Monday, January 30, 2012

Afghan Woman Strangled For Giving Birth To Third Daughter

I just wrote a post about female gendercide, and how prevalent it is in China and India, Taiwan, Pakistan and South Korea. But it's not just in those countries that females are so devalued they wind up dead, pre or post-birth. And it's not just baby girls that are targeted for death- a mother that gives birth to too many girls can wind up losing her life, as well.

That's what allegedly happened to a woman in Afghanistan, but as with most stories out of those regions the details can differ quite substantially.  What we do know is that a woman was strangled by her husband, with the help of her mother-in-law, because she failed to give birth to a boy. However, this is where the stories vary: they have her age ranging from 22 to 30 with most claiming she was killed after bearing a third daughter, although several  mention it was a second baby girl.  Storay or Storai had given birth to a daughter two or three months ago, which so infuriated Sher Mohammad (her husband) that she was apparently tortured and then strangled with a rope. Wali Hazrata, mother-in-law from hell, tried to make it look like a suicide, but the police claim her body had been brutalized, so suicide was ruled out. Hazrata was subsequently arrested as an accomplice. Of course, the cowardly husband, a suspected militia man, has disappeared.

Hazrata denies killing her daughter-in-law, and police are searching for Mohammad.  He is believed to be in hiding with local militia which means he probably will never be found, and therefore not prosecuted.

Tragically, she had told her family that she might be killed if she had another daughter. Perhaps they didn't take those threats to heart because men simply take on new wives if one of them is unable to bear sons.

Thankfully, the baby girl was not killed.

Ironically, it's the man that determines the gender of a child. He should have strangled himself.

Sources: UK DailyMail, NY Daily News, NY Times, Al Arabiya

Muslims and Others Balk At Proposed Dutch Burqa Ban

As expected, the response to the planned Dutch burqa ban  has not been positive.  But it's not just the Muslim community that has balked at the prospect of freeing women from the shackles of oppression, the usual liberal, PC suspects, have also chimed in.  You know, the ones who claim that banning the face veil is infringing upon a woman's religious freedom, whereas the opposite is true.  Most women are forced to wear the burqa or niqab by their controlling husbands, furthermore, it's a cultural not a religious prescript. Nowhere in the Quran is it mentioned that a woman must wear a burqa. So much for the 'freedom of religion' argument.

According to Aydin Akkaya, chairman for some Dutch Turkish organization (IOT), the ban would seriously affect the quality of life for burqa-wearing women.

“Women who currently only venture outside, or are allowed to go outside, wearing a burqa, will from now on stay home,”
"Allowed" is the operative word here. It's hard to believe that in the Netherlands, in the 21st century, there are women who are forced to go outside in full burqa regalia, and who will be forced to remain at home if the ban goes into effect.

Then you have the lefties perspective:

Green Left Party MP Tofik Dibi says he doesn’t understand why the government attaches such importance to the ban in the midst of an economic crisis: “Why track and fine a handful of people with a burqa, when people are deeply worried about their future and that of their children?”
I'm still trying to figure out what a burqa ban has to do with an economic crisis, but it seems to be a common concern with other political parties, like the social conservative, but centre-left Christian Union party that also criticized the ban.

Arie Slob, the parliamentary leader of the small Christian Union party, also questioned the ban’s wisdom at a time of deep budget cuts: “The way the government of Mark Rutte tackles the crisis: by banning burqas. That’s not going to do the job.”
You'd think women, of all people, would applaud the ban, but not so.  Leyla Çakir of Al Nisa (a Muslim women's group) is dead set against it.

“Self-determination is our top priority. Some women may now well decide to wear a burqa in defiance of the ban, but a number of women are now likely not to leave their home any longer.”

Okay, then those defying the ban will be fined and some will stay at home.  Those are choices too. It's not as if the Dutch are banning the hijab (head scarf), which is mentioned in the Quran, and would be a religious freedom issue. They're banning a non-prescribed symbol of oppression, but most importantly something that could pose a criminal threat or hazard to others. And since the burqa isn't the only face covering that is being banned, they shouldn't take offense. But, as always they do.

Source: Radio Netherlands

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Tunisians Take To The Streets To Protest Conservative Islam

Here's some promising news out of Tunisia. Some people there are not too happy about the turn of events since the Islamists took control of the government in October. It seems the uber-conservative Salafists are, like in Egypt, trying to see how far they can push the envelope, so to speak, and the moderate Islamist Ennahda party is not doing much to stop it.

So, the people are back on the streets, but this time it's not to demonstrate against former dictator Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, it's to protest the Islamists

An AFP correspondent estimated several thousand activists, professors, artists and other demonstrators flooded the streets of the nation’s capital, including along Bourguiba Avenue, a well-known thoroughfare that became a center for dissent during protests that led to the ouster of dictator Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali a year ago.

Some in Tunisia are angry by the growing influence of radical Islamists, known as Salafists, who have dominated headlines in recent weeks.

Police on Tuesday ended a weeks-long sit-in by Salafists at the university in Manouba, about 25 kilometers (15 miles) from Tunis. The Salafists were angry the university had banned the full-face Muslim veil, or niqab, over security concerns if students were concealed from head to toe.

Journalists have also suffered attacks at Salafist protests.

“We are here to speak out against aggression against journalists, activists and academics,” said Ahmed Nejib Chebbi, founder of the Democratic Progressive Party. “And to tell the government that Tunisians’ hard-fought freedoms must not be compromised.”

Sarah Kalthoum, a retired teacher in her 70s, said she was concerned by what she viewed as regressive ideas from Salafists.

“We spent our lives educating people, and now some want us to go back in time 14 centuries,” she said.
These people might have lived under autocratic rule for several decades, but at least the country was secular. The possibility, nay,  probability of their country turning religiously conservative- if they don't fight it now- is not appealing in the least. One woman  said of the growing problem,

“The grocer told me the other day, ‘I don’t like your jeans,’“ said Leila Katech, a retired anesthesiologist. “I told him I didn’t like his beard.”

Through this religious prism, “Everything becomes tougher: Going to see a gynaecologist, what to wear, how to talk,” Katech said.

According to Chebbi,  Ennahda just doesn't want to rock the boat when it comes to their more extremist brothers; they're "complacent", as he put it.  Which, of course, is the quickest way to lose control.  The Tunisian people are very smart to tackle the problem now, before it's too late. You cut that tumor out before it metastasizes.

Since Tunisia was the catalyst for the Arab Spring, perhaps those other countries who kicked out or killed their own dictators who are having their own Islamist troubles will do the same thing.

Friday, January 27, 2012

The Netherlands To Ban Muslim Face Veils In 2013

The Netherlands, one of the most liberal, progressive countries in the world- where prostitution is legal and drugs, like marijuana, are tolerated- has decided to join France in banning Muslim face veils. As of next year, anything that covers the face, like burqas and niqabs, will be verboten in public. 

There are approximately 1 million Muslims in a country that has a population of 17 million, and they've been pretty much left to their own devices. Because of the Netherlands's lax and permissive attitude towards everything, there are an abundance of mosques, some of which preach radical Islam. I can't imagine they're going to be very happy about the decision. Remember Theo Van Gogh, the Dutch filmmaker who was slaughtered like an animal in 2004 by a 26-year-old Dutch Islamist of Moroccan heritage because he was offended by the short film "Submission" that Van Gogh and Ayaan Hirsi Ali  had produced?   He was shot eight times, his throat slit, and then Mohammed Bouyeri rammed a five page note to Van Gogh's body with a knife.  All because "Submission" dared broach the subject of abuse against women in Islam. 

Written in Dutch, the bloody letter called Hirsi Ali an “infidel fundamentalist” who “terrorizes Islam” and “marches with the soldiers of evil.” With her “hostilities,” she “unleashed a boomerang and it’s just a matter of time before this boomerang will seal your destiny.” In capital letters it said: “AYAAN HIRSI ALI, YOU WILL SMASH YOURSELF ON ISLAM!” The letter ended with a kind of chant: “I know for sure that you, O America, are going to meet with disaster. I know for sure that you, O Europe, are going to meet with disaster. I know for sure that you, O Holland, are going to meet with disaster.”

The face veil isn't the only thing on the chopping block. According to Deputy Prime Minister Maxime Verhagen, motorcycle helmets and balaclavas (those ski masks that criminals like to wear) will also be banned in places they shouldn't be worn, like stores, so they're hoping it won't be seen as a religious ban aimed at Muslims. The interior affairs ministry said,

“People should be able to look at each other’s faces and recognize each other when they meet.”

The ban should only affect around 100 to 400 or so women, since the headscarf is more commonly worn than the niqab or burqa.

If someone is caught with their face covered, they could face a fine of up to $510.00, that's if the law is approved. The ban won't affect the use of a face veil in a church or mosque, or on airplanes. Nor will Santa Clauses or Halloween costumes be banned.

Barack Obama's SOTUs Have All Been Written At An 8th Grade Level

Now this is interesting: According to the Flesch-Kincaid readability test, Barack Obama's State of the Union Address last night was written at an 8th grade level. In fact, none of his 3 SOTU speeches have reached a 9th grade level.

Smart Politics (which conducted the testing), claims Obama scored the lowest average of any modern day president. Even George 'Dubya' Bush, razzed about his lack of verbal skills, ranked higher than Obama, his dad George H.W., Clinton and Reagan.

JFK, Eisenhower and Nixon scored highest, with Kennedy at a 12th grade level, Dwight Eisenhower at 11.9, and Richard Nixon at 11.5.

The Flesch-Kincaid test is designed to assess the readability level of written text, with a formula that translates the score to a U.S. grade level. Longer sentences and sentences utilizing words with more syllables produce higher scores. Shorter sentences and sentences incorporating more monosyllabic words yield lower scores

He said his message was simple. So simple I slept through part of it. But, as per usual, there were overblown promises that he can't and will never keep. 

You can view the charts here.

Thursday, January 26, 2012

Voices of Reason In The Muslim World- Egyptian al-Aswani and Saudi Cleric al-Ghamdi

It's hard to tell if the dearth of voices of reason in the Muslim world is because they simply don't exist, or because they're too afraid to say anything because their extremist brethren will more than likely make them their next targets.  There are a few, however, willing to say something.

Egyptian writer Ahmad al-Aswani is one of them.  Translating Jihad has posted a commentary by al-Aswani where he places full blame on Muslims and Islam for terrorism in the world. A refreshing take, for a change, since so many (including Westerners) love to blame the West.  Although it was posted on on 22 December 2011, and just posted on Tranlsating Jihad today, I think it was actually written quite a few years ago. Jihad Watch has excerpts from it in 2008.  But he makes some cogent points from an Arab's perspective that I feel are worth sharing: 

Who Offends the Prophet?

I don’t believe that cartoons, books, or movies can offend any religion, or affect the faith of those who adhere to that religion with truth and conviction.

The ones who offend the Prophet are those who slaughter and blow up innocent people throughout all the world—from New York to Madrid, in London, Bali, Riyadh, Cairo, Kabul, and Baghdad—even now, after mentioning Allah and the Prophet under the banner of Islamic jihad. Protests come out in support of all this, and internet forums sing praises to the knight Usama bin Laden, the hero of the raids of  New York and Washington.

Who offends the Prophet is a man like al-Qaradawi, who incites people to kill Jewish children in their mothers’ wombs (from an interview with Egyptian journalists in 1996), and incites people to carry out suicide operations. In the name of the religion and the Prophet, he declares jihad in Iraq, and innocent victims are killed.

Who offends the Prophet are those who demand that the world issue a decision preventing the disrespect of religions while they practice it themselves in every prayer in their mosques, schools (madrasas), and on their television stations. They especially disrespect Christians and Jews, and curse them in every prayer (after the Islamic bloc offered a decision on this issue in the Human Rights Council in the United Nations, the Saudi Shura Council objected to this decision because insulting other religions is one of the rites of Islam, according to what was published on the Saudi site al-Arabiya).

Who offends the Prophet is he who issues a fatwa, ruling that adults should be breastfed, and that the urine of the Prophet is blessed. It is he who allows hadiths like these to be studied in religious schools (madrasas) and colleges, such as the hadith of the fly, hadiths about holding the dhimmis (Jews and Christians) in contempt and humiliating them, hadiths about Paradise being under the shadow of swords, and thousands of other hadiths like these, whose mere existence offends the Prophet and Islam.

Read the rest here.

Not quite as brave, but considering the source brave enough, we have Saudi cleric Sheikh Ahmed bin Qassim al-Ghamdi.  Al-Ghamdi was the former president of the virtue and vice police in Mecca has actually issued fatwas saying that listening to music and the mixing of genders should be allowed.  He also believes that one should be able to pray alone, not just in groups.  He, of course, has been savaged for voicing those opinions, but has asked those in opposition to debate him in a civil manner.

In his special interview to Al Arabiya, he said that his edicts are the result of extensive research based on experienced scholars’ clarifications. He expressed surprise at the amount of criticism that he receives on his social networking site, Facebook and accused extremists of resorting to abuse to whoever speaks of revivalism in religion or espouses values that do not conform to theirs.

He said: “I have received both support and criticism for my views, but sadly the debate is not about concepts, the problem exists in the nature of the dialogue. We are not brought up to accept different views, which is an essential component to knowledge growth.”
In reference to his fatwa against the prohibition of listening to music he said this was nothing new, as senior clerics have ruled on this in the past.

He said: “Let’s ask those who are against music whether they consider ‘duff’ (local instrument) as musical? If they say yes then we have evidence from credible sources about the Prophet listening to ‘duff’, thus he wouldn’t listen or do something forbidden.”
He has been  slammed for issuing fatwas that are not authorized by the King, but he has this to say about those charges:

"I did not go against the decision of the King. I don’t issue fatwas; what I came up with was a point of view, everything I said was the result of my studies, I have gained wider knowledge in this field of research and I felt obligated to deliberate it.”

This isn't the first time he has been vocal about reform, he was fired and then rehired for his positions on gender mingling and praying in mosques in the past.  You have to give him credit for continuing to promote change in Islam when so many refuse to evolve.

We need more like al-Aswani and al-Ghamdi.

Millionaire Obama Has Nothing In Common With The 99% Who Still Adore Him

This photo has been making the rounds on Facebook, along with all the expected nastiness.

The individual that photoshopped these two pictures together clearly wanted to make everyone think that Romney is completely out of touch with the people compared to Obama. After all, here's millionaire Mitt Romney getting his shoes shined, while Barack Obama is fist-butting, or whatever that gesture is called, the common man.  The problem is, that's no shoeshine man, that's a TSA agent with a security wand doing his thing.

Whether it was a deliberate act to mislead or not, it was enough to cause a maelstrom of anger directed towards not just Romney but the entire Republican lot.  Even when one liberal 'friend' posted that he did not approve of the misleading propaganda, one piped in saying it was fair play because of Republican "lies." Referencing some programme she saw, another launched into a long diatribe about the Republican candidates'  "mansions" and how she believes Obama has her best interests at heart.  She believes he simply wants to put the country back on the right track- including cutting the debt. She went on to say that she believed the right wing wealthy candidates have nothing in common with her or the majority of the country.

Talk about out of touch, both my 'friend' and Obama. My friend is as out of touch because of her woeful, willful ignorance.  Obama, on the other hand is just out of touch because he is who he is. First of all, he's an elitist and a millionaire, to boot. People talk about Obama as though he's one of them, when he's not. He's one of the so-called "1%" along with all the Republicans everyone loves to lambaste:

In 2010 Gingrich paid 31.7% tax on $3,142,066 adjusted gross income, while Obama only paid 26.3% on $1,728,096. Newt Gingrich has a net worth of 7 million, on the other hand Obama has a net worth of 10.5 million.  And it's not like Obama lived in a nice, modest home when he was a Chicago senator.  In 2005 he purchased a home for over 1.5 million dollars, although it's not worth as much due to the housing crash. Obama also takes $4 million vacations, and his wife has a penchant for expensive designer clothes, as frightfully ugly as they might be.

Obama has absolutely nothing in common with my 'friend' or the other 99% who still adore him. 

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Egypt's New Political Parties Refuse To Protect Women's Rights

The Egyptians (mostly youth) who fought long and hard to oust dictator Hosni Mubarak after decades of totalitarian rule only garnered a small percentage of votes in the latest democratic elections. A whopping majority of the parliamentary seats went to Islamists: 47 percent to the so-called 'moderate' Muslim Brotherhood, and 25 percent to the ultra-conservative Salafis. With the final tally in, it seems that the Egyptians squandered away the tremendous gains they made with Mubarak's ouster. Not that it was terribly surprising to me when the Islamists effectively 'bought' the Egyptian people's vote.

Although the Islamists have been trying to assuage the fears of the West and secular Egyptians with promises of 'moderation', they're proving it's nothing but lip service, at least when it comes to their female population.  The Salafis are already trying to force their conservative will on the people, though the women are fighting back. But according to Amnesty International,

“Most of the biggest Egyptian political parties have committed to delivering ambitious human rights reform in the country’s transition, but have either given mixed signals or flatly refused to sign up to ending discrimination, protecting women’s rights and to abolishing the death penalty,” Amnesty said.

The London-based rights watchdog had contacted 54 parties running in Egypt’s first post-revolution parliamentary elections to sign a “human rights manifesto” containing 10 key pledges.

“It is disturbing that a number of parties refused to commit to equal rights for women,” said Philip Luther, Amnesty International’s interim director for the Middle East and North Africa.

“With a handful of women taking up seats in the new parliament, there remain huge obstacles to women playing a full role in Egyptian political life,” said Luther.

Apparently, the Muslim Brotherhood did not respond to Amnesty, and the Salafi Al-Nour party

“agreed orally to all pledges with the exception of the abolition of the death penalty and protection of women’s rights.”
Equally troubling is the fact that it wasn't just the Islamists who either didn't respond or refused to commit to women's rights.  The Free Egyptians party didn't respond either, and ten other parties also refused to commit to women's rights and discrimination.  Out of all the many parties that make up the new Egyptian government, only the Popular Socialist Alliance Party and the Egyptian Social Democratic Part agreed to all ten pledges,

 which also include ending the state of emergency, combating torture, ensuring fair trials and upholding freedom of association and expression.

Of course, pledging and actually acting upon those pledges are two separate things. It's easy to say one thing and do another. Only time will tell if they actually do implement change, but the fact that the majority (including non-Islamists) refuse to view women as equals does not bode well.

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Muslim Girls Gone Wild In Kuwait- 3 Women Arrested For Being Naked Under Abaya

Shove young women under an abaya (Muslim cloak) and veil, force gender segregation and other restrictions on them and they're bound to rebel.

In a case of Muslim girls gone wild, two young women and a minor were arrested at a cafe in a shopping mall in Kuwait after a little boy spied one of the women buck naked under her long cloak. What the little boy was doing peeking under the woman's abaya is anyone's guess, but little boy tells mum, outraged mum obviously calls the police, and it turns out all three had not a stitch of clothing on underneath.

But walking around naked in a Kuwaiti mall isn't the only thing those naughty girls were guilty of. Apparently they told police they had also been drinking alcohol and getting it on the night before. Not a  good thing to admit to in a Muslim country. And they certainly didn't make it easy for the police- one girl refused to leave, giving the customers a little peep show before they were hauled off.  No-one knows what they will be charged with, yet. But according to Marwa Tarek, a Kuwaiti activist, if they are found guilty of being gay the punishment could be severe.

“The crime and penalty for being gay is not a nice one here and they could be facing years in prison if the accusations they had consensual sex are proven true,” she said.

Not quite accusations since they were the ones to admit to the sexual activity, if they were indeed telling the truth.  I don't know why they would admit to drinking and having gay sex in a religious culture that forbids both, but at least they're not in Iran.  There, they would be hanged.

Only one woman was local, while the other two were from undisclosed Gulf countries with a father who was "too busy with" his "business" to go to Kuwait to deal with his errant kids.

It's all rather amusing, if it weren't for the potential consequences of their actions.

Salman Rushdie Bashes Indian Government For Not Protecting Free Speech At Literary Fest

It's been almost 23 years since Sir Salman Rushdie had a death fatwa placed on his head by then Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. On February 14 1989, Khomeini issued the following:

"We are from Allah and to Allah we shall return." (Qoranic verse). I am informing all brave Muslims of the world that the author of The Satanic Verses, a text written, edited, and published against Islam, the Prophet of Islam, and the Koran, along with all the editors and publishers aware of its contents, are condemned to death. I call on all valiant Muslims wherever they may be in the world to kill them without delay, so that no one will dare insult the sacred beliefs of Muslims henceforth. And whoever is killed in this cause will be a martyr, Allah Willing. Meanwhile if someone has access to the author of the book but is incapable of carrying out the execution, he should inform the people so that [Rushdie] is punished for his actions.

Less then a month later that fatwa was the catalyst for the breakdown of diplomatic relations between Britain and Iran.  It wasn't until 1998- in order to reestablish relations with the U.K.- that then President Mohammad Khatami had to make a statement claiming Iran would "neither support nor hinder assassination operations on Rushdie."  However, in 2005 they backtracked and the current Ayatollah Ali Khamenei declared it was still cool to kill Rushdie for writing his 'blasphemous' novel "The Satanic Verses".  Banned in all but one Muslim-majority country (Turkey), it was also banned in several other nations including Venezuela and Rushdie's birthplace India.  It is no longer banned in Egypt and Libya, but still banned in India.

But what's most astonishing (or maybe not) is that after all these years people are still taking that fatwa to heart.   Rushdie was scheduled to speak at the Jaipur Literary Festival in India this week, but had to cancel because of assassination threats, and threats of violence.  Even a video-linked appearance was cancelled, although Rushdie has "doubts about the accuracy" of the intelligence sources that warned of  "paid assassins from the Mumbai underworld may be on their way to Jaipur to "eliminate" him.  Rusdhie believes the Indian government is kowtowing to Muslim extremists, and bashed officials for being more concerned about Muslim votes in upcoming elections than protecting free speech. He was also highly critical of

"Muslim groups that were so unscrupulous, and whose idea of free speech is that they are the only ones entitled to it". "[If] Anyone else, who they disagree with, wishes to open his mouth, they will try and stop that mouth. That's what we call tyranny. It's much worse than censorship because it comes with the threat of violence."

Rushdie has never been harmed but others affiliated with the work were not so lucky a publishers in Norway and Italy were shot and knifed respectively, and a Japanese translator was killed.

Sadly, Muslim extremists have long memories, great patience and unforgiving hearts.

Sources: DailyMailUK, GuardianUK, TelegraphUK

Monday, January 23, 2012

Israeli Settler/Palestinian Drug-Dealing Network Uncovered In West Bank

I guess the bitter, ongoing hostility between Israeli settlers and Palestinians magically disappears when it comes to drugs.

An Arab-Jewish drug-dealing network was uncovered operating in West Bank districts when police detained a group as part of a cross-border probe this week.

Settlers from the Tapuch Junction area in the West Bank were suspected of purchasing drugs from their Palestinian neighbors in the village of Hawara, south of Nablus city, Israeli online site Ynet news reported.

A narcotics investigation resulted in the arrest of Arabs from Hawara and four alleged Jewish drugs “clients.”

It is unclear how many Arabs were arrested on suspicion of drug-dealing.

It surprised everyone, it seems, considering they're usually at each other's throats.  Just last year

“Settlers went on the rampage through the villages damaging property, assaulting residents, burning cars and throwing stones at everything."

Too bad it takes drugs to get them to cooperate and coexist.

Democratic Campaign Manager's Cat Butchered- "Liberal" Marked On Its Body

This horrifying story is what turns people off conservatives.

Some sicko in Arkansas killed the cat of the campaign manager for Democratic congressional hopeful Ken Aden, and painted "liberal" on its battered little body.

According to a press release sent out by the Aden campaign, "The family pet, an adult, mixed-breed Siamese cat, had one side of its head bashed in to the point the cat's eyeball was barely hanging from its socket. The perpetrators scrawled 'liberal' across the cat's body and left it on the doorstep of [Jacob] Burris' house."
Burris, Aden's campaign manager, told The Huffington Post that it was his 5-year-old son who first saw the atrocity. He had taken his children out to fill the family car with gas before going to church, and the young boy was the first one out of the vehicle when they returned.

Aden, a former Staff Sargent in the U.S. Army and career military had this to say about the incident:

Thankfully, no-one believes that his Republican challenger, Rep. Steve Womack had anything to do with the horrific act, and Womack's campaign manager has condemned it.  But what kind of sick mind would harm an innocent animal to express their disapproval of liberalism?  I am not fond of liberals, and have no hesitation criticizing them, but this is beyond the pale. 
"To kill a child's pet is just unconscionable. As a former combat soldier, I've seen the best of humanity and the worst of humanity. Whoever did this is definitely part of the worst of humanity."

This is not who we are, if this was indeed perpetrated by a conservative!

BlueArkansas blog has a graphic picture of the cat, and more information.

Who Should I Vote For President In 2012

So far, the race for GOP nomination is wide open.  At this point in time it's too hard to predict who will get the nod with Santorum winning by a very slim margin the Iowa caucuses, Romney handily winning in New Hampshire and Gingrich's slam dunk in South Carolina.  I'm still not sure who I will vote for, but it's a toss up between Gingrich and Romney.

For those who are still stumped as to who to vote for in the upcoming elections (the next is Florida on January 31st), I posted  several quizzes to help you decide.

Now ABC News has created their own Match-O-Matic quiz that includes a list of candidate statements on everything from the economy to global warming to abortion.  All the candidates including Barack Obama and some who have already dropped out are represented, although not all categories include every candidate's statement. From 10 categories you get to pick which statement best represents your views on the subject matter.

You just might be surprised.  I know I was.

UPDATE: May 2012

Here's another quiz with all the current candidates, including some third party and independents.

Sunday, January 22, 2012

Human Rights Watch Tells The West To Stop Hating On Islamists

Human Rights Watch has just told the West to stop hating on Islamists, because political Islam is so much more palatable than the autocracies it's replaced in the Middle East.

In its annual report, HRW's Kenneth Roth, executive director, said

“The international community must ... come to terms with political Islam when it represents a majority preference,” he said. “Islamist parties are genuinely popular in much of the Arab world, in part because many Arabs have come to see political Islam as the antithesis of autocratic rule.”

“Wherever Islam-inspired governments emerge, the international community should focus on encouraging, and if need be pressuring, them to respect basic rights ─ just as the Christian-labeled parties and governments of Europe are expected to do,” he said in the introduction to the report.

He added that the international community “should adopt a more principled approach to the region than in the past. That would involve, foremost, clearly siding with democratic reformers even at the expense of abandoning autocratic friends.”
Yes, we have to come to terms with Islamism because the West has no other choice when stupid people choose one equally if not more repressive/oppressive system over another, but we don't have to like it. Nor should we.

He advises the international community to encourage or pressure Islamist-led governments to respect basic rights?  Well Mr. Roth, that's worked very well in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan (to name a few), hasn't it.

The Arab Spring movement in the Middle East gave those people who fought so fiercely for major change the perfect opportunity to usher in democracy, but it's something they've obviously squandered.  The Tunisian and Egyptian majority Islamists have said they will remain moderate, but what guarantee is there that they will.

I'm not saying that autocratic/totalitarian leaders are preferable, but Islamic theocracies are far worse. 

Saturday, January 21, 2012

After Third Rescue Of Fishermen, Iran Calls U.S. Presence In Gulf Part Of "Permanent Presence"

After warning the U.S. to stay the heck out of the Arabian Sea and threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz, Iran is now claiming that our presence there is business as usual. Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps said:

“U.S. warships and military forces have been in the Arabian Gulf and the Middle East region for many years and their decision in relation to the dispatch of a new warship is not a new issue and it should be interpreted as part of their permanent presence,” IRGC Deputy Commander Hossein Salami told the official IRNA news agency.

Maybe it's because we've saved their butts three times in the past few weeks. The first time, the U.S. Navy aided a group of fishermen who had been held captive by pirates. Then a few days later a Coast Guard cutter rescued 6 Iranian merchant marines on a cargo ship with a flooded engine room. They were fed a halal meal and sent on their way.  The latest U.S. Navy to the rescue episode was in the Gulf of Oman after a helicopter from the USS Dewey came upon some fishermen in distress. Apparently one of their dhows was sinking after battling their flooded vessel for 3 days. The Al Mamsoor was being towed by another fishing boat and the crew were in need of food and water. Our guys gave them water, supplies and 150 pounds of food.

I guess the above IRGC statement is as close to a thank you we'll ever get from the Iranian regime. 

But this is who we are- coming to the aid of those in need, regardless of who they are.

Thursday, January 19, 2012

It's A Girl- Female Infanticide and Foeticide In China and India

Women are not highly regarded in certain cultures, religions and countries.  In fact if you're female in certain regions of the world you'd be lucky if you even make it out of your mother's womb. In those places where males are valued more than females gendercide is astonishingly prevalent. According to the United Nations there are more than 200 million 'missing' girls as a result of 'femicide'.

If you live in China or India (followed closely by Taiwan, Pakistan and South Korea) you have less of a chance of surviving birth or toddlerhood than anywhere else in the world. It's estimated that China and India combined kill more infant girls than are born in the U.S. per annum. If they're not aborted, the infants are killed or abandoned and neglected.

The documentary film "It's A Girl!", produced by ShadowLine Films, documents this tragedy.

It tells the stories of abandoned and trafficked girls, of women who suffer extreme dowry-related violence, of brave mothers fighting to save their daughters' lives, and of other mothers who would kill for a son. Global experts and grassroots activists put the stories in context and advocate different paths towards change, while collectively lamenting the lack of any truly effective action against this injustice.

Girls who survive infancy are often subject to neglect, and many grow up to face extreme violence and even death at the hands of their own husbands or other family members.

The war against girls is rooted in centuries-old tradition and sustained by deeply ingrained cultural dynamics which, in combination with government policies, accelerate the elimination of girls.

Shot on location in India and China, It’s a Girl! explores the issue. It asks why this is happening, and why so little is being done to save girls and women.

According to Safe World For Women, more often than not it's women who are responsible for the death of their baby girls. One harrowing interview in the film trailer (see below), a giggling woman nonchalantly discusses killing 8 of her young daughters. Oftentimes, it's the mother-in-law who forces the issue:

The most insidious force is often the mother in law, the domestic matriarch, under whose authority the daughter in law lives. Policy efforts to halt infanticide have been directed at mothers, who are often victims themselves. The trailer shows tragic scenes of women having to decide between killing their daughters and their own well-being. In India women who fail to produce sons are beaten, raped or killed so that men can remarry in the hope of procuring a more productive wife.

And poverty and ignorance are not always a factor in gendercide.

Firstly, there is no evidence of concerted female infanticide among poverty-stricken societies in Africa or the Caribbean. Secondly, it is the affluent and urban middle classes, who are aware of prenatal screenings, who have access to clinics and who can afford abortions that commit foeticide. Activists fear 8 million female foetuses have been aborted in India in the last decade.

Read the rest of the article on gendercide.

"It's A Girl" is scheduled for a release in 2012.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Claims HIV Created By West To Weaken Third World

Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the fruit loop over in Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, are two peas in a pod- they're both delusional. Maybe that's why they're best buds. Chavez is a tad more prolific when it comes to absurdities, but Mahmoud has come out with some equally good ones.  Take his latest claims that the West is behind the HIV virus.

"Today there is this outstanding question that why so many killer viruses, including the HIV virus, have spread all over the world. Many so-called experts say the spread has come as a result of vices and immoralities but we see that in the centre of the places that these viruses have emerged these immoral acts have not been reported." "Then how is it that at the same time in some African countries they find these viruses?

"It is obvious that the African countries must be plundered of their wealth and resources. The major powers and despots are behind the development of these diseases so they could then sell their drugs and medical equipment to the poor countries".

Huh?  What wealth and resources?

I guess he didn't get the memo that the bulk of African countries are piss-poor, and that HIV started in monkeys in Africa and was probably transmitted to humans not through "immoral acts" but rather through consumption of diseased meat.

But a conspiracy theory is far more exotic to Mahmoud and Chavez than the truth. After all, Chavez was busy entertaining the notion that the U.S. gave him, Argentina's Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner and several other Latin leaders the big "C".  It turns out, however, that Cristina didn't have cancer after all. 

Mahmoud also believes 9/11 was an inside job (though there are plenty of loonies in this country who agree with him:

"Some segments within the American government orchestrated the attack to reverse the declining American economy, and its grips on the Middle East, in order to save the Zionist regime," he said.

Ha. That's a good one, since our economy is doing so well, Mahmoud!

Then there's also the fact that he's a holocaust denier, and claims they have no homosexuals in Iran. Of course, that's just wishful thinking on his part.  If Mahmoud wasn't so dangerous, he'd be funny.

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

More Gender Segregation In Iran- Schoolgirls To Get Separate Text Books

Saudi Arabia ranks as one of the most backward, unenlightened countries in the world in terms of how it treats its women folk, in spite of a few paltry attempts at reform. Not to miss out on the fun, it looks like Iran is making huge strides towards joining in that backwardness.

Gender segregation in education isn't enough for the Iranian government, they have now decided that school girls and boys should have separate textbooks.

Why? No-one is saying.

Iran's minister of education, Hamid-Reza Hajibabai, made the announcement during a press conference in Tehran on January 16. He said the ministry plans to publish school textbooks that reflect the country's educational system, which requires boys and girls to study at different schools.

Iran’s Mehr news agency quoted Hajibabai as saying that in line with gender segregation in the education system, "education, training, and textbooks should be adjusted accordingly."

"In the next year, comprehensive education reforms will occur in all fields, including teachers, classes, books, and teaching methods," Hajibabai said, without revealing any specifics.

Even preschool children are now subject to gender segregation.

Apparently gender separation started after that unholy Islamic revolution in the late 1970s, which set back the Persian nation centuries.

But according to Hojatoleslam Nabiollah Fazlali, a rep for Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, co-education in universities is like "putting meat in front of a cat" because, I guess, he thinks we're nothing more than animals at heart, with no self restraint. This was at a speech given at Khajeh Nasir Toosi University of Technology in 2009.

At least they allow females to get an education. Afghan women haven't fared so well in that area.

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

Bye Bye Barbie and Ken- Iran Cracks Down On Sale of Un-Islamic Barbie Dolls

Barbie dolls have been banned in Iran since 1996, not because oftheir unrealistic, anorexic, cinch-waisted, long-legged, blond-headed perfection but because they represent Western culture in all its hated glory.

But that fatwa hasn't stopped shop owners from selling those evil dolls in their stores. The mullahs might find Barbie and Ken dolls distasteful, but the average Iranian is just as taken with the cultural icons as people in the West. But the Iranian Jane-Q might have a harder time finding Barbie as a result of a recent crackdown by the Iranian morality police.

Iran’s morality police are cracking down on the sale of Barbie dolls to protect the public from what they see as pernicious western culture eroding Islamic values, shopkeepers said on Monday.

As the West imposes the toughest ever sanctions on Iran and tensions rise over its nuclear program, inside the country the Barbie ban is part of what the government calls a “soft war” against decadent cultural influences.

“About three weeks ago the morality police came to our shop, asking us to remove all the Barbies,” said a shopkeeper in a toy store in northern Tehran.

As a replacement for the un-Islamic Barbie and Ken, the Iranian government in 2002 approved of Sara and Dara: plump, modestly and traditionally dressed female and male dolls that were deemed kosher for Iranian consumption. 

But that hasn't quite work out as planned, because people still want their Barbies.

“My daughter prefers Barbies. She says Sara and Dara are ugly and fat,” said Farnaz, a 38-year-old mother, adding that she could not find Barbie cartoon DVDs because she was told they were also banned from public sale.

Though they were openly sold in shops in spite of the ban, the Iranian government's latest Barbie clampdown has the shop owners scuttling to hide those harbingers of Western cultural decadence behind Iranian-sanctioned toys.

Pointing to a doll covered in black long veil, a 40-year-old Tehran toy shop manager said: “We still sell Barbies, but secretly and put these in the window to make the police think we are just selling these kinds of dolls.”

I wonder if Barbie wore a veil would she be state-approved? 

Oh, and remember that U.S. spy drone that Iran claims it allegedly shot down, although there is debate as to whether it actually crash landed?  Replicas available in a slew of different colors will be available in toy stores soon.

Monday, January 16, 2012

Martin Luther King Day, 2012

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity"
Martin Luther King, Jr., registered Republican

It's rather amusing to hear liberals claim MLK as one of their own. But he was a Republican not a Democrat.

Frances Rice, of NBRA wrote this about MLK.


By Frances Rice

As we honor the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., let us pause to reflect on who he was and why his struggle to obtain civil rights for black Americans was necessary.

First, Dr. King was a Republican until the day he died because he knew that the Republican Party, from its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party, championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. For details on the history of civil rights, see the NBRA Civil Rights Newsletter posted on the NBRA's website.

Second, the nemesis of Dr. King's valiant and historic campaign to end discrimination and gain equality for blacks was the Democratic Party, the party of slavery, segregation and the Ku Klux Klan. Led by the former Senator and Klansman Robert Byrd, Democrats launched a despicable crusade to smear and undermine Dr. King. This relentless disparagement of Dr. King resulted in his being physically assaulted and ultimately to his tragic death.

When Dr. King left Memphis, Tennessee in March of 1968 after riots broke out where a teenager was killed, Byrd called Dr. King a "trouble-maker" who starts trouble, but runs like a coward after trouble is ignited. A few weeks later, Dr. King returned to Memphis and was assassinated on April 4, 1968.

Prior to his death, Democrats bombed Dr. King's home several times. The scurrilous efforts by the Democrats to harm Dr. King included spreading rumors that he was a Communist and accusing him of being a womanizer and a plagiarist.

An egregious act against Dr. King occurred on October 10, 1963. Democrat President John F. Kennedy authorized his brother, Democrat Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, to wiretap Dr. King's telephone using the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Wiretaps were placed by the FBI on Dr. King's telephones in his home and office. The FBI also bugged Dr. King's hotel rooms when he traveled around the country.

The trigger for this unsavory wiretapping was apparently Dr. Kings' criticism of President Kennedy for ignoring civil rights issues, according to the author David Garrow in his book, "Bearing the Cross". As was pointed out in the book by Wayne Perryman "Whites, Blacks and Racist Democrats", Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Act while he was a senator. After Kennedy became president, he was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King.

The justification given by the Kennedy Administration publicly for wiretapping Dr. King was that two of Dr. King's associates, including David Levinson, had ended their association with the Communist Party in order to work undercover and influence Dr. King. However, after years of continuous and extensive wiretapping, the FBI found no direct links of Dr. King to the Communist Party.

Kennedy's disdain for blacks further manifested itself when the King family sought help with getting Dr. King out of a Birmingham jail. Kennedy's civil rights advisor, Harris Wofford who was a personal friend of Dr. King, made a telephone call on behalf of Kennedy without Kennedy's knowledge. That call resulted in Dr. King's release. Kennedy was angry about the call because he feared he would lose the Southern vote. History shows, though, that the call by Wofford eventually worked in Kennedy's favor and is the primary reason so many blacks today wrongly venerate Kennedy.

The unrelenting efforts by Democrats to tarnish Dr. King's reputation continued for years after his death. To his credit, Republican President Ronald Reagan ignored the Democrats' smear campaign and made Dr. King's birthday a holiday.

Today, while professing to revere Dr. King, Democrats are still attempting to sully his image by claiming that he was a socialist. In reality, Dr. King was a Christian, guided by his faith and Republican Party principles as he struggled to gain equality for blacks. He did not embrace the type of socialist agenda that is promoted by the Democratic Party today, which includes fostering dependency on government handouts that trap blacks in generational poverty.

Frances Rice is a retired US Army Lieutenant Colonel, a lawyer and chairman of the National Black Republican Association. She may be contacted at: www.NBRA.Info

Sunday, January 15, 2012

Iran Executed 12 Prisoners Sunday, January 15 2012

Iran's on a roll.

12 people were executed on Sunday January 15- no day of rest for them!

Iran Human Rights, January 15: According to the reports from Iran 12 prisoners were executed in the city of Shiraz (southern Iran) today January 15th.

Iran Human Rights (IHR) had earlier this week warned about the scheduled execution of nine prisoners in Shiraz.

According to the state run Iranian news agency Fars, five prisoners were hanged publicly in three different parts of Shiraz, while seven prisoners were were hanged in the Adelabad prison of Shiraz.

The five prisoners who were hanged in public were identified as:

1. Rahmat Heydari, convicted of kidnapping, murder and armed robbery. He was arrested four weeks ago and his judicial process lasted less than a month.

2. Esmaeil Hamidi Mahmood Abadi, convicted of armed robbery

3. Ali Hadavinia, convicted of armed robbery

4. Mohammad Nabi Tavakoli, convicted of kidnapping and rape

5. Ramin Darakhshan, convicted of rape and kidnapping

Age of none of the prisoners was mentioned in the report.

According to this report seven other prisoners were hanged in the Adelabad prison of Shiraz this morning. All these prisoners were convicted of drug-related offences and none of them were identified by name.

That now makes a total of more than 54 people (that we know of) who have been executed since the beginning of 2012.

Way to go Iran. Keep racking up those deaths, so you can maintain top honors for the greatest number of executions per annum .  Allah and Mohammad would be very proud of you.

Palestinian Mufti Uses 'Kill The Jews' Islamic Hadith At Moderate Fatah Celebration

People are under the false impression that Fatah - PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas' political party-  is a moderate one, and I suppose in comparison to Hamas (Palestine's other major party) it is.  But we must never forget that no matter how moderate Fatah might seem on the surface, most Palestinians want Israel out of the picture, Hamas and its supporters are just more obvious about their intentions.  Yes, in 2010 Fatah removed from its charter the paragraph referencing its desire to wipe Israel off the map, whereas Hamas has not, but that doesn't necessarily mean Fatah wants to coexist with Israelis. Far from it.

Palestinian Media Watch (PMW)  just posted a recent video that aired on PA TV (see below) of the head Mufti Muhammad Hussein speaking at a celebration of the 47th anniversary of Fatah where he urged Muslims to kill the Jews by quoting from a popular Sahih Muslim Hadith 6985:

"The Hour [of Resurrection] will not come until you fight the Jews.
The Jew will hide behind stones or trees.
Then the stones or trees will call:
'Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.'"

According to PMW, during the 2000-2006 Intifada this particular Hadith was commonly used on PA TV as a motivating tool for generating more violence, but not so much in recent years.  The last time was in 2010, but it's obviously still very relevant in Islamic teachings today with 73% of the Palestinian population believing it, as per a 2011 Israel Project poll. 

Apparently not all Hadiths are accepted:

There are numerous collections of Hadith, some of which are not accepted as reliable. However, the Mufti stressed that the Islamic belief that Jews will be killed by Muslims as a precursor to Resurrection, is an authentic Islamic belief because it appears in "the reliable" and trusted Hadith collections of Al-Bukhari and Muslim.

This Islamic tradition asserts that as the killing of Jews will progress, Jews will hide behind stones and trees, but even they will expose the Jews and call out: "Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him." One tree however, called the Gharqad, will hide the Jews from the Muslims. The Mufti in his talk at the Fatah event claimed that in response to this Islamic belief, Israelis have been planting Gharqad trees around their cities and towns, in order to have a place to hide from the Muslims who will be coming to kill them.
And it's not as if Abbas is unaware of Sheikh Hussein's preachings, since Abbas is the one who appointed Hussein.

It's quite obvious that regardless of what they say to the contrary, it's not just about Israel and ant-Zionism, it's about the Jews.  And the promotion of this Hadith proves it without a doubt.


Moderator at Fatah ceremony:
"Our war with the descendants of the apes and pigs (i.e., Jews)
is a war of religion and faith.
Long Live Fatah! [I invite you,] our honorable Sheikh."

PA Mufti Muhammad Hussein comes to the podium and says:
"47 years ago the [Fatah] revolution started. Which revolution? The modern revolution of the Palestinian people's history. In fact, Palestine in its entirety is a revolution, since [Caliph] Umar came [to conquer Jerusalem, 637 CE], and continuing today, and until the End of Days. The reliable Hadith (tradition attributed to Muhammad), [found] in the two reliable collections, Bukhari and Muslim, says:
"The Hour [of Resurrection] will not come until you fight the Jews.
The Jew will hide behind stones or trees.
Then the stones or trees will call:
'Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.'
Except the Gharqad tree [which will keep silent]."
Therefore it is no wonder that you see Gharqad [trees]
surrounding the [Israeli] settlements and colonies.."

Saturday, January 14, 2012

Young Afghan Suicide Bombers Being Told Allah Will Help Them Survive

Children are as disposable as women in the eyes of Muslim extremists. Animals are probably worth more in their estimation since wives can be bought for little at very young ages, and both wives and children are easily replaced. Polygamy facilitates that mindset since the more wives they have the more children they can birth, so losing a child to jihad is not much of a loss.  Perhaps that's why the Taliban has no problem  grooming children as suicide bombers in madrassas across Pakistan. Unlike Palestine, where some mothers seem to glorify martyrdom and actually encourage it, the Taliban (for the most part) use other people's kids as shaheed (martyrs), and parents oftentimes have no clue what fate awaits their offspring.  As a result, many Afghans are refusing to let their kids return to Pakistani Islamic schools because they've heard reports that children were being used for suicide attacks. One father said of his son:

“My son is vehemently opposed to the government. He says suicide attacks are considered a superior form of martyrdom and courage in Islam, and that Muslims must wage a jihad against the Jews and their friends,” he said.

His son told him that on Fridays, the madrassa students were shown footage of Americans and Britons being beheaded.

The father concluded, “I’m not going to allow my son to go back to study in Pakistan again, because I know I will lose him.”
Although some are willing participants, ready to give up their lives for their 72 virgins, other young boys are actually being lied to. Yes, they're well aware they'll be killing a bunch of American infidels, but they're also told that Allah will miraculously save their asses. Remember, at these schools the minds of these supremely ignorant, illiterate boys are being pumped with anti-everything propaganda on a daily basis, and are being primed to kill. One Afghan intelligence official said,

"The worst part is that these children don't think that they are killing themselves," said the official. "They are often given an amulet containing Koranic verses. Mullahs tell them, 'When this explodes you will survive and God will help you survive the fire. Only the infidels will be killed, you will be saved and your parents will go to paradise'."
13-year-old Abdul Samat was one of those young boys who was told that once he had set off the explosives nestled in his vest he'd be okay.  He apparently had been recruited in Quetta Pakistan and driven blindfolded to Kandahar, Afghanistan to do the deed. But Abdul lucked out. For some reason he realized he was about to turn into minced meat and backed out.

"When I opened my eyes, I saw it was a very black thing they wanted me to do," he later recalled.

"I began to cry and shout. People came out of their houses and asked what was wrong. I showed them I had something in my vest. Then they were scared too and called the police who took the bombs off me."

The reason extremists use young children (and occasionally women) is that they're less likely to be questioned at checkpoints.

Apparently suicide bombings in Afghanistan did not become de rigueur until 2004, since it was considered un-Islamic.  They learned that charming tactic from their Arab jihadist brothers.

According to the Daily Telegraph, the Taliban claims "All our bombers are men and they are all volunteers. We never use boys." Then again, they also tell those boys they'll live to see another day.

Friday, January 13, 2012

Mercedes-Benz Apologizes For Che-Guevara Gaffe In Promo

Mercedes-Benz's parent company Daimler AG, pissed off its Cuban-American buyers with an incredibly stupid marketing blunder at the Las Vegas Consumer Electronics Show.

Dieter Zetsche, Chairman, was there to talk about a cool new Iphone car-pooling app called 'Cartogether', but as part of the presentation he stood in front of a huge poster of Che Guevara wearing his iconic beret not with the customary small star, but rather the Mercedes logo in its place. To make matters worse, Zetsche said

“Some colleagues still think that car-sharing borders on communism. But if that’s the case, viva la revolución!”

Excuse me, but what does carpooling have to do with communism?

Naturally, Cuban exiles who know the truth about the real Che Guevara, and not the watered down, Hollywood version of the ruthless revolutionary, were outraged.

One of them is Felix Rodriguez, who was recruited by the CIA to aid Bolivian soldiers in tracking down and killing Guevara in 1967.

“I know who Che Guevara was," Rodriguez reportedly wrote, "and he was a criminal, a murderer and a person who hated the United States of America.”

And Michael Gonzalez wrote in an article on the Huffington Post:

"Che Guevara, not to put too fine a point on it, was a psychopath whose sadistic lust for blood was not easily quenched. He killed for pleasure."
Che was also rabidly racist, ordering the execution of young boys and men without a trial.

So yes, the promo ruffled more than a few Cuban feathers.

Cuban American Ernesto Ariel Suarez took to Facebook and created a page "Tell Mercedes-Benz that it is NOT OK to use the image of a mass murderer."

Daimler did eventually apologize:

"Daimler was not condoning the life or actions of this historical figure or the political philosophy he espoused. We sincerely apologize to those who took offense"

What were they thinking?

Thursday, January 12, 2012

British Engineer Could Spend 1 Month In Abu Dhabi Jail For Insulting Islam

I can't quite figure out what the appeal of the Gulf countries is, either as an ex-pat worker or a tourist.  The beaches might be lovely but the do's and don'ts in Abu Dhabi and Dubai are extensive and with even the slightest infraction you can end up in jail. I'm sure there's a truckload of money to be made in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) but is it worth the risk? You be the judge:

A British engineer could spend a month in jail because he insulted his Muslim co-workers by telling them in a fit of frustration:

 'When will we finish with the damn mosques?'
Misinterpreting and overreacting, as Muslims are apt to do, his colleagues then tattled on him to the authorities and he wound up in court. The ex-pat (who is appealing the sentence) tried to explain that the 'insult' was not deliberate, and that it was simply his frustration at how slow moving the project was, and that he just

".. wanted it to be ready as soon as possible.'

Apparently he works for Abu Dhabi's parks and recreation and is in charge of designing the gardens surrounding a mosque that has yet to be finished, and obviously taking far longer than it should. 
The engineer will know on February 7 whether he'll be spending a month in jail or be a free man.

If he's smart he'd head on back to England.

Arab Man Shot By Hamas Saved By Israeli Soldier

Here's a video (from several years ago) that you'll never see in the Arab Media or pro-Pali circles.

An Arab Muslim man who was shot by Hamas(and consequently lost both his legs) was saved by an Israeli soldier.

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Federal Appeals Court Overturns Oklahoma State Ban On Sharia Law

In 2010, an amendment banning any Islamic (Shariah) or international law from being implemented in Oklahoma courts was approved by an overwhelming 70 percent of  voters. But, the ban was shot down by a federal appeals court in Denver on Tuesday because it violated Muneer Awad's First Amendment Rights. And can you guess what organization Awad is executive director of in Oklahoma?  Bingo. Council on Islamic-American Relations (CAIR).  Yes, poor Awad bemoaned the fact that his whole life would be affected (including his will upon his death) if the law took effect, and so he won his lawsuit. 

The Oklahoma amendment, called "Save Our State" was deemed unconstitutional because it discriminated against religions. It was actually blocked soon after its approval by dhimmi  U.S. District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange because she knew he would prevail. Isn't that telling. And, although the amendment called Save Our State was aimed at banning all religious laws, the backers made the mistake of using the term 'Islamic' as an example. 

"The courts shall not look to the legal precepts of other nations or cultures. Specifically, the courts shall not consider international law or Sharia law."

Because the amendment mentioned Sharia Law twice, the appeals court determined it was an attack on Muslims, so bye-bye ban. Another reason it was blocked was none of the backers were able to prove that Sharia Law (or any other international law) had been used in Oklahoma courts. Yet!

"When the law that voters wish to enact is likely unconstitutional, their interests do not outweigh Mr. Awad's in having his constitutional rights protected," the court said.

So, the so-called constitutional rights of one individual takes precedence over the will of the people, it seems. And I guess 'separation of church and state', part of that same First Amendment, means absolutely nothing.  Because we can't ruffle their feathers, right?!

This court decision, sadly, will set a terrible precedent. Down the line, it will pave the way for implementation of Sharia Law in our court systems.

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

Apartheid Against Palestinian Refugees In The Arab World

The leftist/Pro-Pali crowd love to talk about apartheid in Israel. In fact, good ol' Jimmy Carter said as much when he wrote a book entitled Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, which went on to become a bestseller.

But if apartheid exists anywhere, it's in other Middle East Arab countries, as you will see in the video below.  I had no clue that this was going on because you never see it on the liberal media, since they're too busy criticizing Israel.

The stark difference between how those Arab countries treat their Palestinian refugees and how Israel treats them is astonishing. Of course, liberals and Israel haters will still blame Israel for what is happening to the Palestinians in Lebanon, Egypt and Syria. 

And why are they marginalized and discriminated against? Israel.

H/T BlazingCatFur

Egyptian Women Beat Up Salafi Morality Police

"Give them a finger, and they'll take the whole hand" is an apt cliché for the ultra-conservative Islamists in Egypt.  For decades they were banned from forming a political party under the mostly secular Hosni Mubarak's regime.  But now that they've won a majority, with the Salafists garnering about 30% of the vote in recent elections, they're like caged animals who have suddenly been set free.  The Salafists (the most fundamentalist of them all) want to impose their skewed religious ideology on the rest of the Egyptian population, whether they want it or not.

Of course, those who will suffer the most under an Islamist majority government would be the women of Egypt.  But after decades of secular living and actively participating in the Arab Spring movement, I'm not sure they won't go down without a fight. At least the more secular ones won't. And they proved that in Benha, a town in north-eastern Egypt.
A group of ultra-conservative Salafis got more than they bargained for after bursting into a beauty salon in the Egyptian town of Benha in an attempt to enforce “God’s law” on the women inside reported the online newspaper, Bikya Masr.

The women were told to stop what they were doing or face physical punishment from the group.

But instead of complying out of fear, or calling for help, the women took matters into their own hands by striking back.

They beat and whipped the vigilante gang “with their own canes before kicking them out to the street in front of an astonished crowd of onlookers,” Egyptian online newspaper, Bikya Masr, reported

It looks like the Salafists are already trying to flex their religious muscles, and if Egyptian women don't nip it in the bud before it's too late, they're going to find themselves dressed in niqabs like their Saudi sisters.

Apparently the beauty salon incident wasn't the first of its kind. Salafis (like their Saudi brothers) have recently been conducting surprise inspection raids on other shops to make sure everyone (owner and customers alike) are in compliance with "God's Law". That means no more clean-shaven faces, and 'indecent' clothing is a no-no. And we all know that in Islam anything other than a niqab and abaya is considered indecent. And it's not just Muslim businesses they're targeting, they've also allegedly destroyed any Christmas decorations in area shops and malls because Christmas is for infidels and therefore forbidden.

Granted, this particular group of zealots was just created, fashioning itself after the similar Saudi 'Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice' (CPVPV), and even going so far as using the same name. But no-one wants to claim ownership of that group including Al-Azhar (Egypt's main mosque in Cairo) and the Salafi al-Nour Party, which denies any connection whatsoever to that group in spite of the CPVPV claiming they are.  In fact, in response to Al-Azhar's rejection they posted a statement to their Facebook page:

“The Committee, which millions of Egyptians have agreed to, and expressed their desire to see its members diligently apply God’s law, draws the attention of our brothers in Al-Azhar to what happened in the last elections when millions of citizens voted for Salafi parties.”

Trouble is brewing in Egypt, if even the Islamists can't control their ultra-conservatives. But hopefully the women will save the day. You go girls!

Monday, January 09, 2012

Islamic Extremist Planning Terror Attacks In Tampa Arrested By FBI

Terrorists come in all genders and from all ethnic backgrounds, they're not just Arab or Pakistani-looking 25 to 35-year-old uneducated, disenfranchised men.  But the one thing most terrorists have in common these days is Islam and their love of jihad.

25-year-old Sami Osmakac (or Brother Abdul Samia as he is referred to in the video below) isn't Arab or Pakistani, but he does love jihad and was just busted by the FBI for planning to terrorize people in the Tampa Bay area of Florida.

"I want to do something terrifying like one day, one night, something's going to happen. Then six hours later, something else."

Osmakac, born in Kosovo when it was part of the former Yugoslavia, is now a naturalized U.S. citizen living in Pinellas Park. The ingrate was arrested after he tried to purchase an AK-47, an explosive vest a bunch of explosives and grenades to go with it from an undercover FBI agent. He wanted to target MacDintons (a south Tampa pub), some night clubs in Ybor City (Tampa's historical Latin Quarter) and a Sheriff's office in Ybor City for good measure.  The FBI had been monitoring him for several months after a tip off.

On January 1, he was given the opportunity to back out, but said "We all have to die, so why not die the Islamic way?" And as per the 'Islamic way', he wanted to cause as much damage and carnage as possible. In reference to his plans for Ybor City (an area full of nightclubs) he would blow up a car in front of a busy nightclub because he knew "..a lot of places where it gets real crowded," and then he'd "take down buildings" and "kill people inside."

Detonating the car bomb would be first on his agenda, then he planned on using the explosives belt to take hostages and demand the release of prisoners, although who he wanted released is unknown. Then he was perfectly happy to be taken  " five million pieces" along with all those nightclubbers and hostage negotiators, I assume.

To their credit, jihad-boy was served up to the FBI by the Tampa Muslim community. CAIR's Hassan Shibley claimed that Osmakac was a "self-radicalized lone wolf" who had been banned from several local mosques. But in the usual CAIR fashion, he was also concerned

"..about a perception of entrapment." "If he was instigated by the government, we're going to be very concerned about that." "The weapons and explosives were provided by the government. Was he just a troubled individual, or did he pose a real threat?"

Well, I have news for Mr. Shibly, a troubled individual with explosives poses a greater threat than a troubled individual with none. According to Shibly the Muslim community found his extremist views so troubling they thought he might be a tad screwy. I think they're all a tad in denial considering he's not the only one with jihadi aspirations. And if he's unhinged, that would then make thousands upon thousands of other Islamic extremists just as mentally unbalanced as Osmakac. And what do all those jihadis have in common?

If convicted of 'attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction" he could wind up in jail for the rest of his life, and fined a meager $250,000.  I guess he'll just have to wait a lifetime before he gets his 72 (virgins).

Source: 970WFLA, Sunshine State News, The Suncoast News

U.S. Expels Venezuelan Consul In Miami, Livia Acosta Noguera, Over Iranian Cyber Attack Plot

The U.S. State Department has just given the boot to Venezuela's consul general in Miami. According to William Ostick, Livia Acosta Noguera has until Tuesday to leave the country after being declared 'persona non grata' for allegedly being a very naughty girl:

The State Department had said last month it was looking into “very disturbing” allegations that Ms Acosta was a participant in an alleged Iranian plot to launch cyber-attacks on sensitive US national security facilities.

According to the Spanish-language TV network, Univision, Ms Acosta was taped discussing the alleged plot with Mexican students who later sought asylum in the US. The discussions reportedly took place in 2007 while she was serving at the Venezuelan embassy in Mexico City.

Ostick wouldn't give any details regarding the matter, but the allegations came to light after a documentary aired on Univision in December which highlighted her involvement in a plot to target the FBI, CIA and the White House. Naturally, Hugo Chavez denied those allegations, but it wouldn't be surprising at all if they were true, considering Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are best buds.

I can't wait to hear what Chavez has to say about the expulsion of one of his diplomats.

2012 Heralds More Muslim Violence- From Iraq to Nigeria to Syria

Liberals love to blame the ongoing violence in the Muslim world on the "occupation". Well, we are no longer "occupying" Iraq and yet the bloodshed continues unabated. In fact it has actually increased since our troops pulled out of there at the end of last year. We're only eight days into 2012 and we've already witnessed a series of bomb attacks against Shiite Muslims which killed over 72 people and wounded scores more.  Earlier in the week families of police officers were targeted and multiple bomb blasts killed four Sunnis, two of which were children. The bombings have everyone worried about renewed sectarian strife.  Can't blame the West for that.

Then there's Nigeria. No occupation there. And yet Islamic militants 'Boko Haram' continue to wage war against the Christians in the northern part of that country. They want them out or dead, and they've been making sure they get the message. On Christmas day 2011 they bombed several churches, and haven't let up since. Just 8 days into 2012 and 20 more Christians were killed on Friday as they mourned the murder of three fellow Christians who had been killed on Thursday. Can't blame the West for that either.

And the recent suicide bombing in Syria? Nope, no occupation there either. 

This random violence in 'unoccupied' territories proves two things- that the whole theory of Western 'occupation' being the primary cause of Muslim violence is a fallacy, and that Islam is in no way a religion of peace, as so many proclaim. It's quite obvious they can't even get along with each other, let alone live peacefully with those of other religions.