The American Kafir


Pakistan acid attack victim commits suicide

Filed under: Acid Attack, Honor Killings, Oppression, Pakistan — Tags: , , — - @ 1:55 pm

Source Telegraph

Pakistan acid attack victim commits suicide

One of Pakistan’s most high profile victims of domestic acid attacks has committed suicide in Rome where she had been undergoing cosmetic surgery to rebuild her face.

By Dean Nelson

Fakhra Yunus Before and After acid attack by her ex husband Bilal Khar

Fakhra Yunus, 34, leapt from the sixth floor of an apartment building to her death just weeks after Saving Face, a film on the plight of the 100 women per year disfigured in acid attacks in Pakistan, won an Oscar.

Ms Yunus was a beautiful 22 year old when her estranged politician husband, the son of one of Pakistan’s most powerful political families, who allegedly poured battery acid over her face and body in front of her five year old son.

Following the attack she endured 38 surgical operations in 12 years to reconstruct her face and repair severe wounds on her arms and body.

But according to friends the years of surgery had failed to restore her striking looks and she still regularly burst into tears after catching her face in the mirror.

Her close supporter, the leading Pakistani author and her husband’s former step-mother, Tehmina Durrani, described the attack had left her mutilation as so horrific that she “was confronted by open disgust and contempt by everyone who set eyes on her in Pakistan.” Parts of her body had been “melted to the bone,” she said.

Her husband Bilal Khar, who is the son of former Punjab governor and cousin of foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar, initially went into hiding after the attack while police officers sought to frustrate attempts to bring him to justice. He was later arrested in 2002 but released shortly after when relatives paid £2,000 bail.

Since Fakhra’s death there have been fresh demands for him to be jailed, but he denies any involvement in the attack.

In an article in The News International newspaper, her supporter Tehmina Durrani said she had met many women victims of ‘acid terrorism’ but none as brave and disfigured as Fakhra.

“She had not just become faceless; her body had also melted to the bone. Despite her stark and hopeless condition, the government of the Islamic Republic Of Pakistan was not in the least God fearing. She was provided nothing..but disdain..and trashed,” she wrote.

The Italian government, by contrast, had provided free accommodation, schooling for her son, and the medical care of one of the country’s best surgeons.

Despite her extremely disturbing ‘image’, the gracious people of Italy never ever made her feel she was any different to any one of them! In the beautiful city of Rome, Fakhra “She was able to walk the streets, laze in the parks, and enter a shop or a restaurant in the most prestigious of places, without an iota of embarrassment. In fact every waiter served her more respectfully than he did any other, and every person who looked her way smiled and nodded with respect,” she explained.

Professor Charvelli, the surgeon who had spent years trying to recreate her face, said he could not treat the biggest scars. “I tried to mend her physical scars. but was unable to heal her soul,” he said.

Saving Face Trailer

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Related Articles



Girl strangled to death in name of honour

Girl strangled to death in name of honour

Staff Report

LAHORE: A 15-year-old girl was allegedly strangled to death by her uncle in the name of honour in Shera Kot Police limits on Wednesday.

The deceased was identified as Anam, daughter of Ramzan, resident of Ghousia Park. Police said that the deceased’s uncle, Talib Hussain, who was residing at his brother-in-law’s house, suspected that Anam had illicit relations with a Christian youth of the same area.

On the day of incident, Talib entered the house and strangled Anam to death and managed to escape from the crime scene. She was taken to a local hospital where the doctors pronounced her dead. Police, after being informed, reached the spot and shifted the dead body to a city morgue. Police registered a case against the accused on the complaint of deceased’s father, Ramzan.

Separately, two unidentified persons were found dead from Bhaati Gate and Islampura police jurisdictions. A 35-year-old man’s dead body was recovered from Bhaati Gate Police precincts. The deceased, yet to be identified, was lying dead along a roadside near Data Darbar. A passersby spotted the dead body and informed police. Police reached the spot and shifted the dead body to a city morgue for autopsy.

Source Link: Daily Times

Emphasis added by me


Wafa Educates Bill on the “Rape Factor” in Islam

O’Reilly has a history of pumping his own chest and screaming over his guests in order to appear to his audience and his swollen head that he knows more than the guest who actually lives under Shari’a Law. Wafa Sultan has a Death Fatwa (Islamic decree: a formal legal opinion or religious decree issued by an Islamic leader) placed on her head by Islamic Imams.

O’Reilly continues to sell himself and any of his Rags called books, through the majority of his show. Yes I do understand it is HIS show and he can do as he wants,  I also understand you should show respect to your guests, especially those who experience Radical Islam first hand. It is individuals like O’Reilly who make it dangerous because of his ignorance of Shari’a Law, his viewing audience becomes ignorant as well if they only listen to what he screams about and not look into the subject on their own. Walt

Source Link:

Hat Tip Act for America

Written by Andrew Bostom


At least by her??

Last night for a few brief shining television moments (captured here), Wafa Sultan, courageous  author of the indispensable jeremiad “A God Who Hates,” strove gamely to educate Bill O’Reilly—often seemingly impenetrable by facts regarding Sharia—about how Islamic Law, patterned on the “perfect example” of Islam’s prophet Muhammad, sanctions rape.

The news “hook” for Wafa’s unfortunately rare appearance was the recent alleged rape of a Libyan woman, Iman Al-Obeidi by Qadaffi’s minions.

As a working physician in her native Syria, Wafa noted that she was familiar with “many such crimes” committed with the sanction of  Sharia—Islamic Law. She elaborated that under Sharia,

Any sexual activity is considered the given right of a male…A Muslim woman cannot report being raped because she will be asked to provide four witnesses otherwise she will be accused of committing adultery, and she will be stoned to death.

The scholar Ibn Warraq affirms this “iniquitous situation.” He notes that Koran 24.4 states: “And those who accuse honourable women but bring not four witnesses, scourge them (with) eighty stripes and never (afterward) accept their testimony – They indeed are evil-doers.” But Warraq elaborates how this injunction renders women defenseless under misogynistic Islamic Law, past and present:

Muslim jurists will only accept four male witnesses. These witnesses must declare that they have “seen the parties in the very act of carnal conjunction.” Once an accusation of fornication and adultery has been made, the accuser himself or herself risks punishment if he or she does not furnish the necessary legal proofs. Witnesses are in the same situation. If a man were to break into a woman’s dormitory and rape half a dozen women, he would risk nothing since there would be no male witnesses. Indeed the victim of a rape would hesitate before going in front of the law, since she would risk being condemned herself and have little chance of obtaining justice. “If the woman’s words were sufficient in such cases,” explains Judge Zharoor ul Haq of Pakistan, “then no man would be safe.”

Responding to Wafa Sultan’s remarks, Mr. O’Reilly expressed his (uninformed) incredulity regarding the teaching, and example of Islam’s prophet:

I find it hard to believe that the prophet Muhammad would preach a doctrine where any woman can be abused at any time by any Muslim man and be held not accountable.

And Wafa replied, appropriately

You need to get familiar with Muhammad’s life and how he treated women in his life…Don’t forget, Muhammad is the role model for every Muslim man.

Notwithstanding the predictable American Muslim Brotherhood taqiyya O’Reilly is likely to air in the coming days as a “fair and balanced” riposte to Wafa’s irrefragable presentation, some salient details merit review.

What was Muhammad’s “perfect” role model? And what do Islam’s canonical texts, especially the Koran and the hadith (Muhammad’s “guiding” words and deeds as recorded by his pious Muslim companions), opine on these matters?

Using the Koranic “revelation” as justification, Muhammad insists that he is entitled, not simply his own wives, but those captured in battle, and cousins as well, as per Allah’s grant in Koran 33:50.

O Prophet, We have made lawful for thee thy wives whom thou hast given their wages and what thy right hand owns, spoils of war that God has given thee, and the daughters of thy uncles paternal and aunts paternal, thy uncles maternal and aunts maternal, who have emigrated with thee, and any woman believer, if she give herself to the Prophet and if the Prophet desire to take her in marriage, for thee exclusively, apart from the believers — We know what We have imposed upon them touching their wives and what their right hands own — that there may be no fault in thee; God is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.

Koran 4:24 extends the “privilege” of having sexual intercourse with captured slave women to all Muslim men.

For example, Muhammad and his minions attacked and subdued the prosperous Jewish tribe Banu-Mustaliq in a surprise raid (during 626 A.D.). The Banu al-Mustaliq males were slaughtered and the “booty” included the victims’ women. Juwayriyya, the most beautiful captive and daughter of the leader of the Banu al-Mustaliq was taken as a “bride” for Muhammad himself. The mass rape by “coitus interruptus” of the captured women—as sanctioned by  Muhammad—was described in a canonical hadith, thusly:

(Sunan Abu Dawud 2167)—Muhairiz said: I entered the mosque and saw Abu Sa’id al-Khudri. I sat with him and asked about withdrawing the penis (while having intercourse). Abu Sa’id said: We went out with the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to Banu al-Mustaliq, and took some Arab women captive, and we desired the women, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, and we wanted ransom; so we intended to withdraw the penis (while having intercourse with the slave-women). But we asked ourselves: Can we draw the penis when the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) is among us before asking him about it? So we asked him about it. He said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.”

Moreover, according to modern Western law (for example this Canadian law), statutory rape is sexual intercourse with anyone under the age of 14 — a punishable offense unless both parties are aged within two years of each other, or the accused is aged 12 to 13. Here is how the two most important canonical hadith collections describe Muhammad’s “relationship” with Aisha — their “marriage contract” and its sexual consummation — when the Muslim prophet was some four decades older than his child bride (aged 6-7 at the time of her “marriage”):

Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3311: Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and she was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88: Narrated Ursa: The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151: Narrated Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, who had not yet reached the age of puberty.)

Sahih Muslim, Book 031, Number 5981: Aisha reported that she used to play with dolls in the presence of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and when her playmates came to her they left (the house) because they felt shy of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), whereas Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent them to her.

The ugly living legacy of such pedophilia persists in Islamic communities across the globe from Yemen, to Afghanistan—to Britain. Here is a description of the modern horrors, including rape, engendered by Muhammad’s “sacralized” example from a contemporary female Muslim child “bride” living in the West—in London:

“I told them I was terrified and desperate, that I was just a child and far too young to get married. I pleaded with them to help me escape, but no one saw anything wrong in what was happening. I begged my husband not to marry me, but he told me I had no choice.” Despite being two years below the British age of consent, Ayse was moved into her cousin’s family home, where she lived openly as his wife in the local Kurdish Turkish community. “I was all alone in a foreign country, unable to speak the language,” she said. “I was trapped. Until I escaped, I didn’t even realize that marrying at 14 wasn’t legal in Britain: everyone I knew in London regarded it as normal.” In the two years before she reached 16, the sex Ayse was coerced into having with her cousin was statutory rape. “It was disgusting, awful,” she said. “I used to scream and cry all night. I was too young, too tender. It killed me inside. Life became meaningless.”

Of course since Koran 2:223 states that women are “tilth” to be “cultivated” (or “plowed”) as men please, contemporary mainstream, institutional Islam sanctions marital rape. As reported in the UK Independent (10/14/10), president of the Islamic Sharia Council in Britain, Sheikh Maulana Abu Sayeed, affirmed this view during March, 2010 interview.  Sheikh Sayeed was in fact responding to an inchoate effort at modernizing the contracts which govern Muslim marriages in Britain. The good Sheikh, representing Britain’s main Islamic Sharia court, the Islamic Sharia Council, promptly published a rebuttal of the contract, which included a statement on sexual abuse (page 6 here). He opined in the March interview:

Clearly there cannot be any “rape” within the marriage. Maybe “aggression”, maybe “indecent activity.”

He further rejected both the characterization of non-consensual marital sex as rape, and the prosecution of such offenders as “not Islamic.” Sheikh Sayeed, who came to Britain from Bangladesh in 1977, also brazenly expressed his Sharia-supremacism and accompanying disdain for Western, i.e., British Law, stating

…to make it exactly as the Western culture demands is as if we are compromising Islamic religion with secular non-Islamic values.

Sayeed re-affirmed these sentiments to The UK Independent:

In Islamic sharia, rape is adultery by force. So long as the woman is his wife, it cannot be termed as rape.

Click Here to Read it All at


The ‘Palestinization’ of lesbian activism

I enjoy reading anything written by Dr. Chesler, once again she has been able to fuse her Real Life and Academia Experience together in order to understand what makes the Gay and Lesbian Activist think they are ‘Palestinization’. Walt

Source Link: National Post ·
Written By Phyllis Chesler,

On February 22, the New York City Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community Center cancelled an upcoming Israeli Apartheid Week fundraising “party,” whose organizers planned to raise money for another flotilla to “break the siege of Gaza.”

Michael Lucas, a pro-Israel activist and gay adult filmmaker who belongs to the Center, insisted that this anti-Israeli-Apartheid “party” would be “anti-Semitic.” His opponents are mainly Jewish lesbian feminists who believe that the cancellation undermines their right to free speech. Over the years, most lesbian feminists have strongly supported pornography as a First Amendment right. Only now are they demonizing Lucas as a “Zionist” pornographer.

According to Sherry Wolf, a spokeswoman for a group called SeigeBusters, and an outspoken proponent of the cancelled anti-Israeli-Apartheid “party”: “It’s atrocious that after 28 years, [the LGBT Center is] becoming yet another occupied, homogenized space that only powerful and, frankly, white people dominate.” She subsequently organized a demonstration that took place on March 5, the date the fundraising event was to have taken place. On March 14, at a forum organized to debate the issue, SeigeBusters and its supporters outnumbered the pro-Israel activists by more than two to one.

When I was much younger, I took an idealistic view of gays and lesbians -invariably associating them with divine artists, writers, dancers, composers, playwrights and civil rights activists. But then, when I began working with real lesbian and bisexual women as part of my feminist activism, I discovered that -like everyone else -lesbians were neither angels nor devils. Like men, many lesbian feminists I met had internalized sexism and homophobia, and did not really respect or trust other women. In many cases that I observed, they used their intimate groups to bully, isolate and then shun any lesbian feminist who was “out of line” -despite the common pretense that feminist groups are leaderless and free-thinking.

In particular, I discovered that lesbians, bisexuals and “queers” often are expected to toe a party line when it comes to the Middle East. I am talking about the Palestinianization of lesbian feminists, including -perhaps especially -Jewish lesbian feminists, who are more concerned with the rights of a country that does not exist, “Palestine,” than with the rights of real Muslim women who are forced to veil themselves, accept arranged marriages and whom are victimized by honour killings when they are seen as too western or disobedient.

I have seen these North American lesbian “queers” at university-based Israel Apartheid Week events in America and Canada, wearing kaffiyas, sporting buttons that say “I am a Palestinian,” “I am a Jewish antiZionist” or “Jews For Justice in Palestine.” Many wear military buzz cuts and boots, carry heavy backpacks and sport other insignia of the EuropeanArab Street and ACT-UP-style protests. Were these women to dress this way in the West Bank or Gaza, they would be persecuted for their appearance -or worse.

What is going on? According to a group called Jews Against the Occupation-NYC: “It’s no coincidence that queers have been at the heart of Palestine solidarity groups for decades… The demonization and dehumanization of Palestinians under occupation resonates loudly for queers, as do other forms of racism and militarism.”

In emphasizing their view of Palestinians as the quintessential innocent victims, these politicized lesbians do not see themselves as others see them: Privileged, educated and free American “queers.” Instead, these activists imagine themselves to be outcasts, pariahs, “occupied” by Western patriarchy. And so they long to be somehow “Palestinian” in spirit, a posture that allows them to share in the Palestinians’ victim status. Perhaps they also feel victimized by the Jewish families, and by homophobic strains of Judaism, that have rejected them for their sexuality; in turn, they reject the Jewish state.

Ideologically, such Jewish lesbian feminists tend to be anti-racists. They seek to relive the good old days of the fight against South African Apartheid. This romantic, backward-looking attitude blinds them to reality. They do not view Palestinian terrorists as “terrorists” but as freedom-fighters. They do not understand that, at many points in history (including this one), Islam has been the largest practitioner of both religious and gender “apartheid” known to humankind.

Groups such as Seigebuster ignore the fact that there are gay-pride parades in Israel, and that “out” gay soldiers serve in the Israeli army. For years, Israel has been providing asylum for Palestinian homosexuals who have been tortured and near-murdered by their own Arab leaders.

For example, in 2003, the BBC reported that there were 300 gay Palestinian men secretly living and working in Israel. One 22-year-old gay man who fled from Gaza told a reporter that he fled after he was almost killed when his family discovered his sexual orientation. “[My brother] brought a stick and hit us,” he said. “He tied us up with an iron rope and went to call my dad, and tell my partner’s [family]. Then he came back and hit us again.” He only survived because he persuaded his mother to release him.

I have seen gay and lesbian contingents marching together with leftists and Arabs outside presentations I have given; they have heckled, hooted and tried to silence me in the lecture hall. The loudest chants of “From the River to the Sea -Palestine will be free” are coming, not only from the Muslim student associations or from the Palestinians with loudspeakers; they are coming from the mouths of American Jewish lesbian feminists whose very lives, certainly their political identities, are strangely bound up with Arab territorial claims.

The Jewish lesbians among them are not “self-hating Jews.” They are political opportunists obsessed with their own victimhood posturing -even if it means they must sacrifice the cause of both women and homosexuals in the process.

– Phyllis Chesler, PhD is an emerita professor of Psychology and Women’s Studies at City University of New York. She is an author, psychotherapist and an expert courtroom witness.


Former Muslims Excluded From King Hearings

Source Link: FrontPageMag

Written By Nonie Darwish

I have admiration and respect for Congressman Peter King and I salute him for holding hearings on the “Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community’s Response.” However, as a former Muslim I have not seen anyone testifying on our behalf in the hearings. At least one former Muslims should have been there to tell America of our plight. To tell them why we left Islam right here in America. How we had to choose between Islam and loving America. How radicals and jihadists followed us right here after we immigrated to the US to try to force us back into the same old culture of jihad, hatred and anti-Semitism — that we had escaped from in the first place. How radicals who want to deny us our freedom of religion under the US constitution threaten our lives and civil rights daily.

Most former Muslims in the US started by going to mosques but we soon discovered a political and jihadist agenda. In mosques I was told not to assimilate in America, to have more children and to wear Islamic clothes even though I never wore it in the Middle East before coming to the US. We were encouraged to pray wherever we wanted and do that with assertion even if we have to inconvenience others at airports, baseball games or at work. We soon found out that many mosques in America, as they are in the Middle East, are more of a political organization than a place of worship. We noticed that the more pious Muslims in the mosque were the ones seeking confrontation with American culture, such as getting offended if Americans have dogs or alcohol when riding cabs with Muslim taxi drivers.

Muslims are told openly in mosques that they have a mission in America and that is to make Islam the law of the land. Lying to America and getting offended to cover up the jihadist aspiration was encouraged, and became a perfected art and a religious obligation, which further alienated Muslims from American culture.

Many of us former Muslims have left the religion precisely because of the radicalization we confronted in America. But when we dared to stop going to mosques and left Islam altogether our lives turned into a nightmare. Many former Muslims contact me looking for shelter after their lives have been threatened. Just a couple of days ago I was contacted by a young 21 year old Muslim man telling me he left Islam years ago and has to hide the Bible from his family and friends after his own brother told him he was going to kill him if he does not return to Islam.

I receive testimony after testimony of former Muslims, some of whom are American converts who decided to leave Islam and are afraid for their lives. Many of us have to move from one apartment to another so we are not found by those who threaten our lives. Just last year, we all heard of the plight of the 17 year old apostate Rifqa Bary who had to flee her home after her life was threatened by her father and her local mosque. There are many Rifqa Barys in America where radical Islam is working under the radar to silence and force some of us to return to Islam or else.

I am also in contact with apostates in the Middle East. A student from Yemen told me that when he applied for a scholarship to come to the US, financed by Saudi Arabia, his application was rejected because he believes he was not radical in his Islamic views enough. He complained to me that the ones who won the scholarship were extreme Islamists and that tells us something about the kind of people we are giving student visas to.

How can former Muslims live in peace in America when there are Muslim scriptures sold and bought in all mosques telling Muslims that it is OK to kill apostates, meaning those who left Islam? The tragedy of apostasy from Islam has taken the lives of some in the West and caused mental and physical abuse for many and is never documented as a religious hate crime. Part of the jihad doctrine obliges Muslims to do internal jihad, by forcing Sharia on Muslim citizens. Sharia books in mosques across the US tell Muslims they will be forgiven for murder of an apostate and an adulterer, thus making vigilante street justice and honor killing acceptable religiously.

Muslim groups and their American appeasers are up in arms against the King hearings and are claiming that their civil rights are being violated. I wonder whose civil rights are violated in America? Is it Muslims or former Muslims?

Nonie Darwish is the author of “Cruel and Usual Punishment; the Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law” and founder of Former Muslims United.


On the 100th Anniversary of International Women’s Day — What Are Feminists Doing About Honor Killings?

Source Link|

Written By Phyllis Chesler

Editor’s note: The following is adapted from a speech delivered on March 8 by the author in observance of Women’s History Month to the New York County Supreme Court.

When my Second Wave generation of feminists started out, Gender Fairness committees did not exist nor did as many women lawyers and judges or the number of feminist lawyers, both male and female, whom I see here today. As many of you know, my or should I say, our generation had the privilege of changing all that.

We also named and exposed the hidden epidemic of physical and sexual violence towards women and children.

Second Wave feminists challenged sexism in advertising, (we still do), the pornography industry, (which has grown), and prostitution which now includes human sexual trafficking.

We also challenged corporations for economically discriminating against women; that work continues. We took on drug companies whose medications caused women to die from cancer. We championed women’s reproductive and sexual rights but we also challenged birth control. We waged a war to save women’s lives. The work continues.

Courtesy of Second Wave feminist activism, more women entered previously all-male professions, and some men became feminists.

Before the Second Wave began making waves, mothers received little child support and less alimony—that has improved although custody battles have, in some ways, gotten harder, more terrible. The 25th anniversary edition of “Mothers on Trial” will be published this summer with eight new chapters.

Our generation had a universalist vision of human rights—one standard for all. I still do. While I believe in cultural diversity, I am not a multi-cultural relativist. Therefore, I have taken a strong stand against the persecution of Muslim women and dissidents. Thus, I now submit expert courtroom affidavits on behalf of Muslim girls and women who have fled being honor murdered and are seeking asylum here.

Those of us who expose the plight of such women, and this includes Somali-born feminist hero Ayaan Hirsi Ali, as well as myself, have been demonized as “Islamophobes” and racists because we do not, in the same breath, blame America, the West, or Israel for their suffering.

In my view, western academic feminists, including gay liberationists, are so afraid of being condemned as “colonialists” or “racists” that this fear trumps their concern for women’s rights in the Arab and Muslim world.

What is Islamic Gender Apartheid? Islamic gender apartheid is characterized by normalized daughter- and wife-battering, forced veiling, female genital mutilation, polygamy, purdah, (the segregation or sequestration of women), arranged marriage, child marriage, first cousin marriage; girls and women are honor murdered if they resist such practices, if they wish to divorce a dangerously abusive husband, and if they are viewed as too independent, too modern.

Today, at its most extreme, Islamic gender apartheid is characterized by acid attacks, public stonings, hangings, and beheading of women in Iran, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia—countries in which girls and women who are raped are further victimized: jailed, tortured, and executed.

Feminists should be crying out from the rooftops against these practices. Some are. I am. Yet, many Muslim men and women, as well as many intellectually “progressive” western infidels, are not. They are demanding or welcoming the imposition of Islamic religious law, Sharia law, not only in Egypt and Saudi Arabia but also in the West.

I have published two academic studies and nearly 100 articles about honor killings both in the West and in the Islamic world. How is an honor killing defined? An honor killing is a collaborative conspiracy carried out against one victim, usually a young girl, by her family of origin. Both her male and female relatives believe that their “honor” demands her death; that her “impure” behavior has shamed and destroyed her family’s reputation and community status. A battered wife—or one who dares leave her tormentor—may also be “honor murdered” by both her husband, assisted by his relatives, and to an extent, the wife’s relatives as well.

In the West, honor killings are a mainly Muslim-on-Muslim crime. Hindus and Sikhs perpetrate such killings but mainly in India, not in the West.

An honor killing is not the same as western domestic violence or western domestically violent femicide. Many honorable feminists disagree with me. They believe that honor killings are the same as western domestic violence. Understandably, such feminists fear that by singling out one group for behavior which may be common to all groups they will stigmatize the token group and minimize the suffering of all the other groups. They have a legitimate fear—and yet if, for reasons of “political correctness,” we fail to understand a crime, we will never be able to prevent or to prosecute it.

Honor killings are shameful, secretive; they are allowed to flourish and fester precisely because the perpetrators and their collaborators do not want them exposed. Instead, they blame the victim, and they blame those who expose it.

I began writing about honor killings in the United States, Canada, and Europe in 2004. My first study about such honor killings first appeared in 2009 in Middle East Quarterly, the second appeared there as well in 2010. In the most recent publication, I studied 230 victims who were honor—or “horror” murdered on five continents over a twenty year period in 172 separate incidents. (More than one person was murdered in some of the incidents).

A murder is a murder and must be treated as such. However, honor killings are not like western domestic violence or domestically violent femicide.

Unlike Western domestic violence, honor killings are carefully planned by the victim’s own family of origin who have warned her, repeatedly, from childhood on, that they will kill her if she dishonors her family in any way: If she is even slightly disobedient; refuses to veil, veils improperly, rejects an arranged marriage, wants to leave a violent marriage, dresses in too Western a fashion. Worldwide, women are honor-murdered based on mere rumors of inappropriate behavior, for wanting to choose their own husbands, having infidel friends, choosing a non-Muslim friend or husband—or a non-Muslim God.

It is rare for a domestically violent western father to routinely batter, stalk, patrol, and murder his own daughter or to be assisted in this gruesome task by his entire family.

While men are also honor killed, young girls (average age: 17) and older married women (average age: 36) are the primary targets.

In the West, the majority (91%) of honor killings are Muslim-on-Muslim crimes. While Hindus and Sikhs do honor murder, they mostly do so in India, not in the West. Both men and women are honor murdered for marrying someone from the “wrong” caste.

Honor killings are also distinguished by their barbaric ferocity. The female victim is often gang-raped, then burned alive, stoned or beaten to death, cut at the throat, decapitated, stabbed numerous times (10-50), suffocated slowly, etc. This may resemble what western serial killers do to prostitutes.

Worldwide, 54% of female victims were tortured before being murdered; that number was 68% in Europe where the temptation to assimilate must be very great. Hence, a barbaric object lesson, a human sacrifice, is required. In Europe, 83% of the girls under eighteen who were honor murdered were torture-murdered.

Their killers were seen as heroes. In the West, child-murderers, wife batterers and wife-killers are now (courtesy of Second Wave feminism), seen as criminals. Those who commit or assist in the commission of honor killings view such killings as heroic and even view the murder as the fulfillment of a tribal, a family, and, rightly or wrongly, as a religious obligation.

Instruments Used In Africa For Femal Genital Mutilation

Based on my research, I have increasingly been asked to submit expert affidavits on behalf of girls and women who have fled being honor killed and who are seeking asylum in the United States or Canada. I have, thus far, worked on four such cases in the last 16 months.

My first case was that of an abused Muslim-American teenage immigrant who had secretly converted to Christianity. This was a high profile case. Lawyers in Florida, (she fled there), and in Ohio, (the court returned her), both won her the right to remain in foster care and helped her obtain a green card. The girl now lives in hiding, apart from her family, somewhere in America.

My second case concerns a North African woman who has fled a small European country to seek asylum in America. Just because a Muslim woman lives in Europe does not mean that she lives in a Western environment. Her large, tight-knit, violent, Islamist family inhabits a parallel universe in a country which has viewed such parallel bastions of gender and religious apartheid as “politically correct;” as a convert to Christianity, this woman’s family will hunt her down until they kill her. They will never stop trying. This case is still pending.

My third case concerns a brilliant graduate student from a prominent family in a south east Asian country. She has applied for asylum here. What is her crime? She dared to marry a man whom she loved but who belonged to a different sect of Islam; she did so against her parents’ wishes.

My fourth case concerns a woman who was born and raised in the killing fields of Congo. After her father was murdered, her mother fled to a neighboring African country, where she married a Muslim man who insisted on marrying his new stepdaughter off as the fifth wife to an elderly Muslim man; in turn, her chosen husband insisted that she be genitally mutilated.

Desperate, defiant, this brave soul fled Africa and arrived in the United States with falsified documents. Without going into too much detail, let me say that she has languished in jail in Buffalo, New York for more than three months. Last week, a judge ordered that she be deported to Congo. She has six weeks to appeal this decision.

One must ask: Should the United States and Canada be taking in so many persecuted victims from other countries? That’s certainly what America and Canada are about—but can either country afford to subsidize the wholesale rescue of so many persecuted human beings? Can we afford not to? Whatever our answer, we nevertheless have a responsibility to those immigrants and citizens who already live in our countries.

How should we address the problem of honor killings in the West? Obviously, immigration, law enforcement, legislative, and religious authorities all have important roles to play in terms of education, prevention, and prosecution.

In addition, just as we have shelters for battered Orthodox Jewish women, shelters for battered Muslim girls and women should be established and multilingual staff appropriately trained in the facts about honor killings. For example, young Muslim girls are frequently lured back home by their mothers. When a shelter resident receives such a phone call, the staff must immediately go on high alert.

Perhaps the equivalent of a federal witness protection program for the intended targets of honor killings should be created; England has already established just such a program. British police are uniquely empowered to return British citizens who have been kidnapped to Southeast Asia and married against their will.

We must issue clear government warnings to all immigrants to the West: Honor killings, daughter- and wife-battering, female genital mutilation, etc.—all “culturally sensitive” areas– will be prosecuted under western law. Since honor killings are collaborations, conspiracies, the perpetrators, accomplices, and enablers will all be prosecuted.

European courts have recently begun to do all this. Unlike the United States, they have a large Muslim immigrant population.

In 2006, a Danish court convicted nine members of a Pakistani-Danish clan for the honor murder of Ghazala Khan.

In 2009, a German court sentenced a Turkish-German father to life in prison for having ordered his son to honor murder his sister; the 20-year-old son was sentenced to nine and a half years.

In 2010, a British court, with the help of testimony from the victim’s mother and fiancé, convicted a Kurdish-British father of a 10-year-old honor murder after the police reclassified old, unsolved crimes.“

Like Islamic gender apartheid, an honor killing, is a human rights violation and cannot be minimized or justified in the name of cultural relativism, tolerance, anti-racism, diversity, or political correctness. As long as Islamist groups continue to deny or obfuscate the problem, and as long as western government, police, and judicial officials accept their inaccurate versions of reality, women will continue to be killed for honor, not only in Muslim-majority countries but also in the West.

The battle for women’s rights is central to the battle for Western values. It is a necessary part of true democracy, along with freedom of religion, tolerance for homosexuals, and freedom of dissent. Here, then, is exactly where the greatest battle of the twenty-first century is joined.

This op-ed was adapted from a 2011 women’s history month speech for the New York County Supreme Court.

To subscribe to the Phyllis Chesler mailing list, go to


Muslim Men and Non-Muslim Women

Source Link: NewsRealBlog

Written By Daniel Greenfield

Cross-posted from Sultan Knish.

When American mother Melissa Bender married Pakistani Mohammad Khan, she brought three children from a previous marriage into the relationship. Today the children are in protective custody after police discovered that her 13 year old daughter, Jessie Bender wasn’t taken away by a predator, but that the predator had been right in her own house.

Mohammad Khan was planning to take Melissa and Jessie to Pakistan, where the 13 year old girl feared she would be forced into an arranged marriage. Instead she bravely went on the run and the police department appears to be doing the right thing. For now.

Had Mohammad Khan taken her to Pakistan and married her off, it would have been almost impossible for the child to escape again. Particularly from a rural area. She would have been repeatedly raped by her “husband”, beaten by her in-laws and turned into a slave. And Khan would have likely profited from the exchange. Khan didn’t just marry a middle aged woman, he married a woman with at least one girl at home. And in Pakistan that translates into a salable commodity.

Last year the British Home Secretary warned about grooming of English girls by Pakistani men.

Last month, Mohammed Liaqat and Abid Saddiquewere jailed for a series of rapes and sexual assaults on young girls as young as 12.

Atma Singh, from the Sikh Community Action Network, said: “Well done to Jack Straw for being 100 per cent honest and saying what many people already know – that there are pockets of youngsters in the Pakistani Muslim community who treat girls from other communities as sexual objects.”

Mohammed Shafiq, director of the Muslim youth group the Ramadan Foundation said 53 out of the last 65 convictions for grooming had involved British Pakistanis.

“The reality is that there is an issue,” he said. “There is a perception that these white girls have lesser morals and lesser values than women from Pakistani heritage.

“It’s abhorrent and there needs to be debate.”

These are not quotes from the BNP or the EDL. These come from the inside. And it’s time Americans thought seriously about what they are importing into this country.

Let’s look at how women are treated in Pakistan. In many tribal areas, rape is a punishment meted out by tribal elders. Rape convictions are virtually impossible to achieve.

Here are apolitical stories from Western women living in major cities in Pakistan.

YES I believe you would be in danger if you dressed in a skimpy way. Flashy, skimpy clothes tell men that you are a loose woman, available to all. If you are raped or attacked, the men will say you brought it on yourself by the way you dressed.

It will also bring ‘shame’ on your husband and his family and may create large problems with the in-laws.

One of my friends was reprimanded for wearing capri length pajama pants and a t-shirt around the house at night. Her mother in law said it brought shame on the family.

If you’re living independently, wear whatever you want inside, but I’d suggest always answering the door in full length pants, a short sleeve shirt and a scarf. If you don’t, it is as if you are inviting men to have sexual relations with you.

Many Pakistani men already believe that Western women are loose and are all whores. Prepare to be groped in public by passing men, whether you dress conservatively or not.

That’s it. In Pakistani Muslim culture not wearing a hijab is asking to be raped. Wear a t-shirt in your own house and you’re setting yourself up for an honor killing. And even if you dress conservatively, you’ll still be molested in public on a regular basis.

What does that mean again? Here is one woman’s story from Pakistan. Be warned it is graphic, but it’s also a reflection of what daily life is like in a culture with no respect for women as human beings.

The situation is worse for non-Muslim women, particularly indigenous Christians and Western travelers, who are held to be less than human.

Do you think that magically changes when Ahmed or Mohammed moves to London or New York? It doesn’t. He only learns to be more discreet when outside his own community, otherwise the shaitan damned infidel yahood police will get him in trouble. His attitude doesn’t change. Only his tactics do.

A Pakistani immigrant in Brooklyn blackmailed his friend’s teenage daughters into having sex with him by threatening to tell their traditionalist parents they were being intimate with their boyfriends, law-enforcement sources revealed yesterday.

In one instance, Mohammad Naseer allegedly threatened to kill one of the Pakistani girls if she didn’t sleep with him.

“If you don’t do what I want, I will tell your father that you had sex with your boyfriend and if your father does not kill you, I will kill you. No one will find your body,” he threatened, according to court documents.

Pakistani men are prominent in lists of sexual assaults over and over again. In Australia, the Ashfield gang rapes by four Pakistani brothers (whose father perjured himself in court to give them an alibi), their defense was that being Pakistani Muslims gave them the right to rape.

The eldest of four Pakistani gang rapist brothers has admitted lying at trial and apologised to his victims but said he thought he had a right to rape the “promiscuous” teenage girls.

MSK, 27, told the NSW Supreme Court yesterday that this was because the girls did not wear headscarves, were drinking alcohol and were unaccompanied when they went to his Ashfield home.

Here’s a direct quote from the rapist himself, which should give you a terrifying understanding of how Pakistani men think

“She don’t know us, I don’t know her, like she was not related to us and she was not wearing any purdah … like she was not … covered her face, she was not wearing any headscarf and she started drinking with us and she was singing.

His cultural assumption was that a girl whose face is not covered, who sings and drinks has no rights whatsoever. It’s not an unusual assumption. If it was, then Western women wouldn’t have to be afraid of visiting Pakistan.

The legal system in this case and in every case misses the point. MSK is not a rapist, he’s a Pakistani Muslim. In Pakistan rape is not a crime against a person, but against property. The father or the husband’s property. His honor. Pakistani immigrants do not recognize the same notion of equal human rights that Westerners do. You can send them to jail for rape, but you can’t force them to think like the citizens of the free world do.

The values don’t change. They’re embedded in the Koran. Mohammed married Aisha when she was 6. Half Jessie’s age. A girl who reaches puberty is widely considered marriageable in the Muslim world. MSK is confused, the way most Americans would be if they visited a foreign country and in some unclear way offended their hosts. To MSK this is a cultural misunderstanding. And so it is to most Muslim Pakistani men.

Now think about a 13 year old American girl being taken into a home with a stepfather like that. And think about all the little girls who don’t run away from home. Who do go to Pakistan. How many are they? We’ll never know. But one thing we can be sure of, their numbers is growing.

Jessie Bender was meant to be an American Aisha. Instead thanks to her own courage, and a legal system that appears to be doing the right thing, she may now have the chance to grow up, fall in love and be a free human being. That elementary right which we take for granted and that no woman living in the Muslim world ever can.

How academic is this, let’s take a brief trip from Pakistan to Egypt, home of the joyful Democratic revolution, where 98 percent of foreign women complained of being sexually harassed on a daily basis.

Let’s step back and look at those numbers for a moment. Nearly every single foreign woman who visits Egypt can expect to be sexually harassed… every single day that she is there. Where does that kind of attitude come from?

Remember Sheikh Qaradawi, who heads the Muslim Brotherhood, and is preparing to be Egypt’s Ayatollah Khomeini. The man who has managed to get more followers into Tahrir Square that any individual of the so-called leaders who the media promises us will lead Egypt to democracy, thinks that way.

Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Muslim cleric currently on a controversial visit to Britain, believes that female rape victims should be punished if dressed “immodestly” when assaulted.

One question asked: “Are raped women punished in Islam?” A panel, headed by Mr al-Qaradawi, replied: “To be absolved from guilt, the raped woman must have shown some sort of good conduct . . . Islam addresses women to maintain their modesty, as not to open the door for evil.

“The Koran calls upon Muslim women in general to preserve their dignity and modesty, just to save themselves from any harassment.

This is the exact same rationalization used by MRK in court. It’s a universally common view throughout the Muslim world. (Now imagine how wonderful Egypt will be for women under Qaradawi. David Stein at Counter Contempt asks whether his views influenced the rape of Lara Logan.)

And Qaradawi concedes that the reason for the Burka and the Hijab and all the rest of that garbage is so that women do their part to keep from being raped. That’s what Islamic modesty really is. A sign that reads, “I’m a decent Muslim woman, I belong to my father or my husband, please don’t rape me.”

That is what Jessie narrowly escaped in Pakistan, but it’s coming here too. It is here. In Canada, Australia, England, France and everywhere else.

This is the undeniable reality that the left refuses to acknowledge.

When a group of prominent women in Israel put out a letter urging Jewish girls not to marry Muslim men, cries of racism went up.

“There are quite a few Arab workers who give themselves Hebrew names. Yusef turns into Yosef, Samir turns into Sami, and Awabad turns into Ami. They ask to be close to you, try to find favor with you, and give you all the attention in world, they are actually here knowing to act with courtesy, acting as if they really care for you, say a good word, but their behavior is only temporary. The moment you are in their hands, in their village, under their control, everything changes.”

“Your life will never go back to the way it was, and the attention you so desired will turn into curses, beatings, and humiliations,”

But frankly how can even the left argue with this assessment?

“It’s known that girls who go out with Arabs are beaten, these girls are in danger. . . . There is a violent social trend and everyone ignores it,” said the head of the group, Anat Gopstein, in a radio interview Wednesday morning.

But of course liberal clergy like Gilad Kariv shrieked, “Israeli society is falling into a deep, dark pit of racism and xenophobia”.

Is there anyone who still doesn’t know it? And if women are treated just as well in the Muslim world, then why do 98 percent of foreign women in Egypt report being abused on a daily basis. There is no answer to the truth.

When Jewish women do marry Arab men, they often end up being trapped in villages, abused and degraded.

Galit met Rami Kadera, an Arab from Gaza, ten years ago when he was employed as a waiter in a wedding hall. She was just sixteen — “I knew he was an Arab but all my friends were meeting Arabs”— and thought he had Israeli citizenship and would be allowed to live in Israel. When he eventually took her and their four children back to Gaza after being forced to leave Israel, where he had been working illegally, she thought it was for a short visit, never imagining she would be taken hostage by her own husband. Instead, she found herself trapped, stripped of her documents, and routinely beaten and tortured.

…Her mother arranged to pay for the cab, and the relative made contact with the Israeli soldiers at the Erez checkpoint, explaining that an Israeli woman and three children would be passing through. When she arrived back in Israel, she was covered with bruises and weighed under a hundred pounds.

Sometimes they can be rescued by organizations like Yad L’Achim, but often they and their children descend into a life of permanent slavery.

Phyllis Chesler has lived this life when she moved to Afghanistan and speaks with an insight that few others can muster.

I have talked to many American mothers who have traveled to the Muslim world to meet their husbands’ families who soon find that they cannot leave. Their passports may be taken away. They have no local resources to protect them.
Long ago, this happened to me in Kabul, Afghanistan.

He lied. One thing that Westerners find hard to believe is the ease with which many traditional Arabs and Muslims both exaggerate or lie. Think about how effective Islamist propaganda has been in the West. Then, think of how this capacity might play out in a domestic setting.
Talk to most Arab and Muslim men and you will find that the slightest departure from their being in control means that they have been victimized and must avenge their lost honor. Thus, Yazmin’s attempt to remove Sadiq’s “property” (their daughter) means that Yazmin will tarnish Sadiq’s honor. If Sadiq is like other Arab, Muslim men, he will say and do anything to avoid this.

Anything. That is the source of the honor-killing.

From An Overseas Reader: An Islamic Valentine for Lara Logan

Source Link: WRSA

Over the transom of the WRSA International desk comes this thought-provoking essay. Note that for young people or other folks not steeped in wonderfully-diverse and equally-valid cultures from around the world, some of the following content may be disturbing:

Pssst…that catchy title was just to grab your attention. This letter is meant for you infidel men.

You infidel women, please click back to fuzzy bunnies and unicorns. I’ll wait.

[Dum-dee-dum dum…]

All men now? Good.

Don’t worry, this isn’t about flowers, candy or cards. Of course the very idea is ridiculous. Valentine’s Day is an infidel holiday celebrating lewd, immoral and licentious behavior typical to your fallen religions. Trust me when I say we have nothing like Valentine’s Day in the one true religion of peace.

And men, isn’t it better for us that we don’t have it in our religion? No need to buy your wife flowers, candies or even a card on Valentine’s or any other day. This is just one small example of why the one true religion is better for men, and why you should seriously consider switching over while we’re still taking volunteers.

And it’s really easy to join. Just say one prayer, and you’re in for life.

Here’s another good reason to switch. Say you don’t feel like showing tender affection to your wife. You don’t have to! In fact, if she burns dinner, doesn’t clean the house, or pisses you off in any way you can just back-hand her, (as long as you don’t break any bones or mark her face.) In fact, it’s okay for you to give her a good thrashing now and then to get her back into line. Why? Because it says it’s okay in the holy books of the one true religion of peace, that’s why.

Don’t worry, the bruises covering the rest of her body won’t show, because (isn’t this great!) a wife can never leave the house while showing one square centimeter of bare uncovered skin that’s not between her eyes and her chin. Which is mighty handy, in case she’s still covered with bruises from her last few disciplinary sessions. And as long as you are careful not to beat her face in, she can still go out in public to do your shopping, (while properly attired, of course).

Here’s another reason why the one true religion is better for us men. Maybe your wife just doesn’t have the old sex-appeal any more. The thrill is gone. No problem! You can remarry, and bring a second, third or a fourth wife home. You don’t have to even ask the old bat’s permission. Whom you marry is up to you and you alone in the one true religion, because you are a man! If wife-number-one doesn’t want you bringing that pretty little thing home to your bed, well too bad for wife-number-one. She has no say in the matter. You may do what you want, because you are a man!

Now, my infidel friend and prospective member of the one true religion of peace, maybe you’re not such a handsome young stud yourself any more. You’re over forty, and you haven’t exactly been working out and keeping buff. Don’t worry, that’s not a problem. Let’s say your brother has a cute little daughter, Fatima. She’s going to be turning thirteen soon. For the first eleven or twelve years of her life she was allowed the run of the block like a free-spirited little sprite. Uncovered, just as cute as a button, and sure to be one hot number once she passes through puberty.

And as luck would have it, you also have a daughter of fourteen or so (perhaps from your second wife) who is not exactly getting any younger and you want her out of the house. Perhaps she is not as pretty as Fatima, but don’t worry, your brother is not as picky as you are. That’s right! You can trade your adolescent daughter to your brother, and he can reciprocate with Fatima. What a great deal this is for us men, under the rules of the one true religion of peace. In this way, you can keep a fresh stock of nubile teenage girls in your bed until you’re too old to want them any longer. And nobody can say a word against this excellent practice, because the prophet of the one true religion explicitly condones and encourages it as one of the very best ways to find a good wife. In fact, this is how the prophet found his favorite wife of all.

But what if your bubbly thirteen-year-old niece—excuse me—bride—objects to having sex with you, simply because you are forty-five and have a gray beard down to your big stomach? Ha-ha-ha! As if what she wants matters! Trust me, she has no say in the matter, none. If you and your brother like the idea of swapping teenage daughters for child brides, that’s all there is to it, it’s settled. (Some Western so-called scientists claim that all of this marrying of close relatives has caused so-called genetic problems, but what do they know? “Genetics” are not mentioned anywhere in our holy books, so they have no importance to members of the one true religion of peace.)

Read it all


U.K.: U.S.-Taliban Talks Are Best Hope In Afghanistan

Isn’t the Taliban one of the reasons we entered into Afghanistan? The Taliban provided safe harbor for al Qaeda (you remember those Peaceful Muslims who attacked the United States by flying airplanes into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center on 9/11/2001), little girls could not go to school, women had to wear a burqua covering her body from head to foot. Stoning, cutting off hands and feet and hanging were all used against the people of Afghanistan in accordance to the Qur’an and how it was read by the Taliban Leaders. What a few years and Politicians will do. All the American blood spilled in Afghanistan for nothing. W

Source Link: STRATFOR

The British parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee said the Afghan military campaign is not working and called upon the British government to urge Washington to engage in direct talks with militant Taliban leaders, Reuters reported March 2. The committee’s report said an Afghan-led but U.S.-driven political reconciliation process was the best hope for an honorable exit from Afghanistan, adding Afghan President Hamid Karzai could not negotiate alone and U.S. participation was essential. While admitting the evidence behind the committee’s report might be dated, British Foreign Secretary William Hague said he supported the committee’s recommendation that the time is right for the advancement of the political process in Afghanistan.


Is the Arab Middle East Really Ready for a True Revolution?

I hope that the many Women Organizations in the United States and Free World will join in  supporting these brave women. My Prayers will be with them as well. W


Written By Phyllis Chesler

Is the Arab Middle East really ready for a true revolution? A genuine uprising in the Muslim world which does not focus on the issue of women’s rights is not much of an uprising and does not bode well for a true democracy, one defined by the rule of law, a constitutional system of checks and balances, a separation of mosque and state, freedom of religion, a free press, universal education, individual human rights and freedom.

Miraculously, amazingly, a Saudi woman or a number of Saudi women have just launched a new and fabulous Facebook page. They call it Saudi Women Revolution. It features a white smurf-like figure joyfully throwing off her chains and has links to the Saudi women’s drive-in and to campaigns against child brides.

They are talking about arranging meetings in Jeddah and Riyadh.

Given what they know can happen to them: divorce, loss of custody, being honor murdered by their families, jail, torture (flogging), and murder (beheading, stoning), I must congratulate them for their awe-inspiring bravery. Alas, we do not have such brave women here.

I will also pray for their safety.

Please realize: The Kingdom is very severe, quite serious about repressing, oppressing, tormenting women. Yes—even those women who can shop-until-they-drop and who can afford the most expensive clothing, jewelry, furniture, and electronic entertainment; even those who are well educated; even those who are members of the royal family. All women are subject to the same laws. Women keep women in line psychologically—but, in case that fails, the law takes over.

All Saudi women must be heavily, fully, face-and-body veiled, no matter how hot it is.

They must always be accompanied by a male escort if they leave home.

They cannot choose whom they wish to marry nor can they leave violent, polygamous, and philandering husbands.

They cannot leave the country without a male escort and without male family permission to travel.

They are forbidden to drive.

However, in 1990, Saudi women conducted a “drive-in” to protest the ban on women driving. I was privileged to know some of these magnificent women. Everyone was barred from foreign travel for one year. Those who had government jobs were fired. They were denounced from mosque pulpits by name as “immoral” women. According to one of the women, Fawzia al Bakr, “Wherever you work, you are labeled as a ‘driver’ and you will never be promoted, no matter how good you are,” she says.

The new Facebook page lists this drive-in as well as a petition to abolish child marriage. This is truly an example of great courage. Why?

All Saudi women live with the knowledge that even a Saudi royal princess is in no way exempt from these harsh laws. For example, in 1977, a Saudi princess dared to fall in love with a man of her own choosing. She tried to flee the Kingdom. She was caught. Her own grandfather sentenced her to be publicly shot in the head six times. Her fiancée was forced to watch her death—and he was then publicly beheaded. A gripping British documentary, “Death of a Princess,” was made in 1980 about this tragedy.

All Saudi women know that in 2001, Dr. Hatoon Ajwad Al-Fassi, an assistant professor at King Saud University, was banned from teaching there. Her crime? As a historian, she has done research showing that women in the pre-Islamic and early Islamic period were actually freer than they are in Saudi Arabia today.

All Saudi women know that in 2002, terrified Saudi teenage girls were beaten back into a blazing Saudi schoolhouse because the religious police were furious that they had not had time to veil themselves properly as they fled; fifteen girls died.

All Saudi women know how savagely foreign female servants are mistreated; they are verbally and physically oppressed both by their female “employers” and sexually, by their male employers. Many are unpaid, some are murdered. There is very little redress for such crimes.

All Saudi women know what happened to a very high profile Saudi television “talking head.” On April 4, 2004, prominent journalist Rania Al-Baz was beaten within an inch of her life by her husband and dumped outside a hospital. Her face was barely recognizable and she suffered 13 facial fractures because her husband had bashed her head repeatedly against the marble floor of their home. Breaking a national taboo against mentioning domestic violence in public, she permitted newspapers to print images of her injuries. The Saudi royal family offered her financial support, and the following month the first ever Saudi research on domestic violence was conducted by a Saudi university. Her husband was sentenced to six months in prison as well as a public flogging. He was released from prison after three months. She “forgave” him in order to get a divorce but she left the country and now lives in Paris. One assumes that Rania had to leave her children behind as hostages or as the property of their father.

All Saudi women know that in 2003, Wajeha Al-Huwaider, a prominent Saudi women’s rights activist, was booted from her position as a journalist for two Saudi newspapers. Why? Al-Huwaider dared to criticize discrimination against women in Saudi Arabia. She leads the campaign to allow Saudi women the right to drive, and the Saudi secret police have detained her on multiple occasions for demonstrating on behalf of women’s rights.

Ida Lichter has written an important book: Muslim Women Reformers: Inspiring Voices Against Oppression. She details twelve Saudi women reformers. I strongly suggest this book as a reference guide.

Saudi (and Iranian) feminists stir my imagination. They live as if they know that heroism is their only alternative.

President Obama, Secretary Clinton: Please offer your support to these unknown feminists. Do so now—not when it’s too late. And, by the way, other Saudis have just announced the formation of a political party; true, it is merely a symbolic gesture since the Kingdom has no parliament—but once again, show America in her best colors, and support this gesture as well.

Don’t miss any of Dr. Chesler’s articles. Subscribe to The Phyllis Chesler Organization mailing list.


Will Egypt’s New Freedom Force More Women Under a Veil of Brutality?

Source: NewsRealBlog

Written By Phyllis Chesler

Islamism seems to be winning the day in the Middle East and in central Asia. Today, the Obama Times has a highly sympathetic article about how shelters for battered women as well as for women who are at risk of being honor murdered are themselves “under siege.” The shelters are seen as encouraging forbidden female flight and independence and as exposing and tarnishing Afghanistan’s reputation.

According to Amina Afzali, a member of a new government commission,“there [are] cases where women needed protection but [she] was upset about the shelters’ high profile in discussing abuse.” Afzali found it “grating” that Time magazine featured child bride Bibi Aisha on its cover; her husband had hacked off her nose after she tried to run away from home. Such publicity “humiliates us in the eyes of the world.”

In 1937, the British traveler Rosita Forbes visited Afghanistan. In From Kabul to Samarkand, she wrote: “Afghans are peculiarly afraid of criticism.” She found Afghan men utterly charming and unaffected—and yet they lived “as martyr(s) to their own fear of criticism.”

Little has changed. Today, President Karzai’s government has decided to placate the Taliban by putting the fate of desperate Afghan runaways back into the hands of their families or at least into the hands of the pro-Taliban government.

This otherwise useful news reportage provides absolutely no political analysis of the situation or of the way in which both Islam and Islamism negatively affect the lives of Muslim women. And, the op-ed pieces, usually by Nicholas Kristof, that do feature stories about the abysmal plight of women in the Muslim world, also draw no political conclusions about the nature of Islam, Islamism, sharia law, or about its stealth jihadic presence in the West.

Last week, The (Obama) New York Times also described a disturbing scene in Baghdad:

On a raised stage between two shops, four mannequins in Western dress, their blond hair peeking out under colored scarves, stood amid crepe-paper flames. To one side was a banner featuring lust-crazed male ghouls; behind the mannequins, images of eternal suffering.

At the foot of the stage is a piece of scripture:

Whoever fills his eyes with the forbidden, on judgment day God will fill them with fire.

According to the Times, one Iraqi father brought his wife and daughters to see the stage because “everyone has forgotten about God, and they say that this is progress. Well, I call it depravity.”

I do not mourn the passing of Saddam Hussein. Nevertheless, under his brutal and corrupt tyranny, modern Western-style gains for women did take place. True, this did not help the women who were routinely kidnapped and gang-raped by Hussein’s sons and cronies and not for the dissidents who were routinely tortured and murdered. However, the Islamic Republic of Iran tortures and murders even more brutally.

Educated women in Iraq agree that “religious parties are on top right now.” As we have seen in the photos  and videos of female faces in Tahrir Square, Egyptian women are also wearing heavy hijab and even niqab. This is also the case in Gaza and on the West Bank, and of course in Saudi Arabia and throughout the Arab World.
According to one Iraqi woman, “the pressures to cover…[are] getting stronger and uglier. Men who used to flirt now use nasty words.” The fact that so many Muslim girls and women are “covering” does not mean that they are freely choosing to do so but that they do not wish to be berated, beaten, or honor murdered.

Islam and Islamism is traditionally a culture that blames women for male lust—something that the Catholic inquisition in Europe did; it was the basis upon which the Church burned an estimated nine million women over a period of three centuries as witches. The Inquisition believed that women were guilty of arousing male lust, causing male impotence, falsely accusing men of rape—and oh yes, of causing drought, famine, and other natural disasters. Just read the Malleus Maleficarum, it’s all there.

One young Iraqi man is quoted as saying:

I do look at women when I see them dressed up with tight jeans. That is one of the problems. It means the devil is doing a good job.

Allow me to predict the intensification of woman battering and honor killings of those girls and women who show too much hair, too much flesh, too much ankle, and perhaps anything more than their eyes, if even that.

I fear that such misogyny is coming our way soon. Clearly, Muslim women are heavily veiled all over Europe and are increasingly heavily veiled in Muslim-majority areas in the United States and Canada and on many university campuses. As I have argued in my piece in Middle East Quarterly, peer pressure and threats of beatings or of honor murders create a climate of coercion in which no woman can truly choose whether to veil.

Meanwhile, the New York Times and other mainstream media steadfastly refuses to draw any political conclusions from its own news stories and refuses to cover Muslim forced veiling and Muslim honor killings in North America.

Even as Britain’s David Cameron, France’s Nicolas Sarkozy, and Germany’s Angela Merkel are proclaiming that “multiculturalism” and multicultural relativism have failed in their countries, the American mainstream media and professoriate still refuse to draw any conclusions about the superiority of American freedom for women and the profound danger that Islam and Islamism, as currently practiced, as well as Muslim Sharia law pose both for women and infidels.

What else can we expect given that last April,“Obama banned use of the terms ‘jihad,’ ‘Islamic terrorism’ and ‘radical Islam’ in US government documents.” Obama has also ignored the danger that the Muslim Brotherhood poses both to Egypt and to America.

Muslim Women Under Shari’a Law

Source: INN (

by Nonie Darwish

Shari’a, that is Muslim law, controls the private as well as the public life of the woman.

In the Western  World (including America ) Muslim men are starting to demand Shari’a Law under which wives can not obtain a divorce and men have full and complete control of their children.  It is amazing and alarming how many of our sisters and daughters attending American Universities and other parts of the Western world are now marrying Muslim men and submitting themselves and their children unsuspectingly to the Shari’a law.

By publicizing the information below, I hope to help enlightened American and other women avoid becoming slaves under Shari’a Law:

  1. In the Muslim faith, a Muslim man can marry a child as young as 1 year old, consummating the marriage by 9
  2. A dowry is given to the family in exchange for the woman who becomes a slave.
  3. Even though a woman is abused she cannot obtain a divorce.
  4. To prove rape, a woman must have four male witnesses.
  5. Often after a woman has been raped, she is returned to her family and the family must return the dowry.  The family has the right to execute her (an honor killing) to restore the honor of the family.
  6. Husbands can beat their wives ‘at will’ and do not have to say why the beating occurred.
  7. A husband is permitted to have 4 wives and a temporary wife for a limited period at his discretion.

The goal of radical Islamists is to impose Shari’a law on the world, ripping Western law and liberty in two.  If that happens, Western civilization will be destroyed. Westerners generally assume all religions encourage a respect for the dignity of each individual.  Islamic law (Shari’a) teaches that non-Muslims should be subjugated or killed in this world.

Peace and prosperity for one’s children is not as important as assuring that Islamic law rules everywhere in the Middle East and eventually in the world.

While Westerners tend to think that all religions encourage some form of the golden rule, Sharia teaches two systems of ethics – one for Muslims and another for non-Muslims. Building on tribal practices of the seventh century, Sharia encourages the side of humanity that wants to take from and subjugate others..

While Westerners tend to think in terms of religious people developing a personal understanding of and relationship with G-d, Shari’a advocates executing people who ask difficult questions that could be interpreted as criticism.

It’s hard to imagine, that in this day and age, Islamic scholars agree that those who criticize Islam or choose to stop being Muslim should be executed. Sadly, while talk of an Islamic reformation is common and even assumed by many in the West, such murmurings in the Middle East are silenced through intimidation.

While Westerners are accustomed to an increase in religious tolerance over time, petro dollars are being used to grow an extremely intolerant form of political Islam in Egypt and elsewhere.

In twenty years there will be enough Muslim voters in the  U.S. to elect the President by themselves! Rest assured they will do so… You can look at how they have taken over several towns in the USA . Dearborn Mich. is one… and there are others….

It is too bad that so many accept Muslims as peaceful.. some may be but they have an army that is willing to shed blood in the name of Islam… While America is getting rid of Christianity from all public sites and erasing God from the lives of children the Muslims are planning a great jihad on America .

More about the author:

Nonie Darwish recently authored the book, Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law.  In it she warns about creeping shari’a law – what it is, what it means, and how it is manifested in Islamic countries.

Darwish was born in Cairo and spent her childhood in Egypt and Gaza  before immigrating to America in 1978, when she was eight years old. Her father died while leading covert attacks on Israel. He was a high-ranking Egyptian military officer stationed with his family in Gaza.

When he died, he was considered a “shahid,” a martyr for jihad. His posthumous status earned Nonie and her family an elevated position in Muslim society.

But Darwish developed a skeptical eye at an early age. She questioned her own Muslim culture and upbringing and later abandoned Islam.


No safety in Shariah

Source: Washington Times

Political correctness puts women at risk

Editorial by the Washington Times

The barbaric Middle Eastern practice of honor killing has made an appearance on our shores. It happens when men murder members of their own family to avenge purported slights against Islam. For instance, Pakistan-born Muzzammil Hassan allegedly beat and then beheaded his wife Aasiya in Buffalo, N.Y. on Feb. 12, 2009. Six days earlier, Aasiya announced her intention to file for divorce and obtained a restraining order.

In another example, Iraq-born Faleh-Hassan Almaleki allegedly ran down his 20-year-old daughter Noor with his Jeep Cherokee near their Phoenix home on Oct. 20, 2009. Noor was killed and the mother of her boyfriend was injured. Prosecutors say Almaleki was angry at his daughter for refusing an arranged marriage.

These cases bear the signs of honor killings and the men, both Muslims, are currently on trial for murder. If the crimes had been committed in their home countries – where Shariah law forms the foundation for judicial proceedings – the defendants frequently escape serious punishment because witnesses often refuse to testify out of fear.

Texas and Wyoming want to make sure legal concepts based on the Koran don’t gain a foothold in America. Proposed state constitutional amendments would ban the use of Shariah and other forms of international law from the courtroom. On Election Day in November, Oklahomans gave an overwhelming 70 percent approval to a similar amendment to the Sooner State constitution.

While a Shariah ban ought to be a no-brainer, it has generated significant controversy. In November, a federal magistrate sided with the Council of American-Islamic Relations and ordered an injunction that blocked certification of Oklahoma’s amendment. Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange wrote that a Muslim activist would suffer “a stigma attaching to his person, relegating him to an ineffectual position within the political community, and causing him injury” had the amendment been allowed to take effect. In other words, it might hurt someone’s feelings.

It also would have stopped a development taking hold in some European nations where two parallel legal systems have emerged. In the United Kingdom, for example, there are 85 Shariah courts employing imams to adjudicate civil and familial matters. These operate independently of the crown. A 2010 report by One Law for All Campaign titled “Shariah Law in Britain: A Threat to One Law for All and Equal Rights,” says women have the most to lose from the influx of Islamic law. This code lends a woman’s testimony half the weight of a man’s and grants a husband’s petition for divorce more readily than a wife’s. The supposed women’s rights groups are strangely silent when the issue involves the crescent.

It isn’t difficult to imagine the gradual curtailment of other, more essential liberties should Shariah courts be allowed to flourish, for example the lenient treatment for men involved in honor killings of women.

America owes its historic achievements to a founding social contract, the Constitution, which promises to “secure the Blessings of Liberty” for its citizens. Those who would come to these shores and attempt to secrete Shariah into U.S. law will only succeed in diminishing the freedoms of all


Shariah the Threat to America Team B Report-PDF Copy

View this document on Scribd


Shari’a for Dummies

Source: FrontPageMag

By Nonie Darwish

Imam Feisal Abdel Rauf claims that the U.S. constitution is Sharia compliant. Now let us examine below a few laws of Sharia to see how truthful Imam Rauf is:

1- Jihad, defined as “to war against non-Muslims to establish the religion,” is the duty of every Muslim and Muslim head of state (Caliph). Muslim Caliphs who refuse jihad are in violation of Sharia and unfit to rule.

2- A Caliph can hold office through seizure of power meaning through force.

3- A Caliph is exempt from being charged with serious crimes such as murder, adultery, robbery, theft, drinking and in some cases of rape.

4- A percentage of Zakat (charity money) must go towards jihad.

5- It is obligatory to obey the commands of the Caliph, even if he is unjust.

6- A caliph must be a Muslim, a non-slave and a male.

7- The Muslim public must remove the Caliph if he rejects Islam.

8- A Muslim who leaves Islam must be killed immediately.

9- A Muslim will be forgiven for murder of: 1) an apostate 2) an adulterer 3) a highway robber. Vigilante street justice and honor killing is acceptable.

10- A Muslim will not get the death penalty if he kills a non-Muslim, but will get it for killing a Muslim.

11- Sharia never abolished slavery, sexual slavery and highly regulates it. A master will not be punished for killing his slave.

12- Sharia dictates death by stoning, beheading, amputation of limbs, flogging even for crimes of sin such as adultery.

13- Non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims under the law. They must comply to Islamic law if they are to remain safe. They are forbidden to marry Muslim women, publicly display wine or pork, recite their scriptures or openly celebrate their religious holidays or funerals. They are forbidden from building new churches or building them higher than mosques. They may not enter a mosque without permission. A non-Muslim is no longer protected if he leads a Muslim away from Islam.

14- It is a crime for a non-Muslim to sell weapons to someone who will use them against Muslims. Non-Muslims cannot curse a Muslim, say anything derogatory about Allah, the Prophet, or Islam, or expose the weak points of Muslims. But Muslims can curse non-Muslims.

15- A non-Muslim cannot inherit from a Muslim.

16- Banks must be Sharia compliant and interest is not allowed.

17- No testimony in court is acceptable from people of low-level jobs, such as street sweepers or bathhouse attendants. Women in low level jobs such as professional funeral mourners cannot keep custody of their children in case of divorce.

18- A non-Muslim cannot rule — even over a non-Muslim minority.

19- Homosexuality is punishable by death.

20- There is no age limit for marriage of girls. The marriage contract can take place anytime after birth and can be consummated at age 8 or 9.

21- Rebelliousness on the part of the wife nullifies the husband’s obligation to support her, gives him permission to beat her and keep her from leaving the home.

22- Divorce is only in the hands of the husband and is as easy as saying: “I divorce you” and becomes effective even if the husband did not intend it.

23- There is no community property between husband and wife and the husband’s property does not automatically go to the wife after his death.

24- A woman inherits half what a man inherits.

25- A man has the right to have up to 4 wives and none of them have a right to divorce him — even if he is polygamous.

26- The dowry is given in exchange for the woman’s sexual organs.

27- A man is allowed to have sex with slave women and women captured in battle, and if the enslaved woman is married her marriage is annulled.

28- The testimony of a woman in court is half the value of a man.

29- A woman loses custody if she remarries.

30- To prove rape, a woman must have 4 male witnesses.

31- A rapist may only be required to pay the bride-money (dowry) without marrying the rape victim.

32- A Muslim woman must cover every inch of her body, which is considered “Awrah,” a sexual organ. Not all Sharia schools allow the face of a woman exposed.

33- A Muslim man is forgiven if he kills his wife at the time he caught her in the act of adultery. However, the opposite is not true for women, since the man “could be married to the woman he was caught with.”

34-It is obligatory for a Muslim to lie if the purpose is obligatory. That means that for the sake of abiding with Islam’s commandments, such as jihad, a Muslim is obliged to lie and should not have any feelings of guilt or shame associated with this kind of lying.

The above are clear-cut laws in Islam decided by great Imams after years of examination and interpretation of the Quran, Hadith and Mohammed’s life. Now let the learned Imam Rauf tell us: What part of the above is compliant with the U.S. Constitution?

Nonie Darwish is the author of “Cruel and Usual Punishment; the terrifying global implications of Islamic law” and founder of Former Muslims United.


Turkey: Hizb ut-Tahrir Member Charged in “Honor Killing” of Sister

H/T Jeffrey Imm

By R.E.A.L. Organization

Turkish news media is reporting on an “honor killing” of a 17 year old girl, Seyma G., by her brother “Y.G.”   The brother accused with the murder was a member of the anti-democracy group Hizb ut-Tahrir.  The murdered girl, Seyma G. had reportedly been staying in a shelter for women, fleeing family abuse.

The international group Hizb ut-Tahrir is against democracy and freedom, seeks the creation of a global Islamic caliphate, and calls for the “death penalty” for “traitors” who leave Islam.  The Hizb ut-Tahrir America organization had a conference scheduled for July 11, 2010 in a Chicago area suburb, that was canceled by Marriott Hotels.  See additional reports by Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.) on Hizb ut-Tahrir at

Turkish media Today’s Zaman reports: “Girl’s murder by brother was ‘honor killing” ’states that “The police statement also noted that Y.G. was a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir (Party of Liberation), an outlawed fundamentalist organization. Y.G., who was detained during the Diyarbakir police investigation, was questioned and then jailed on July 16.”

Hurriyet Daily News reports that:  “A 17-year-old woman found dead one month ago was allegedly murdered by her 15-year-old brother in an ‘honor killing’ after she left the women’s shelter where she was staying, daily Radikal reported Wednesday.”…  “The body of Seyma G. was found half buried in the ground in the southeastern province of Diyarbakir, while subsequent tests revealed that she had been strangled to death. Her brother Y.G. was caught by police and then arrested July 16.”  “The victim had reportedly been staying in a women’s shelter after being subjected to violence at home. Family members allegedly found her after they learned she had left the shelter.”   “Her brother, who is accused in the murder, had previously been detained for being a member of the illegal Muslim organization Hizb ut-Tahrir.”

Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.) rejects violence and threats of violence, including those who rationalize “honor killings” and related threats with claims that such violence is justified by one’s culture or religion.  R.E.A.L. rejects such rationalizations for hate and violence.  R.E.A.L. supports our universal human rights for women and for all human beings.

We urge all to Choose Love, Not Hate – Love Wins.