By Bernie on 08 Feb 2008
Autopsy report of Citizen Mohamed Abdel
Qader, who died of torture on the hands
of State Security Captain Ashraf Hussein
Safwat, in Hadaek el-Qobba
Flickr-User: 3arabawy - صَحـَـفي مِصـْـري.
Imagine for a moment, and only for a moment, that you find yourself in 1939 America. You are by a water-cooler during a break and you hear your colleagues discussing the Nazis attacking Jewish businesses. You hear one of them say, "So what? Haven't Americans attacked Jews before? What, are we perfect?"
I know, for a moment you think you are in the Twilight Zone, so you interject, "But in Germany it is official policy that allows one to attack Jewish interests without legal consequences. In America, if such things happen, the perpetrators are arrested and punished."
Your colleagues are not impressed, "Ahhh, you're a Naziphobe and racist, what have you got against Nazis?"
You point out that the majority of Nazis either agree with Hitler's anti-Jewish Policies or say and do nothing to oppose them while in America it is only a small minority that engage in violent anti-Semitic acts and when they do they are punished. But they do not see the difference. If 99% of Nazis are evil and only 1% of Americans are evil then the two are morally equivalent.
I bring you back to the present and just when you thought you were out of the Twilight Zone, let me present you with the following information:
In my recent article Milk, Sugar or a Burqa with that Coffee? I wrote: "During her stay in a Saudi dungeon she was, predictably, strip-searched and then forced to sign a false confession. Unfortunately for the police, she was not in custody long enough for her to be tortured and raped as is the custom among Muslims".
A reader of mine took offense at that and left the following comment: "Americans, on the other hand have never been known for their use of torture...or rape...or coercion..or wrongful arrest...or...oh forget it.
And you Bernie, are an idiot of the highest order."
I tried to find the exact logical fallacy to attack my reader's argument. But among all the common errors in logic the closest I could come to is the Slippery Slope argument; Slippery slope arguments falsely assume that one thing must lead to another:
- If you smoke marijuana, then next you'll be snorting cocaine, and before you know it you'll be dealing crack on a street corner in Harlem.
- You don't want to become a crack dealer.
- You shouldn't smoke marijuana.
This argument commits the slippery slope fallacy because it is perfectly possible to smoke marijuana, as I once did, without going on to become a crack dealer. You could smoke some weed in college and then stop there. The conclusion therefore hasn't been proven, because the argument's first premise is false.
But my reader's argument is close but not quite. Perhaps the logic is that if a population is 1% evil then one day it could be 50% evil and then eventually totally evil. But the actual fallacy committed here I would like to call the logical fallacy of the 1% Equality, that is, there is no difference between 1% and 99%:
- If 1% of Americans are evil, then American culture is evil.
- If 99% of Muslims are evil, then Islamic culture is evil.
- American and Islamic culture are equally evil.
Evil is Evil, Therefore:
One can see this logical error committed in blogposts and comments all over the Internet. Mention in a post that Muslims, as a cultural trait, kill their daughters for dating a non-Muslim and you will get some comment saying, "What no American has ever killed his daughter?" They ignore the fact that 99% of all Muslims would willingly kill their daughters for apostasy, or dating out of their religion, or for perceived sluttiness while only a handful of psychotic Americans and much less than 1% would do the same. But the fact that there is at least one savage, barbaric American lets the leftist equate Islam with American culture. We're all savages.
Point out that Muslims in the tens of thousands rape, torture, hang, burn, and drag the corpses of women who flaunt their femininity and some whining liberal will bring up the case of a handful of American sickos who do the same. The fact that the religion of Islam makes the Muslim do the first and a pathological sickness makes the American do the second is lost on the poor fool. That a small percentage of Americans are capable of killing their own daughters for any reason and that a large percentage of Muslims have no qualms over the matter is equally lost on our liberal friends.
Mention that Muslims drill the eye-sockets of their prisoners and the liberal cries about the indignity our Muslim prisoners suffer by having a female rub her body against his. That Muslim torture is 99% unbearable, excruciating pain and American torture is barely 1% unpleasant is morally equivalent. If you had to be a prisoner where would you want to be, in the most luxurious Saudi prison or the dankest of an American jail? Be honest.
Full caption for photo above:
Prosecute Hadayek el-Qobba torturer
The Egyptian Movement for Change, Kefaya, is demanding the prosecution of a State Security Captain involved in the torture and killing of citizen Mohamed Abdel Qader in custody four years ago.
On 16 September 2003, State Security Captain Ashraf Mustafa Hussein Safwat summoned two brothers Mohamed Abdel Kader el-Sayyed, 31, and his 27-year-old brother Sameh for interrogation in Hadayek el-Qobba Police Station, based on an illegal detention order. After a five-day torture odyssey on the hands of Captain Ashraf, citizen Mohamed died, while his brother Sameh has remained in detention since then.
The family of the victim refused to receive his body, and sought legal help from Association for Human Rights Legal Aid (AHRLA), whose lawyers notified the Prosecutor of the incident. The forensic report, after examining the body of Mohamed Abdel Qader, proved that he was subject to injuries that involved "red bruises and hematomas (blood collections) in the lower lip, left nipple, right wrist, right forearm, chest, left arm, left thigh and left leg (..) in addition to severe hemorrhagic injuries in the head and abdomen which are contusive injuries resulting from collision with solid body or bodies. These are recent injuries that coincide with the date of death.”
The forensic report also confirmed the presence of "congestion and evidence of use of high temperature to the right and left breast and the penis resembling the effect of electrocution with an electric wire. He was subject to those injuries hours before this death.”
While working on the case, the AHRLA lawyers faced great difficulties that included denying them access to the complete file of the case—in violation of criminal law. The Interior Ministry refused to comply with the prosecutor’s orders to arrest and summon the accused officer, Ashraf Hussein. Finally on 4 November 2006, the victim’s family surprised the lawyers by dropping the case in court and cancelling their power of attorney, after they were blackmailed by the security: We will release your living son, if you give up the rights of the deceased one, the police told the family.
The executioner is about to escape justice once more, so that he can torture and kill more Egyptian citizens inside the morgues and torture chambers of State Security Police. It is further evidence to how Mubarak’s regime nourishes torture systematically, and covers up for the criminals engaged in it.
The torture victim, citizen Mohamed Abdel Qader had rights. His three daughters also have rights. Their last chance of achieving justice could be on the 3rd of February, where the Hadayek el-Qobba Prosecution Office for Family Affairs (in charge of financial custody over Mohamed’s minor daughters) will reopen the investigation into the case once again.
Kefaya obtained previously unpublished copies of the Forensic Medical Authorities autopsy report that prove citizen Mohamed Abdel Qader died because of the torture he received on the hands of State Security Captain Ashraf Mustafa Hussein Safwat. As we publish them today, we call on all civil society organizations to extend their solidarity to the victim’s family, and show up on 3 February, 2007 in court.
Anyone may republish this article for non-commercial use without asking my permission. I make it easy, see details here.
comments powered by Disqus