The Costs of Freedom

Freedom has costs. Those costs must be paid up front in blood and treasure if freedom is to be maintained. We have been fortunate to have a nation and leaders who both understood these fundamental truths and who had the wisdom, foresight and imagination to know when such costs had to be paid. We live in freedom today because of the blood and gold spent in dear cost by our forebearers.

That is a historical lesson that seems to be denied today by many of our citizens and leaders. Their failure of foresight and imagination to determine when such costs must be paid, or their craven denial of the necessity of such costs, can only have one of two consequences. Either it will end in a loss of freedom to others who desire to conquer, or it will end with a much higher cost in blood and treasure to be paid at a later date. Such is the message today of David Warren in an exception essay, "No Price Too HighFor Human Liberty."

. . . it would seem that [Bush] has failed to mobilize the American electorate behind the "Bush doctrine," as declared so eloquently in the months after the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington; and failed even to mobilize the U.S. bureaucracy, which has consistently resisted direct presidential orders throughout both his terms, and in such cases as the CIA and State Department, often sabotaged them. His principal allies within the administration have been successfully demonized by America's media and entertainment industry, and most have been driven out of public life. So that one wonders if anything of the Bush doctrine -- that America will fight not only terrorists but the dictators who support them -- will survive his administration.

. . . Here are several statements made at the Prague conference, by leading pro-democracy dissidents from around the world, collected by Anne Bayefsky:

Natan Sharansky, of Israel: "Today there are dissidents in many different contexts but the underlying battle is the same -- freedom versus fear. We improve our influence by uniting as dissidents against totalitarian regimes."

Mudawi Ibrahim Adam, of Sudan: "U.N. handling of the Sudanese government has legitimized it regardless of the fact this government is killing its own people. Western states are sending the wrong message -- that democracy is primarily about elections, whereas it requires much more."

Garry Kasparov, of Russia: "Russia today is a police state masquerading as a democracy where elections are theatre. The problem is that the G8 treats Putin as an equal. ... Putin must be sent a message that he cannot act like an Alexander Lukashenko or Robert Mugabe and be treated like a democrat."

Saad Eddin Ibrahim, of Egypt: "We ask Western democracies to stop supporting dictatorships and the darkness of theocrats in the name of stability and continuity."

Bassam Eid, of Palestine: "The Arab world ... is not helped by the fact that the international community applies a double-standard to it -- refusing to insist that the society, including Palestinian society, must ready itself for democracy before handing millions to the security forces of autocracies."

George W. Bush, of USA: "Freedom can be resisted, and freedom can be delayed, but freedom cannot be denied."

This last is the only statement I'll contest. In my view, and my experience, freedom can be resisted, delayed, and denied, and moreover, it can be in decline, as it is in the West, where the nanny state grows insidiously and constantly -- regardless of who is elected to government -- with the expanding power of the self-appointed elites who control our legal systems, and regulatory regimes.

It is nice to say rhetorically that freedom will prevail, but we must realize that such statements apply to heaven and not to earth. For down here, civic freedom is invariably obtained at the cost of human blood and treasure. It is not obtained by negotiating with dictators, except from a position of invincible force, and then only when one is fully prepared to use it. The very argument used against the wisdom of invading Iraq -- that it costs blood and treasure -- is itself the signal of surrender.

Aristotle once wrote that the magnificent man "does not count the cost." He understood also the virtue of prudence, the need for calculation and tact. But prudence itself is not finally calculated in blood or treasure. In the words with which my own country, Canada, was once mobilized against the Hitler menace: "No price too high!"

There is no price too high for human liberty, and those who dispute this are, and deserve to be, slaves.

Read the entire story here. This article articulately sums up how I feel about the far left of this nation. They revel in a suicidal narcissim, seeking only political power. The fact that they now control the Democratic Party, driving its Congressional leaders and would-be presidential nominees into lemming-like lock step is a national tragedy. We are fighting two wars at present - the War on Terror and an internal war against far left forces who would destroy our nation through their embrace of fanatasy and their desire to do good - as they would define it. Failure to win both wars can only lead, at best, to the precipitous and long-term decline of our nation, and at worst, the very loss of our freedom as described by Mr. Warren.

(H/T Steve Halter)

Read More...

Summary only...

Tawfiq Hamid, the Canard of Islamaphobia, and Combatting Salafi Islam

Tawfiq Hamid, a former member of Ayman al Zawahiri's terrorist organization Jemaah Islamiya, has spent the last twenty years of his life to modifying Wahhabi Islam and bringing it peacefully into the 21st century. In a recent article for the WSJ, Mr. Hamid examines the canard of "Islamaphobia" and the hypocrisy of Salafist Islam, suggesting that the cure must lie with modifying some of the beliefs of Salafi dogma:

Islamic organizations regularly accuse non-Muslims of "Islamophobia," a fear and disdain for everything Islamic. On May 17, this accusation bubbled up again as foreign ministers from the Organization of the Islamic Conference called Islamophobia "the worst form of terrorism." These ministers also warned, according to the Arab News, that this form of discrimination would cause millions of Muslims in Western countries, "many of whom were already underprivileged," to be "further alienated."

In America, perhaps the most conspicuous organization to persistently accuse opponents of Islamophobia is the Council of American Islamic Relations. . .

It may seem bizarre, but Islamic reformers are not immune to the charge of "Islamophobia" either. For 20 years, I have preached a reformed interpretation of Islam that teaches peace and respects human rights. I have consistently spoken out--with dozens of other Muslim and Arab reformers--against the mistreatment of women, gays and religious minorities in the Islamic world. We have pointed out the violent teachings of Salafism and the imperative of Westerners to protect themselves against it.

Yet according to CAIR's Michigan spokeswoman, Zeinab Chami, I am "the latest weapon in the Islamophobe arsenal." If standing against the violent edicts of Shariah law is "Islamophobic," then I will treat her accusation as a badge of honor.

Muslims must ask what prompts this "phobia" in the first place. When we in the West examine the worldwide atrocities perpetrated daily in the name of Islam, it is vital to question if we--Muslims--should lay the blame on others for Islamophobia or if we should first look hard at ourselves.

According to a recent Pew Global Attitudes survey, "younger Muslims in the U.S. are much more likely than older Muslim Americans to say that suicide bombing in the defense of Islam can be at least sometimes justified." About one out of every four American Muslims under 30 think suicide bombing in defense of Islam is justified in at least some circumstances. Twenty-eight percent believe that Muslims did not carry out the 9/11 attacks and 32% declined to answer that question.

While the survey has been represented in the media as proof of moderation among American Muslims, the actual results should yield the opposite conclusion. If, as the Pew study estimates, there are 2.35 million Muslims in America, that means there are a substantial number of people in the U.S. who think suicide bombing is sometimes justified. Similarly, if 5% of American Muslims support al Qaeda, that's more than 100,000 people.

To bring an end to Islamophobia, we must employ a holistic approach that treats the core of the disease. It will not suffice to merely suppress the symptoms. It is imperative to adopt new Islamic teachings that do not allow killing apostates (Redda Law). Islamic authorities must provide mainstream Islamic books that forbid polygamy and beating women. Accepted Islamic doctrine should take a strong stand against slavery and the raping of female war prisoners, as happens in Darfur under the explicit canons of Shariah ("Ma Malakat Aimanikum"). Muslims should teach, everywhere and universally, that a woman's testimony in court counts as much as a man's, that women should not be punished if they marry whom they please or dress as they wish.

We Muslims should publicly show our strong disapproval for the growing number of attacks by Muslims against other faiths and against other Muslims. Let us not even dwell on 9/11, Madrid, London, Bali and countless other scenes of carnage. It has been estimated that of the two million refugees fleeing Islamic terror in Iraq, 40% are Christian, and many of them seek a haven in Lebanon, where the Christian population itself has declined by 60%. Even in Turkey, Islamists recently found it necessary to slit the throats of three Christians for publishing Bibles.
Of course, Islamist attacks are not limited to Christians and Jews. Why do we hear no Muslim condemnation of the ongoing slaughter of Buddhists in Thailand by Islamic groups? . . .

Islamophobia could end when masses of Muslims demonstrate in the streets against videos displaying innocent people being beheaded with the same vigor we employ against airlines, Israel and cartoons of Muhammad. It might cease when Muslims unambiguously and publicly insist that Shariah law should have no binding legal status in free, democratic societies.

It is well past time that Muslims cease using the charge of "Islamophobia" as a tool to intimidate and blackmail those who speak up against suspicious passengers and against those who rightly criticize current Islamic practices and preachings. Instead, Muslims must engage in honest and humble introspection. Muslims should--must--develop strategies to rescue our religion by combating the tyranny of Salafi Islam and its dreadful consequences. Among more important outcomes, this will also put an end to so-called Islamophobia.

Read the entire story here.

Read More...

Summary only...

EU Proposes to Allow Sharia Family Law

This is a short article that appears in Dhimmi Watch, followed by a long and thoughtful comment on this bit of EU multicultural insanity by an Iranian woman who is now living in Europe. She does a good job of explaining the evils of Sharia and just how utterly insane it is for the EU to consider allowing for Sharia family law in European courts.

"Opposition to EU divorce rules plan" . . .

Luxembourg (dpa) - A European Union proposal that would allow the laws of non-EU countries to be applicable in divorce cases ran into fierce opposition from Sweden on Thursday.

Liberal Sweden strongly resists the plan, which it says could force EU member states to dissolve marriages on the basis of foreign law, including traditional Islamic law, or Sharia.

"It is not acceptable that the planned rules would lead to Swedish courts having to apply foreign law," a Swedish diplomat told reporters at a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Luxembourg.

Germany is pushing for new rules under which international couples, prior to marriage, would be able to set out in a contract which country's laws will reign in a divorce court.

Germany currently holds the rotating EU presidency.

COMMENT

Actually . . . I read that such a law has been pushed for by Islamic organizations and Imams in Sweden as well. I am glad that they decide to oppose it on an EU level. . . . I think it is absurd to even consider such request by Islamists. They don't represent the Muslim community as a whole. They just represent their own opinions and maybe some like them. So as unelected people they have no right to push for any laws for a constituency (Muslims) who never officially and openly elected them. As an ex-Muslim in Europe who left her native country because of Islamism I am scared to death by such attempts to creep barbaric Shri'a law into civilized countries. Here is a copy of my comment to the news on "Islam in Europe Blog":

"The Swedish authorities should never accept such a thing. The point is that these so-called "Islamic divorce laws" are objectively and truly unjust and demeaning to women and violates their unalienable human rights. According to these laws a woman has no right to get a divorce unless her husband wants to grant it to her, but a man can divorce his wife anytime he wants without her consent, and the custody of the children over 6 y.o. will automatically go to their father and he will decide whether the mother is allowed to see them and how often. This is an unjust and shameful system which should be eradicated even from the Islamic country in the name of human rights and sexual equality. It is a source of much evil in those places too. As an Iranian ex-pat I have seen first hand the damaging and tragic effects of these laws in the lives of many women. Many mothers live with abusive husbands from the fear of losing the not only the custody of their children but also the right to visit them. Many women who wish to divorce cannot get it from their husbands and are forced to live with them against their will. Many people from Muslim countries migrate away from their native countries exactly because of the existence of such unjust laws in their countries of origin. If these abominable rules and injustices are going to follow them all the way to their newly adopted countries then where should they run away to, to be safe from these laws. Besides I highly object the fact that some Imams and so-called Islamic originations own the monopoly on representing "the Muslim community" which is very diverse and complex. The Swedish or any other European government should not get tricked into thinking that by granting the wishes of a few Imams and Mullahs, they are doing the Muslims community as a whole any favor and showing them openness and tolerance. These Imams and Mullahs and Islamic organizations have no other intention but to do away with the Swedish law so that they can impose their own power and interpretation of religion and religious life on the Muslim community as a whole. I think they should not be trusted and they should not be allowed to speak for the community as a whole. Many of us immigrants from Muslim countries came to Europe because we prefer to live the European way of life and our rights must be respected as well and our destiny should not be entrusted to the hands of some questionable people that we never openly chose to represent us! If that happens it would be a tragedy!

April 18, 2007 2:28 PM"

Posted by: ritamalik

Read More...

Summary only...

Once a Muslim . . .

The hypocrisy of Islam is mind boggling. Doesn't it say somewhere in the Koran that there shall be "no compulsion in religion?" Oh yes, verse 2:256. So why is it that to leave Islam for Christianity or Hinduism or just out of sheer agnosticism is considered a crime of apostacy under Sharia law and dealt with in Islamic countries by the sword or other coercive means? It is an outrage. Where is the UN on issues like this:

A Malaysian Islamic court has extended the detention of a Muslim-born woman living as a Hindu in defiance of the law after she refused to be rehabilitated, an opposition leader said Wednesday.

Revathi Masoosai, an ethnic Indian, was detained by the Islamic Religious Department in southern Malacca state in January and sent for religious counseling in a rehabilitation center after they discovered she had been born to a Muslim family.

Revathi, 29, was born to Indian Muslim parents who gave her a Muslim name, Siti Fatimah. But she claimed she was raised as a Hindu by her grandmother and changed her name in 2001, opposition Democratic Action Party officials have said. Malaysian Islamic law regards people born to Muslims as being Muslims themselves.

Islamic officials seized her 15-month-old daughter from her Hindu husband, Suresh Veerappan, last month and handed the child to Revathi's Muslim mother.

Revathi married Suresh in 2004 according to Hindu rites but the marriage has not been legally registered because Suresh would have had to convert to Islam first. Revathi's official identification documents state she is Muslim because Malaysians who are born as Muslims cannot legally change their religion.

Parliamentary opposition chief Lim Kit Siang, who chairs the DAP, said the Malacca Shariah Court has extended Revathi's initial detention term of 100 days, which expired Wednesday, for an additional 80 days.

Her husband was informed by court officials that "she did not cooperate during the 100-day stay," Lim told The Associated Press.

Revathi was not brought to court and Veerappan's demand for a copy of the court order on the extension was rejected, he said.

Islamic Department officials in Malacca could not immediately be reached for comment.

"It is sad and tragic that this heart-rending tale of the father, mother and baby girl being forcibly separated into three different locations by law and religion had not been resolved today," Lim said.

"When law and religion comes together to break the family, it gives a bad name to our country. Something is very wrong and it must be put right."

Lim urged the government to intervene and ensure justice for Revathi's family, warning that the case could promote ill-will among Malaysia's different races.

Read the entire article here. Where is CAIR on this one? As to the UN, they are busy legislating that their can be no criticism of Islam in the West. In any sane world, they would be condemning the Islamic practice of enforcing its religion by the sword or by coercion on those who would leave it. That being one among countless human rights violations that can be laid at the doorstep of Islam.

H/T Dhimmi Watch

Read More...

Summary only...

Egypt Taking Action Against the Muslim Brotherhood

Even as the Democrat's in Congress are, in an act of extreme madness, giving the Muslim Brotherhood an opportunity to address Congress, Egypt is doing all it can to fight this scourge in its own country as part of its process of democratic reforms:

In recent months, as the Egyptian regime has been taking action against the Muslim Brotherhood, various spokesmen for Egypt's religious establishment - the sheikh of Al-Azhar, the Mufti of Egypt, Egypt's minister of religious endowments, and the vice-president of Al-Azhar University - have unanimously rejected the concept of a religious state headed by clerics, saying that this concept is incompatible with the principles of Islam. They have argued that Islam has from its outset decreed that there should be a civil democratic state with man-made laws, and that these laws may be based on Muslim religious law.

Columnists in the Egyptian government press also expressed objections to a state headed by clerics. Gaber 'Asfour, lecturer at Al-Azhar University's faculty of literature and head of Egypt's Supreme Cultural Council, even depicted a cleric-led state as the tyrannical state longed for by Islamists, which would abolish civil liberties and endanger all humanity with jihad and a new form of Nazism.

This firm public statement by the Egyptian establishment against the idea of a state headed by clerics is apparently driven by several developments in Egypt and in the region. The first of these is the Egyptian regime's fear of the Muslim Brotherhood movement in Egypt gaining strength. For several months now, the regime has been engaged in a campaign against the movement, including extensive arrests and interrogations, shutting down the places of business, publishing houses, newspapers, and websites of those close to the movement, and engaging in an anti-Muslim Brotherhood media campaign.

Further, due to the Egyptian regime's wish to show the West, and particularly the U.S., that it is in the midst of processes of reform and democratization, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak declared constitutional reform, which was brought to a referendum on March 26, 2007 and passed by a large majority. One of the amendments that was approved was a ban on religion-based political activity, along with declarations that religion and politics must be separated. With this, Egypt is looking to dispel any image it may have as a regime opposed to authentic movements, and to show that its fight against the Muslim Brotherhood is a fight for liberal civic values.

The Egyptian regime is likewise seeking to end the debate that has been going on in Egyptian society in recent weeks, over Article 2 of the Egyptian constitution, which defines Islam as the state religion and shari'a as the main source of legislation, and was not included in the referendum. The country's Coptic Christian community and also parts of the intellectual community are in favor of amending Article 2, but the regime has clarified that Article 2 will remain as is. The regime also stressed that this does not mean that Egypt is either a religious state or a secular state, but a democratic civil state that respects all its citizens and their religion, as Islam commands.

Continue reading here.

Read More...

Summary only...

Weekly News from the Religion of Peace

In northern Nigeria, Muslims find that burning churches can be an enjoyable pastime. Indeed, it can be almost as satisfying as murdering Christians.

In Sri Lanka, making the historically accurate statement that Buddhism in Central Asia fell to the sword of imperialistic Islam earns one the "wrath of the Islamic World" for such sacrilegious tripe. Lies, I say, all lies already "completely shattered by great Imams and Islamic Scholars throughout the ages."

How to handle those troublesome Christian evangelists if you are a Wahhabi Islamist in Ethiopia? Not a problem, just drag one into a mosque and beat him to death. Clean, neat, and besides, those silly Christians always just turn the other cheek anyway.

How does one get an A in 12th grade classes in Palestine? According to their school text books – just remember to answer that Israel has no right to exist and fighting Jews is a good Muslims religious duty. Allah Akbar.

What’s more fun then killing a Christian accused of desecrating a Quran? If you live in Punjab Province in Pakistan, it’s to listen to the Christian scream for a few hours while you torture him – oh, and to steal all the money in his house that was saved up for the daughter’s wedding. Hey, now before you criticize the religion of peace, don’t kid yourself - torturing Christians is thirsty business, especially when it goes on for a few hours. The mob no doubt needed libations to cool their parched throats, and since the Christian caused all of their angst in the first place . . .

How do you respond in the UK to an MP’s suggestion that you fly the UK flag over the mosque to show that you really want to integrate into British society? You respond with a collective middle finger and a disbelieving "Inter-what?"

If you are a young Muslim girl in Malaysia that no longer wants to play along with the Muslim misogynistic game plan but . . . still want to keep your head attached to your shoulders, what do you do? Why you ask the country’s Sharia court for permission to denounce Islam, pointing, among other things, to the Koran’s promise that there is to be no compulsion in religion, and also noting your fear of denouncing Islam without a seal of approval to guard your throat. Sound reasonable? Not to a Sharia court whose reasoning seems more then a little circular:

"The reasons given by the applicant are based on fear of punishment which is against the teachings of Islam. Is fear a good enough reason?

"The court finds the reasons given are weak and not one that can be used as permissible to [leave Islam]."

And lastly, lets not forget the Fatwah on Your Hymen. And that is but some of the news coming out of the religion of peace this week.

Oh, and if you happened to miss it, do please see the Lighter Side of Wahhabi Islam.

Read More...

Summary only...

More Sharia Law - Stonings of Women Ordered in the Sudan

And more Islamic justice, this one not from Germany, but from the Sudan, where the Islamic government imposes Sharia law upon all. In this particular instance, two women, non-Arabs, non-Arabic speaking, not provided with an interpreter, and not represented by a lawyer, where sentenced to death by stoning following a trial conducted in Arabic by a Sharia Court for the crime of adultery. If that were not appalling enough, in one of the cases, the male also accused of adultery was released for lack of evidence. Read the story from Gulf news here.

Read More...

Summary only...

German Court Cites Koran to Allow Domestic Violence in Muslim Marriages

A German court, in adjudicating a divorce case between a young muslim couple, applied the concepts of Sharia law that allow for a husband to strike his wife in deciding that the woman's basis for seeking a divorce, that her husband had battered her and made repeated threats to kill her, was not justified. Citing to the Koran, the judge wrote in his decision denying a speedy divorce:

"The exercise of the right to castigate does not fulfill the hardship criteria as defined by Paragraph 1565 (of German federal law)," the daily Frankfurter Rundschau quoted the judge's letter as saying. It must be taken into account, the judge argued, that both man and wife have Moroccan backgrounds.

"The right to castigate means for me: the husband can beat his wife," Becker-Rojczyk said, interpreting the judge's verdict.

Read the story here. I am near speechless. While my knee-jerk reaction is to be hyper-critical of the Germans, accusing them of quickening the pace of their march towards dhimmi status, I have to be fair and note that most Germans seem appalled by this decision and are seeking discipline of the judge.

Read More...

Summary only...

Trying to Wake Europe

The Gates of Vienna is covering the work of SIAD -- Stop Islamification of Denmark, as they take their activism beyond the borders of Denmark and take to the European stage.

SIAD is carrying its message to the very heart of the EU on September 11th. Anders Gravers, the founder and leader of SIAD, recently sent me the following press release:

Demonstration outside the European Parliament
September 11th 2007
Europeans are saying
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
NO SHARIA HERE!
So join the call
All European nations must be represented
SO IF YOU LOVE FREEDOM
IF YOU LOVE YOUR COUNTRY
BE THERE!!

The organizers of the demonstration are: SIAD (Denmark) sioe@siad.dk phone: +45 96771784 No Sharia Here (England), sioe.nsh@btinternet.com. We are in contact with Akte-islam in Germany, which is organizing the German participation. We seek people / organizations from all other European countries who will organize participation by their own countrymen. For questions or coordination amongst countries, contact SIAD or No Sharia Here.

Read the whole story here. It is heartening to see at least some sanity emerging from the continent before it is too late. If you or anyone you know can be there to support this group, please, by all means do so.

Read More...

Summary only...

How to Define a Multicuralist's Nightmare?

To be a practitioner of that uniquely western philosophy, multiculturalism, means that the adherent adopts the belief that cultures of other countries are at least the equal to, if not better then, his or her own. The adherent makes no comparative moral judgments.

But sometimes that can be difficult. Sometimes, the mores of other cultures are so outrageous, so antithetical to liberal Western values, that only deliberate ignorance of reality will allow the multicultural philosophy to remain untarnished.

With that in mind, let me set a scenario. A man and woman go out, when they are accosted by five knife wielding men who kidnap them. They are taken to a remote location, where the kidnappers gang rape the woman a total of fourteen times. The kidnappers/rapists are eventually caught. On those facts, what do law and justice demand as punishment for the guilty and as recompense for the victim?

If we were in America, the charges would likely be aggravated kidnapping and aggravated rape along with a smattering of other, lesser charges. It is quite likely the prison terms for these offenses, in sum, would range from twenty years to life. The victim would be be given counselling and she would likely receive funds from a government victim's compensation program.

That's in America, where we are ruled by a secular legal code that developed out of a judeo-christian ethic. It would likely be similar in any western country.

In Saudi Arabia, where this crime actually occurred, the nation is officially ruled by Sharia law -- the code of law discerned from a reading of the Koran -- and as interpreted within the strictures of Wahhabi Islam. Wahhabi Islam is, unfortunate to say, the triumphalist, grossly racist, misogynistic and brutal form of Islam that has been exported to the United States and across the world by Saudi Arabia, using billions of dollars of oil money. So what happens to the victim and her attackers under Wahhabi Sharia law? According to a report in the Agence France-Presse:

Five men were arrested for the rape and given jail terms ranging from 10 months to five years by a panel of judges . . . But the judges also decided to sentence the woman . . . and the man to lashes for being alone together in the car.

Yes, you heard that correctly. The victim will be flogged for, as the article goes on to say, a total of 90 lashes.

Just to put how barbaric this is into perspective, what follows is a description of a Saudi judicial flogging given to a man.

I was brought to the whipping area. They tied me to a post. My hands were handcuffed and they also shackled my legs. I was wearing a T-shirt and jogging pants... The whip was one and a half metres long... with a heavy lead piece attached to the tip. It was terrible. Some fell on my thighs and my back. I would fall when the whip reached my feet but the prison guard would raise me up to continue the whipping. It was terrible. I was amazed to find myself still alive after the 70th lash was given. It lasted about 15 minutes... my back was bleeding. I cried.

As to the victim in the rape, she appealed her verdict but was "told by one of the judges [that] she was lucky not to have been given jail time." Since her trial, the woman . . . [has] tried to commit suicide because of her ordeal and was beaten by her younger brother because the rape had brought shame on their family." Nice to see her family supporting her and protecting her honor, isn't it?

Such are Sharia law and the concept of family honor in Saudi Arabia. So please tell me now, is there anything about a culture that can treat someone this way that makes you feel as if it is, on balance, equal or superior to Western culture? And therein lies the problem for the multiculturalist. Facts are the clay from which their nightmares are made.

Read More...

Summary only...

Keeping an Eye On CAIR: Part I

And CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, does bear watching for several reasons, including their support of and ties to terrorist groups, their propaganda efforts in support of Wahabbi Islam, and their efforts to change the laws and culture of America. I previously posted on CAIR here, and most recently here, on their disgraceful part in promoting the canard of Israeli wrongdoing in making repairs to a walkway near the Temple Mount. Maverick News Network recently covered CAIR's support of convicted terrorist supporter Sami Al-Arian.

CAIR's latest act, shown in their post here, involves an attempt to change the laws and culture of the United States.

CAIR has asked the FBI to investigate a video on MySpace as a civil rights violation. The video, called "Kill the Koran," shows a Koran being shot and then deposited on the steps of a Mosque. Certainly while this may be distasteful to Muslims and non-Muslims alike, that alone does not constitute a civil rights violation. To the extent that CAIR is arguing that any desecration of the Koran should be a violation of law, they are in essence enlisting the FBI to help impose - by law or by coercion -- Sharia law in the U.S. Under Sharia, the Koran is considered holy and its desecration is a punishable sin. Under U.S. secular law, you of course, as the NYT will tell you, have a First Amendment right to speak out symbolically by showing such things as a cross in a glass of urine. I see no difference here.

The closest possible basis for a civil rights violation arises from the burning of a cross. In 2003, the Supreme Court held, in Virginia v. Black, that states can explicitly outlaw the burning of a cross on someones lawn, largely because the well known historical basis for that act was illegal coercion. But it is a far cry from that one exception to the rule to now say that the destruction of any religious icon amounts to coercion and is a civil rights violation. Indeed, CAIR cannot even claim coercion in this case since it is they, not the attendees at the mosque, who have brought this matter to the FBI. Moreover, the title of the video was "Kill the Koran," not "Kill Muslims." That also vitiates against any finding of coercion as opposed to simple exercise of free speech.

While CAIR could publicly condemn this act -- and I for one would join them in such condemnation -- instead they vastly, and foolishly, overreach. They have no right or basis to make the desecration of the Koran a crime in America.

I would urge you, if you see the actions of CAIR as a threat, to tell the same to your elected representatives, and ask them to make sure that our tools of government are not being improperly enlisted to further the goals of CAIR and Wahabbi Islam.

White House: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Sen: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Representative: http://www.house.gov/writerep/

Update: There is an excellent post from Martin McBride on the MNN site that strongly urges that anyone concerned about CAIR start attending their local functions and document for the world what is going on. I could not agree more. Here is the link to Mr. McBrides post.

Read More...

Summary only...