Feb 22, 2007

Egyptian Blogger Convicted for Internet Posts

Share
Abdel Karim Nabil Suleiman, also known as Kareem Amer (Alexandria, Egypt) An Alexandria court convicted an Egyptian blogger named Abdel Karim Nabil Suleiman today for insulting both Islam and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, sentencing him to four years in jail over posts on his blog.

Suleiman, known online as "Kareem Amer," was sentenced to three years for insulting Islam and inciting sedition and one year for insulting Mubarak. The court session lasted only five minutes, after which the verdict was disclosed.

Suleiman has not denied authoring the posts, but said they merely represented his own views. The jailed blogger's lawyer, Ahmed Seif el-Islam, said that he would appeal the verdict, arguing that the ruling will "terrify other bloggers and will negative impact on the freedom of expression in Egypt."

Human rights groups, journalists, and bloggers have watched the case closely, and many have expressed concern that the conviction could set a legal precedent limiting Internet freedom in Egypt. Dalia Ziada, a journalist, blogger, and activist with the Cairo-based Arabic Network for Human Rights Information, argued that Suleiman's conviction remains the first time an Egyptian blogger has been sentenced for writing on his personal blog.

“It sends a chilling message to bloggers of all persuasions in Egypt and across the Middle East," Ziada said. "We are not free to express ourselves openly on our websites.”

For more information, visit the Free Kareem! website.

10 comments:

liberal_dem said...

I saw that article yesterday and thought, it could happen here with Cheney at the controls.

Kooz said...

Cheney at the controls???

You libs never cease to amaze me. You criticize the man and the administration trying to stop these people...and empower the very enemy who wouldn't think twice to put you in prison if you made the same comment about one of their leaders!

You and those like you obviously will never get it...until maybe your put in a cell for expressing your opinions or worse yet...having your head cut off for it.

Incredible! Don't condemn the muslims who put this guy in jail...but criticize Cheney.

Idiot.

Dariush said...

Yo, Cletus.

You might actually want to check out the Free Kareem website before you start foaming at the mouth over "dem Islams".

Jethro: "Incredible! Don't condemn the muslims who put this guy in jail...but criticize Cheney."

Yeah, Lib Dem's an "idiot" but the guy who calls Mubarak's regime "Muslim" is a freakin' genius.

Ah, the wonders of dysgenics.

-Sepp said...

Yeah, yeah, yeah LD, the scenarios of all the bad things Cheney "could" do are just a bunch of paranoid prattle. Meanwhile, there is a real person, in a real jail, doing real time wishing he had the same rights to criticize his leaders and religon as YOU do.
You worry about paranoid liberal fantasy while this guy gets to worry about who behind him in jail for the next 4 years.
Think about that during your next rant about how bad our country is.

Dariush said...

Sepp,

Just as Mubarak and his government don't equal Egypt or Islam, Cheney and his gov't don't equal America.

We (and by that I mean humans) have a really bad habit of glorifying people who look on us the same way we do ants.

microdot said...

Sepp, you say you are a Libertarian in your political stance yet never mention the fast erosion of our basic rights by stealth that is occurring daily.
Obviously the fellow above who equated Mubarak with Islamic fundamentalism has no clue as to what is going on in the world. You do!
Cheney has been a defender of Nixon since his early days in the WhiteHouse in the 70's. To him Watergate was not so much a scandal but a power struggle. He formulated his concept of an all powerful unitary chief executive at that time.
Last October, for example, a defense budget bill was passed and signed into law by the president with the condition that a few riders which had nothing to do with the law be included in it.

The provision, signed into law in October, weakens two obscure but important bulwarks of liberty. One is the doctrine that bars military forces, including a federalized National Guard, from engaging in law enforcement. Called posse comitatus, it was enshrined in law after the Civil War to preserve the line between civil government and the military. The other is the Insurrection Act of 1807, which provides the major exemptions to posse comitatus. It essentially limits a president’s use of the military in law enforcement to putting down lawlessness, insurrection and rebellion, where a state is violating federal law or depriving people of constitutional rights.

The newly enacted provisions upset this careful balance. They shift the focus from making sure that federal laws are enforced to restoring public order. Beyond cases of actual insurrection, the president may now use military troops as a domestic police force in response to a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, terrorist attack or to any “other condition.”

Changes of this magnitude should be made only after a thorough public airing. But these new presidential powers were slipped into the law without hearings or public debate. The president made no mention of the changes when he signed the measure, and neither the White House nor Congress consulted in advance with the nation’s governors.

This is but one example of what is going on under your complacent nose.

Roland Hansen said...

Sticks and stones may break some bones but name-calling indicates lack of thinking processes.
I do not find thrashing another person or thrashing that person's views to be a convincing argument to the other side.

microdot said...

I hope you don't think Libertarian is a bad name....only kidding!

-Sepp said...

Totaly missed the point dintcha? While a real guy sits in a real jail doing time for nothing worse and probably a lot less harshly than LD does everyday...criticize the government and a religon. Meanwhile, LD makes a comparison between that guy's problem and (cue darth vader music)a liberal fantasy about Cheney. LD is far from the gulag but, likes to let on that things are just about as bad. They're not even close.

Microdot, I didn't defend Cheney in the least bit. I do think it's a load of crap that someone will compare a paranoid fantasy to someone else's very real plight. As for basic rights eroding, dude, you praise socialists on your blog. What erodes rights faster than more government controll of people's lives? Government control has always begat more government control. Maybe you're ok with that in France but, I think that the government already has too much power! Also, cite the law passed in October so I can peruse it. If there was a some law enacted that handed out the powers you say it does, I'm surprised that nothing was said about it before , after or, since it was enacted.

-Sepp said...

lmlmTotaly missed the point dintcha? While a real guy sits in a real jail doing time for nothing worse and probably a lot less harshly than LD does everyday...criticize the government and a religon. Meanwhile, LD makes a comparison between that guy's problem and (cue darth vader music)a liberal fantasy about Cheney. LD is far from the gulag but, likes to let on that things are just about as bad. They're not even close.

Microdot, I didn't defend Cheney in the least bit. I do think it's a load of crap that someone will compare a paranoid fantasy to someone else's very real plight. As for basic rights eroding, dude, you praise socialists on your blog. What erodes rights faster than more government controll of people's lives? Government control has always begat more government control. Maybe you're ok with that in France but, I think that the government already has too much power! Also, cite the law passed in October so I can peruse it. If there was a some law enacted that handed out the powers you say it does, I'm surprised that nothing was said about it before , after or, since it was enacted.