This may look like “Rule 5 Friday” at first glance, but it’s way more important than that. Be sure to read the article too!

Daily Mail (UK): Belgian politician risks Muslim backlash after using teenage daughter dressed in burka and bikini for campaign against Islam

(h/t: Blazing Cat Fur)

By Rick Dewsbury
Last updated at 1:33 PM on 3rd February 2012

A Belgian politician has risked causing uproar among Muslims after starting a ‘Women Against Islamization’ campaign featuring his 19-year-old daughter wearing a burka and a bikini.

Filip Dewinter, leader of the far-right Vlaams Belang party, uses a shot of his daughter An-Sofie Dewinter in the dark blue bikini for the political campaign.

The glamorous teenager dons a burka that covers her head and face, while the rest of the Muslim garment is draped over her back.

The provocative image is likely to inflame tensions among Islamic groups and nationalists in the racially-divided country.

The poster shows the words ‘Freedom or Islam?’ written on a red bar across Ms Dewinter’s breasts.

Further down the poster a black panel with the words ‘You choose!’ is seen covering the teenager’s crotch.

The extremist Vlaams Belang party claims that it wants to convince women to take a stand against Islam.

Ms Dewinter told the Belgian press she does not feel used by the party.

She said: ‘I’ve suggested (the poster) myself, I have learned to live with it but I have had everything up to death threats made at me.’

She said that she ‘ wanted to make this statement.’

She added: ‘What is the greatest contrast with a niqab? Nude.

‘The campaign fits in perfectly with how I feel about the whole issue. As women, we must choose: freedom or Islam.’

The teenager claimed that she had been threatened by Muslim groups

She added: ‘Death threats and criticism no longer scare me off.’

Her father, the party’s leader, said: ‘Women are always the first victims of Islam. We want to make clear that they have a choice.’

The potentially incendiary poster comes after The Islamic fundamentalist group Shariah4Belgium was slammed for its aggressive stance.

The group opened the country’s first Sharia court, a putting it on a collision course with the country’s nationalists.

Vlaams Belang spoke out against the Muslim courts and said that all legal disputes should be settled in the country’s civil judicial system.

More here.

Let’s expose some of the “spin” in the Daily Mail article:

First of all, there’s this phrase in the article title: “…using teenage daughter in burka and bikini…” Filip Dewinter is not “using” his teenage daughter in this campaign. She suggested the poster; it is not unduly revealing; and, at 19, she is of age to make the decision to be photographed. As a young adult who grew up in a political family, she thoroughly understands and accepts the risks involved. Kudos to her for participating in the Women Against Islamization campaign.

“…likely to inflame tensions among Islamic groups and nationalists in the racially-divided country.” Yeah, we get it; if you object to the burqa or the niqab, you must be a raaaaacist. Belgium is divided in two different ways, neither of which have to do with race: by region (socialist French/Walloon versus conservative Flemish) and by ideology (Islam versus freedom). Islam is a totalitarian ideology; it is no more a “race” than communism is, and non-Muslims have the right to reject it.

“Filip Dewinter, leader of the far-right Vlaams Belang party…” Here we go again. Patriotism in western Europe has become a dirty word. Any European political party or organization that takes a stand for national sovereignty or against Islamic infiltration will be labeled as “far-right.” In the mainstream media, “far-right” is a code word for raaaaacist or neo-Nazi. This smear against conservatives is especially misleading in view of the fact that Hitler was a Marxist, always a man of the Left.

“The extremist Vlaams Belang party claims that it wants to convince women to take a stand against Islam.” Extremist is another code word that the mainstream media uses to make a person, group, or idea seem too far outside of the mainstream to be a respectable topic for discussion. On the one hand, jihadi violence is blamed on a “tiny minority of extremists” within Islam, rather than on mainstream Islamic doctrine set forth in the Qur’an, the hadiths, and the schools of Islamic jurisprudence. On the other hand, any party opposing Islamic expansionism is labeled extremist, as a ploy to make the reader feel secretly ashamed for agreeing with it.

More here:

• Filip Dewinter (Flemish language)
• Vlaams Belang (Flemish language)
• The Flemish Republic

ACT for Australia has the story:

Australians are becoming increasingly aware that many Muslims refugees:

• Abuse our hospitality. E.g., Mansor Almaribe threatened to sue the Australian Government after they had lobbied the Saudi Government when he was arrested on charges of blasphemy, helping to get his sentence drastically reduced .
• Import barbaric sharia. E.g., the man who strangled his wife with her veil, because she ‘shamed’ him by leaving him after many years of abuse.

So when growing public anger forces our government to restrict Islamic immigration, Islamic countries will have to think of new strategies to gain entry. It won’t be easy, as evidence of the repressive nature of Islamic countries is continually being exposed.

The Barnabas Fund reports:

• The media is banned from producing or broadcasting any programme “that humiliates Allah or his prophets or the holy Quran”.
• Foreign workers and tourists can practise their faith only in private. It is also illegal to carry or display in public books on religions other than Islam.
• In October 2011 a Christian teacher from India working in a school on Raa Atoll was imprisoned for transferring Christian songs on to a school laptop and keeping a Bible in his home.

In 2010, it was reported that legislation was planned to ban all non-Muslim places of worship in the Maldives:

• … the bill would make it illegal to build non-Muslim places of worship or to practise non-Muslim faiths in public… Punishment would be a jail term of three to five years or a fine of between US$2,800 and US$4,700.
• … Muttalib, MP… said that the purpose of the legislation was to maintain Islamic principles and to prevent the spread of non-Muslim faiths. He mentioned too the phenomenon of “wedding tourism” , which would “indirectly set up churches in this country”.
• Sheikh Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed… commented that non-Muslim places of worship are necessary only in countries where there is religious diversity. This did not apply in the Maldives… whose constitution does not permit Maldivians to follow a non-Islamic faith.
• Nazam Rashid MP agreed the bill was important because human rights organisations were trying to impose freedom of religion on the Maldives.

The Maldives has no freedom of religion, and denigrates and oppresses any who follow another religion.

Its pretense of being moderate in order to attract tourists has resulted in some bizarre situations, as when a wedding celebrant was caught out insulting tourists:

• The celebrant, who conducted the ceremony in the local language at an upmarket resort fringed by white sand and turquoise water, had been arrested …
• A video of the ceremony, during which the hapless couple are taunted and subjected to a series of insulting and religious-tinged abuse, was posted on YouTube and has sparked fears for the country’s tourism-dependent economy.
• President Mohamed Nasheed announced his government would introduce strict guidelines on conducting wedding ceremonies … he expressed “disgust” at the incident … saying “bad behaviour, such as that depicted in the YouTube video, can cause enormous damage to the country’s tourism industry”.
• The Vilu Reef hotel… said it was “unforgivable” that a staff member had read out the sexual and religious slurs in the Dhivehi language.“You are swine,” the couple were told. “The children that you bear from this marriage will all be bastard swine.”

Muslims are encouraged to denigrate and curse other religions, so Nasheed would have been shocked, not by the celebrant’s behaviour, but that this story leaked out.

That’s the problem with deceit: sooner or later the mask slips, and the perception that the Maldives is just like any other luxury resort, with alcohol aplenty and people in skimpy clothing relaxing by the pool, is shattered by the reality of Islam, as when the government tried to close down all spas:

• The Maldives government is looking to rethink a decision to close down all spas after the tourism industry threatened protests if the decision was not reversed.
• A protest was called by the opposition Justice Party and several other groups that accuse President Nasheed’s government of compromising principles of Islam and want strict Islamic law.
• The protesters also have called on authorities to stop the sale of alcohol, shut down brothels operating in the guise of what they said are “massage parlors” and demolish monuments gifted by other countries marking a South Asian summit because they are “idols.”
• An angry protest also followed a call by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay for the Maldives to end floggings of women being punished for adultery.

Some Maldivians are aware of the contradictions:

Lured by the exotic brochures they come to visit the Maldives. Sun. Sand. Sea. holiday. Paradise.

The visiting tourist knows he is going to a 100% Muslim Nation. But he is unaware that his Paradise package that mustached man sold him at the travel fair is going to land him in Hell.

Mamduh Waheed explains it all at Minivan News:

…the Maldivian constitution…clearly states that a Maldivian citizen can only be a Muslim. And from this follows other laws and regulations which prohibit Maldivians from consumption of alcohol and any other behavior that is deemed outside of the Muslim moral code. And tourism regulation in the country is perhaps a good example of this. We facilitate tourists to travel thousands of miles and spend as much dollars to travel to the beautiful islands of the Maldives (of which we are the inhabitants) and do things we believe will only take them closer to hell; drink alcohol, engage in sex outside marriage, wear revealing clothes in public, etc. So we have a situation where we ourselves refrain from the bad things but actually help others who do not belong to our community to do these very sinful things. The same laws of the land has different provisions to different persons, and while some laws describe us as having certain unalienable rights, others deny us those very same rights.

For many centuries, the Maldives were populated by Buddhists from Sri Lanka. They were converted to Sunni Islam in 1153, and, in true Islamic fashion, virtually all traces of the indigenous culture have been obliterated.

Under the Constitution, Islam is the basis of all laws in the Maldives and no laws contrary to any tenet of Islam can be enacted. Only Muslims can be citizens or own land. Non-Muslims may not vote or hold public positions.

Eventually, this must put an end to the wedding and other tourism: in the meantime, there are still many wealthy/naïve tourists who are drawn to the luxury resorts.

But no worries: when tourism dries up, they can always invade neighbouring countries and plunder their wealth. Luckily, President Nasheed is on the ball, using the climate change pretext to announce his plans to use tourism money to purchase land in Australia, for his people to relocate should rising sea levels due to climate change inundate the country.

We know Muslims would get a welcome from the Greens:

The Greens have pledged that they will:

“Establish a new climate refugee visa to help those displaced by climate change.”

Our elite media is also on their side.

An editorial published in The Age and elsewhere lectured us on our obligations:

THE idea of government ministers donning scuba gear to attend an underwater cabinet meeting seems to conjure up a scene from surrealist drama, but in the Maldives it really happened. In 2009 President Mohamed Nasheed and his cabinet did just that to draw attention to the fact that their country might literally disappear beneath the waves… If the sea level rises by 59 cms in the course of the century… most of the republic’s 200 inhabited islands will have to be abandoned.

Rising sea levels are one of the key indicators of human-induced global warming, which is perhaps why skeptics contest the evidence for it so vigorously… But the inhabitants of the Maldives… have no doubt that the IPCC’s predictions are a pointer to their future…

Australians tend to think about the Maldives, Tuvalu and Kiribati…as paradisal holiday destinations…The islands’ proximity, however, is a reminder that the threat to the low-lying states’ existence is not only a problem for the islanders themselves.

If the Maldives were to vanish, their 350,000 human inhabitants would have to go somewhere…Australia, Sri Lanka and India, would be their most likely destinations.

These islanders would not be asylum seekers in the strict sense, because they would not be fleeing persecution. But as victims of a catastrophe not of their making they would certainly have a claim on the rest of humanity. Two of the most divisive issues in Australian politics in the past two decades, climate change and immigration, would have coalesced.

At last year’s UN climate-change conference in Durban… delegates agreed to begin work on a new global treaty…on carbon emissions, to come into force by 2020.

To Nasheed, 2020 will be too late. He wants world leaders to bring the date forward, but he is also keenly aware that the Maldives… lacks diplomatic clout. That may well doom his plea, and ultimately his nation, too. But Australia should remember that our neighbours’ interests are also our interests.

How can our neighbours’ interests also be our interests when Australia is a democracy, with egalitarian values and freedom of religion, whereas, behind a façade of an idyllic holiday destination, The Maldives is a totalitarian Islamic state?

Fairfax’s Sydney Morning Herald are also on side:

THE Maldives will begin to divert a portion of the country’s billion-dollar annual tourist revenue into buying a new homeland – possibly in Australia – as an insurance policy against climate change that threatens to turn the 300,000 islanders into environmental refugees, the country’s first democratically elected president has said.

Mohamed Nasheed… said the chain of 1200 islands and coral atolls… is likely to disappear under the waves if the current pace of climate change continues to raise sea levels.

“We can do nothing to stop climate change on our own and so we have to buy land elsewhere. It’s an insurance policy for the worst possible outcome. After all, the Israelis [began by buying] land in Palestine.”

The President – a human rights activist who swept to power in elections by ousting Maumoon Abdul Gayoom…said he had broached the idea with a number of countries and found them to be receptive.

He said Sri Lanka and India were targets because they had similar cultures, cuisines and climates. Australia was being considered because of the amount of unoccupied land available.

Environmentalists say the issue raises the question of what rights citizens have if their homeland no longer exists.

“It’s an unprecedented wake-up call,” Tom Picken, head of international climate change at Friends of the Earth, said. “The Maldives is left to fend for itself. It is a victim of climate change caused by rich countries.”

Nasheed is a rising star in Asia, where he has been compared to Nelson Mandela. Before taking office the President asked Maldivians to move forward without rancour or retribution – an astonishing call, given that Nasheed had gone to jail 23 times, been tortured and spent 18 months in solitary confinement.

The Maldives is one of the few Muslim nations to make a relatively peaceful transition from autocracy to democracy. The Gayoom “sultanate” was an iron-fisted regime that ran the police, army and courts and which banned rival parties.

Public flogging, banishment to island gulags and torture were routinely used to suppress dissent and the fledging pro-democracy movement… However, public pressure grew and last year Gayoom conceded that democracy was inevitable.

Nasheed said that without an emergency bail-out from the international community, the future of the Maldives as a democracy would be in doubt.

“It’s desperate. We are a 100 per cent Islamic country and democracy came from within. Do you want to lose that because we were denied the money to deal with the poverty created by the dictatorship?”

Amazing that an Australian newspaper can publish an article which claims that The Maldives is a democracy, Nasheed a Human Rights Activist, climate change is the fault of rich countries and if we don’t let them in, we will be destroying their ‘democracy’.

Come to think of it, aren’t the Arab countries rich? Plus they have “they had similar cultures, cuisines and climates”. Moreover, the Emirates are the biggest environmental vandals, so surely it’s their fault too! Maldivians would feel right at home in Dubai or Saudi Arabia, both of which have sharia and despise human rights and democracy.

Mind you, The Age recently published a revealing article on The Maldives, so I guess that’s pretty even-handed!

WHEN the UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay visited the Maldives, she urged that the practice of flogging women for having sex outside marriage – and very rarely punishing men in the same way – should be abolished.

“This practice constitutes one of the most inhumane and degrading forms of violence against women,” she told local reporters.

The response was as vicious as it was unexpected.

The next day protestors rallied outside the UN building, carrying placards that read “Ban UN”, “Islam is not a toy” and threatened to “Flog Pillay”. A website promised to “slaughter anyone against Islam”.

Anecdotal reports suggest female circumcision is undergoing a resurgence in the Maldives, particularly on the outer islands.

Maldives President Nasheed conceded an emergent religious fundamentalism had changed the way women were viewed, and were treated, in his country.

He said he was distressed by groups who campaigned for girls to be circumcised [FGM] or to be kept home from school.

“We were a matriarchal society, our inheritance, also, in the past was from women. But with a new kind of radical Islam, the perceptions some of them have on women are not familiar to many Maldivians.”

Sadly, our Government promotes the idea of a moderate Islam.

Journalist Peter Day writes:

In 2004, the Australian Government produced a glossy promotional booklet on Islam – Muslim Australians: Their Beliefs, Practices and Institutions… authored by Professor Abdullah Saeed, the Sultan of Oman Professor of Islamic Studies and Director of the Centre for the Study of Contemporary Islam at Melbourne University.

… the booklet’s treatment of the right of Muslims to leave Islam (apostasy) is … an example of the booklet’s overall approach to explaining Islam. This topic is dealt with in a section headed ‘Stereotypes and Misconceptions,’ where the proposition that ‘People who leave Islam (apostates) will be killed’ is listed as one of the ‘misconceptions’. The text that addresses this explains Muslim teaching on the matter as follows:

From a religious point of view, the Qur’an stipulates that ‘there is no compulsion in religion (2:256), and a person can neither be forced to become a Muslim nor to stay in the religion.

It is also stated that in the time of the Prophet, if a person left Islam because of their own religious choice, then in general there were no repercussions. This is because the Qur’an instructed the Prophet that his duty was to preach the message of Islam but that ‘If then they turn away, We have not sent thee as a guard over them. Thy duty is but to convey [the Message].

It seems fair for a reader to conclude from this that Islamic teaching is summed up in the words… ‘a person can neither be forced to become a Muslim nor to stay in the religion’. But Professor Saeed, is also co-author of a major book on this very topic, Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam, which takes a very different view. His book … will be an eye-opener to anyone who has gleaned what they know of the religion from his Muslim Australians… he summarises the consensus position on apostasy among Muslim religious scholars as follows:

While there is general consensus that coercion should not be used to convert anyone to any religion … the right of religious freedom is not extended to a Muslim who wants to change his or her religion to another.

He goes on to tell us that, according to ‘the majority of Muslim jurists’, to flout the prohibition on leaving Islam ‘is to commit the crime of apostasy, and a person so doing should be put to death.’

Based purely on the information presented in Professor Saeed’s Freedom of Religion book, it is clear that the Muslim Australians booklet falls well short of an accurate presentation of contemporary Muslim teaching on this issue.

It is clear… that most current Muslim teaching and practice in this area is in direct contravention of both Article 18 and Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Maldives rather neatly exemplifies current trends on human rights in the Muslim world generally. A revised Maldivian constitution …makes it a formal requirement for all citizens of that country to be Muslims; and that explicitly subordinates all of its citizens’ human rights to Sharia. Notwithstanding this, the Maldivian foreign ministry announced in 2008 that it was joining other members of the UN… to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). There the country’s UN representative unblushingly stated: ‘In today’s Maldives, the ideals and principles contained in the Universal Declaration have found real-world form in our proud new Constitution.

As in the Maldives, so elsewhere in much of the Islamic world: there are greater restrictions on freedom of thought and expression, including the continuing threat of punishment for apostasy; and greater enforcement of Sharia, accompanied by an ever more strident insistence that ‘human rights’ are being fully respected.

So the question must be asked: should our government, media and leaders be promoting an illusory moderate Islam which is perfectly compatible with democratic values?

Or should they tell the truth, and risk offending those determined to suppress criticism of Islam?

Related reading: Seems the Maldives is flavour of the month – The Age has a piece on it and surprisingly, not a complimentary one!

By Cassandra

Also see:

• Vlad Tepes Blog: MPs approve bill to outlaw places of worship for non-Muslims: Maldives
• Maldives government highlights the impact of climate change… by meeting underwater
• Islamic coup of Maldives? President resigns

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary Feminism is defined thus:

Date: 1895

1 : the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
2 : organized activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests

Who can ever forget the iconic cover of “The Female Eunuch”, by Germaine Greer?

It was everywhere when it was first published in 1970.

It was virtually the next best thing that had happened to women since Emmeline Pankhurst and her Suffragettes worked to get women the vote. So we were told.

And certainly you cannot deny the benefits and progress that have come from these two women, and the many others who have taken over the baton and changed the lives of millions.

Many of today’s other famous feminists are living very comfortably on self-earned wealth: fine with me, it’s well-deserved.

They have turned their politics and activism into income sources by working in journalism and other media.

People listen to them.

They have power, enormous power.

Camille Paglia is but one of many whose opinions are highly respected, and it is easy to see why.

Germaine Greer is still going on strongly about all kinds of issues.

Gloria Steinem is another member of this esteemed crowd and there are also very many not-so-famous feminists.

These feminists are in almost all professions from politics to pianists, parents and yes, prostitutes – the oldest “profession” of them all!

Then of course there are the other women in the world who don’t occupy this rarefied space but who have decided, and yes, it is a decision now, to become homemakers and mothers. Some of them decide to resume successful careers and some chose not to.

But I wonder if we all really received so many benefits from all these feminists? Some of us didn’t.

With all that is good and liberating in human progress there are often side effects and “unintended consequences”.

Sadly there are goals that have not, and will not, be achieved.

Certainly many of us get equal work for equal pay nowadays, but not all of us.

Then there are those who chose to be wives and mothers, who are often scorned, or looked down upon, for their choices.

“They had jobs, but feminists weren’t satisfied; every other woman had to get one too. So they opened fire on homemakers with a savagery that still echoes throughout our culture. A housewife is a “parasite,” [Betty] Friedan writes; such women are “less than fully human” insofar as they “have never known a commitment to an idea.”

And….

Housewives, not men, were the prey in feminism’s sights when Kate Millett decreed in 1969 that the family must go. Feminists do not speak for traditional women. Men cannot know this, however, unless we tell them how we feel about them, our children, and our role in the home.

Men must understand that our feelings towards them and our children are derided by feminists and have earned us their enmity. Whether or not this understanding garners men’s support, traditional women must defend ourselves because the feminist offensive is, most essentially, a breach of solidarity with us, a disavowel [sic] of the obligation to honor the Women’s Pact [that religious celibates, professional women, and homemakers respect each other] that women in the movement owed to us” (Source).

Oh yes, this site has more. Feminism today goes on and on, intellectualising and re-defining feminism to the extent where it is almost too difficult to follow, let alone comprehend.

Quite frankly I am more interested in the practical day-to-day realities.

I take the two definitions at face value and I note it doesn’t specify any nationality, political allegiance or religion.

1 : the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
2 : organized activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests

It is true a lot of this has happened in the West but rather than have Greer et al espouse “intellectual yada yada” I would rather see these women get militant again and do something to help their long-suffering sisters who live in Islamic countries, and who can but only dream of the lifestyle many of their famous feminist sisters enjoy.

All too often I see stories of honour killings, rape, female genital mutilation, subservience, domestic (and other) violence, forced marriage and utter discrimination perpetrated against women in Muslim countries and now also in the West.

Some women are getting hymenoplasties and buying repair kits before they marry.

Some are being recruited as homicide bombers.

One is punished for drinking beer, others face lashings or stonings.

Recall the recent case of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani. Fate not yet known, but not looking promising. Here I admit many westerners got under the skin of the Iranian Mullahs. At least they tried.

An Australian Islamist tries to justify poligamy for everyone. Why not? Let’s normalise this situation, let’s legitimise it. How do you suppose women would fare in such a relationship that is so one-sided in favour of the male gender?

There are women who suffer terribly from acid attacks quite frequently.

Women in Gaza are not allowed to ride motorcycles, and Somali women are being scrutinised for wearing a bra!

Where’s Germaine when you need her, or would this make her happy I wonder?

Yet in spite of these incidents feminists like Naomi Wolfe manage to defend discrimination towards women in Islam and it then takes a compassionate feminist, Phyllis Chesler, who has actually lived in a Muslim country, to sort it out for her!

I know many feminists, and women in general, can be fearless fighters.

Code Pink, for example, have gone to Iraq and Afghanistan. True, they are an anti-war movement, but perhaps, just perhaps, they could have drawn some attention to the women who live and suffer in the war zones they are so adamantly against.

They could have easily added one more mission statement to what is on their website which mentions “social justice” – an insidious phrase which bears investigating.

How about some “equal justice” instead?

Indeed, any other anti-war group could easily have done the same. I know they do not define themselves as feminists per se, but why not do more?

Could they not have met with Malalai Joya and offered some help?

Now of course, in hindsight, one knows far more about Code Pink. They are not an anti-war movement at all. They have been helping orchestrate the “Arab Spring” in Egypt.

Together with Bill Ayres and his wife, Bernadine Dohrn they are political activists of a rather nasty kind – and I am being polite here!

And they have the full backing of the Obama Administration.

When I read about the case of Sahar Gul, 15 years of age, I wonder how these feminists can sleep at night.

(Warning – very graphic images.)

Not to mention the wife of Rafiqi Islam who had her fingers chopped off because she wanted an eduction!

I would like to see some of our famous feminists, female politicians and celebrities who spend so much time choking on their own venom over Sarah Palin instead do something useful for the women in Islam.

Are they afraid? “You betcha!” as Sarah Palin would say. Afraid and gutless!

Or are they simply not interested in the women’s issues of today because they think it is another culture and therefore they shouldn’t interfere when they often stick their noses where they may not be wanted.

They know it isn’t right but they can turn a blind eye to it, even as it happens under their noses, and in their own backyards.

How can one respect these women anymore?

It’s a cop-out.

The improvement of the condition of women in Islam is, to me, a far loftier goal than getting to wear trousers, getting equal pay, getting an abortion on demand, and having a man treat a woman more like a man!

This was definitely an “unintended consequence” for me: trivial as it may seem.

I am much heartened by the fact that progress is being made, albeit in small steps.

Kuwati women in parliament refuse to wear the veil. How long will they be able to keep it up?

An Egyptian Cleric wanted to ban burquas and other facial coverings.

Not going to happen anymore with the Muslim Brotherhood in charge!

The women in any country controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood are going to have it worse than ever before.

Strict Sharia Law will prevail.

Honour killing or Honourcide is getting more attention. The tragedy of this is that we are seeing it in the West more and more and little is being done about it.

Lubna Hussein got a lot of media attention over her sentence for wearing trousers.

Najwa Bin Laden and her son, Omar, wrote a book about their now late husband and father, Osama, and seem to be fearless about it. They have provided a fascinating insight into this man as well.

I think the real “feminist”heroines now are the ones who have literally put their lives on the line, not only for women in Islam but for the world in general.

Their goals and commitment are what is truly deserving of our respect and support.

I am referring to women like Dr Wafa Sultan, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Nonie Darwish, Irshad Manji and women like them.

Although Ms Manji has not left Islam it is still worth noting she has put herself out there and for this she deserves credit.

There is another one who would have possibly made it to this list – the face of the Iranian Green Movement: – Neda Soltan -

Tragically she cannot, but in spirit she can inspire so much. I feel she deserves a mention among these brave, dedicated and fascinating women.

This is my challenge to today’s feminists. Use your power again.

I am not a celebrity, a journalist or a politician. I do not have your platform and power.

Justice and equality for women in Islam is indeed a most worthy cause to support and fight for now more than ever.

First Published on “Muslims Against Sharia”.

This is the updated version with permission from the author.

Margaret MacDonald is nearly 83 years old and suffers from lung damage (as do I). Standing outside in the cold at night could have killed her. Though she could not muster enough lung power to activate a breathalyzer, her blood alcohol level proved to be zero.

Unless we all want to capitulate to shari’a law, it’s time to put a stop to the moral panic about alcohol in Canada and the US.

Ezra Levant on Canada neo-Prohibitionist fascists

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Jan 12, 2012

To bully and berate an innocent senior then punish her without a trial for a crime she clearly didn’t commit.

This, apparently, is what Alberta has to look forward to under draconian drunk-driving laws inspired by our neighbouring province, where suspected motorists are guilty until they prove themselves innocent.

Fortunately for 82-year-old Margaret MacDonald, tears brought on by allegedly obnoxious B.C. RCMP officers didn’t blind her to protecting herself.

“I came into the house and burst into tears — then I stood here at three o’clock in the morning and thought ‘my word means nothing,’” said MacDonald.

“Three officers don’t believe me, so I phoned the hospital and took a taxi over to have a blood test.

“I’m not going to let the Mounties get away with saying I was drunk.”

At the Cranbrook Hospital, she obtained a laboratory document proving what she’d desperately been trying to tell police a few minutes before.

There was no alcohol in her system — not a drop — and yet MacDonald’s failure to provide a proper breath sample meant her car was taken away for a month and her licence suspended for 90 days.

Now, $6,000 out-of-pocket and in fear of losing her home, the Cranbrook senior will wait another six months for a ruling on her case, as the B.C. government tweaks legislation to comply with a court order.

It was May 21 when MacDonald was approached by an off-duty RCMP officer, just outside her home.

MacDonald, a near-teetotaler, was returning from an engagement party at a friend’s house when she mistakenly turned into the wrong lane. She assumed that’s why the police officer was there.

Even when the off-duty cop told MacDonald a breathalyzer was coming to test her for drinking and driving, she didn’t worry — her last serious drink was 60 years ago: “I really don’t drink,” she said.

What she didn’t count on was the lung power needed to properly blow into a police breathalyzer. Having suffered from serious pneumonia a few years ago, she couldn’t manage.

That didn’t stop RCMP from making her try — over the next two hours, MacDonald says she was forced to stand in the chill and told to blow 15 times by increasingly snotty RCMP officers.

“He pounded on the hood of his car and shouted at me to blow. He shoved this thing in my mouth and it fell on the ground, and he picked it up and put in back in again,” said MacDonald.

“I said ‘I don’t drink, I haven’t been drinking,’ and he said, ‘you’re sticking your tongue in there because you don’t want do this — you’re slurring, you’re drunk and you stink of alcohol.’”

RCMP officials are now reviewing the conduct of officers that night, but try as they might, the Mounties couldn’t get a sample from the shivering, teary-eyed senior, who was wearing only sandals and a thin dress.

Thus, MacDonald was cited for failing to provide a breath sample, given a Notice of Driving Prohibition for three months, fined $500 and told her car was to be towed.

MacDonald wept, but she was sharp enough to obtain proof of her innocence, because in Canada that used to be enough to make those in power see sense.

Not anymore. Under a system about to be adopted in Alberta, drivers suspected of driving drunk, even under .05%, can lose their licences and cars without a trial.

Even after MacDonald took her blood test to the RCMP station, she was told nothing could be done.

A helpful corporal on duty provided her with a letter, stating: “I believe it is only fair that this Driving Prohibition and Vehicle Impound be terminated and removed from your driving record as soon as possible.”

But it didn’t end there.

Despite proof of alcohol-free blood, B.C.’s superintendent of motor vehicles adjudicator still found her guilty — a decision now under review by direct order of B.C. Solicitor General Shirley Bond.

“Obviously, I am concerned with this circumstance but it is important that we get all the facts of the case,” Bond said in a statement to QMI Agency.

“As soon as I became aware of this, I directed the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles to review the case and that work is currently underway.”

The ordeal took a massive toll on MacDonald — a few days later, she suffered what doctors in Calgary told her was a mild, stress-related heart attack, leaving her bed-ridden in hospital.

Back in Cranbrook, all she can do is wait.

“I’m nearly 83 and you have to cope with life, but through my years I’ve never been this traumatized over anything,” she said.

“Especially when I’m totally innocent.”

- Calgary Sun

Piss off, MADD, you pathetic prohibitionists

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Jan 18, 2012

In Ontario the legal BAC limit is 0.08 per cent, but the blithering idiots at MADD have seen to it that your car can be impounded if you blow at the * legal * limit of 0.05. The cop has been made judge and jury. Your papers, please.

And wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which strengtheneth man’s heart. – Psalm 104:15, KJV

Lawfare attorney Rahool P. Agarwal exposed!

Ezra Levant: Saudi Arabian Fascists Threaten Free Speech In Canada!

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by blazingcatfur on Sep 19, 2011

This is the entire episode of The Source for Sept. 19th 2011, in which Ezra Levant reveals the sinister effort by Saudi Arabia to Silence EthicalOil.org for this commercial http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9z2FVmVb14. Ezra’s guests are Tom Ross, Alykhan Velshi, Brooke Goldstein & Daniel Pipes.

Background: Ethical Oil group squares off against Saudi Arabia over TV ad

An advocate for Canada’s oil sands is thumbing his nose at the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which wants anti-Saudi TV ads suppressed.

“We caught this foreign dictatorship trying to undermine freedom of the press here in Canada and trying to export its own contempt for democracy, its own contempt for freedom of the press here in Canada,” Alykhan Velshi, founder of the group Ethicaloil.org, told the Toronto Sun.

The TV spot, set to start running on the Sun News Network Monday, argues against importing oil from Saudi Arabia because of its poor human rights record.

More: Ethical Oil group squares off against Saudi Arabia over TV ad

If you haven’t subscribed to Blazing Cat Fur’s YouTube channel, you are missing a lot!

Also see:

• The Ad Saudi Arabia Wants to Stop You From Seeing
• The Lawfare Project

From YouTube:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Jan 13, 2012

Muslim groups claimed a win in Oklahoma on Tuesday after a federal appeals court upheld a block on a proposed constitutional amendment to ban Sharia law in the state’s courtrooms.

In November, 70 percent of Oklahoma voters approved an amendment that would ban state judges from considering Sharia law in their decisions, the Associated Press reports.

But the appeals court said the ban discriminates against Islam, as Sharia law is the only law mentioned in the proposed amendment.

The appeals court also noted that no example could be found in which Sharia law was used or cited in a U.S. court case.

“It’s just fear-mongering; it’s nothing,” Saleem Quraishi, president of the American Muslim Association of Oklahoma City, told CNN. “What’s Sharia law have to do with Oklahoma?”

Turns out, it has a lot more to do with the whole country. The debate over whether to consider Sharia law in U.S. courts has been ongoing for years and is growing louder.

On one side, the neoconservative Center for Security Policy argues that Sharia law is in conflict with American state law. In a report published last June, the center examined 50 cases that it said involved Muslim Americans and conflicts between Islamic and state laws.

“These families came to America for freedom from the discriminatory and cruel laws of Sharia,” the report’s summary reads. “When our courts then apply Sharia law… and deny them equal protection, they are betraying the principles on which America was founded.”

In February, several Tennessee lawmakers sought to take the fight a step further, introducing a bill would make it a felony to follow Sharia law, punishable by 15 years in jail.

On the other side of the debate, there are those who say that international law like Sharia can have an assisting role in U.S. courts.

During her 2010 confirmation hearings, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan said she would be willing to consider international law when hearing cases before the court.

Several Islamic law experts who have started a blog, Sharia Index, similarly believe Islamic law should have place a place in U.S. court.

In its mission statement, Sharia Index argues that because we live in a “global village,” in which marriages and commercial transactions are crossing borders, so too must U.S. courts interpret and apply international law — including Islamic law.

“Sharia can be relevant in various circumstances,” Sharia Index writes, “everything from the recognition of foreign divorces and custody decrees to the validity of marriages, [or] the terms of an Islamic finance deal.”

The Oklahoma case goes back to federal court in Oklahoma City to determine the amendment’s constitutionality, where Tuesday’s judgment could be reversed.

NineMSN: Convert feared kidnapped by Muslim hardliners

The husband and friends of an Iranian refugee missing since last month fear she has been kidnapped by Islamic extremists because of her efforts to convert Muslims to Christianity.

Melbourne woman Mandy Ahmadi disappeared from her Dandenong home on December 16, leaving behind her handbag, money and credit cards, The Age reported.

Moving to Australia in 1999, Mrs Ahmadi became a Christian five years ago, and her husband Nathan converted from Islam a year later.

Mrs Ahmadi became active in the migrant community, helping Muslims leaving detention centres through an agency she co-founded at a local church.

“It is so painful. My heart and my brain are frozen,” Mr Ahmadi was quoted as saying.

Pastor Daniel Nalliah expressed his concerns in an email sent out yesterday.

“I was able to give some very important insight as to how under Islamic Sharia law, Muslims converts are sentenced to long terms in jail, torture and in places like Iran and some other Muslim countries, they are executed,” Mr Nalliah wrote.

“If this is an abduction, then we are really fighting against time, as to whether Mandy is still alive is a very big question.”

Under a hardline interpretation of Sharia law, Muslims who leave the religion can be sentenced to death.

Mr Nalliah, who worked as a missionary in Saudi Arabia before founding the controversial Catch the Fire Ministries, successfully defended a lawsuit from the Islamic Council of Victoria after being accused of religious vilification in 2002.

Photo here.

Update:

Husband charged with wife’s murder

From the 1389 Blog mailbox:

Subject: halal being shoved down Canadians’ throats at movie theatres across Canada
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 12:18:08 -0500

At the movie theatre, check the yogurt before ordering a yogurt smoothie…

I asked about the packages they were using, not because I ever dreamed it might be halal, but because I thought if I got the name of the producer of the frozen yogurt packages, I could get some myself at Costco or another wholesale outlet and use them to make my own smoothies.

Anyway, the package shows the halal safe product, and when I politely declined the smoothie, and explained why, the girl got upset and asked the other server to call the manager. When he came over, I explained that I refused to eat halal products and asked if he knew what the slaughter process was all about, and he explained yes, they had two other muslim managers and they had explained it all to him.

Eat up all you ignorant fools as sharia compliant products fill the market and this sharia just keeps on creeping, With absolutely no public awareness.

It makes me sooooooooooooooo angry…

Here’s a follow-up:

Sent: Friday, January 6, 2012 3:02 AM
Subject: RE: halal being shoved down Canadians throats at movie theatres across canada

…This one has several aspects to it.

I contacted COR, as this yogurt company (Yogen Früz) also has the COR label as well as Halal.

COR (Kashruth Council of Canada) is an regulatory organization in Toronto that makes sure products are Kosher and thus authenticates them as such for Jewish people.

The shocking thing is that these products carry both authentications.

I hope some strong outspoken Jewish people will contact the yogurt company (Yogen Früz) about aligning Kosher with Halal.

This kind of makes me sick. These creepy Muslims…

Jewish people have never ever tried to deceive the public about eating kosher products, but now the Muslims are not only trying to deceive everyone, they are trying to align themselves with the Jewish Kosher products so people won’t object. There are more and more restaurants and franchises opening up where Muslims are the owners, and where they serve the public with halal meat products and do not tell the public.

There has to be a market for all the 20 to 25 percent of halal slaughtered meat in Alberta…If that isn’t sickening…

The killing of meat in halal is very different from anything the Jewish people do.

Originally posted on Translating Jihad, 22 Dec 2011

Many in the West have praised the “Arab Spring” as a pro-democracy movement, and are encouraged by the fact that elections in Egypt have (ostensibly) been largely free and fair. In the face of big victories by Islamist parties, some have even gone so far as to argue that the results are largely irrelevant; instead the “value lies in the integrity of the process” (1).

But what if voters use their new-found political freedom to vote for candidates who are expressly opposed to democracy and even the very electoral process they are attempting to ride to power? This is exactly what is happening with the unexpected electoral success of the Islamist Nur Party.

Most Egypt-watchers have been surprised by the electoral success of the Nur Party. Current estimates put the party’s electoral gains at over 20% of the votes in the parliamentary elections, second only to the Muslim Brotherhood’s (another hard-line Islamist party, which however knows better how to speak soothing words to the West) estimated 40-50%.

The Nur Party’s long-standing opposition to democracy is well-known in Egypt. See the below 2010 video from one of its leaders–popular tele-shaykh ‘Abd-al-Mun’im al-Shahat–who was himself a candidate for parliament in the Alexandria region:

Click here to view the embedded video.

This is not just some embarrassing clip from long ago which was brought up in the electoral process in order to derail al-Shahat’s campaign. When asked about his position on democracy and elections just a few weeks ago, al-Shahat responded that he continues to maintain the same opinion, namely that democracy is “disbelief   in Allah (kufr) and forbidden (haraam).” However, to justify his candidacy in the elections, he offered his opinion that “Egyptian-style democracy is permissible, while Western democracy is disbelief in Allah” (2).

Perhaps explaining what al-Shahat meant by ‘Western democracy,’ other Nur Party candidates have affirmed that “the understanding of democracy with the meaning of people ruling themselves is disbelief in Allah.” They also went further, arguing that democracy was merely “Masonic-Jewish propaganda” (3). One of the candidates also praised Saudi Arabia’s application of Shari’ah-law penalties, which are generally much harsher than what Egypt experienced under Mubarak.

So the question remains:  if citizens use their freedom to elect tyrants worse than the one they overthrew, can that really be counted as progress?

Source List

1) http://allafrica.com/stories/201112221145.html

2) Translated from Arabic-language article at Masrawy.com, 1 December 2011:

Representative ‘Abd-al-Mun’im al-Shahat: Democracy Is Still Forbidden

‘Abd-al-Mun’im al-Shahat, a spokesman for there’s da’wa salafiya, announced that he still holds the opinion which he declared a short time ago, that democracy is forbidden (haraam) and disbelief (kufr). He declared at the same time that democracy is the only means for solving the political differences in order to preserve the cohesion of the society.

After playing the video which shows al-Shahat declaring at a previous time that democracy is disbelief (kufr) and forbidden (haraam), (media personality) Dina (‘Abd-al-Fatah) asked al-Shahat his opinion about this after he was about to win the election. Al-Shahat responded that he continues to hold the same opinion.

Al-Shahat said in an interview with media personality Dina ‘Abd-al-Fatah on the satellite station al-Tahrir, that all of the electoral indicators show that he is ahead of his opponents, and has gained more than 60% of the votes in the Montazah Department in Alexandria.

The spokesman for the Salafi Call (ad-da’wa as-salafiya) does not believe that his entrance into Parliament despite his declaration that democracy is forbidden is political opportunism. He pointed out that he believes that Egyptian-style democracy is permissible, while Western democracy is disbelief in Allah.

Al-Shahat also believes that the cause for him leading his opponents in the elections owes to his religious and political background, as well as his participation in various debates and seminars.

3) Translated from Arabic-language article at al-Masry al-Youm, 8 December 2011:

Nur Party Candidates: Democracy is ‘Kufr’ … and Propaganda from the Masonic Bloc … We Should Return to “al-Bay’a”

A number of leaders and candidates from the Nur Party in the Department of North Giza (Egypt) stressed that the understanding of democracy with the meaning of the people ruling themselves is disbelief (kufr) in Allah. They believe that the political elite “are opposed to what the apostles followed” in relying upon the system of allegiance (al-bay’a) after the death of the Apostle, in order to choose the caliph for the Muslims.

In an electoral meeting which they held Wednesday night in a hall attached to the Eastern Mosque in Barajil province, they described ads in the streets from the Egyptian Bloc as “Masonic-Jewish ads.” Shaykh Sha’ban Darwish–a member of the Nur Party High Council–stressed the need to change the philosophy of the current liberal system which the last two presidents, Sadat and Mubarak, produced, and which failed to promote the state to an Islamic system.

Darwish said:  ”If the Salafis strike the earth, it will bring forth money. The liberals should be ashamed of themselves and remove themselves from politics through the ballot box, because they caused corruption in the land over the last 60 years. Now they want to preserve their interests and benefits, which are connected to the Americans and the West.”

Dr. ‘Adil ‘Azazi, who is at the head of the Nur Party list in the Department of North Giza, said:  ”Leaving the ruling to the people, or what is called democracy, is disbelief (kufr) in Allah.” He pointed to the need to rely upon the system of allegiance (al-bay’a) to choose the caliphs of the Muslims. ‘Azazi added that Islamic laws applied in Saudi Arabia, and especially in applying the penalties of the Islamic Shari’ah, have contributed to a decrease in crime.

Sheik has the story at Winds of Jihad.

It’s not only about defending Canadian and Western values, it’s also about putting a stop to immigration and citizenship fraud.

Canada’s Ringing ‘No’ to the Niqab

The Canadian government of Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper showed new immigrants that Canadian and Western values are paramount in Canada on Monday when it banned face coverings for Muslim women at citizenship swearing-in ceremonies. The prohibition occurred after the country’s immigration minister, Jason Kenney​, had received complaints from citizenship judges and other ceremony participants that it is “hard to tell whether veiled individuals are actually reciting the oath.

“Allowing a group to hide their faces while they are becoming members of our community is counter to Canada’s commitment to openness, equality and social cohesion,” Kenney stated.

The wearing of the Muslim face-veil was becoming a growing problem at citizenship ceremonies. Government officials across the country were being confronted “every week” with veil-wearing women. This went against the grain of the government’s belief that taking the citizenship oath, according to Kenney, was “a public declaration that you are joining the Canadian family and it must be taken freely and openly.” In fact, Kenney called it “frankly bizarre” that regulations had allowed for face coverings at the ceremonies in the first place.

“We cannot have two classes of citizenship ceremonies,” the immigration minister maintained. “Canadian citizenship is not just about the right to carry a passport and to vote.”
[...]
The Canadian government’s ban can only represent a defeat for those Islamists who regard the wearing of the face-veil in the West as an outward display of sharia law as well as a barrier meant to separate Muslims from their Western societies. In the West, in the Islamists view, the veil’s wearing was always meant to make Islam visible in public spaces and relay the unspoken message: We are different. Besides being the Islamists’ version of showing the flag, the veil and headscarf have also served as Islamist probes to test a host society’s resolve to defend its values.

As a result of the veil’s and headscarf’s importance to Islamist plans, it is not surprising that in Germany a parliamentary delegate of Turkish origin, Ekin Deligoz, received death threats when she told Muslim women living there to take their headscarves off. Deligoz was a member of the leftist Green Party at the time. Ninety percent of the threats she received were from men and were so serious that Deligoz had to have police protection.

But the Canadian ban’s greatest significance is that it represents a setback for Islamic supremacism. There is currently a religiously motivated, political offensive being waged in Western countries, principally in the courts and under the guise of religious freedom, through which Islamists are attempting to establish a superior position for Islam over other religions in Western societies. Council on American-Islamic relations (CAIR) co-founder Omar Ahmad clearly expressed this Islamist design for the United States when he said to a Muslim audience in Fremont, California, in 1998 when he said: “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant.”
[...]
Read it all.

Michael Coren & Barbara Kay on the burka

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 13, 2011
“Rabble.ca . . . you might as well ask a cat.”

Lilley & Coren on banned nikabs & burkas

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 12, 2011
This is just the start – we need to get this crap banned from everyday life.

Indeed. Let’s start by banning facial disguise from the court system:

John Robson: show your face . . . or get out!

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 9, 2011

John Robson discusses the meaning of freedom of religion, the inferiority of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the place of islamic face coverings in Canadian society and its courts.
====================
The Supreme Court of Canada heard arguments Thursday about whether a Muslim woman accusing her cousin and uncle of childhood sexual abuse should be allowed to wear a full face-covering on the witness stand.

The case, which pits the woman’s freedom of religion against the right to a fair trial for the accused, will have national significance for Muslim women in the Canadian justice system.

Joanna Birenbaum, of the Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund, said the case will have important repercussions throughout Canada because “if the court requires women who wear the niqab to remove them to testify . . . the result will be that niqab-wearing women will not report sexual assaults at all, and the message is that they can be raped with impunity.”

N.S. — whose identity is protected by a publication ban — was ordered during a preliminary hearing in Ontario court to remove her niqab, a Muslim head and face covering which leaves only a slit for her eyes. She refused and, after making its way through the Ontario court system, her precedent-setting case is now at this country’s top court.

Lawyers for the accused argue that, if N.S. is allowed to testify with her face covered, the judge will not be able to determine the truth of her testimony.

However, David Butt, the woman’s lawyer, said the benefits of including people of the Muslim faith who wear a niqab, outweigh the negative aspects of the face covering, which he says are fairly minor.

“There are certain institutions in our society where it’s really important that they take people just as they are — one of those is hospitals, another one is courts. And, unless it’s going to seriously interfere with the functioning of the court, we should say, if that’s your sincere belief, we’re not going to stand in your way.”

If the court rules that N.S. must remove her niqab to testify, “it will put her in an impossible situation. She will have to choose between violating her religion or not seeking redress as a sexual assault complainant,” said Butt.

But, Tyler Hodgson from the Muslim Canadian Congress, said “the niqab, as an institution, undermines gender equality and full participation in a democratic society and the court ought to at least consider that when balancing these conflicting rights.”

Immigration and citizenship fraud definitely is a problem in Canada and elsewhere:

Palestine House: a locus of immigration fraud

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 9, 2011

The RCMP is investigating a potentially massive case of citizenship fraud involving 300 people who claimed to live at the same Mississauga address where Palestine House is located, according to a front page story in The Globe and Mail today.

The newspaper cites sources claiming that citizenship court judges were briefed on the case late last year and were specifically asked to be cautious of cases where multiple applicants appear to be using the same address.

Palestine House is located on Erindale Station Rd., next door to The Woodlands School in central Mississauga. It offers language and settlement services to immigrants and also lobbies the municipal, provincial and federal governments on behalf of Palestinian causes.

Citizenship and Immigration Canada gave the centre $2.4 million for English-language training in a multi-year agreement last April, an agreement that has been criticized by some Jewish groups who say Palestine House officials have sometimes publicly supported the violent actions of the Palestine Liberation Organization.

An employee at Palestine House, who spoke to The Globe anonymously, said he believes the RCMP investigation involves a rented office suite on the upper floor. The office is leased by private companies not associated with Palestine House.

The employee said brown government envelopes sometime were mailed to people who didn’t live or work at Palestine House. The envelopes contained government cheques for child benefits for people not living in Canada.

The RCMP went to Palestine House to ask about the envelopes in late 2007. The RCMP would not confirm or deny that an investigation is underway.

Immigration Minister Jason Kenney confirmed to The Globe that he was recently briefed on a citizenship fraud case by federal officials.

“There are a number of ongoing police investigations into this practice of people abroad hiring consultants to establish for them evidence of residency in Canada, to meet the three-year residency requirement, when, in point of fact, they are often living abroad most or all of that time,” Kenney said.

Proof of residence in Canada for three of four years prior to granting of citizenship is required by Immigration Canada.

- Mississauga News, Feb 1/2010

Jason Kenney clearing out illegal aliens

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 9, 2011

Who is benefiting from mass immigration? Just askin’.

Michael Coren with Peter Brimelow (VDare): immigration

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 12, 2011

Peter Brimelow, founder of VDare and author of Alien Nation: Common Sense About America’s Immigration Disaster, joins Michael Coren via video link.

Listen carefully to this Christian woman from Egypt as she describes what happens to Christians when Muslims are in control! This is what Islam demands: that all non-Muslims be treated as infidels, hated, abused, humiliated and killed. This will happen wherever Muslims have sufficient numbers to enforce shari’a law.

From YouTube:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by securefreedom on Dec 9, 2011

This week, Egyptian political activist Cynthia Farahat testified before the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission in the House of Representatives. Reps. Frank Wolf and James McDermott presented Under Threat: The Worsening Plight of Egypt’s Coptic Christians.

Ms. Farahat spoke about her experiences as an activist and co-founder of the Liberal Egyptian Party in 2006, while in her twenties– the platform of which argued for “secularism, human rights, capitalism, the rule of law, and rejection of pan-Arabism and Islamic imperialism,” not to mention the rejection of Shariah.

For more: http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/p18878.xml

CAIR Bears: The Movie

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by TheRudeNews on Apr 3, 2008

This is a quick vid of the CAIR Bears who reside at Therudenews.com.
Feel free to stop by there and see them…

See:

• The Rude News on Facebook
• CAIR Bears Return

Yes, the bears ARE for sale. Leave a message on the blog above or on Facebook if you are interested.

Michael Coren with Robert Spencer – Dec 8, 2011

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 8, 2011

Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch joins Michael Coren to discuss jackass English judge Robert Brown who gave a gang of muslim attackers a suspended sentence “after hearing mitigation that as Muslims, the women were not used to being drunk.”

Don’t know enough about Islam and Jihad? Need more information?

Here’s a list of Christmas reading for you,,maybe even a list of gifts to some of those friends who think you are making all this up perhaps?

Note the international authors: from Australia to Europe.

They can’t all be wrong!

From Bill Muelenberg’s Culture Watch – A comprehensive guide to what we are up against.

There are many areas of concern when it comes to standing up for a free and democratic West. One of the biggest threats is posed by the ongoing activities of creeping sharia and stealth jihad. Whether by demographics, outright terrorism, or indirect jihad, the West is under assault and it needs to be aware of the threat.

A number of important works continue to come forth from the presses, and these are some of the newer and better volumes worth recommending. They cover a number of related issues, offering theological, political, historical, legal, social, cultural and geo-political considerations.

All have been penned in the last few years, and all are well worth getting to understand the situation the West now finds itself in. Some are written by Christians, and some by secular authors. Some deal with political and ideological concerns while others look at religious and theological issues.

I offer these twenty books in no particular order, but do suggest that you try to get at least a few of these important works in order to better understand the new Cold War we are in.

Durie, Mark, The Third Choice. Deror Books, 2010.
Mark Durie is one of Australia’s leading experts on Islam. He has written much on Islam in general and dhimmitude in particular. The condition of Christians in Muslim nations is getting worse, and believers will fare no better as Islam gets further entrenched in the West. Here is a first-rate look at the issue from historical, theological and pastoral perspectives. We ignore the warnings here at our own peril.

Ye’or, Bat, Europe, Globalization, and the Coming of the Universal Caliphate. Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2011.
Egyptian-born Ye’or is perhaps the world’s leading authority on dhimmitude. This book is a continuation of her very important 2005 volume, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis. Here she shows how the Islamic advance in Europe has only intensified since six years ago. She carefully demonstrates how Islam is wielding tremendous power through the EU, the UN and other bodies. This is a wake-up call for Europe and the West.

Goldman, David, How Civilizations Die: (And Why Islam Is Dying Too). Regnery, 2011.
In this very important volume a number of themes are discussed, all tied in with demographics. Religion and fertility are intertwined, and when people lose faith, they stop having children. That is how civilisations commit suicide. But when Muslim women become educated and literate, they too tend to abandon their faith and stop having kids, so even the Muslim world is now in upheaval in this regard. This book is must reading.

Geller, Pamela, Stop the Islamization of America. WND Books, 2011.
As the subtitle says, this is “A practical guide to the resistance.” And resistance is certainly needed. America is being Islamised big time, with stealth jihad occurring with increased intensity. Geller documents the many ways in which this is taking place, and offers some much-needed strategies to turn it around.

Reilly, Robert, The Closing of the Muslim Mind. ISI Books, 2010.
Why is scientific inquiry almost non-existent in the Muslim world? Why does open debate and genuine intellectual inquiry seem to be so hard to come by in the Islamic world? Why is genuine peace so illusive in the Middle East and the Muslim world? Why does Islam seem to be trapped in a seventh century mindset? These and other issues are nicely dealt with in this important volume.

Muthuswamy, Moorthy, Defeating Political Islam. Prometheus Books, 2009.
Muthuswamy argues that we in the West are in a new Cold War. There is an international Islamic political agenda being financed and promoted by Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, with a war of ideas just as important as any armed conflict. The West needs to fully engage in this ideological battle, and urgently take steps to reverse the main gains of the Islamists.

Babbin, Jed, In the Words of Our Enemies. Regnery, 2007.
Just what do the Islamists and the jihadists actually want? What are their goals, their aims, their strategies and their plans? Actually, it is not hard to discover the answers to these questions, because they have in fact told us all this and more. Here Babbin simply compiles what the enemies of the West have been saying, what they hope to achieve, and how they seek to go about it. Sobering reading.

Bennett William and Seth Leibsohn, The Fight of Our Lives: Knowing the Enemy, Speaking the Truth, and Choosing to Win the War Against Radical Islam. Thomas Nelson, 2011.
In this well documented volume the authors lay out for us the dangers we face with Islamic terrorism, and show us how we might better deal with it. They examine a number of issues, and make it clear that we must be sure of who our enemy is and what it is they want. A brief but helpful look at the struggle we all face.

Shoebat, Walid, Why We Want to Kill You: The Jihadist Mindset and How to Defeat It. Top Executive Media, 2007.
As a former Islamic terrorist, Shoebat knows a thing or two about the forces at war against the West. Here he describes in detail the terrorist mind, the plan and goals of the Islamists, and how “moderate” Muslims are paving the way for stealth jihad. Must reading from an authority on the topic.

Gabriel, Brigitte, They Must Be Stopped. St. Martin’s Press, 2008.
The author of the very important 2006 volume Because They Hate, here continues her clarion call for the West to wake up and face this threat head on. The former Arabic news program anchor knows full well the struggle we face, and here offers numerous helpful proposals on how we can keep the West free and prevent stealth jihad from succeeding.

Sultan, Wafa, A God Who Hates: The Courageous Woman Who Inflamed the Muslim World Speaks Out Against the Evils of Islam. St. Martin’s Press, 2009.
The author spent 30 years in Syria and knows firsthand the oppressive and misogynist world of Islam. She now resides in the US and regularly debates Muslims, informing us about the deplorable condition of women in Islam, and how women in the West are also in danger. A revealing and eye-opening volume.

Weigel, George, Faith, Reason and the War Against Jihadism. Doubleday, 2007.
Weigel is always well worth reading, and in this insightful volume we find a helpful essay on the struggle the West is engaged in, and how we must face it. Historical, political and religious considerations are examined as he discusses how we can confront this challenge. Philosophical reflections are combined with public policy proposals in this wide-ranging work.

McCarthy, Andrew, The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America. Encounter Books, 2010.
Leftists have long ago declared war on America, as have the Islamists. In fact, we often find them working together arm in arm to achieve their aims. In this very thorough and well-documented volume McCarthy looks at how these two movements have combined to wage war on the US and subvert its constitutional democracy. A real wake-up call to the imminent dangers the US and the West face.

Spencer, Robert, The Complete Infidel’s Guide to the Koran. Regnery, 2009.
The Koran is a closed book to most people – even to most Muslims. Here the American expert on Islam provides an in-depth view of what the Koran teaches and how we are to understand it. It offers detailed chapters on all the crucial issues, such as Islam and violence, Islam’s treatment of women, Islam and Christianity, and the Koran’s treatment of Jews. A helpful and revealing volume.

Warner, Bill, Sharia Law for Non-Muslims. Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2010.
In this thin volume (just 48 pages) Bill Warner outlines what sharia is and how it relates to how women are treated, how jihad is waged, and how infidels are dealt with. Also examined are sharia finance, Islamic family law, and so on. He demonstrates how creeping sharia is making huge inroads in America and the West and the very real threat this poses.

Boykin, William et al, Shariah: The Threat to America. The Center for Security Policy, 2010.
This is a lengthy, detailed and careful study of what sharia is and how it operates. This study is the result of an indepth analysis by a team of security policy experts, and makes it clear what very real dangers America is confronted with. A very comprehensive and meticulous work which makes it clear that we are not just up against “extremists” but a political and unyielding religion.

Bawer, Bruce, Surrender. Doubleday, 2009.
Surrender is exactly what the West is doing in the face of radical Islam, especially Europe and the UK. In this well-argued and well-researched volume Bawer shows how we are undermining our own efforts as we attempt to appease the Islamists. We are surrendering our freedoms, our values and our beliefs as we cave in to the demands of those pushing for a global caliphate and universal sharia law. An important wake-up call.

Janson, Vickie, Ideological Jihad. Castle Publishing, 2009.
This Melbourne writer has long been involved in reaching Muslims. Here she examines how Islam is pushing its agenda ideologically, and in particular, she examines the writings and influence of Muslim apologist, Waleed Aly. She shows how in spite of the smooth-sounding propaganda, Islam and Christianity are on two different roads, and can never meet. She dissects the various myths being perpetrated by Muslim apologists, and makes the case for the uniqueness of Christ. A helpful response to the misinformation and half-truths being peddled in our mainstream media by Muslim activists.

Solomon, Sam and E al Maqdisi, Modern Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration. ANM, 2009.
Armed jihad is not the only way the Islamists can defeat a nation. There are numerous other ways in which stealth jihad occurs. How an Islamic minority can consolidate power in a Western nation and eventually take it over is the focus of this work. Plenty of Arabic sources are utilised as the authors solidly make their case for this very real type of jihad.

Phares, Walid, The War of Ideas. Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.
The war between democracy and Islamism is the supreme battle of our time. This volume offers a learned, incisive and careful look at this conflict, and how the two sets of ideas can never be reconciled. A very valuable discussion of the ideological crisis of our age, and how the West can defeat this dangerous foe.

Cross-posted at Act For Australia