This year marks not only the 50th anniversary of the shooting of John F. Kennedy but also the 45th anniversary of the shooting of Robert F. Kennedy, which occurred in June 1968. Was there a common source motivating the assassins of both Kennedys—that is, Lee Harvey Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan?
That renowned political philosopher Mick Jagger speculated on a source. “I shouted out ‘Who killed the Kennedys?’” asks the lyrics in the 1968 song by The Rolling Stones. “When, after all, it was you and me.” The song was titled, “Sympathy for the Devil.” It was, The Rolling Stones suggested, the Devil who had killed the Kennedys, along with his accomplices.
I must say I can’t disagree with that one—a rare area of agreement between me and Mick Jagger.
There is, however, a more earthly answer. And it was provided, surprisingly, by a rising political star in the immediate hours after the shooting of Bobby Kennedy. That star was the new governor of California, Ronald Reagan.
RFK was shot in Governor Reagan’s state. Reagan was no stranger to Bobby Kennedy. He had debated him a year earlier on national television, which didn’t go well for RFK, with Reagan clearly outshining him. Kennedy told his handlers to never again put him on the same stage with “that son-of-a-b—-.”
That debate occurred five years after Bobby Kennedy had intervened to get Reagan fired from his long stint as host of the top-rated GE Theatre on CBS—a fact unknown until it was revealed by Michael Reagan in his excellent book, The New Reagan Revolution. Typical of Reagan, he harbored no bitterness toward RFK. That was quite unlike Bobby Kennedy, a man who personally knew how to hold a grudge.
On June 5, 1968, Reagan was full of nothing but sympathy for RFK. He appeared on the popular television show of Joey Bishop, one of the extended members of Frank Sinatra’s Rat Pack. Bishop and Reagan were old Hollywood friends, and Bishop extended the governor a platform to address the shooting. A transcript of Reagan’s appearance on that show was grabbed by his young chief of staff, Bill Clark, who died just a few months ago. Clark shoved it in a box that ended up in the tack barn at his ranch in central California. It lay there until I, as Clark’s biographer, dug it out three decades later.
That rare surviving transcript reveals a Reagan who spoke movingly about RFK and the entire Kennedy family. Condemning the “savage act,” Reagan pleaded: “I am sure that all of us are praying not only for him but for his family and for those others who were so senselessly struck down also in the fusillade of bullets…. I believe we should go on praying, to the best of our ability.”
But particularly interesting was how Reagan unflinchingly pointed a finger of blame in the direction of Moscow. Reagan noted that Kennedy’s killer, Sirhan Sirhan, a Palestinian Arab and also a communist, had shot Kennedy because of his support of Israel during the Six Day War that had occurred exactly one year earlier. On that, we now know beyond dispute what Reagan knew then: That war had been shamelessly provoked by the Kremlin.
Looking to exploit divisions in the Middle East and further exacerbate America’s foreign-policy problems at the time (we were mired in Vietnam), Soviet officials cooked up false intelligence reports claiming that Israeli troops had been moved into the Golan Heights and were readying to invade Syria. They peddled the malicious, phony information to Egypt and other Arab states for the explicit purpose of creating a military confrontation with Israel. The Israeli leader, Levi Eshkol, immediately denounced the accusation, telling the Soviet ambassador to his face that there were no Israeli troops there whatsoever, and offering to personally drive him to the Golan at once. Acting on orders, the ambassador flatly refused, shouting “Nyet!” at Eshkol and storming out of the prime minister’s residence. The Egyptians, too, checked their intelligence sources and found no evidence of Israeli troops in the Golan. Nonetheless, the pieces were in motion, and one thing dangerously led to another until everything spiraled out of control. Within mere weeks, the Six Day War was on—precipitated by the Kremlin. The egregious depths of Soviet disinformation spawned a major Middle East war.
RFK supported Israel in that war. Sirhan Sirhan never forgave him for that. He killed him for that.
Again, Ronald Reagan knew about the Soviet role in instigating the conflict, which he apparently pieced together via various reports at the time. As a result, he linked Bobby Kennedy’s assassination to the USSR’s mischief in the Middle East. “The enemy sits in Moscow,” Reagan told Joey Bishop. “I call him an enemy because I believe he has proven this, by deed, in the Middle East. The actions of the enemy led to and precipitated the tragedy of last night.”
Moscow had precipitated the Six Day War in June 1967, which, in turn, had prompted RFK’s assassin in June 1968.
But Reagan wasn’t finished positioning blame where it deserved to be placed. Eight days later, on July 13, 1968, Reagan delivered a forgotten speech in Indianapolis. Both the Indianapolis News and Indianapolis Star reported on Reagan’s remarks, but the only full transcript I’ve seen was likewise located in Bill Clark’s private papers. In that speech, Reagan leveled this charge at international communism, with an earlier Kennedy assassination in mind: “Five years ago, a president was murdered by one who renounced his American citizenship to embrace the godless philosophy of communism, and it was communist violence he brought to our land. The shattering sound of his shots were still ringing in our ears when a policy decision was made to play down his communist attachment lest we provoke the Soviet Union.”
Recently, US Treasury Secretary Jack Lew and Secretary of State John Kerry held closed-door top-secret meetings to persuade the US Senate foreign relations and banking committees to end sanctions on Iran. The next day, Iraqi President Nouri al-Maliki visited the White House to ask for assistance against terrorist insurgents. Trying to curry favor with either Iraq or Iran is a losing proposition.
Having served in Iraq and Afghanistan, I can tell you it’s well recognized that Iranian influence is heavy in providing weapons, especially explosive force penetrators (EFPs) and training to groups fighting against our deployed men and women. We also know that Iran is led by radical theocrats with one goal in mind: destruction of the smaller Satan (Israel) and the greater Satan (America). We must understand their concept of returning the Mahdi, the hidden Imam, and what that means for the global Islamic revolution and global conquest.
The demonization of free thinking individuals is about to begin. By branding Paul Ciancia a conspiracy theorist, all of us will come under scrutiny.
Anyone who does not believe wholeheartedly in the crap the government tries to feed them on a daily basis will become a danger to society.
It stands to reason that after a major public incidence of violence such as mass shootings or bombings, people want answers. It’s right and proper that these cases are investigated and as many answers as possible are provided to the citizens of this country.
Having said that, an alarming pattern is emerging,
Some events are highlighted and get massive coverage on television, on the internet and in the newspapers but most incidents do not.
Those that can’t be ‘spun’ by the government are given a couple of lines in the papers or a minute of airtime, and that’s it. Done. Gone. Forgotten.
The events that can be used by the government, get acres of print space and constant news coverage. In addition they always have a reason behind them that benefits the government in some way.
Let me show you what I mean. In 2012 88 people were killed in mass shootings in the United States. Sixteen mass shootings with 88 deaths.(source) Here’s the list:
February 22, 2012: Five people were killed in at a Korean health spa in Norcross, Georgia, when a man opened fire inside the facility in an act suspected to be related to domestic violence.
February 26, 2012: Multiple gunmen began firing into a nightclub in Jackson, Tennessee, killing one person and injuring 20 others.
February 27, 2012: Three students at Chardon High School in rural Ohio were killed when a classmate opened fire.
March 8, 2012: Two people were killed and seven wounded at a psychiatric hospital in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania when a gunman entered the hospital with two semiautomatic handguns and began firing.
March 31, 2012: A gunman opened fire on a crowd of mourners at a North Miami, Florida funeral home, killing two people and injuring 12 others.
April 2, 2012: A 43-year-old former student at Oikos University in Oakland, California walked into his former school and killed seven people, “execution-style.” Three people were wounded.
April 6, 2012: Two men went on a deadly shooting spree in Tulsa, Oklahoma shooting black men at random in an apparently racially motivated attack. Three men died, and two were wounded.
May 29, 2012: A man in Seattle, Washington opened fire in a coffee shop killing five people and then himself.
July 9, 2012: At a soccer tournament in Wilmington, Delaware, three people were killed, including a 16-year-old player and the event organizer when multiple gunmen began firing shots, apparently targeting the organizer.
July 20, 2012: James Holmes enters a midnight screening of The Dark Knight Rises and opens fire with a semi-automatic weapon; twelve people are killed, and fifty-eight are wounded.
August 5, 2012: A white supremacist and Army veteran shot six people to death inside a Sikh temple in suburban Milwaukee, Wisconsin before killing himself.
August 14, 2012: Three people were killed at Texas A&M University when a 35-year-old man went on a shooting rampage; one of the dead was a police officer.
September 27, 2012: A 36-year-old man who had just been laid off from Accent Signage Systems in Minneapolis, Minnesota entered his former workplace and shot five people to death and wounded three others before killing himself.
October 21, 2012: 45-year-old Radcliffe Frankin Haughton shot three women to death, including his wife, Zina Haughton, and injured four others at a spa in Brookfield, Wisconsin before killing himself.
December 11, 2012: A 22-year-old began shooting at random at a mall near Portland, Oregon killing two people and then himself.
December 14, 2012: One man, and possibly more, murders a reported twenty-six people at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, including twenty children, before killing himself.
2013 is looking very similar, those cases that got/get airtime are the Christopher Dorner case back in February, the Boston Bombings in April, the Navy Yard shooting in September, and of course yesterdays incident at LAX. There are other cases that in total killed over 30 people (source) but they didn’t have the required ‘spin’ factor so they have not stayed in the news.
All the cases that have made it big news wise have had a message from the government to us. These cases were chosen by the government to highlight the need for more gun control, more surveillance and tighter security. I believe that the ‘evidence’ for these events was tailored. Tailored to suit the governments needs at the time. To give the public a reason for the measures that will be imposed to ‘solve’ the problem. It was spun and nipped and tucked and most likely bears no resemblance to the original reasons behind the act.
With the LAX shooting they have gone a step further. In addition to once again raising the issue of privately owned assault rifles, they have put terms like ‘New World Order’ and ‘fiat currency’ into the wider public domain.
They are pre-conditioning the wider public in subjects usually confined to alternative media. The average Joe on the street is not familiar with these terms. But now the government itself has introduced them. They have publicly acknowledged them and linked them to the term ‘conspiracy theorist’.
A note allegedly found in the suspect’s bag said that he wanted to kill at least one transport officer with his AR-15 semi-automatic rifle and didn’t care which one.
“Black, white, yellow, brown, I don’t discriminate,” the note read, according to a paraphrase by a law enforcement official briefed on the investigation.
The suspect’s screed also mentioned “fiat currency” and “NWO,” possible references to the New World Order, a conspiracy theory that foresees a one-world government.
I will bet my last dollar that in the very near future alternative media will be mentioned. Alternative media sites will be accused of spreading these messages.
We, the alternative media, both writers and readers are next on the list to be demonized. We are the next ‘issue’ that the government needs to find a solution to. Like gun control et al, we have become a target.
The government knows that the alternative media is growing. That more and more people are looking for answers that the main stream does not provide. This cannot be allowed. It is dangerous to a government that sees itself as omnipotent.
The ‘revelations’ that will come out over the next few days will most likely say that Paul Ciancia frequented alternative media websites and that these sites had a bearing on his actions.
Gone are the days when a man with a gun is just insane, vindictive or just plain bad and decides to shoot people. Now there always has to be a reason, and that reason always has to be one that will allow the government to ride in and rescue us.
It will always be a reason that gives them justification for exercising more control over our lives and this time the reason could well be us, the alternative media.
Chris Carrington is a writer, researcher and lecturer with a background in science, technology and environmental studies. Chris is an editor for The Daily Sheeple. Wake the flock up!
Please share: Spread the word to sheeple far and wide
Is the President consciously trying to find ways to out-do himself each morning? It feels like he may be sitting in the Oval Office of the White House scheming about what new things he can say or do to make his Presidency even more of a failure.
Business Insider has broken a story from a new book by Mark Halperin and John Heilemann called Double Down which is a follow up to their popular book from 2008 called Game Change. According to Double Down, which is a chronicle of the 2012 election, “President Barack Obama told his aides that he’s ‘really good at killing people’ while discussing drone strikes.”
Yeah, our President literally told the people who work for him that he is “really good at killing people.”
Look, the issue of using drones as assassin’s in the war on terror is a hot-button issue, and I realize a lot of good conservatives are for their use. (I am personally opposed to our use of drones – but I’m not arguing for or against them here.) The use of drones is not the problem with this little “joke” – the problem with the fact that the President of the United States would say something like this is that it illustrates for us the aloofness that is inherent in President Obama’s character.
War, death, killing… these should be topics for serious consideration and discussion.
The folks at pitch interactive have built an interactive timeline of the use of drones in Pakistan, and it is not pretty.
In fact Barack Obama has ordered the killings of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people using drones. Human rights groups believe that the USA drastically underreports the deaths by drones that occur each year. That happens because of the amount of collateral damage that drone strikes cause, which also happens to be the chief reason so many are killed by drones.
Under Obama U.S. drone operators began practicing “signature strikes,” a tactic in which targets are chosen based on patterns of suspicious behavior and the identities of those to be killed aren’t necessarily known. (The administration counts all “military-age males” in a strike zone as combatants.)
So although President Obama has proven to be “really good at killing people,” the demonstration has not necessarily been noble.
And really, all of this leads us back to the real point. The President of the United States should be dignified, gracious and magnanimous. The President should show the character, fortitude and culture of his nation. Our President does none of this, and his “joke” to his aides proves this yet again. In fact, President Obama’s ability to joke about his role in the deaths of THOUSANDS is terrifying.
Even more, it’s not really a joke… he really ISgood at killing people.
The world expects more from America and her leaders, and we should too.
CBS TV Discovers Benghazi : The Administration has put ‘extraordinary amount of pressure’ on people not to talk Benghazi
Q&A: The 60 Minutes Benghazi investigation – 60 Minutes Overtime – CBS News.
What were your concerns in reporting a story that’s as politically charged as Benghazi is?
Q&A: The 60 Minutes Benghazi investigation – 60 Minutes Overtime – CBS News.
What were your concerns in reporting a story that’s as politically charged as Benghazi is?
Lara: We had to make sure we weren’t used by anyone on the Left or the Right who had a political agenda. That was our biggest concern. Journalism is not about making a case, it’s about finding the facts. In this story, you had to work really hard to find the facts and not be seduced by anybody. So, we left about 98 percent of what we learned on the floor– didn’t even report it– because unless we could substantiate it with primary sources that we truly trusted and whose motivations we trusted, then we didn’t even go there.
Max: The challenge was sifting out the political bias that might exist with the information that you’re trying to get, finding the little…
“On Tuesday Night Charles Krauthammer dropped another Benghazi bombshell on The O’Reilly Factor. He claims that the President’s phone call to Hillary Clinton was made so that they could develop their “cover story” shortly before she released this statement at approximately 10 PM:
I condemn in the strongest terms the attack on our mission in Benghazi today. As we work to secure our personnel and facilities, we have confirmed that one of our State Department officers was killed. We are heartbroken by this terrible loss. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and those who have suffered in this attack.
This evening, I called Libyan President Magariaf to coordinate additional support to protect Americans in Libya. President Magariaf expressed his condemnation and condolences and pledged his government’s full cooperation.
Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.
In light of the events of today, the United States government is working with partner countries around the world to protect our personnel, our missions, and American citizens worldwide.
The first confirmed death would have been Sean Smith whose body was found some six hours before this statement was issued. It is Charles Krauthammer’s contention that at least two of the victims were still alive when Clinton’s statement was released and also during the President’s call to Clinton.
I think there is a bigger story here that will in time come out. The biggest scandal of all, the biggest question is what was the president doing in those eight hours. He had a routine meeting at five o’clock. He never after during the eight hours when our guys have their lives in danger, he never called the Secretary of Defense, he never calls the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, he never called the CIA Director, Who does he call? But five hours in he calls the Secretary of State. And after the phone call she releases a statement essentially about the video and how we denounce any intolerance. It looks as if the only phone call is to construct a cover story at a time when the last two Americans who died were still alive and fighting for their lives. There’s the scandal and that has to be uncovered.
It should also be noted that roughly four hours before Clinton issued her statement there was an email sent to the White House. Factcheck.org reports:
6:07 p.m.: The State Department’s Operations Center sends an email to the White House, Pentagon, FBI and other government agencies that said Ansar al-Sharia has claimed credit for the attack on its Facebook andTwitter accounts. (The existence of the email was not disclosed until Reuters reported it on Oct. 24.)
Krauthammer’s reasoning is solid. Government officials were already aware at this point that Al Qaeda linked terrorists were claiming credit for the attack. Obama and Clinton likely had to get their story straight before Clinton released her statement.
Krauthammer is not the only one questioning this phone call. AIM’s Andrew McCarthyreported on May 22nd:
“What would you be focusing on in the Benghazi investigation?” I spent many years in the investigation biz, so it’s only natural that I’ve been asked that question a lot lately.
I had the good fortune to be trained in Rudy Giuliani’s U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan. Rudy famously made his mark by making law enforcement reflect what common sense knew: Enterprises take their cues from the top. Criminal enterprises are no different: The capos do not carry out the policy of the button-men – it’s the other way around.
So if I were investigating Benghazi, I’d be homing in on that 10 p.m. phonecall. That’s the one between President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – the one that’s gotten close to zero attention.
Benghazi is not a scandal because of Ambassador Susan Rice, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland, and “talking points.” The scandal is about Rice and Nuland’s principals, and about what the talking points were intended to accomplish. Benghazi is about derelictions of duty by President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton before and during the massacre of our ambassador and three other American officials, as well as Obama and Clinton’s fraud on the public afterward.
In another stunning turn of events, WND’s Aaron Klein broke a huge story on Wednesday that uncovered a non-reported Library of Congress document from August 2012:
A Library of Congress report that received almost no media attention detailed – one month before the deadly Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi – how al-Qaida established a major base of operations in Libya in the aftermath of the U.S.-NATO campaign that deposed Muammar Gadhafi and his secular regime.
The report documented al-Qaida and affiliated organizations were establishing terrorist training camps and pushing Taliban-style Islamic law in Libya while the new, Western-backed Libyan government incorporated jihadists into its militias.
The document named Benghazi as a new central headquarters for al-Qaida activities.
Amazing. The Library of Congress reports that Benghazi, Libya is the new central hub for Al Qaeda activities in the region and Clinton and Obama insisted on trying to spin this incident. The report is 54 pages but if you would like to see it, you can find it here.
The question remains the same.
What did Obama know and when did he know it?
As more and more people are forced to perjure themselves in order to cover for the president, we get closer and closer to the truth.”
The Grand Mufti of Bosnia Herzegovina, Dr Mustafa Ceric urged the Muslim Ummah to conquer the world through Halal movement as Halal means pure and hygieneand non-Muslim world has no hesitation to accept it.
Addressing a reception hosted by Islamic Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ICCI) held in his honour and other delegates of Global Halal Congress, Dr Ceric said that Halal movement has the strength to lead Muslims to rule the global economy as the food and other services are the basic need of every human being.
Considered by some to be a leading “liberal” Islamic leader, Mustafa Ceric is tied to the global Muslim Brotherhood through his membership in the European Council for Fatwa and Research(ECFR), headed by Brotherhood leader Youssef Qaradawi and by his participation in the U.K.-based “Radical Middle Way” consisting of a wide range of associated scholars representing the global Muslim Brotherhood.
The global halal industry is shifting into high gear to expand its market in the non-Muslim world as part of a broader mission to Islamise the West.
“SLICK ADVERTISING”
As part of its campaign, the World Halal Forum attempts to link the halal brand with qualities prized by affluent consumers in the West and elsewhere. The video opens with the claim thathalal is “a centuries-old guide to how life should be lived” and goes on to make unsupported assertions about halal‘s natural and organic qualities, its ethical and environmentally friendly production methods and its animal welfare benefits.
The strategy includes frightening consumers off non-halal products by reminding them of recent global epidemics, such as mad cow disease and bird flu, that badly affected farm production and raised severe public health concerns. It insinuates that shifting to halal production and distribution would avoid these problems, but offers no scientific basis for this claim. In fact, Muslim methods of rearing animals can be even worse than some non-Muslim practices, and some animal welfare groups regard halal slaughtering as cruel and unhygienic.
This is a thinly veiled attempt to promote the spread of sharia in non-Muslim countries. Islamist zeal is exploiting commercial gain as part of its unrelenting mission to conquer the world for Islam. The tactics used in this video are deplorable, twisting the truth and using the worst methods of slick advertising to convince the non-Muslims of the supposed advantage of halal products.
On August 6, 2011, a military helicopter—Extortion 17, carrying thirty-eight men, including seventeen of the elite SEAL Team 6—was shot down over Taliban-controlled territory in eastern Afghanistan. It was the worst loss of life in a single day suffered since the Afghanistan war began.
There’s good reason to ask this question to ‘nice’ Muslims. It invites Muslims to declare their true values and loyalties: “When jihad comes, whose side will you be on?”
Shoppers at Westgate Mall in Nairobi and Christian students in Nigeria have recently been killed because they had the wrong religion. What will our Muslim neighbors do when the jihadists come to our neighborhood schools, churches and shopping centers in Europe and North America? Will Muslims protect non-Muslim neighbors from death or will they side with the jihadists? A shopping mall jihad has already occurred in the U.S., but it was largely ignored.
You mean, it’s already happened in America?
Yes, an event similar to the Westgate Mall attack occurred on the evening of Feb. 12, 2007. A young Muslim man walked into the Trolley Square Mall in Salt Lake City with a pistol-grip, 12-gauge shotgun and a 38-caliber revolver and opened fire on shoppers, killing five and wounding four others, including a pregnant woman. The death toll at Trolley Square was higher than in the Boston Marathon Bombing, but the killings were misattributed to insanity, rather than jihad.
Will jihadists attack shopping centers across America? Undoubtedly! They will do so because it is the Sunna, the perfect example of Mohammed. In 627 AD, Mohammed beheaded 800 unarmed male civilians in Medina in a single day. He did so in a market.
Islam’s Dual Allegiance
Muslims have two loyalties: religious and political. Americans are loyal only to the constitution. America has no state religion to adhere to. But Islam has both. True Muslims must be loyal to the political act of jihad as well as to the religion of Islam. Islam is a religion as well as a military organization. This is not an opinion, but the decree of Mohammed:
“My brother and I came to the Prophet and I requested him to take the pledge of allegiance from us for migration. He said, “Migration has passed away with its people.” I asked, “For what will you take the pledge of allegiance from us then?” He (Mohammed) said, “I will take (the pledge) for Islam and JIHAD.” – (Bukhari 4,52,208)
Mohammed says allegiance to Islam includes the political act of jihad. Jihad is holy fighting against the Kafirs; it is the personal duty of every Muslim. If a Muslim does not participate in jihad, he will die a ‘hypocrite’ and burn in hell. Mohammed is the authority on Islam.
Why don’t Muslims denounce the terrorists?
Islam is harsh on ‘hypocrites’ (munafiqoon in Arabic). Munafiqs are ‘moderate Muslims’. They give only lip service to Islam. Mohammed wanted to burn the munafiqs to death in their homes for not participating in prayers or jihad.
Nonetheless, participate or not, they must not hinder jihad by thought, word or deed. Islam’s ‘munafiqs’ sit back and look the other way, while jihadists fight the Kafirs and subdue them. When a munafiq helps Kafirs during jihad, he becomes a traitor to Islam; he is considered to be a Kafir at war with Islam, so jihadists may kill him too.
When jihad comes, a munafiq is not neutral. He is on the side of jihad, rather than on the side of Kafirs. A munafiq is silent when the jihadists knock on their non-Muslim neighbor’s door. The reason for this silence is in the Koran (28.86) ‘never be a supporter of the disbelievers’.
Munafiqs can be reactivated in jihad
One of the surprising things about Islam is how non-practicing Muslims often return to active service in jihad. Sometimes it only takes a personal contact or a rousing sermon to turn a non-practicing, ‘moderate’ Muslim into a jihadist. This is similar to the recruitment of young pacifists in time of war. The Tsarnaev brothers were nice, ‘moderate’ Muslims and then they became religious jihadists.
Boston Munafiqs
How did ‘munafiqs’ behave during the Boston Marathon Bombings? When Djokhar Tsarnaev was about to be arrested, he called his non-practicing, ‘secular’ Muslim friends to dispose of incriminating evidence in his dorm room. They eagerly complied. When members of the Tsarnaevs’ mosque were asked about the two brothers, they kept silent about what they knew. When recruited, the munafiqs acted on the side of jihad.
Munafiqs at Westgate Mall, Nairobi
When jihad came to Westgate Mall in Nairobi, there were many munafiqs shopping that day. Did those munafiqs try to convince the jihadists that Islam is a ‘religion of peace’ and to stop the executions and tortures? No, they left hurriedly and let the jihadists do their work of executing unarmed Kafirs in a market. The Westgate jihadists believed they were following Sunna.
The Westgate Mall munafiqs were not neutral. They took the side of jihad by doing nothing to stop it. Their silence gave approval to jihadic terrorism.
Salman Rushdie Fatwa
When a fatwa was declared against writer Salman Rushdie, ordinary British Muslims expressed strong support for blasphemy laws to punish critics of Islam.
The musician known as Cat Stevens was asked if he would go to a demonstration to burn an effigy of the author Salman Rushdie. ”I would have hoped that it’d be the real thing,” he replied.
Furthermore, if Mr. Rushdie turned up at his doorstep looking for help, ”I might ring somebody who might do more damage to him than he would like…I’d try to phone the Ayatollah Khomeini and tell him exactly where this man is.” In his own words, Cat Stevens, aka Yusuf Islam, would take the side of jihad if the opportunity came. ‘Moderate’ Muslims like Yusuf Islam know which side they are on. Not on the side of the Kafir, because jihad is not a ‘peace train’.
Jihad at Broken Hill, Australia, 1915
In 1915, two Kurdish immigrants to Australia read the Sultan’s pamphlet announcing a universal jihad and planned their own self-directed jihad. They waited beside railway tracks and randomly shot Australian civilians on a train on its way to a picnic. Fatalities occurred. They then shot a police constable. It’s similar to the Boston Marathon bombings, when you think about it.
What has changed in 100 years? The doctrine is the same. The weapons are more sophisticated.
Munafiqs of the Armenian Genocide
Edwin Pears recorded this account from a Muslim woman in Turkey: “Then one night, my husband came home and told me that the padisha (caliph) had sent word that we were to kill all the Christians in our village, and that we would have to kill our (Christian) neighbours. I was very angry, and told him that I did not care who gave such orders; they were wrong. These neighbours had always been kind to us, and if he dared to kill them Allah would pay us out. I tried all I could to stop him, but he killed them — killed them with his own hand.” (Sir Edwin Pears, Turkey and Its People, London: Methuen and Co., 1911, p. 39)
When jihad against Christian subjects of Turkey was declared in 1915, ordinary Muslim village men were led to Friday prayers. Someone read out the Sultan’s summons to jihad and the villagers proceeded to participate in the genocide of Armenians, Assyrian Orthodox and Greek Anatolians, the indigenous peoples of Turkey. Ordinary ‘moderate’ Muslims responded to the call of jihad. Three million people disappeared from the populace within ten years.
Notable Exceptions
There are some noteworthy examples of Muslims who saved lives during jihad. Khaled Abdewahhab of Tunisia was the first Arab to receive a ‘Righteous Gentile’ award from Israel. He had hidden a Jewish family at his country home until liberation came. In 1915, a Turkish doctor ‘married’ four of his Armenian patients to save them from extermination. The uncle of the Tsarnaev brothers denounced his nephews and ordered them to surrender.
So what motivates Muslims when they help Kafirs in trouble? The answer is these ‘moderate’ Muslims are disregarding the Koran (28.86) ‘never be a supporter of the disbelievers’.
We Western people need to reexamine our political correctness. We need to learn the dualistic doctrine of the Kafir that underpins jihad. Otherwise, we will continue to have attacks against Kafir civilians like those at the Westgate Mall, Trolley Square Mall and the Boston Marathon. Muslims who attack civilians are imitating what Mohammed did in Medina in 627 AD.
One of the ways to learn about Islam’s dualism is to ask a Muslim: ‘When jihad comes to our neighborhood, whose side will you be on?’
Posted by prayingforoneday on October 9, 2013
maxresdefault
HE WARNED US ALL AFTER THE BOSTON BOMBING!!!!
The day after the Boston bombing a Retired Lt. Colonel said there are factions of the USA government that are Evil and that there is an internal struggle for power within the hallways of Washington, from what I read and hear Obama has surrounded himself, in his staff with other members of the Muslim Brotherhood (Islam) in the US Government
I know it is easy to say this, we all know it. But from what I am hearing and reading, and PLEASE I am not a racist person, I am hearing Obama is supporting Islam in a BIG way and as we all know he is a Muslim. Could it be that Obama who has put Muslims into high places in the US government is trying to change the entire country and bring in Islam?
I think it is possible and I believe what we are seeing now is American politicians fighting back to try and free the country from what is an attack from within Government itself. I know this is a HUGE leap of faith to take in, and a lot to believe, but it is my belief Obama supports Islam and he there are rogue people all over the many government departments in the States
Obama’s half brother Malik Obama is doing a LOT to support his half brother RIGHT NOW in many Muslim Countries. In early 2012, Muslim Brotherhood presidential candidate Mohammed Morsi pranced around Egypt proclaiming “Jihad is our path,” and thought there was nothing better than to die in the cause of Allah—that is, the exact language used by terrorists!
Despite this, Barack Obama gushed on national television after Morsi was elected President of Egypt. And oddly—or not so oddly—Obama continued to gush over Morsi while reports surfaced that the Muslim Brotherhood were setting up torture chambers for their political enemies, not to mention openly crucifying Christians!
When Morsi was deposed, the Egyptian military discovered a treasure trove of documents linking the Obama regime with the illegal activities of the Muslim Brotherhood.
One such document is a list of Muslim Brotherhood officials receiving secret bribes in U.S. currency, paid out by the U.S. consulate, amounting to millions of dollars.
So from where I see it the Muslim Brotherhood is being helped by Malik Obama and The president of America Obama knows and is funding these countries to make America more “Islam Friendly” I know this is a HUGE leap of faith and thinking
Again PLEASE research on your own; I kept this short so people would read it
EGYPTIAN NEWSPAPER’S EXPLOSIVE ALLEGATION: PRESIDENT OBAMA IS A SECRET MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD MEMBER
I will leave this here as the blog I want to keep readable, I will be doing follow up blogs on this, BUT PLEASE GO AND LOOK!!! You Tube, Google etc. If you are in America and scared to look due to the NSA use this search site: https://www.ixquick.com/ it is safe and open to all sites. If you want to search from WITHIN the USA use that search engine
Barack Obama is a Member of the Muslim Brotherhood
(http://www.clarionproject.org) “The Third Jihad is a film that exposes the threat that Islamic extremism poses to the American way of life. In 1988, the FBI discovered a secret Muslim Brotherhood document which laid out their plans to replace the Constitution with Islamic Sharia law.
The document stated that “The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers…”
One person who dared to speak out about the Islamist threat is Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a devout Muslim-American who served as an officer in the U.S. navy and also as a physician to the US Congress.
After the FBI released the radical Islamist manifesto describing how to destroy America from within, Dr. Jasser decided to investigate.
The Third Jihad is about what he discovered.
Clarion Project (formerly Clarion Fund) brings together Middle East experts, scholars, human rights activists and Muslims to promote tolerance and moderation and challenge extremism. “
Seattle Area Transit Authority Refuses to Run Anti-Terrorism Advertisement for Fear of Offending Muslims; Federal Lawsuit Filed | AFLC – American Freedom Law Center. On October 7, the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against King County, Washington, for refusing to run an anti-terrorism advertisement that displayed photographs of global terrorists from the FBI’s most wanted list. The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle on behalf of the advertisement’s sponsors, the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) and its co-founders, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer. In June of this year, King County displayed an advertisement submitted by the federal government that depicted the “Faces of Global Terrorism” in an effort to “stop a terrorist” and “save lives.” The advertisement offered “up to $25 million reward” for helping to capture one of the FBI’s most wanted terrorists. The advertisement appeared as follows:
“The terrorists identified in the advertisement are also found on the FBI’s most wanted global terrorist list, which is posted on the FBI’s website. This list includes pictures and “wanted posters” for thirty-two terrorists. Not surprisingly, of the thirty-two listed terrorists, thirty are individuals with Muslim names and/or are wanted for terrorism related to organizations conducting terrorist acts in the name of Islam. Despite these facts, the federal government decided to terminate its “Faces of Global Terrorism” advertisement campaign after receiving complaints from politicians and advocacy groups that the list of wanted global terrorists pictured in the advertisement appeared to include mostly Muslim terrorists. Appalled at the government’s decision to pull this important message from the public square, on July 30, Geller and Spencer, on behalf of AFDI, submitted an advertisement to King County that included the same pictures, names, and message as the government’s advertisement. The AFDI advertisement appears as follows:
David Yerushalmi, AFLC Co-Founder and Senior Counsel, commented: “Our government’s incessant desire to appease Islamic terrorist apologists like the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Hamas-Muslim Brotherhood front group operating here in the United States with impunity, is literally placing all American citizens at serious risk. Consequently, if the government won’t identify our enemy, we will make certain our clients can.” Despite having previously accepted the federal government’s “Faces of Global Terrorism” advertisement, on August 15, King Count rejected AFDI’s advertisement, claiming that it contains (1) “material that is or that the sponsor reasonably should have known is false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive or would constitute a tort of defamation or invasion of privacy”; (2) “material that demeans or disparages an individual, group of individuals or entity”; and (3) “material that is so objectionable as to be reasonably foreseeable that it will result in harm to, disruption of or interference with the transportation system” in violation of the County’s Transit Advertising Policy. As a result of this decision, AFLC filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against King County, alleging that the County violated the First Amendment free speech rights of AFDI, Geller, and Spencer; that the County violated the equal protection guarantee of the Fourteenth Amendment by denying AFDI, Geller, and Spencer access to a forum for their speech based on the content and viewpoint of their message; and that the County violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment in that the County’s speech restriction is unconstitutionally vague and it grants government officials unbridled discretion to restrict speech that they dislike.”
Posted on October 10, 2013 by creeping “The FAA, DHS, FBI, the White House and all the media cover are covering it up and clamoring for open borders, amnesty for illegals and taking direction from Muslims who want to destroy the U.S. via 10 News Investigators find memo warning about terrorist “dry-runs” on airplanes | wtsp.com. Orlando, Florida — It was a flight bound for Florida, and some airline pilots believe it also may have been a dry-run for terrorists. The 10 News Investigators have obtained an internal memo that details a frightening incident that brings back memories of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Since then, federal efforts have gone in place to prevent a similar attack, leading many to believe another attack what happened on 9/11 could never happen again. Wolf Koch, who flies Boeing 767s for Delta Airlines and is the Aviation Security Committee Chairman for the Air Line Pilots Association International, says that belief “is very foolish.” Koch describes the events of 9/11 as “an incredible attack on us. It was very well orchestrated and they’re going to try it again… 100 percent, no question in my mind. They’re going to try it again.” According to Koch, many other flight crews are concerned the planning may already be underway. A memo obtained by the 10 News investigators from the union that represents pilots for US Airways says that “there have been several cases recently throughout the (airline) industry of what appear to be probes, or dry-runs, to test our procedures and reaction to an in flight threat.” READ: The Security Update Memo (PDF) Koch says, “What most security experts will tell you that if a dry-run is occurring, the attack will shortly follow.” The pilots say the most recent dry-run occurred on Flight 1880 on September 2. The flight left Reagan National Airport in Washington D.C. and headed to Orlando International. Crew members say that shortly after takeoff, a group of four “Middle Eastern” men caused a commotion. The witnesses claim one of the men ran from his seat in coach, toward the flight deck door. He made a hard left and entered the forward bathroom “for a considerable length of time.” While he was in there, the other three men proceeded to move about the cabin, changing seats, opening overhead bins, and “generally making a scene.” They appeared to be trying to occupy and distract the flight attendants. The 10 News Investigators contacted both US Airways and the Transportation Security Administration both confirmed the incident. US Airways says it won’t discuss the details of security measures, but that it works closely with authorities. The TSA told us it takes all reports of suspicious activity aboard aircraft seriously, and the matter requires no further investigation at this time. However, a current Federal Air Marshal who works flights every week says of the TSA, “They’re liars. They’re flat out liars.”
The Air Marshal, whose identity we are not revealing because agency rules prohibit him from talking to the media, says the TSA doesn’t want the flying public to be aware of the problems with terrorist probes.
The Air Marshal and others we have spoken to say several flights they have worked were targets of dry-runs and that most of his colleagues believe no matter what the TSA says, the incident aboard Flight 1880 is serious.
Until now, there has been absolutely no publicity about the US Airways flight from D.C. to Orlando International Airport, but security experts say incidents like this should not and cannot be ignored.
As the Federal Air Marshal and industry insiders tell us, “We’re waiting for the next 9/11 to happen, because it’s not a question of if. It’s a question of when.”
The history of Islam in Europe and how it effects us to this day. This is a history based on numbers and facts that you may not see anywhere else and explains why we may be afraid to see Islam for what it is based on its own doctrine and practice.
“CANADA: Muslims protest that Muslim honor killings being called ‘honor killings’ is racist (What ‘race’ is Islam?)
Are they willfully misleading? Or are Canadian Muslims who are fighting against federal funding to investigate honor violence in the Muslim community simply naïve victims of the same propaganda used routinely to explain away the religio-culturally-based murders of Muslim women?
IPT Every year, according to United Nations reports, 5,000 women worldwide are killed for reasons of “honor” that relate to matters of modesty and obeyance, though most experts maintain the numbers are far higher. And the number of victims of honor violence, which can involve beatings, acid attacks, or locking a woman in her home, is literally incalculable.
In the United Kingdom alone, more than 3,000 such honor crimes occurred just in 2010, according to a study by the Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organization (IKWRO). The vast majority of those crimes, the organization states, were committed by Muslims, though Sikhs and Hindus have also been known to commit honor-related crimes.
In Canada, the decision to earmark funds to combat honor violence began in 2007, after a series of honor crimes over the previous two years resulted in the deaths of two women and one man. Soon after the program was announced, on Dec. 10, 2007, the father and brother of 16-year-old Toronto native Aqsa Parvez, strangled her to death. The reason: she had refused to wear the hijab, or scarf.
Yet recently, some groups have begun speaking out against the idea of specifying these crimes as “honor killings” and providing targeted programs to address them, even as two subsequent events underscore just how urgently such funds and programs are needed.
The first of these was the 2012 conviction of Mohammad Shafia, his wife Tooba Yahya, and their son Hamed in the murder of Mohammad and Tooba’s three teenage daughters and of Rona Amir Mohammad, Mohammad Shafia’s other wife in a polygamous arrangement – a case that received worldwide attention.
That conviction confirmed the findings of a University of Sherbrooke study released earlier that year showing an exponential increase in the number of honor killings in Canada. Only three known victims were killed between 1954 and 1983. Since 1999, 12 women have died in honor killings.
All of the murders, the study reported, took place within immigrant families. (It is worth noting that the increase may or may not reflect either the growing numbers of Muslim immigrants to Canada over the years, or a better understanding of honor crimes among law enforcement and other agencies.)
Yet according to a recent report from Women’s e-News, many Canadian Muslim women now are speaking out against the government’s new focus on these crimes, arguing that honor violence is no different from any other form of domestic abuse.
Opponents of the idea call the projects “racist,” and claim they put an unwarranted and biased focus on Muslim families. “When women of color are killed, we ask these larger questions around their culture. We ask what’s wrong with their entire people – their culture, their religion – instead of a particular person,” Itrath Syed, who is pursuing a Ph.D. in “Islamophobia” in Vancouver, for instance, told Women’s e-News.
What is so tragic about this remark is not just the half-dozen or so ways in which it is patently untrue, but that it seeks to nullify the horror that is honor violence, to deny the profound distinctions between honor crimes and other forms of domestic violence and femicide.
What Syed really was referring to was religion, not race. Or rather, the implication that domestic abuse in Muslim families is related to Islam, and that Muslim families are therefore treated differently than everybody else. It’s a common accusation, and an ongoing question: are honor crimes culturally-based, or founded in interpretations of the Koran?
It’s a bit of both, according to Carla Rus, a psychiatrist in the Netherlands who specializes in working with victims of both domestic abuse and honor violence. “Honor violence involves a kind of ideology, which you don’t find in domestic violence,” she points out. “In [Islamic] cultures, where church and state are not separated, it’s difficult to distinguish whether honor violence comes through cultural or religious motives – culture and religion are inseparable in those cases.”
Moreover, not all domestic violence occurring in Muslim families (some of whom are white) is automatically categorized as an honor crime. But call a crime what it is. When Mohammad Safia curses his daughters for “dishonoring” and “betraying Islam;” when Iraqi-American Aita Altameemi’s mother burns and beats her for engaging in “non-Islamic behavior” – and the family says they “are proud of it” – there is no reason not to take them at their word.
Understanding how dramatically honor violence differs from other domestic abuse is, however, critical – a point that the recent Canadian funding aims to address, as do similar efforts in the UK and the Netherlands. As Phyllis Chesler, author of the landmark study, “Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings,” has noted, ”Westerners rarely kill their young daughters, nor do Western families of origin conspire or collaborate in such murders.”
Similarly, domestic abuse in Western families does not involve brothers murdering their sisters, as happens in cases of honor killings. To the contrary, siblings most often protect one another.
Moreover, while domestic violence may relate to a man’s sense of self-respect, reputation, or “honor” among his peers, it does not – despite what some Muslims argue – reflect his sense of religious honor or his sense, as patriarch, of responsibility for his family’s perceived insults to his god.
Yet it is precisely this mindset which incites much honor-based violence and murder – and not only on the part of the father or husband. Frequently, religious devotion and patriarchy places pressure on other family members – siblings, aunts, uncles, spouses or even mothers of a victim –to commit the act, often under threat.
That fact underscores two other critical points that opponents to Canada’s focus on honor killings apparently do not wish others to see – or perhaps are too culturally blinded to see: Ordinary domestic violence is nearly always spontaneous, while honor violence (and especially honor murder) is almost always calculated, often planned out over time through numerous family meetings.
And the horrific reality is that, these women simply have nowhere to run: no mothers who will shelter them from the husbands they are trying to escape, no sisters or brothers to protect them from their fathers – no one. (Indeed, the sisters and brothers are often recruited to assure a girl hiding from her family to come home, that all is forgiven. But this assertion is almost always a ruse; once she returns, the child is usually killed within days.)
It is, in other words, a long-term family affair, and one that, unlike the problems of domestic violence, can be changed. Which is precisely why funding for, and attention to, understanding and preventing honor violence is so very critical, not only in Canada, but everywhere in the West. It is why women – and especially Muslim women – should be welcoming it, even demanding more.
And yet, countless Canadian (and other) Muslim activists and apologists remain far more devoted to shaping public vision of their culture – even if it means disguising the truth – than to protecting the lives of their Muslim sisters. In some cases, they may go so far as to contend that the very notion of “honor killings” is a “Western propagated myth,” reports Darpan.”
Indeed, one Muslim women’s advocate, Rubaiyat Karim, told Women’s e-News that, “Immigration policy can be very inclusionary and preach the language of multi-culturalism. But if we really want to talk about multiculturalism, we need to address the Orientalist mentality of government.”
She’s wrong. What we really need to address is the refusal of some Muslim families to advance beyond medieval and barbaric religio-cultural practices – and to stop excusing them when they don’t. Not to do so is to abandon thousands of women, not just in Canada or the United States, not just in countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, but in every country, every city, every town across the world. We cannot let that happen.
CANADA: Muslims protest that Muslim honor killings being called ‘honor killings’ is racist (What ‘race’ is Islam?)
Are they willfully misleading? Or are Canadian Muslims who are fighting against federal funding to investigate honor violence in the Muslim community simply naïve victims of the same propaganda used routinely to explain away the religio-culturally-based murders of Muslim women?
IPT Every year, according to United Nations reports, 5,000 women worldwide are killed for reasons of “honor” that relate to matters of modesty and obeyance, though most experts maintain the numbers are far higher. And the number of victims of honor violence, which can involve beatings, acid attacks, or locking a woman in her home, is literally incalculable.
In the United Kingdom alone, more than 3,000 such honor crimes occurred just in 2010, according to a study by the Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organization (IKWRO). The vast majority of those crimes, the organization states, were committed by Muslims, though Sikhs and Hindus have also been known to commit honor-related crimes.
In Canada, the decision to earmark funds to combat honor violence began in 2007, after a series of honor crimes over the previous two years resulted in the deaths of two women and one man. Soon after the program was announced, on Dec. 10, 2007, the father and brother of 16-year-old Toronto native Aqsa Parvez, strangled her to death. The reason: she had refused to wear the hijab, or scarf.
Yet recently, some groups have begun speaking out against the idea of specifying these crimes as “honor killings” and providing targeted programs to address them, even as two subsequent events underscore just how urgently such funds and programs are needed.
The first of these was the 2012 conviction of Mohammad Shafia, his wife Tooba Yahya, and their son Hamed in the murder of Mohammad and Tooba’s three teenage daughters and of Rona Amir Mohammad, Mohammad Shafia’s other wife in a polygamous arrangement – a case that received worldwide attention.
That conviction confirmed the findings of a University of Sherbrooke study released earlier that year showing an exponential increase in the number of honor killings in Canada. Only three known victims were killed between 1954 and 1983. Since 1999, 12 women have died in honor killings.
All of the murders, the study reported, took place within immigrant families. (It is worth noting that the increase may or may not reflect either the growing numbers of Muslim immigrants to Canada over the years, or a better understanding of honor crimes among law enforcement and other agencies.)
Yet according to a recent report from Women’s e-News, many Canadian Muslim women now are speaking out against the government’s new focus on these crimes, arguing that honor violence is no different from any other form of domestic abuse.
Opponents of the idea call the projects “racist,” and claim they put an unwarranted and biased focus on Muslim families. “When women of color are killed, we ask these larger questions around their culture. We ask what’s wrong with their entire people – their culture, their religion – instead of a particular person,” Itrath Syed, who is pursuing a Ph.D. in “Islamophobia” in Vancouver, for instance, told Women’s e-News.
What is so tragic about this remark is not just the half-dozen or so ways in which it is patently untrue, but that it seeks to nullify the horror that is honor violence, to deny the profound distinctions between honor crimes and other forms of domestic violence and femicide.
What Syed really was referring to was religion, not race. Or rather, the implication that domestic abuse in Muslim families is related to Islam, and that Muslim families are therefore treated differently than everybody else. It’s a common accusation, and an ongoing question: are honor crimes culturally-based, or founded in interpretations of the Koran?
It’s a bit of both, according to Carla Rus, a psychiatrist in the Netherlands who specializes in working with victims of both domestic abuse and honor violence. “Honor violence involves a kind of ideology, which you don’t find in domestic violence,” she points out. “In [Islamic] cultures, where church and state are not separated, it’s difficult to distinguish whether honor violence comes through cultural or religious motives – culture and religion are inseparable in those cases.”
Moreover, not all domestic violence occurring in Muslim families (some of whom are white) is automatically categorized as an honor crime. But call a crime what it is. When Mohammad Safia curses his daughters for “dishonoring” and “betraying Islam;” when Iraqi-American Aita Altameemi’s mother burns and beats her for engaging in “non-Islamic behavior” – and the family says they “are proud of it” – there is no reason not to take them at their word.
Understanding how dramatically honor violence differs from other domestic abuse is, however, critical – a point that the recent Canadian funding aims to address, as do similar efforts in the UK and the Netherlands. As Phyllis Chesler, author of the landmark study, “Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings,” has noted, ”Westerners rarely kill their young daughters, nor do Western families of origin conspire or collaborate in such murders.”
Similarly, domestic abuse in Western families does not involve brothers murdering their sisters, as happens in cases of honor killings. To the contrary, siblings most often protect one another.
Moreover, while domestic violence may relate to a man’s sense of self-respect, reputation, or “honor” among his peers, it does not – despite what some Muslims argue – reflect his sense of religious honor or his sense, as patriarch, of responsibility for his family’s perceived insults to his god.
Yet it is precisely this mindset which incites much honor-based violence and murder – and not only on the part of the father or husband. Frequently, religious devotion and patriarchy places pressure on other family members – siblings, aunts, uncles, spouses or even mothers of a victim –to commit the act, often under threat.
That fact underscores two other critical points that opponents to Canada’s focus on honor killings apparently do not wish others to see – or perhaps are too culturally blinded to see: Ordinary domestic violence is nearly always spontaneous, while honor violence (and especially honor murder) is almost always calculated, often planned out over time through numerous family meetings.
And the horrific reality is that, these women simply have nowhere to run: no mothers who will shelter them from the husbands they are trying to escape, no sisters or brothers to protect them from their fathers – no one. (Indeed, the sisters and brothers are often recruited to assure a girl hiding from her family to come home, that all is forgiven. But this assertion is almost always a ruse; once she returns, the child is usually killed within days.)
It is, in other words, a long-term family affair, and one that, unlike the problems of domestic violence, can be changed. Which is precisely why funding for, and attention to, understanding and preventing honor violence is so very critical, not only in Canada, but everywhere in the West. It is why women – and especially Muslim women – should be welcoming it, even demanding more.
And yet, countless Canadian (and other) Muslim activists and apologists remain far more devoted to shaping public vision of their culture – even if it means disguising the truth – than to protecting the lives of their Muslim sisters. In some cases, they may go so far as to contend that the very notion of “honor killings” is a “Western propagated myth,” reports Darpan.
Indeed, one Muslim women’s advocate, Rubaiyat Karim, told Women’s e-News that, “Immigration policy can be very inclusionary and preach the language of multi-culturalism. But if we really want to talk about multiculturalism, we need to address the Orientalist mentality of government.”
She’s wrong. What we really need to address is the refusal of some Muslim families to advance beyond medieval and barbaric religio-cultural practices – and to stop excusing them when they don’t. Not to do so is to abandon thousands of women, not just in Canada or the United States, not just in countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, but in every country, every city, every town across the world. We cannot let that happen.
“The recent terrorist attack in Kenya once again demonstrates that Islam is, indeed, Satan’s pit-bull. The sheer barbarity of the assault (innocent men, women and children executed at close range) underscores a vile dogma that has demanded the rape, torture and slaughter of millions of “infidels” since its nascency in the bowels of hell centuries ago.
Those who espouse the notion that the savagery perpetrated in Kenya is a gross and unfair mischaracterization of Islam are…”
The U.S. is now a Muslim country. It’s that simple. Let me explain.
If you are a Christian in America today, you are a second class citizen. You can not pray in school, or at work if you work for government. Our religious symbols are not allowed to be displayed in public places.
As Christians have had to suppress their religious beliefs, Muslims have come to the forefront. Not only are Muslims taking a more visible role in government, they are not faced with the restrictions Christians face. Christian Chaplains in the military are forbidden to say “Jesus” in their ministries.
Several years ago, Obama changed NASA’s vision from flying in space to spreading the word on the contribution Muslims supplied to math and science. We still fly, but bum rides from other nations.
The National Park Service this past week released a documentary proclaiming Muslims are the leaders in women rights. …
Are they willfully misleading? Or are Canadian Muslims who are fighting against federal funding to investigate honor violence in the Muslim community simply naïve victims of the same propaganda used routinely to explain away the religio-culturally-based murders of Muslim women?
![look_whos_praying[1]](http://ramblinrandyblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/look_whos_praying1.jpg)
Love For America 
Recent Comments