 289 of the Criminal Procedure Code," she was quoted as saying by 'Star' online.

Bar Council Chairman Ragunath Kesavan appealed to the government to immediately review and abolish all forms of punishment involving whipping and to comply with international norms and principles on it.

The 17-year-old told reporters that she surrendered to Islamic authorities after her prematurely born child died. She is now serving a six-month prison sentence.

"I know I have sinned, and I have to be punished. Strangely however, I felt that the caning was not a form of punishment but was an opportunity for me to repent and return to the right path," The Star quoted her as saying.

She has already married her boyfriend, who has also been caned and jailed over the offence. The other women, who have one young child each, are planning to marry their partners, who have also been caned, after they are released.

"On the day I was caned, I was scared but, at the same time, I knew I deserved it and was willing to take the punishment," said one of the women, a 25-year-old who went by the name of "Ayu."

She told the New Straits Times that the punishment – administered while they were fully clothed and by a female prison officer wielding a thin rattan cane – did not hurt.

"Those out there who are having sex before marriage should really consider the consequences and not only think about momentary pleasure," she told the daily.

The three women said they turned themselves in to religious authorities after being wracked by guilt over having pre-marital sex.

"Ayu" has a one-year-old daughter with her boyfriend, who she plans to marry, and the other two women also gave birth out of wedlock.

Human rights campaigners, who were stunned by the caning of the three women which had not been foreshadowed by authorities, were skeptical over the comments published in several Malaysian newspapers.

"These three women are just normal people who have been surrounded by all kinds of legal mumbo jumbo and pressured into agreeing to be caned," one activist told AFP, declining to be named because of the sensitivity of the issue.

A Prison Department official confirmed the women's comments, made at a news conference at the women's prison outside Kuala Lumpur to local, government-linked media under the watch of authorities. He said they were reluctant to speak to other media. It could not be confirmed whether they were speaking voluntarily. A request with the department for interviews is pending.

Malaysia has a two-tier justice system. Shariah courts deal with personal matters for Muslims, who account for about two-thirds of the country's 28 million people, while non-Muslims – many of whom are ethnic Chinese and Indians – go to civil courts.

(Note: The above photograph was allowed to be taken at Kajang Prison in Kuala Lumpur, and depicts officials demonstrating how caning is employed.)

Let me very, very clear: I abhor caning, and view it as legalized torture — but I am a Westerner. It remains up to the citizens of Malaysia to decide what their culture, their government does or does not do in the name of justice and religion. However, as citizens of the world we have a solemn responsibility to voice our unflagging support of ALL people who are endangered or abused. But be very careful oh-oft-arrogant American before you condemn: Make sure your own land is in order before you judge the land of another.

— The Curator

France Recommends Partial Ban on Veils — Not Total Ban

French lawmakers recommended a partial ban on any veils that cover the face – including the burqa, the full-body covering worn by some Muslim women, backing off from a total ban that is supported by a clear majority of its citizens.

The ban on the "voile integrale" – which literally means "total veil" – would apply in public places like hospitals and schools, and on public transport, a French parliamentary commission announced Tuesday.

It would also apply to anyone who attempts to receive public services, but it would not apply to people wearing the burqa on the street, the commission said.

The commission stopped short of recommending a full ban only because not all of the 32 commission members could agree on it.

Italy announced that it too may soon seek a ban or partial ban on full-face Muslim veils, drawing on France’s debate. Equal Opportunities Minister Mara Carfagna has said the Italian government will quickly follow in France's footsteps, breathing new life into four draft bills on the niqab or burqa already circulating in parliamentary committees.

"I completely agree with the French initiative, which I think will push other European countries and hence, also Italy, to enact laws on this issue," Carfagna said this week.

"This is about a sacrosanct battle to defend the dignity and rights of immigrant women. A law is being studied that would ban the use of a burqa and niqab, which are not religious symbols – that's not us saying it, but the top religious authorities of the Islamic world, like the imams of Cairo and Paris."

France already has a law against Muslim girls wearing headscarves in state schools. It sparked widespread Muslim protests when the French Parliament passed the law in 2004, even though the law also bans other conspicuous religious symbols including Sikh turbans, large Christian crucifixes and Jewish skull caps.

The Commission has now recommended that Parliament pass a resolution on the partial ban. Such a resolution, if passed, would not make the wearing of a full veil or burqa illegal, but it would give public officials support when asking people to remove it.

Commission members began their work six months ago after French President Nicolas Sarkozy controversially told lawmakers that the full veil was "not welcome" in France.

Sarkozy said the issue is one of a woman's freedom and dignity, and did not have to do with religion.

The French National Assembly assembled a cross-party panel of 32 lawmakers to study whether women in France should be allowed to wear the burqa – or any other full veil, including the niqab, which shows only the eyes. The commission also studied whether such full veils pose a threat to France's constitutionally mandated secularism.

Commission members heard from 200 people from all areas of French society, including Muslims, though they only heard from one woman who wears a veil.

By recommending a ban on full veils in public places such as hospitals and schools and by anyone receiving public services, the commission members said they wanted to assist those working with members of the public when asking that full veils be removed. That would include school teachers who meet children's parents or ticket agents at train stations.

A date for the vote in Parliament has not been set, though it is unlikely to happen before regional elections which are scheduled for March 14 and 21. Parliamentary majority leader Jean-Francois Cope said this week he believed the resolution will pass.

Any law directed at an outright ban of full veils is likely to be challenged in the courts both in France and at the European level.

Nonetheless, more than half of French people support a full ban, according to a recent opinion poll. The Ipsos poll for Le Point magazine found 57 percent of French people said it should be illegal to appear in public wearing clothes that cover the face.

That's despite government estimates that less than 2,000 women in the country actually wear the full Islamic veil.

France has about 3.5 million Muslims, representing about six percent of the population, according to research by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. The country does not collect its own statistics on religion in accordance with laws enshrining France's status as a secular state.

French lawmakers believe the burqa is a growing phenomenon beneath which lies a not-so-subtle message of fundamentalism.

Those who advocate the ban say women are often forced to wear full veils by the men around them – husbands, fathers or brothers – and that it is a sign of subjugation.

However, women who actually wear the veils deny that.

"You are going to isolate these women and then you can't say that it is Islam that has denied them freedom, but that the law has," said Mabrouka Boujnah, a language teacher of Tunisian origin.

Boujnah, who at 28 is about to have her first child, says she came to wearing a full veil gradually, after wearing headscarves as an teenager. She said she believes a law against full veils would take away fundamental rights of Muslim women.

She and her friend Oumkheyr, who would not give her last name, say they prefer to cover their faces out of piety. The women, both French citizens, say they are only following their religious beliefs and France should respect that.

But even some Muslims in France think the full veil goes too far.

There is nothing in the Quran that directs women to cover their faces, said Imam Hassen Chalghoumi, who runs the Islamic center in Drancy, a Paris suburb. He said it is ridiculous to do so in France.

In 2008, France's top court denied a Moroccan woman's naturalization request on the grounds that she wore a burqa.

France is not the only European Union country to consider banning the burqa. Dutch lawmakers voted in favor of a ban in 2005, although the government at the time left office before legislation could be passed.

Critics see the niqab or burqa, a full veil with a slit for the eyes, as a symbol of the subjugation of women.

To the full Islamic veil worn by some women in his country, Sarkozy answers with a resounding, "Non."

Saying the clothing was "not welcome" in a nation that valued sexual equality in his new year’s speech to the nation, Sarkozy said he favors moves to ban the face-covering veil, calling for an “unambiguous” parliamentary resolution.

However, to squelch accusations of promoting anti-Muslim sentiment, Sarkozy said any law should avoid stigmatizing any ethnic or religious groups.

In response to those in his right-wing Union for a Popular Movement (UMP) party who are pushing for an immediate ban of the full veil in public, he said lawmakers should wait for results of a six-month parliamentary inquiry before taking action. After that, parliament should pass a non-binding, but “unambiguous,” resolution against wearing the full veil in public.

In his speech, Sarkozy addressed accusations that his actions are creating a more hostile environment toward France’s 6 million Muslims and said the proposed ban was motivated by love of his nation’s principles, not racism.

“The full veil is not welcome in France because it runs contrary to our values and contrary to the idea we have of a woman’s dignity,” he said, while cautioning against an extreme move that would further alienate a section of society.

“Let us undertake not to give opponents of democracy, dignity and sexual equality the chance for a victory which would put our society in a very difficult situation,” he said, adding it was “essential that no one felt stigmatized.”

In Italy, the initiative has drawn strong support from the far-right, anti-immigrant Northern League party in Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's conservative government, though some opposition figures have also applauded the move.

In deeply Catholic Italy – where a European court ruling against crucifixes in classrooms sparked a national uproar – a few small northern towns have already tried to ban niqabs or burqas with local decrees, though some of those were later annulled.

The ban initiative also appears to have the backing of most Italians. A poll by the SWG polling group showed 71 percent of Italians were in favor of a ban on full-face veils.

Still, like in France, the issue has provoked sharp debate in Italy over whether a new law is needed, with leftist politicians and even some in Berlusconi's coalition questioning whether legislation could end up being counterproductive.

"I'm convinced the burqa is a prison and a form of male dominance," said leftist senator Vittoria Franco. "Having said that, I think it's wrong to ban it because it would be an abstract intervention that would not help emancipate women."

Others say wearing a burqa or a niqab is already illegal under a 1975 anti-terrorism law in Italy that bars appearing in public with a masked face.

But conservative lawmaker Souad Sbai, who has proposed amending the 1975 law to specifically include the words "niqab" and "burqa," says a clear message needs to be sent to dissuade young immigrant Muslim women from taking up face veils.

"If we don't ban it now, tomorrow we'll have lots of women walking around in a niqab," Sbai, who is of Moroccan descent, told news outlets. "Each day the number of women wearing it rises. Just go to Brescia, Bergamo or Milan or any market, they are full of women wearing them."

She says more than 1,000 women in Italy wear full face veils, though Ahmad Gianpiero Vincenzo, head of the Italian Muslim Intellectuals group, says not more than 100 women do.

Muslim groups in Italy say they advise women against wearing face veils, but that enacting a new law on it is either unnecessary or could constitute an attempt to legislate personal choice.

Either way, niqab or burqa wearers are unlikely to get much done in Italy, says a reporter from La Repubblica newspaper. Going undercover in a niqab, she recounted not being allowed to borrow library books and being asked to leave local government offices.

"Walking around Milan inside a burqa is like walking under water," she wrote in the left-leaning newspaper.

A burqa ban in Italy would be largely symbolic, since the full veil is hardly ever seen in the country. Even in France, which is about 10 percent Muslim, estimates are that fewer than 2,000 women wear the full veil.

Here’s a small sample of Letters/Op-Ed Columns regarding the issue:

Column, The Wall Street Journal
Nadra Poller

“The question is not if, but when and how France will banish full facial veiling from the streets of the République. Contrary to what has been reported in international media, the conclusions of the Parliamentary Commission are not the ‘government's’ decision. President Nicolas Sarkozy is asking Parliament for a ‘solemn declaration’ that veiled women do not belong in France, followed by an outright legal ban.

Paris is now concerned with crafting a law that will stand up to eventual challenges from the Conseil Constitutionnel and the European Court of Human Rights.

Polls show that a majority of French people support the maximalist ban. French Muslim intellectuals, activists, and community leaders who represent the promise of an enlightened European Islam are asking for an unambiguous ban on the niqab. Poet and scholar Abdelwahab Meddeb calls the niqab the ‘ideological sign of radical Islam.’ Psychoanalyst Fethi Benslama exposes the ‘masochism’ of the self-imposed veil, ‘unacceptable even in the name of individual freedom.’ Fadela Amara, undersecretary for Urban Affairs and former president of Ni Putes Ni Soumises [Neither Whores Nor Doormats] calls the niqab ‘the visible, physical expression of fundamentalists.’ This week NPNS activists dressed in burqas gathered in front of the National Assembly and major party headquarters, calling on lawmakers to protect them from this violation of women's rights.

Democracy means individual responsibility, which means showing our faces.

No one in France publicly supports the niqab – often inaccurately referred to as a burqa – except certain apologists hidden in yards of fabric finished off with a black veil that barely shows their eyes and thick gloves to hide their hands. The Islamist currents that propel this armada lurk behind the scenes or send out representatives in suits and ties who explain that the niqab is not a religious obligation, but that a legal ban would stigmatize Muslims.

The Socialist Party, in trying to define itself in opposition to Mr. Sarkozy without defending the garment, is tripping over the skirts of an extremist practice that is the antithesis of the feminism it supposedly defends. François Hollande, who is angling for the Socialists' presidential nomination in 2012, opposes facial veiling but claims a hasty law will provoke hostility and defiance. He wants more explanation, persuasion, and bipartisan consultation.

Socialist members of the parliamentary commission refused to so much as vote on the conclusions, in protest against the parallel debate on ‘national identity’ launched by the Sarkozy government and construed as hostile to immigrants. In fact, the problem is not ‘immigration.’ France has always been a land of immigration. The problem is a certain category of French people – immigrants and native born – who do not accept the essential values that define the Republic and ensure the general welfare.

Facial veiling was the focal point of a much broader phenomenon – what could be called ‘creeping sharia’ – that led Communist Deputy André Gerin to initiate the parliamentary investigation. As mayor of Venissieux, a troubled banlieue of Lyon, Mr. Gerin has witnessed a steady rise in Islamic assaults on social cohesion.

As the debate raged in the French media this week, journalists and TV cameras sought out veiled apologists who declared in muffled voices from the depths of the niqab that no one had imposed it and no one could force them to take it off. ‘Of course we lift the veil to be identified,’ declared one purist, ‘they don't even have to ask. As long as it's a woman.’ ‘And if it's a man?’ ‘Oh no, out of the question!’ Another ‘sister’ went to the heart of the matter: ‘If they pass a law I won't obey it. The law of Allah is above the law of men.’

There's the rub. And there's the message of defiance carried by these phantom women. How many are there? Two hundred? Two thousand? Has anyone gone door to door to locate them? Can you count them in the streets? How would you know if you were seeing five different women or the same woman five times? No one knows how many there are today and it doesn't matter. The issues are elsewhere.

For the French, the veil cannot be accepted as a religious accoutrement because it denies our democratic values. In a democracy the individual enjoys civil rights and accepts individual civil responsibility. This is why we show our faces, sign our names, look each other in the eyes. Moreover, integration into French society has always meant assimilation. The French do not want to follow what they see as the Anglo-Saxon model of juxtaposed ethnic ghettoes. Immigrants who master the French language, codes, style, tastes, and flair are sincerely accepted and flourish here. Today, the personal success stories of French Muslims could be swept away by a rising wave of radicalization.

The stakes are high and the debate could turn into a battlefield. Hassen Chalgoumi, the Imam of Drancy – known for his outreach to Christians and Jews – announced he is in favor of a ban on the niqab, which he calls ‘a prison for women, a tool of sexist domination and Islamist proselytism…incompatible with life in society.’ A few days later a ‘commando’ of 80 men burst into Chalgouni's mosque and threatened to get rid of ‘the imam of the Jews.’

In sharp contrast to the cohort of veiled apologists, the France-Soir daily on Tuesday published the chilling testimony of a young woman who was nudged and pushed by her husband from hijab to jilbeb to niqab to total seclusion. The couple's devout Muslim families and neighbors looked on with approval as the young woman disappeared behind the veil, hiding her despair and the bruises inflicted by her violent spouse. One day she turned for help to Ni Putes Ni Soumises, threw off her veil, divorced, and began to live again. But she is terrified that ‘they’ will find her and kill her.

The veiled saleswoman, in a shop near the radical Omar mosque on Paris's rue Jean-Pierre Timbaud, says the debate has boosted sales of jilbeb, ‘as if the girls were buying it just to stoke controversy.’

The woman in niqab is the figurehead of a subversive movement that threatens all democratic nations. A French ban that would clearly make full facial veiling unwelcome and out of bounds could be a hopeful sign for European citizens – in all their diversity.”

(Poller is an American novelist living in Paris since 1972.)

Column, The Guardian, UK
Nabila Ramdani

“Has Nicolas Sarkozy lost face in his battle against the burqa? One might think so considering his latest compromise on the issue. While the French president firmly believes that these allegedly Islamic veils are ‘a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement’ which are ‘not welcome’ anywhere in the Fifth Republic, he now thinks the only workable ban would be on public transport or in civic buildings.

In a country which is meant to champion secularism and gender equality, it really is quite a climbdown. The vast majority of French people, including most Muslims, believe that face coverings should be banned completely. They're not only intimidating and divisive, but actually have very little to do with Islam, and far more to do with central Asian and Middle Eastern traditions. They certainly engender more than a sneaking suspicion that they've been imposed by men intent on keeping their spouses or daughters away from the common gaze.

Sarkozy clearly laid out the popular view with the words: ‘The full veil is not welcome in France because it is contrary to our values and contrary to the ideals we have of a woman's dignity.’ A ban would be an entirely democratic one which would not stigmatise anyone, least of all members of France's six millon-strong Muslim community, Sarkozy argued.

Despite this, Sarkozy left us in little doubt that all those who wear face coverings – whether burqa or niqab – are Muslims living in a country which increasingly expects everyone to ‘adapt’ to the Gallic way. It was certainly no coincidence that the clampdown on religious symbols in state schools which began in 1994 centred on Muslim headscarves. Sixteen years on, the only reason Sarkozy has stopped short of a full burqa ban is because he thinks it would be thrown out by appeal courts under European human rights legislation.

Such legal challenges would be a huge embarrassment to Sarkozy, especially during his rightwing government's ill-conceived national identity debate which is allowing racist and Islamophobic views to masquerade as 21st-century patriotism. Even anti-terrorism judges have captured the increasingly hostile nature of the arguments by saying that a full ban on the veil would lead to an increase in Islamic extremism.

Under such circumstances the real issue raised by Sarkozy's burqa ban – and especially the watered down version – is not the freedom of the handful of few women who wear full veils (less than 2000 and most of them confined to isolated housing estates, according to all reliable estimates), but the very place of Islam in modern France. By targeting his tokenistic policies and soundbites at a harmless minority, Sarkozy and his cronies succeed in linking Islam with everything from sexism to national security threats. If these associations are genuine, then they should be dealt with in a manner which is honest and unambiguous. Anything less results in weak compromises engendering nothing but fear and suspicion, often without anybody really understanding why."

Letter to the International Herald Tribune
Anne Charlotte Hinet, Paris

“...France is a republic and one of the nation’s most important tenets is secularism.

Some see French secularism as intolerance toward religion, but French republicans will explain that secularism is the only way to respect all religions and let none of them dominate another. Secularism is not a rejection of religion but an attempt to make religion disappear from public life.

I disagree with President Sarkozy’s politics and approve of your editorial’s view that his support for a ban on the burqa is to ‘deflect public anger over high unemployment’ as elections approach. But it is dangerous to say the government ban is a violation of individual liberties.

The vast majority of French people – across the political spectrum – agree on the need to ban the burqa. Also, some Muslim leaders will say that wearing the burqa is not required by the Koran. And even if the burqa was required for women by the Koran, no religious law should overtake Republican law.

Another thing to keep in mind: Anglo-Saxon countries place the individual above society. In France, it’s the opposite.”

Letter to The Guardian, UK
Ken Livingstone, Susan Kramer MP, Claude Moraes MEP, Jenny Jones Green party, Cllr Salma Yaqoob, Edie Friedman Jewish Council for Racial Equality, Anas Altikiriti British Muslim Initiative, Billy Hayes General secretary, Communication Workers, Bellavia Ribeiro-Addy NUS Black Students Officer, Weyman Bennett and Sabby Dhalu Joint national secretaries, Unite Against Fascism, Lindsey German National convener, Stop the War

“Shutting down the right to choose to wear the veil will only further embolden Islamophobia, the far right and fascist parties. The debate has had the net effect of demonising a minority of Muslim women, who number less than 2,000 in France. It will mean the only option for many of these women will be to stay confined to their homes. All this, ironically, in the name of integration and the liberation of women. We are one society and many cultures; respecting and allowing all cultures freedom of expression, as long as this does not impinge on the rights of others, means all communities can fully contribute to society. The debate in France is already impacting here, with Ukip calling for a ban on the burka and niqab.”

As you can imagine, social networking websites have been inundated with voices condemning and praising the French proposal, with some people actually forming Facebook groups specifically to react to the news.

Scores of readers also sent in their views to the Arab-based Al Jazeera, which published the following in its English edition:

Sherpa, from India, was among those who felt the proposal to ban women from wearing the niqab or burqa from schools, hospitals and government buildings, was a “direct attack on Islam.”

"If a woman feels comfortable covered up and that's her norm, what right do supposed advanced civilised societies like France have to dictate what a woman does or doesn't do?" she asks.

Yusuf, from Brazil said the move sent a clear message to all Islamic countries that the French government "cannot tolerate its Muslim population."

"I am amazed how the French strut around the Middle East on peace and reconciliation missions. When clearly they have serious misconceptions and prejudices against Muslims," he wrote.

Others felt the proposal, which follows a 2004 ban on Muslim children wearing the hijab in schools, revealed the French to be more critical than Muslim nations when it came to different dress codes.

"I wore a French beret all day and night in Pakistan, in masjids around the world, and no muslim ever objected," Omar from Pakistan wrote.

The panel's description of all-encompassing veils to be "contrary to the values of the republic" triggered further outrage.

"Do they want Muslim women to adopt the ‘values’ of many French or western women...who choose to publicly pose nude or nearly nude for money or attention?" Ishmael from the U.S. asked.

Others labeled the proposal, which will be put to a vote in the French parliament, a suppression of human rights.

"Sometimes you get astonished, when you think of any western or pro-western country talking about human rights. Human rights in West, means the right to suppress muslims and defame Islam by any means," Waheed, from Afghanistan, wrote.

Another reader, Omar from the U.S., added: "It doesn't seem very liberating to tell a woman what she cannot (or can) wear. Is it supposed to be progressive to tell women they can not wear certain clothing?"

But many readers have agreed with the French recommendation, saying that the niqab has no place in a civilized society.

"Hopefully this will lead to a full public ban. The veils are symptomatic of creeping Islamisation in France and the rest of Europe, which has been disastrous in many respects.

"They have no place in open, secular, egalitarian societies. The French are to be commended for taking this step," Jerry Philipson from Canada wrote.

Other viewers took the view that one who lives in a Western country must abide by Western dress codes.

"When I'm a guest in somebody's house (country) I respect them and live by their rules. I don't impose my views, rules, etc. on them," Alvaro from Spain said.

Lila from the U.S. echoed the sentiment: "If I were to live in a Muslim country I would bow to their dress code. I live in a free country and people can practice their Muslim religion without the burqa or the hajib. When you move to another country, be part of that country."

Another drew on history to suggest wearing a face-covering veil is not a necessary part of Islam.

"During the heydays of Islam in Spain (a 1000 years ago!) when Spanish-Arabic medicine and philosophy laid the foundations for the Christian Renaissance, women only loosely covered their heads," Geert Kliphuis from Brussels argued.

Elise from the U.S. doubted wearing the niqab or burqa to be an expression of religion, but instead said it constituted a threat.

"People who will not represent who they are are sneaky in all respects and I personally don't trust them. It is not possible to have a relationship with someone who is untrustworthy, hides themself."

But perhaps Irfan from France should have the last word, who retaliates: "Try smiling when you talk over phone and the person on other will know that you are happy."


It is clear that this issue will continue to be debated worldwide. While I understand the arguments the French have put forth, I urge extreme caution: This is not a dress-code issue, and I believe they should go no further than they already have. I also urge Italy to tread lightly, and if intent on imposing a restriction, follow France’s fall-back position and enact a partial ban only.

I am sorry to say that I find this to be is a very thinly "veiled" attempt to control the spread of Islamic fundamentalism.

While terrorism should be deplored and vigorously resisted whether it's based on religious or ethnic reasons, freedom of religion must be protected just as staunchly – even if we don’t understand or even like a specific faith. As a westerner, I have no right to seek the reduction of religious followers of Islam, or any other religion. If the true intent of the proposed ban is to protect the rights or women, there are many other ways to accomplish that without restricting religious freedom. I very much fear that this is not a woman's issue at all.


— The Curator