SINISTER plans to criminalise “political dissent” against the EU project took a step closer to becoming reality today, prompting a dismayed response from free speech campaigners.
Human rights groups have reacted with horror after EU member states approved draconian new anti-terror laws which critics have warned could be used to suppress eurosceptic movements by force.
In a rare show of universal anger seven leading civil rights movements tore into unelected Brussels bureaucrats over the shadowy plot, warning that it endangers “fundamental rights and freedoms” including the right to protest.
Leading lawyers and campaigners have warned that it could easily be used to mercilessly crack down on eurosceptic movements and thwart protest against controversial EU initiatives.
Worry about the draconian new law is running so high that seven top human rights groups have penned an open letter to the European Union urging them to reconsider it.
Amnesty International, the European Network Against Racism (ENAR), European Digital Rights (EDRi), the Fundamental Rights European Experts (FREE) Group, Human Rights Watch, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), and the Open Society Foundations (OSF) all called for the legislation to be comprehensively amended or else scrapped altogether.
“San Bernardino terrorists may have been motivated by Christmas decoration-studded holiday party,” by Meg Wagner, New York Daily News,
“Anti-Muslim bigotry causes jihad”
US ABC News’ investigative team discovered emails between Farook and his Pakistani wife, Tashfeen Malik, which indicate she was upset that her Muslim husband was being forced to attend a Christmas gathering.
Syed Farook killed 14 infidels of his coworkers in San Bernardino.
“She didn’t think that a Muslim should have to participate in a non-Muslim holiday or event,” San Bernardino police chief Jarrod Burguan, in a statement with implications that are simply staggering. The message is clear: Muslims must always and in every case be accommodated. Nothing whatsoever that could possibly offend the poor dears must ever be displayed. If you hang Christmas decorations, why, you may provoke them to a massacre! So…don’t hang Christmas decorations. Don’t do anything they don’t like. That way you may escape with your life, but be attentive to their changing moods, and ready to accommodate any new demands pronto. Or else.
Mark Steyn: Don’t Say I’m Violent, Or I’ll Kill You
Yes, he was trying to murder Infidels in the name of Allah and Islam — after all, he said, “By Allah, I am willing to kill a billion infidels” — but it isn’t as if he was a right-winger or a member of some other morally suspect group. On the contrary, he was a triple victim: a Muslim, a refugee, and a racial minority. That means that for addled leftists such as Stephanie Clemons Thompson, he is the real victim, no matter what he did.
In the wake of recent terror attacks, some liberal journalists and academics have suggested that Islamophobia causes Islamic terrorism.
But a series of initiatives meant to stamp out Islamophobia at Ohio State University proved ineffective at stopping Somali refugee and devout Muslim Abdul Razak Ali Artan from stabbing nine people on Monday. (continued below)
Artan, who referenced al-Qaida cleric Anwar Al-Awlaki in a pre-stabbing rant posted to Facebook, launched his attack in spite of university events like “Islam 101” and “Islamophobia in America” meant to decrease the Islamophobia that some leftists in the media and academia have said is the root cause of Islamic terrorism.
After the Brussels terror attack that left 32 people dead, for example, Georgetown professor Engy Abdelkader wrote an article arguing that Islamophobia causes Muslims to radicalize into terrorists.
Similarly, a Columbia University student wrote an editorial arguing that the attacks were caused by Islamophobia.
Islam is again challenging the integrity of our judiciary, which is part of their quest to make the shari’a the law of the land.
An Australian district court judge has declined a request from a Muslim woman to wear a niqab while giving evidence in a damages claim against police where she alleges that officers assaulted her during a raid on her home.
On Tuesday in the New South Wales district court, judge Audrey Balla ruled on a request from Moutia Elzahed to wear her niqab while giving evidence to the court, in what may by one of the first rulings of its kind in Australia.
Moutia Elzahed, whose husband was convicted of aiding terrorism, is denied the request in her damages claim against police
Balla offered a number of alternatives to Elzahed – including that the court be closed to the public or that she give evidence in a remote room – but she declined to accept the alternatives, because there would still male legal representatives in the room.
Forget the daily terror, the rapes, the beheadings & the bombs, forget the vehicle jihad and the jihad in Africa: what could me more pressing than the Buddhists of Burma not giving in to Mohammedan mores? How dare a bunch of monks resist the soldiers of allah? Once again, the UN brings out the heavy hitters to serve the OIC, the block of 56 Islamic nations that corrupts everything:
Ex-UN chief Annan to visit troubled Myanmar state
Chair of Advisory Commission on Rakhine State to visit area in which violence which has seen between 86 and 417 people killed
Former United Nations chief Kofi Annan is set to visit Myanmar’s troubled Rakhine State amid international cries for a probe into violence which has seen between 86 and 417 people killed.
Nobel laureate Annan was selected in August to chair the Advisory Commission on Rakhine State, with the aim of finding lasting solutions to “complex and delicate issues” in Myanmar’s westernmost area — the impoverished home to around 1.2 million stateless Rohingya Muslims.
Not “violence”: jihad. When the soldiers of allah attack soldiers and border guards, they should be ready for some blowback.
On Monday, commission member and Chief Convener for the Islamic Centre of Myanmar Aye Lwin told Anadolu Agency that Annan would arrive in Myanmar for the mission in days.
“He will visit [Myanmar capital] Nay Pyi Taw and Rakhine State,” said Aye Lwin, who is also a founding member of the interfaith organization Religions for Peace.
All “interfaith” activities are da’awa efforts, a proselytizing effort to make disbelievers convert to Islam.
Apropos: what afflicted the Ohio jihadist murderer, Abdul Ali Artan, with Sudden Jihad Syndrome? According to him, it was… Burma!
While the enemedia, law enforcement authorities and Governor Kasich continue to scratch their heads in bewilderment as to why this devout Muslim went jihad, Abdul Ali Artan made his motives quite plain:
Charlie Hebdo’s surrender is not a new development. After jihadis opened fire on our free speech event in Garland, Texas in May 2015, Charlie Hebdo staffers attacked us, not the jihadis. Charlie Hebdo editor-in-chief Gérard Biard rejected any comparison between our event and Charlie Hebdo’s Muhammad cartoons: “The difference between us and these people is that these people are organizing contests, anti-Islamist contests. It’s an obsession … We are not obsessed. We are just obsessed by the news, and by how the world is going on. The difference with Pamela Geller, she is obsessed by Islam. She waits [sic] every morning and thinks, What can I do today to defy these people?”
That was bad enough, but it could be dismissed as the typical Leftist fear of being associated with anything described, however inaccurately, as “right-wing”: indeed, it was absurd to think there was any difference between what they did and what we did. Both of us drew Muhammad to defy violent intimidation; there is no “right-wing” and “left-wing” defiance of violent intimidation, it is the same motion.
But now Charlie Hebdo has not just surrendered; it has switched sides and become part of the problem: “Take Charlie’s recent covers. Against terrorists? No. Against those who called them “racists”? No. It was against Éric Zemmour, the brave French journalist at Le Figaro who has led a public debate about French identity. ‘Islam is incompatible with secularism, incompatible with democracy, and incompatible with republican government,’ Zemmour wrote. Laurent Sourisseau, aka “Riss,” now the publishing director and majority owner of Charlie, was shot during the 2015 attack on the magazine, and lives under police protection. He depicted Zemmour on the cover with an explosive vest, effectively comparing him to a terrorist. Charlie Hebdo also recently satirized Nadine Morano, a critic of Islam, depicting her as a baby with Down Syndrome. Riss also recently published a comic book attacking another easy target of submissive conformists, entitled ‘The Dark Side of Marine Le Pen.’ Le Pen leads France’s National Front party, with a platform fighting for national sovereignty and Europe’s Judeo-Christian identity. In Charlie, the political leader of the French ‘right’ is dressed as Marilyn Monroe.”
In Garland, jihadis tried to murder those of us who were standing for the freedom of speech, but they failed; in Paris, they succeeded. I can understand how that difference can change one’s perspective. Nonetheless, I can only hope, no matter what happens in the future, that on none of the days I have left will I surrender and grovel, and shy bricks at those who are still fighting the fight, as Charlie Hebdo is doing, rather than stand for what is right.
“Islamists Won: Charlie Hebdo Disappears,” by Giulio Meotti, Gatestone Institute, November 30, 2016:
“The newspaper is no longer the same, Charlie is now under artistic and editorial suffocation.” — Zineb el Rhazoui, French-Tunisian intellectual and journalist, author of Destroying Islamic Fascism.
“We must continue to portray Muhammad and Charlie; not to do that means there is no more Charlie.” — Patrick Pelloux, another cartoonist who left the magazine.
“If our colleagues in the public debate do not share part of the risk, then the barbarians have won.” — Elisabeth Badinter, philosopher, who testified in court for the cartoonists in the documentary, “Je suis Charlie.”
After the Kouachi brothers slaughtered Charlie Hebdo‘s journalists, they ran out into the street and cried: “We have avenged Muhammad. We killed Charlie Hebdo.” Two years later, it appears that they won. They succeeded in silencing the last European magazine still ready to defend freedom of expression from Islamism.
This shouldn’t surprise anyone, and many more will be found as well. This is because few things are more abundantly attested in Islamic law than the permissibility of child marriage. Islamic tradition records that Muhammad’s favorite wife, Aisha, was six when Muhammad wedded her and nine when he consummated the marriage:
“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)” (Bukhari 7.62.88).
Another tradition has Aisha herself recount the scene:
The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. (Bukhari 5.58.234).
Muhammad was at this time fifty-four years old.
Marrying young girls was not all that unusual for its time, but because in Islam Muhammad is the supreme example of conduct (cf. Qur’an 33:21), he is considered exemplary in this unto today. And so in April 2011, the Bangladesh Mufti Fazlul Haque Amini declared that those trying to pass a law banning child marriage in that country were putting Muhammad in a bad light: “Banning child marriage will cause challenging the marriage of the holy prophet of Islam, [putting] the moral character of the prophet into controversy and challenge.” He added a threat: “Islam permits child marriage and it will not be tolerated if any ruler will ever try to touch this issue in the name of giving more rights to women.” The Mufti said that 200,000 jihadists were ready to sacrifice their lives for any law restricting child marriage.
Likewise the influential website Islamonline.com in December 2010 justified child marriage by invoking not only Muhammad’s example, but the Qur’an as well:
The Noble Qur’an has also mentioned the waiting period [i.e. for a divorced wife to remarry] for the wife who has not yet menstruated, saying: “And those who no longer expect menstruation among your women, if you doubt, then their period is three months, and [also for] those who have not menstruated” [Qur’an 65:4]. Since this is not negated later, we can take from this verse that it is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a prepubescent girl. The Qur’an is not like the books of jurisprudence which mention what the implications of things are, even if they are prohibited. It is true that the prophet entered into a marriage contract with A’isha when she was six years old, however he did not have sex with her until she was nine years old, according to al-Bukhari.
Other countries make Muhammad’s example the basis of their laws regarding the legal marriageable age for girls. Article 1041 of the Civil Code of the Islamic Republic of Iran states that girls can be engaged before the age of nine, and married at nine: “Marriage before puberty (nine full lunar years for girls) is prohibited. Marriage contracted before reaching puberty with the permission of the guardian is valid provided that the interests of the ward are duly observed.”
According to Amir Taheri in The Spirit of Allah: Khomeini and the Islamic Revolution (pp. 90-91), Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini himself married a ten-year-old girl when he was twenty-eight. Khomeini called marriage to a prepubescent girl “a divine blessing,” and advised the faithful to give their own daughters away accordingly: “Do your best to ensure that your daughters do not see their first blood in your house.” When he took power in Iran, he lowered the legal marriageable age of girls to nine, in accord with Muhammad’s example.
“Child brides discovered in Germany – but refugee workers say marriages should REMAIN,” by Jon Rogers, Express, November 26, 2016:
Who is standing in solidarity with them? Those who taunt or brutalize hijab-wearing women are louts and creeps, and should be prosecuted if they commit any acts of violence. At the same time, the women who don’t wear hijab in Muslim countries are far more likely to be victims of violence than hijabis in the West. Who speaks for them?
It is of no consequence that his name was Abdul Razak Ali Artan and it doesn’t matter that he was a refugee from Somalia. And of course the fact that he had driven into a crowd of infidels before taking to eleven of them with a butcher’s knife just happened to be an instruction straight out of the ISIS handbook… it still wasn’t enough for authorities to declare this a terrorist attack, much less an Islamic terrorist attack, before they viewed his suicide notes (above). Presumably, Obama is still President!
Muslim, Buddhist or Christian… the real threat is Islam itself and what is required of a devotee of the cult. Each and every attack since (and including) 9/11 was by people who would never be suspected of unpaid parking tickets, let alone the killing of thousands, and that’s what makes Islam so dangerous.
Unfortunately the rhetoric that protects Muslims will remain until the 20th of January when Trump takes over and a new approach to Islam will catch up with Europe’s hard-learned lessons.
Obama’s cowardly refusal to face and deal with any damned problem will be his only legacy. Turnbull will follow him into historical oblivion as he too refuses to face and deal with our Western Sydney Muslims and Sudanese refugees rampaging through Melbourne.
The Left has infiltrated our Security Agencies over many years and they are demanding that we don’t blame Muslims and that Islam is an honourable faith. And you think Donald Trump has a lot of cleaning up to do? Australia’s Green Left has remained unchallenged while it infects every corner of Aussie society, and we are sans a Donald to fix it.
Where is Australia’s rebirth of sanity? Where is our Wilders, where is our Le Pen? There isn’t one. Those who see Pauline Hanson as a saviour will need to wait for another decade or two, she is leader of a micro party in the Senate, and micro parties are not known for their longevity, even in the Reps. Not even the Nats, as Coalition partners, are known for their bush bravery.
Australia is in danger of being left behind with the plasticine Turnbull and a UN besotted stick insect to lead us. Both have resolved to leave the centre-right Abbott sniping away on the back bench. They have learned nothing from the disastrous Gillard experiment with Rudd.
Our craven Conservatives, under fire, have fled to the Left hopping into bed with Shorten while he pretends to have gone off sex and starts domestic arguments over nothing. So, who the hell do we vote for? Shorten’s out, Turnbull’s out and Pauline’s confined to the obstructionist Senate.
Basically we are rooned, destined to drown in the wake of a reparative Trump tsunami with no-one in sight to deal with our Islamic terrorism or the UN’s massive global warming hoax which is designed to bash energy dependent nations into submission and allow Islamic OPEC to call the tune… which they are already doing.
All roads to destruction can be traced back to the UN where it planned a new world order as the defunct League of Nations. So what hope do we have with the stick insect photocopying Gillard’s infatuation with a UN seat where she can relax holding hands with her sleepy Mr Wonderful?
And Mr Turnbull? Well, while the rest of the sane world was lauding Trump’s win, he was emulating Gillard, snapping selfies and playing touchy feelies with Obama.
And Abbott? Well, if he was to be reinstated, which he won’t be, the main players and their roles would all still be the same. Abbott has suffered fiscal deprivation on the back bench and only a front bench Ministry can remedy that.
“No vacancy”, eh? Turnbull’s ridiculous appointment of Senator Marise Payne to Defence eventually had to be augmented with a novel “dual Ministry” that includes the 60 billion dollar submarine man from South Australia, Christopher Pyne! Neither is capable of the monstrously unwieldy Defence portfolio, whereas Abbott would be ideal.
Turnbull’s Australia runs last again!
But isn’t it nice that Abdul Razak Ali Artan held off his Islamic terrorism until after the Presidential election. I mean, any terrorist activity during the hustings would no doubt have assisted Trump and hurt Clinton, but the Don won anyway.
Yet it does make you wonder just what lovable links flourish between Islam and the Left.