9 posts tagged “muslim”
John McCain made a stop in Norfolk, VA today to discuss foreign policy issues and receive some glowing praise from a number of his colleagues. Always keen to learn more about international relations and, well, see famous people, I managed to weasel my way in and was treated to a sensible, realistic acknowledgment of the threat of radical Islam. This is from some of the most knowledgeable authorities on national security in Congress.
Chief among these in my eyes was John Warner. A Southern gentleman in the truest sense, Senator Warner has been a strong advocate for the military and if he believes that John McCain will do well as the President then I am prepared to believe him.
The major point today was that we absolutely must confront radical, militant Islam. I agree with that sentiment 100%. Senator Sam Brownback made some very excellent statements, bringing the focus onto Africa where a significant amount of Muslim extremism is fomented. Brownback is also extremely prominent in the pro-life community. His endorsement of McCain puts any doubts about McCain's pro-life credits to rest.
In addition to these two men, the endorsement of former Secretaries of the Navy William Ball and John Lehman spoke volumes about their beliefs in McCain's strong military stance. Rebuilding the military is key, as the Clinton years saw too much military reduction. Rumsfeld made an error before Iraq and Afghanistan by not focusing more effort on building up force levels to avoid long, repeated deployments. But another point made today was that we must maintain the All Volunteer Force by increasing recruitment and increasing opportunities for soldiers. As McCain said, there is a market out there and young people have to know their needs will be met should they choose military service.
It is well within the interests of my region of Virginia to elect a man like John McCain.
McCain is strong on the social issues. Period. McCain is obviously strong on foreign policy (his strong language regarding Iran was particularly impressive), though conservatives still need more assurance about the illegal immigration issue. When I informed my good friend W that I was in attendance, he cut to the heart of the matter quite succinctly: "...if they serve lunch order the enchiladas. I hear they taste really good with a side of amnesty." No lunch, but it is important to keep from getting star-struck. Thanks W!
On a side note, I just saw myself on TV. Some guy blocked my handshake with McCain and the annoyance on my face is pretty obvious. I wish I had a picture. It's ok, because I did get to shake Sam Brownback's hand and let him know I appreciate his pro-life stance. He said we've got to push harder on that issue. Agreed.
I got a picture of McCain answering questions from the press, which I have provided. Forgive the quality. I didn't think I'd actually be allowed inside and neglected to bring a camera! If I can locate a bit of that video with my handshake fiasco, I'll post that too. UPDATE: Here's that video...Note the disappointed looking young man at 56 seconds in. That old guy in front of me was such a fanboy, he jostled me out of the way just to tell McCain something the man wouldn't remember in 10 seconds anyway.
I was watching C-Span this morning, not ten minutes ago, getting ready to do a number on a peppermint pie leftover from Christmas. I love peppermint pie with something approaching unnatural strength. Some boring Senate thing was on the screen, but as I read the ticker I was shocked and appalled to read
The woman was a political entity before my time, surely. And she was pretty much fired and charged with corruption in absentia, but for a political leader to be assassinated in such a way is always a shock. These are the people who are positioned to keep things running, who are connected with the movers and shakers in any country. No matter their politics, when they are killed a country has lost a resource.
Pakistan's only hope to pull itself out of the muck of radical Islamic theocracy and into a stable constitutional state is that its political leaders are allowed to make their case without fear of being murdered. I don't believe Pervez Musharraf is responsible for this attack, but I do believe that this highlights just how much control the central government in Pakistan has. That is, not much. When (not if) this blows up into a riotous mob, Musharraf will be hard pressed to keep things from devolving into further bloodshed. He's managed to hold on so far, but now he's got a martyr on his hands.
This is big news. Big news.
Damn these people for their ignorance, and I thank God (not Allah, he's obviously been on vacation) that I live in the United States of America. Despite what its detractors say, the US doesn't kill political opposition, and we have the stability to maintain the rule of law even when the opposition is dangerously close to being John Edwards.
Update: Ha. I forgot. They have nukes, too!
I have to say, the news is out there if you just look for it. Let's see, we had the honor killing in London a while back. Now it seems that Canada has joined the club. I anticipate that within the next two years we will have an instance of this in the United States. Maybe I just don't know about it.
Father killed daughter for not wearing hijab, her friends say
Dec 11 12:56 PM US/Eastern
259 Comments
View larger image
Muslim Man Kills Daughter For Not Wearing HijabFriends and classmates of a 16-year-old girl who police say was murdered by her devout Muslim father in a Toronto suburb told local media Tuesday she was killed for not wearing a hijab. Police said in a statement they received an emergency call at 7:55 am local time Monday from "a man who indicated that he had just killed his daughter."
The victim, Aqsa Parvez, was "rushed to hospital with life-threatening injuries, but tragically passed away late last night."
Her father, Muhammad Parvez, 57, was arrested at the scene and will be formally charged with murder when he appears in court Wednesday, said police.
The girl's friends, meanwhile, told local media she was having trouble at home because she did not conform to the family's religious beliefs and refused to wear a traditional Islamic head scarf, or hijab.
"She wanted to go different ways than her family wanted to go, and she wanted to make her own path, but he (her father) wouldn't let her," one of her classmates told public broadcaster CBC.
"She loved clothes," another of her friends, Dominiquia Holmes-Thompson, told the daily Toronto Star. "She just wanted to show her beauty ... She just wanted to dress like us, just like a normal person."
According to her friends, Aqsa had worn the hijab at school last year, but rebelled in recent months.
They said she would leave home wearing a hijab and loose-fitting clothes, but would take off her head scarf and change into tighter garments at school, then change back before going home at the end of the day.
The victim's 26 year-old brother was also charged with obstructing police in the investigation.
Want to know the problem of Radical Islam? It's that it can grow within communities of moderate or liberal Muslims. Some young fella, maybe second generation (or first, who knows) decides his parents aren't Muslim enough, he starts going to wacky websites and then he finds himself an imam who talks up hardline Islam, pretty soon he's a fairly solid fundamentalist, the type who would read the Koran and say,
"You know what, it's right to kill female members of my family if they cause me shame. Thanks Allah!"
It's interesting.
It can happen in other faiths as well. How many ex-hippies have Southern Baptist children? Difference being that Southern Baptists only rarely engage in strangulation.
Well, as anyone who has been paying attention for the better part of this decade knows, Muslims of a certain stripe don't take kindly to anyone who doesn't follow their customs and way of life. Recently, a British woman living and teaching in Sudan was jailed for the reprehensible crime of naming a class teddy bear "Muhammed." Wait, scratch that. She didn't name it, she merely allowed her class to name it. One boy named Muhammed actually suggested the name, after his own.
What happened next, I'm not sure, but somehow this woman ended up in a Sudanese prison. Better still, she faced a maximum sentence of prison time or forty lashes. Forty lashes with a bamboo cane no wider than a finger has the potential to cause serious permanent damage.
Now, as those who pay attention expected, come the calls for her death. For her death! Who, pray tell, put out these calls? Osama bin Laden? Mahmoud Ahmahdinejad? No, nobody so grand. Local imams preached on the subject today, and afterwards their followers massed for a protest, brandishing knives and clubs and demanding this British woman's execution.
This is clear evidence of the effect of just kernels of radical Islam on a population. Where it is allowed to fester, the populace is soon consumed with a violent antipathy towards non-Muslims and a complete disregard for common sense.
The article states that many British Muslim groups have come out against this action. This is commendable! I have often lamented that the very people in the best position to quash radical Islam - moderate, pro-democracy Muslims - are nearly always silent by choice or by cowardice or by coercion. The more moderate Muslims speak out against things like this - like the Saudi rape case, like the honor killing which took place in London itself - the more progress will be made against our mutual enemy.
And why is Britain even tolerating this? Was a time when the British commandos would have stormed that prison, relations with a pissant little country like Sudan be damned. Shouldn't the lives of British subjects be protected from unjust persecution in foreign lands? This woman committed no crime, and should be freed immediately. She may not last the 15 days in that jail cell before a mob comes and carries her to her death.
Saudi punishes gang rape victim with 200 lashes
Nov 15 10:51 AM US/Eastern
156 Comments
View larger imageA court in the ultra-conservative kingdom of Saudi Arabia is punishing a female victim of gang rape with 200 lashes and six months in jail, a newspaper reported on Thursday. The 19-year-old woman -- whose six armed attackers have been sentenced to jail terms -- was initially ordered to undergo 90 lashes for "being in the car of an unrelated male at the time of the rape," the Arab News reported.
But in a new verdict issued after Saudi Arabia's Higher Judicial Council ordered a retrial, the court in the eastern town of Al-Qatif more than doubled the number of lashes to 200.
A court source told the English-language Arab News that the judges had decided to punish the woman further for "her attempt to aggravate and influence the judiciary through the media."
Saudi Arabia enforces a strict Islamic doctrine known as Wahhabism and forbids unrelated men and women from associating with each other, bans women from driving and forces them to cover head-to-toe in public.
Last year, the court sentenced six Saudi men to between one and five years in jail for the rape as well as ordering lashes for the victim, a member of the minority Shiite community.
But the woman's lawyer Abdul Rahman al-Lahem appealed, arguing that the punishments were too lenient in a country where the offence can carry the death penalty.
In the new verdict issued on Wednesday, the Al-Qatif court also toughened the sentences against the six men to between two and nine years in prison.
The case has angered members of Saudi Arabia's Shiite community. The convicted men are Sunni Muslims, the dominant community in the oil-rich Gulf state.
Lahem, also a human rights activist, told AFP on Wednesday that the court had banned him from handling the rape case and withdrew his licence to practise law because he challenged the verdict.
He said he has also been summoned by the ministry of justice to appear before a disciplinary committee in December.
Lahem said the move might be due to his criticism of some judicial institutions, and "contradicts King Abdullah's quest to introduce reform, especially in the justice system."
King Abdullah last month approved a new body of laws regulating the judicial system in Saudi Arabia, which rules on the basis of sharia, or Islamic law.
Now I know what you liberal jackinapes will say: Oooh, aren't these our allies the Saudis? Ooooh! Well, here's news for you folks. After we stop the ones with guns we need to move on to the ones with whips.
I get into so many arguments about the superiority of Western civilization when compared to this crap. People actually try to argue that we are not superior to these animals when it comes to our laws, treatment of women and tolerance of other religions.
Give me a break.
TESTING THE FAITH
Bishop urges Christians to call God 'Allah'
Catholic leader believes it would help ease tensions between religions
Posted: August 15, 2007
3:28 p.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.comCatholic churches in the Netherlands should use the name Allah for God to ease tensions between Muslims and Christians, says a Dutch bishop.
Bishop Tiny Muskens (Courtesy Radio Netherlands Worldwide)Tiny Muskens, the bishop of Breda, told the Dutch TV program "Network" Monday night he believes God doesn't mind what he is called, Radio Netherlands Worldwide reported.
The Almighty is above such "discussion and bickering," he insisted.
Muskens points to Indonesia, where he served 30 years ago, as an example for Dutch churches. Christians in the Middle East also use the term Allah for God.
"Someone like me has prayed to Allah yang maha kuasa (Almighty God) for eight years in Indonesia and other priests for 20 or 30 years," Muskens said. "In the heart of the Eucharist, God is called Allah over there, so why can't we start doing that together?"
Muskens thinks it could take another 100 years, but eventually the name Allah will be used by Dutch churches, promoting rapprochement between the two religions, he said, according to Radio Netherlands.
However, a survey published today in the Netherlands' largest newspaper, De Telegraaf, showed 92 percent of the more than 4,000 people polled oppose the bishop's view, the Associated Press reported.
(Story continues below)
Some letters to the paper were filled with ridicule for the bishop.
"Sure. Lets call God Allah. Lets then call a church a mosque and pray five times a day. Ramadan sounds like fun," wrote Welmoet Koppenhol.
The chairman of the Protestant Church in the Netherlands, Gerrit de Fijter, told the Dutch paper he welcomed any attempt to "create more dialogue," according to the AP. But he said, "Calling God 'Allah' does no justice to Western identity. I see no benefit in it."
A Muslim spokesman, for Amsterdam's union of Moroccan mosques, said Muslims had not asked for such a gesture from Christians, the AP reported.
Tensions with the Netherlands' 1-million-strong Muslim community have been high since the 2004 murder of filmmaker Theo Van Gogh by a Muslim avenging a film critical of Islam.
Last week, politician Geert Wilders talked about banning the Quran, shortly after the head of a group of former Muslims, Ehsan Jami, compared Islam's prophet Muhammad with al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.
Muskens made similar remarks several year ago about using the name of Allah, Radio Netherlands reported. He also suggested replacing the national Christian holiday Whit Monday – celebrated the day after Pentecost – with an Islamic religious day.
The bishop also has offended Muslims, saying in 2005 Islam was a religion without a future because it has too many violent aspects
Ok, so when I said I'd ridicule another faith, I didn't really think it would be my own. And of course, it's not actually my faith that's on the block here. But this representative of my faith deserves some ire.
Firstly, the point I want to make is the one made by the Protestant. Simply calling God "Allah" does nothing to encourage mutual respect and deference...the actual goal and the point in which Islam is lacking. To simply give up our Western identity because we know a bunch of Mecca-lovers are going to throw a tantrum is spineless.
Which brings me to the point in which Christianity is lacking: too much deference to a faith which doesn't deserve it. In fact, I'd like to see more criticism like that levied by my pope, though after the riots that more than likely won't happen. Because think about it...Catholicism is attacked almost daily, its precepts misrepresented in the media and its priests slandered because of the actions of a few. I've always been a believer that turning the cheek needs to give way to institutional survival, and Catholicism needs to grow a pair.
Forgive my earthiness, but it galls me that we can sit in little circles and talk about how we've got things right and we need to enlighten our Protestant bretheren and those of other faiths, and yet when Islam starts whining we have a bishop who advocates adoption of the Muslim name for God. In a misguided attempt to appease our enemies (let's face it, we're in competition here) that would weaken our distinctive Western characteristics. His point that the Church in Asia uses the name "Allah" is not relevant to the Church in the West.
I think that the time for nancy-boy Christianity has passed. It never actually had a time given to it, rather I feel my faith has been usurped by short-sighted institutional martyrs who want to embrace the oblivion that is relativism. On my blog I'm often accused of bigotry...how can believing that I am right (and by extension, that others are wrong) about God make me a bigot? I don't deny anyone the opportunity to come around to my faith. I have staked my claim to truth, and I refuse to compromise on it. Unlike this bishop.
One more thing: like most of the problems with cultural apathy, this is what seems a subtle and insignificant change. What does it matter if we call God "Allah" anyway? But it'll make it that much easier for the Muslims to make inroads in Europe. And I don't want that, frankly.
Woman raped before "honor killing": court
LONDON (Reuters) - A Kurdish woman was brutally raped, stamped on and strangled by members of her family and their friends in an "honor killing" carried out at her London home because she had fallen in love with the wrong man.
Banaz Mahmod, 20, was subjected to the 2-1/2 hour ordeal before she was garroted with a bootlace. Her body was stuffed into a suitcase and taken about 100 miles to Birmingham where it was buried in the back garden of a house.
Her badly decomposed body was found in April 2006, three months after the killing.
Last month a jury found her father Mahmod Mahmod, 52, and his brother Ari Mahmod, 51, guilty of murder after a three-month trial. Their associate Mohamad Hama, 30, had earlier admitted killing her.
On Thursday at a pre-sentence hearing for Hama, the Old Bailey heard details about Banaz's last moments.
Prosecutors said the three convicted men, along with two other suspects who are still at large, had carried out the killing fearing that the authorities were closing in on them.
They believed Banaz had brought shame on the family by leaving her husband, an Iraqi Kurd she had been forced to marry at 17, and falling in love with Rahmat Suleimani, an Iranian Kurd.
Her former unnamed partner had raped her as well as repeatedly beating her, the court heard.
Hama, who prosecutors said had been a ringleader in the murder, was caught by listening devices talking to a friend in prison about the murder.
In the recordings, transcripts of which were relayed to the court, Hama and his friend are hearing laughing as he described how she was killed with Banaz's uncle "supervising".
"I was kicking and stamping on her neck to get the soul out. I saw her stark naked, only wearing pants or underwear," Hama is recorded as saying.
His lawyers say there is no evidence to support the prosecution's claims.
The decision to kill her came after a meeting on January 23 -- the day before she was murdered -- when the family decided to take action before the police could foil their attempts, said prosecutor Victor Temple.
Hama is due to be sentenced on Friday with Mahmod Mahmod and his brother, Ari.
This is one of those areas where Western Civilization has a lot to
offer the Islamic world. We don't do this to our daughters.
So, what do we do? Talk this out with them? Explain to them
why it was wrong to stomp on the girl's neck and that they are very
naughty boys and mustn't ever do this again, no sir?
This is how they live, this is their world. We are fighting
tribal barbarians with psychotic ideas about honor who show no
compunctions about killing their own daughters to avoid shame.
They don't understand diplomacy, you idiots. They understand
bullets, so let's give it to them before this happens again. This
is the Islam we are fighting, not the happy religion of peace that we
hear about on TV and that I am sure exists somewhere (I really am sure
it does, despite my rancor).
And this is where liberals will always fall flat. Because they
talk about women's rights and they talk about peace and they talk about
all these wonderful things -- but when the time comes to stand up and
eradicate the evils they decry, they balk. They shirk their
responsibility and argue in favor of doing nothing, and I can't for the life of me understand why.
Talk. Talk yourselves to death, they don't care. A culture that believes in this sort of thing is one that believes only the weak talk about their problems. The strong realize their will by force or threat of force.
This happened in England, damn it.
Bush like Hitler, says first Muslim in Congress
By Toby Harnden in WashingtonLast Updated: 3:32pm BST 16/07/2007
America's first Muslim congressman has provoked outrage by apparently comparing President George W Bush to Adolf Hitler and hinting that he might have been responsible for the September 11 attacks.
Addressing a gathering of atheists in his home state of Minnesota, Keith Ellison, a Democrat, compared the 9/11 atrocities to the destruction of the Reichstag, the German parliament, in 1933. This was probably burned down by the Nazis in order to justify Hitler's later seizure of emergency powers.
"It's almost like the Reichstag fire, kind of reminds me of that," Mr Ellison said. "After the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the Communists for it, and it put the leader [Hitler] of that country in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted."
To applause from his audience of 300 members of Atheists for Human Rights, Mr Ellison said he would not accuse the Bush administration of planning 9/11 because "you know, that's how they put you in the nut-ball box - dismiss you".
Vice-President Dick Cheney's stance of refusing to answer some questions from Congress was "the very definition of totalitarianism, authoritarianism and dictatorship", he added.
Mr Ellison also raised eyebrows by telling his audience: "You'll always find this Muslim standing up for your right to be atheists all you want."
A convert to Islam who was previously linked to the extremist Nation of Islam, Mr Ellison, 42, has cultivated a moderate image since being elected last November, concentrating on issues such as health and education.
He is an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq. But he angered his own anti-war supporters by voting for a budget bill that aims to end the war over the next 18 months. His followers want an immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq.
After his speech was reported, Mr Ellison said he accepted that Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11. But his demagogic comments threaten to plunge him in controversy.
Mark Drake, of the Republican party in Minnesota, said: "To compare the democratically elected leader of the United States of America to Hitler is an absolute moral outrage which trivialises the horrors of Nazi Germany."
Peace
be upon you Keith Ellison. Giving voice to that sort of paranoid
nonsense is foolish, and it makes you look like an apologist for
radical Islam. Further, it makes you look stupid as all get
out. Not only did you ignore common sense by speaking in that
way, but you've also undermined your position as a credible moderate
Muslim...the only one in Congress. I'm disappointed that my low
expectations of your character are being met so earnestly. Where
is your savvy, sir?
Thank you KatieKat: حمار
So here's an article. Notice the difference in eyebrow shapes. Methinks Christopher Hitchens waxes.
I think Christopher is right about Iraq, but Peter is right about Christopher and most of what he's writing about. And Peter seems to have a consistent opposition to violence even if he does fail to realize that our Muslim enemies care little for his views. That's where Christopher scores points about faith...radical Islam is a faith that needs to stop existing. But remove the Christian sensibilities from C. Hitchens' worldview and it becomes difficult to rationalize being a good person for its own sake. P. Hitchens and C. Hitchens should write themselves a book together in which they argue bitterly...I would read it.
Also, the article is a good example of how the terms "left" and "right" mean different things across the pond.
