 And the UN passes the “Defamation of Religions” Resolution. I was just about to shut my computer down when I realized that there are two breaking news items that I just have to share with you. First, according to NBC and ABC journalist Mark Schone, “Zawahiri’s Wife Releases Statement, Tells Women They Can Be Suicide Bombers.” What’s this? The twisted triumph of feminism, Islamist-style?
Women have been suicide killers before. Palestinians have forced/manipulated women as well a men into killing themselves as a way to kill Israeli civilians; various Muslim groups in Iraq and Iran, as well as the Tamil Tigers have also forced/manipulated women to become suicide killers. Why is Al-Qaeda’s Zawahiri allowing one of his four (or more) wives to take such an active public role? And, why now? Omaima Hassan , Zawahiri’s wife, first reminds women that their primary role is that of bearing and breeding a jihadic fighter’s sons. She counsels women to support jihad by keeping the warrior’s secrets and his home, and by wearing hijab. She also disapproves of women going out without a male escort or guide. But then, in an unconfirmed report, she goes further. According to Schone: “Hassan also suggests that women can become suicide bombers, which she refers to as "martyrdom missions." This is certainly different from what her husband said in 2008, in a “two-hour recorded interview posted on a web site.” Zawahiri, who is believed to be in Pakistan, insisted “that Al Qaeda did not have women members, and that the role of women in jihad was limited to taking care of the children of fighters and maintaining their homes.” One conclusion: Watch out for suicide bombers wearing burqas. The second piece of breaking news concerns the vote just taken at the United Nations.
According to L. Bennett Graham, Legislative and International Programs Officer at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, the “Defamation of Religions” resolution passed the General Assembly in New York earlier today. It did so “by a vote of 80 in favor, 61 against, and 42 abstentions. As a matter of comparison, last year’s General Assembly passed the resolution by a vote of 86 in favor, 53 against, and 42 abstentions (in other words, the difference in last year’s votes was 33, this year it was only 19).
In 2006, 111 countries were voting in favor of this resolution. So despite another loss, the momentum continues to go against this concept.” Schiff thanks his supporters and all those who are “taking a stand for the freedom of conscience, thought, and religion…Our combined hard work continues to pay off, and while the issue of ‘defamation of religions’ continues to threaten the entire concept of human rights, we are confident that civil society’s voice will be fundamental in defeating this flawed concept and will ultimately bring a better understanding of freedom around the world. There is still plenty of work to be done between now and March, when we expect the resolution to come up again before the Human Rights Council in Geneva.” Let me understand this. Al Qaeda wants burqa wearers, both male and female, to blow us all up but the UN does not want us to say that such killers have anything to do with Islam or Islamic jihad (or with anyone’s interpretation of Islam), lest we commit a thought crime. I say: Shout it from the rooftops, set it to music, add it to our textbooks, teach our children.
As has been said: Silence=Death. Phyllis Chesler
 Bien sûr, les islamistes radicaux sont contrariés par les infidèles et par l'existence d'un état juif. Mais que détestent-ils le plus ? Le féminisme.Dans une interview publiée sur Internet le mois dernier, on demande au Dr Tawfik Hamid, un médecin né au Caire qui se décrit comme ancien djihadiste, pourquoi il a failli devenir terroriste. Il répond que c'était sous l'influence « d'une certaine forme [fondamentaliste] d'enseignement religieux » qu'il a rencontrée à l'université. « Ce n'était pas la pauvreté, explique-t-il, je venais d'une famille aisée. Ce n'était pas le défaut d'éducation, j'étais à la faculté de médecine, mon père était chirurgien orthopédique et ma mère professeur de français, et tout ça n'était donc pas en cause... C'était pour l'essentiel une forme religieuse d'enseignement qui nous ordonne de recourir à la violence contre les non-musulmans ou contre les musulmans qui ne se conforment pas à notre système de valeurs ». Lire le reste...Source: National Post (Traduction par Poste de veille)
 The fifty million Muslims of Europe will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades…Europe is in a predicament, and so is America. They should agree to become Islamic in the course of time, or else declare war on the Muslims.—Muammar Quadhafi From Amy Goodman’s Marxist slanted Democracy Now! program, comes a report out of Switzerland which describes how voters in that country have overwhelmingly approved a referendum banning the construction of minarets on Muslim places of worship. Goodman, describing the referendum as being an effort sponsored by “two right-wing parties,” gives Democracy Now!’s version of what transpired: Swiss voters have overwhelmingly approved a referendum banning the construction of minarets on Muslim places of worship. The referendum was sponsored by two right-wing parties. Switzerland is home to some 400,000 Muslims and has just four minarets. A campaign poster in support of the ban depicted a woman in a burqa in front of a row of minarets shaped like missiles. Oxford University professor Tariq Ramadan, who is a Swiss citizen, said “The Swiss majority are sending a clear message to their Muslim fellow citizens: we do not trust you and the best Muslim for us is the Muslim we cannot see.” Amnesty International said the vote to ban minarets violated freedom of religion and would probably be overturned by the Swiss Supreme Court or the European Court of Human Rights. There is so much to take issue with in Goodman’s report that a weighty tome could be written in response to that one paragraph. One could, for example, question the decision to solicit the opinion of Tariq Ramadan on the issue. Ramadan, you may recall, was the same individual who characterized the 9/11 attacks, the October 2002 Bali nightclub attack, and the March 2004 Madrid train bombings as “interventions,” rather than acts of terrorism. He has a deep-seated hatred of the West and Israel, is the founder of a Swiss Islamo-fascist organization called the “Movement of Swiss Muslims,” and has exhorted Muslim youth “to Islamize modernity rather than modernize Islam.” One could also question Goodman’s use of the specious argument put forth by Amnesty International, which characterizes the Swiss vote banning minarets as a “violation of religious freedom.” A curious argument coming from an organization that remains strangely silent on the issue of religious freedom in the Islamic world, where it is forbidden to build a church of any kind in countries such as Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia (where Christians may not even set foot in many areas for fear of being executed). We will leave those questions for another time. It will prove much more interesting to have a look at two key points which Goodman completely fails to mention in her report: 1) The Swiss vote was democratic; and 2) The largest group of voters turning out to vote against the minarets was not “right-wing” xenophobes, but leftist, feminist women! In considering point number one, it is surprising that an organization that took pains to name itself “Democracy Now!” would leave that out of its report. The Swiss vote, however, was democratic. The fact that it produced a result different from that deemed politically correct is irrelevant. The second point is even more interesting: Post-election polls revealed that the Swiss would have rejected the ban were it not for feminist involvement: 39% of women were in favor of the ban, as opposed to 31% of men. Why is that? Radical feminists argued that the tower-like structures are “male power symbols” and reminders of Islam’s oppression of women. Socialist politicians were also fearful at the prospect of the minarets being built; one exclaiming that she felt that their construction would be “a signal of the state’s acceptance of the oppression of women.” But the issue seems to have struck a nerve in a broad specturm of Swiss women, and not just Socialists and radical feminists. Julia Werner, a housewife, put it this way: If we give them a minaret, they’ll have us all wearing burqas. Before you know it, we’ll have Sharia law and women being stoned to death in our streets. We won’t be Swiss any more. Predictably, the Muslim world is enraged over the vote, and if the furor over the Danish newspaper cartoons portraying Mohammed three years ago is anything to go by, the Swiss are in for a rough time. NewsReal Blog 
 This interview with Turkish-German lawyer, Seyran Ates, first appeared in the land of the fjords, the land of oil, the home of the political correctniks who choose and bestow the Nobel Peace Prize. I am talking about Norway, where my friend and colleague, the American author Bruce Bawer, also lives. Bruce has written a number of important books such as While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying The West From Within and Stealing Jesus: How Fundamentalism Betrays Christianity. Bruce (who currently has a piece featured on Pajamas) is the one who translates my work into Norwegian. Two far-sighted women, Rita Karlsen and Helge Storhaug, publish Human Rights Service as an online journal in both English and Norwegian. I first “met” Seyran Ates when I was researching my book about Islamic gender apartheid and its penetration of the West. Thus, I quoted her twice in The Death of Feminism. I recently met Seyran for the first time in person in Rome at the G8 conference; I wrote about it for PJM here. We bonded. But, we really met when Seyran came to stay with me in New York City. Seyran Ates' latest book: "Islam Needs a Sexual Revolution" By Phyllis Chesler for Human Rights Service This past week, my home and my life were graced by a very heroic houseguest. I am talking about Seyran Ates, the Turkish-German lawyer, author, and freedom fighter who flew to New York City to spend six days with me, to talk, laugh, dream, strategize, hang out, hide out. Yes, hide out. Seyran’s fourth book Islam braucht eine sexuelle Revolution has just appeared in Germany. Its title: “Islam Needs a Sexual Revolution” has, apparently, led to more than the usual number of death threats. Seyran temporarily cancelled her tour to promote the book and came to visit me instead. Seyran is no stranger to serious trouble. In 1984, as a 21 year-old law student, Seyran was working at a Women’s Center in Berlin where mainly Turkish and Kurdish girls and women came for counseling. Seyran was sitting with her client, a fifteen year old battered Turkish Muslim girl. All around them, other women were giving and receiving advice, shelter, legal services. A quiet man quietly entered. Politely, but firmly, one of the women said: “Sir, there are no men allowed here.” Expressionless, the man in the trench coat assured her that “What I have to do will take no time at all.” Quickly, smoothly, he shot and killed the fifteen year old. He also pumped three bullets into Seyran’s neck and shoulder; she was not expected to live since the shooter had punctured a major artery. Against all odds Seyran recovered but her rehabilitation would take six years. The shooter calmly walked out of the Women’s Center. Yes, he was finally found and jailed for six months but no, he was never convicted. Although six Turkish and non-Turkish women identified him, the police made so many procedural errors that the judge felt there was enough reasonable doubt and could not convict him.
In Seyran’s expert opinion, the problem was that the victims were women—and Turkish women at that. It was a Turkish-on-Turkish, Muslim-on-Muslim crime—perhaps the fate of Turkish-German women was not yet seen as a priority on the multi-culti German agenda. A lesser mortal might have given up. Seyran, however, completed law school. She went on to specialize in defending battered, mainly Muslim immigrant girls and women, including those who are the intended targets of honor killing. However, Seyran was a rebel long before this incident. When she was 18 years old, she ran away from home. She could no longer bear being “treated as her father’s and elder brother’s slave and servant.” She wrote a book about it but under a pseudonym. She titled it: Wo gehören wir hin? (Where Do We Belong?) and it was a cri de coeur about immigrant identity. When I asked her how she found the strength to do this, she told me this: “My parents, who were farmers, first came to Berlin in 1968 as guest workers. Berlin was undergoing a political and sexual revolution. I have no idea what they made of it all. Anyway, I arrived here in 1969 when I was six years old. I was the only Turkish girl in school. Everyone spoke German. Me too. I became completely integrated. There were no separate or parallel facilities, no parallel universe to impede my integration.” Seyran wanted the same freedoms that German girls and women had. Now, in retrospect, she realizes that, as the only daughter, her mother really needed her help. (Seyran has reconciled completely with her family. In fact, they all live together in the same building in different apartments and support Seyran’s decision to be a single mother.) Here, in the West, a non-Muslim divorce lawyer who represents a non-Muslim battered woman client might well be sued by her client’s ex-husband; she might have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend herself. I know many American women lawyers who have faced this. But a lawyer like Seyran risks her life, faces death, each day she defends a battered Muslim woman, each time she helps her flee from an intended honor killing. So many heroic Muslim and ex-Muslim feminists and dissidents have received death threats. Some write under pseudonyms, live in exile, often require bodyguards and/or serious police protection.
Here, I am thinking about Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Magdi Allam, Lubna Hussein (the brave, trouser-wearing journalist who just fled Sudan), Ibn Warraq, Irshad Manji, Taslima Nasrin, Asra Nomani, Wafa Sultan. Those of us who share their views and who write about them in the West, are usually called “racist Islamophobes.” More at Chesler Chronicles
 L’un des jouets les plus célèbres au monde, la poupée Barbie, a subi une cure de rajeunissement : elle porte la burqa.
La célèbre poupée recouverte de la robe islamique traditionnelle sera offerte aux enchères chez Sotheby’s au profit de l’organisme Save The Children. Plus de 500 poupées Barbie ont été exposées hier au Salone dei Cinquecento à Florence, en Italie. Le fabriquant Mattel soutient l’exposition, conçue par la designer italienne Eliana Lorena (photo ci-contre). La vente aux enchères s’inscrit dans le cadre des festivités entourant le 50e anniversaire de Barbie célébré cette année. La plus grande fan de Barbie en Grande-Bretagne, Angela Ellis, 35 ans, a une collection de plus de 250 poupées. Directrice de la société des évaluateurs Laird de Wirral, au Cheshire, elle a déclaré: «Les Barbie burqa sont les bienvenues, je pense que c’est une excellente idée et que c’est vraiment important pour les filles. Elles devraient avoir la possibilité de jouer avec une Barbie qui les représente, quelle que soit leur origine. Je sais qu’on a déjà vu Barbie comme un mauvais modèle pour les filles. Mais en réalité, le message de Barbie aux femmes est que vous pouvez être ce que vous voulez. J’ai une Barbie dans un fauteuil roulant et elle s’est envolée en six semaines. » Lire la suite...Source: Mail (Traduction par Poste de veille)
 New York, 6 novembre 2009 : Au cours d’une cérémonie qui s’est tenue le 4 novembre au Metropolitan Museum of Art, le secteur hollandais des bulbes floraux a baptisé une tulipe Ayaan en hommage à Ayaan Hirsi Ali pour sa défense de la liberté et des droits humains des femmes musulmanes.Madame Hirsi Ali, féministe, écrivain, activiste et ancien membre du parlement hollandais a conclu la traditionnelle cérémonie de baptême en éclaboussant du champagne sur les bulbes et en proclamant « De ce jour, cette tulipe sera appelée Ayaan ». M. Thijs Leenders, président de l’association nord-américaine des grossistes en bulbes floraux représentait à cette occasion le secteur hollandais des bulbes floraux. Était également présent M. Wim Pijbes, directeur du Rijksmuseum d’Amsterdam. Ayaan Hirsi Ali est née à Mogadiscio, en Somalie. Elle a immigré aux Pays-Bas en 1992, bénéficiant de l’asile politique. Elle a étudié les sciences politiques à l’université de Leiden et obtenu une maîtrise. En 2003, elle a été élue au parlement hollandais, où elle a siégé jusqu’en 2006. Pendant son mandat législatif, elle s’est beaucoup impliquée dans les questions d’assimilation des immigrés non occidentaux au sein de la société néerlandaise et à travers le monde. En 2004, elle s’est associée au réalisateur hollandais Theo van Gogh pour créer le film Submission, un documentaire sur le traitement des femmes par l’islam conservateur. Le caractère polémique du film a suscité beaucoup de colère dans la communauté musulmane des Pays-Bas. En 2004, Theo van Gogh a été assassiné dans une rue d’Amsterdam par un extrémiste islamique déclaré. Mme Hirsi Ali réside actuellement aux États-Unis où elle collabore à l’American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, un think tank conservateur de Washington. Lire le reste...Source: Flora Culture via Islam in Europe (Traduction par Poste de veille) H/T: S.P.
 In a ceremony on November 4 at the Metropolitan Museum of Art the Dutch flower bulb sector named a tulip after Ayaan Hirsi Ali ‘Ayaan’ in recognition of Ms. Hirsi Ali’s defense of freedom and human rights for Muslim women.
Ms. Hirsi Ali, a feminist, author, activist and former member of the Dutch parliament completed the traditional naming ceremony by drizzling champagne over the bulbs and declaring, “From now on this Tulip has the name ‘Ayaan’.”
Mr. Thijs Leenders, president of the North American Flower Bulb Wholesalers Association represented the Dutch bulb sector in the event. Also in attendance was Mr. Wim Pijbes, director of Amsterdam’s Rijksmuseum.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a native of Mogadishu, Somalia. She immigrated to the Netherlands in 1992 receiving political asylum.
She studied political science at the University of Leiden, earning a Master of Arts degree. In 2003 she was elected a member of the Dutch parliament where she served until 2006. During her legislative tenure, she was very involved in the issues of assimilating non-Western immigrants into Dutch society.
She has long been a vocal defender of the rights of Muslim women in Dutch society and around the world. In 2004, she teamed with Dutch film director Theo van Gogh to create the film Submission, a documentary on the treatment of women by conservative Islam.
The film’s controversial nature angered many in Holland’s Islamic community. In 2004, Mr. van Gogh was murdered on an Amsterdam street by an avowed Islamic extremist. Ms. Hirsi Ali currently resides in the U.S. where she is a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C.
Tulipa ‘Ayaan’ is a dark maroon/brown/purple Triumph tulip hybridized by Ms. Lydia Boots, of Lybo Hybridizing, Hem, NL. Ms Boots is one of few women working in the male dominated world of tulip hybridizing. The hybrid is a crossing of Tulipa ‘Gavota’ x a sport of Tulipa ‘Gander’s Rhapsody’.
The new deep purple tulip joins a group of tulips known in Holland as “black” tulips. The legendary quest of Dutch hybridizers to create a truly black tulip goes back centuries. Many experts consider Tulipa ‘Ayaan’ one of the finest and most successful results of this quest. The selection of the flower to be named in her honor was made by Ms. Hirsi Ali herself.
Upon receipt of the signed christening certificate, the tulip will be entered into the Classified List and International Register of Tulip Names, maintained by the Royal Dutch Bulb Growers Association (KAVB) in Hillegom, the Netherlands.
Supplies of the Ayaan tulip will be limited for several years, as it takes many seasons to build up stocks of new tulips. It is estimated that only 500 bulbs will be available for sale and planting in the fall of 2010. Visitors to Amsterdam in spring of 2010 will be able to view and enjoy the new tulip in the park adjacent to the Rijksmuseum, where 100 bulbs were planted in October in celebration of the upcoming tulip naming.
By Gramfan According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary Feminism is defined thus: Date: 1895 1 : the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
2 : organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests Who can ever forget the iconic cover of "The Female Eunuch", by Germaine Greer? It was everywhere when it was first published in 1970. It was virtually the next best thing that had happened to women since Emmeline Pankhurst and her Suffragettes worked to get women the vote. So we were told. And certainly you cannot deny the benefits and progress that have come from these two women, and the many others who have taken over the baton and changed the lives of millions. Many of today's other famous feminists are living very comfortably on self-earned wealth: fine with me, it's well-deserved. They have turned their politics and activism into income sources by working in journalism and other media. People listen to them. They have power, enormous power. Camille Paglia is but one of many whose opinions are highly respected, and it is easy to see why. Germaine Greer is still going on strongly about all kinds of issues. Gloria Steinem is another member of this esteemed crowd and there are also very many not-so-famous feminists. These feminists are in almost all professions from politics to pianists, parents and yes, prostitutes - the oldest "profession" of them all! Then of course there are the other women in the world who don't occupy this rarified space but who have decided, and yes, it is a decison now, to become home-makers and mothers. Some of them decide to resume successful careers and some chose not to. But I wonder if we all really received so many benefits from all these feminists? Some of us didn't. With all that is good and liberating in human progress there are often side effects and "unintended consequences". Sadly there are goals that have not, and will not be achieved. Certainly many of us get equal work for equal pay nowadays but not all of us. Then there are those who chose to be wives and mothers, who are often scorned, or looked down upon, for their choices. They had jobs, but feminists weren't satisfied; every other woman had to get one too. So they opened fire on homemakers with a savagery that still echoes throughout our culture. A housewife is a "parasite," [Betty] Frieden writes; such women are "less than fully human" insofar as they "have never known a commitment to an idea." And.... Housewives, not men, were the prey in feminism's sights when Kate Millett decreed in 1969 that the family must go. Feminists do not speak for traditional women. Men cannot know this, however, unless we tell them how we feel about them, our children, and our role in the home. Men must understand that our feelings towards them and our children are derided by feminists and have earned us their enmity. Whether or not this understanding garners men's support, traditional women must defend ourselves because the feminist offensive is, most essentially, a breach of solidarity with us, a disavowel of the obligation to honor the Women's Pact [that religious celibates, professional women, and homemakers respect each other] that women in the movement owed to us (Source). Oh yes, this site has more. Feminism today goes on and on, intellectualising and re-defining feminism to the extent where it is almost too difficult to follow, let alone comprehend. Quite frankly I am more interested in the practical day-to-day realities. I take the two definitions at face value and I note it doesn't specify any nationality,political allegiance or religion. 1 : the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
2 : organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests It is true a lot of this has happened in the West but rather than have Greer et al espouse "intellectual yada yada" I would rather see these women get militant again and do something to help their long-suffering sisters who live in Islamic countries, and who can but only dream of the lifestyle many of their famous feminist sisters enjoy. All too often I see stories of honour killings, rape, female genital mutilation, subservience, domestic (and other) violence, forced marriage and utter discrimination perpetrated against women in Muslim countries and now also in the West. Some women are getting hymenoplasties and buying repair kits before they marry. Some are being recruited as homicide bombers. One is punished for drinking beer, others face lashings or stonings. An Australian Islamist tries to justify polygamy for everyone. There are women who suffer terribly from acid attacks quite frequently. Women in Gaza are not allowed to ride motorcycles, and Somali women are being scrutinised when wearing a bra! Where's Germaine when you need her, or would this make her happy I wonder? And recently we have the on-going case of Rifka Bary who, as a minor, cannot chose her religion, and could become a victim of honorcide for apostasy. If she is sent back to her parents her fate is unknown. If she is allowed to remain alive the Islamists can deny honorcide even exists. This is happening in the USA now. Yet in spite of these incidents feminists like Naomi Wolfe manage to defend discrimination towards women in Islam and it then takes a compassionate feminist, Phyllis Chesler, who has actually lived in a Muslim country, to sort it out for her! I know many feminists, and women in general, can be fearless fighters. Code Pink, for example, have gone to Iraq and Afghanistan. True, they are an anti-war movement, but perhaps, just perhaps, they could have drawn some attention to the women who live and suffer in the war zones they are so adamantly against. They could have easily added one more mission statement to what is on their website which mentions "social justice". Indeed, any other anti-war group could easily have done the same. I know they do not define themselves as feminists per se, but why not do more? Could they not have met with Malalai Joya and offered some help? Indeed, could not some of our famous feminists, female politicians and celebrities who spend so much time choking on their own venom over Sarah Palin have done the same? Are they afraid? Or are they simply not interested in the women's issues of today because they think it is another culture and therefore they shouldn't interfere. They know it isn't right but they can turn a blind eye to it, even as it happens under their noses, in their own countries. It's a cop-out. The improvement of the condition of women in Islam is, to me, a far loftier goal than getting to wear trousers, getting equal pay, getting an abortion on demand, and having a man treat a woman more like a man! This was definitely an "unintended consequence" for me: trivial as it may seem. I am much heartened by the fact that progress is being made, albeit in small steps. Kuwati women in parliament refuse to wear the veil. An Egyptian Cleric wants to ban burquas and other facial coverings. Honor killing or Honorcide is getting more attention. Lubna Hussein got a lot of media attention over her sentence for wearing trousers. Najwa Bin Laden and her son, Omar, wrote a book about their husband and father, Osama, and seem to be fearless about it. They have provided a fascinating insight into this man. I think the real "feminist"heroines now are the ones who have literally put their lives on the line, not only for women in Islam but for the world in general. Their goals and committment are what is truly deserving of our respect and support. I am referring to women like Dr Wafa Sultan, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Nonie Darwish, Supna Zaidi, Irshad Manji and women like them. There is another one who would have possibly made it to this list: Neda Soltan. Tragically she cannot, but in spirit she can inspire so much. I feel she deserves a mention among these brave, dedicated and fascinating women. This is my challenge to todays feminists. Use your power again. I am "just a Mom". I do not have your platform and power. This is indeed a most worthy cause to support and fight for. ("Gramfan" has been 'blogging since 2002. She is "just a Mom" of two grown-up sons, and helps her husband of 38 years. She has occasionally written pieces for other 'blogs, and posts comments. She now writes exclusively for Muslims Against Sharia).
 Ayaan Hirsi Ali has put her life on the line to defend women against radical Islam.
For five years she's lived under the threat of death from Islamic radicals, and in those five years, she has become an acclaimed and provocative author on matters about Islam and the West.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali was born into a Somali Muslim family and eventually made her way to the Netherlands as a refugee.
There she wrote a screenplay for a short film about women's treatment under Islam.
Just over two months after it aired, the filmmaker Theo van Gogh was assassinated. A letter threatening Ali's life has meant she has lived under guard ever since -- most recently thanks to a fund set up by private donors.
Controversy follows her: In 2006, she resigned from the Netherlands parliament under fire for lying on her asylum papers; the complex charges and countercharges precipitated a Dutch political upheaval.
She now works for the conservative American Enterprise Institute, which is headquartered in Washington. She established her AHA foundation to defend the rights of women in the West against militant Islam.
Her autobiography, "Infidel: My Life," which detailed her own genital mutilation in Somalia, was a bestseller, and her next book, "Nomad," is to be published in February. H/T: David F.
 By Supna Zaidi Recently, I crossed paths with a cute, chubby prepubescent girl on a street in Philly. She was about six years old, dressed in an ankle length hijab. As we crossed paths, I smiled and thought nothing of it. Later, though, I was bothered by the idea that someone so young would be required to wear a headscarf, since even the most orthodox interpretation of Islam requires a woman to cover her hair upon hitting puberty, and otherwise, simply dress "modestly". Then I remembered her mother and an op-ed I read last year. Her mother wore a niqab, which is a hijab-plus garment that not only covers a woman's hair, but also her face and body, leaving slits for eyesight only. Suddenly, the headscarf on the six-year-old made sense. The daughter was being mentally prepared for the niqab. The niqab is controversial. A ban is being called for from France to Canada. It has become a symbol of not only female suppression, but radical Islam's invocation of separatism and criminality as well. Unfortunately, the niqab is but one issue facing Muslim women today. Remember Lubna Hussain, the Sudanese journalist found guilty of indecent dress for wearing trousers in Sudan, or the more recent news highlighting Egyptian clerical outrage against Chinese hymen reconstruction kits now available for $30? Read more ...Source: Washington ExaminerH/T: FPM
 We live at a moment in history when tyrants hold forth with none to stop them. Ahmadinejad-the-Monster held forth in all his western-suited glory at the UN and so did the terrorist, Gaddafi.
No one at the UN stopped the Libyan madman from speaking well beyond his allotted 15 minutes. If the UN can’t even do this, can you imagine them actually stopping a genocide or a terrorist plot in process?If they can’t or won’t, why are we funding them? Why do they exist? The American President has decided to “engage” with the UN and with the world of tyrants. Perhaps he can, perhaps he thinks like them. Me - I have an increasingly hard time dealing with their righteous arrogance and post-colonial resentments, not to mention their demonization of Israel. For example, let me share two recent conversations with you. In retrospect, both conversations were a little like talking to Red Guard Maoist youth leaders in 1949 in China. The first conversation took place in Rome at the international conference I attended. In my speech I referred to “third world” countries. Immediately afterwards, a young woman in a business suit (pants and a jacket) started following me around. She was from South Africa and was pleasant enough but strangely persistent. She said: “ We do not say ‘third world.’ That suggests that one world is ‘first’ and the others, last, or lesser. We would like you to say ‘developing world’ instead. Isn’t that more hopeful?” Said I: “You make an interesting point and I actually agree with you. Going forward, I might do as you suggest.” But she was programmed to go on, to wear down, force concessions, so that everyone will think exactly as she does. She was not used to easy victories and did not seem to hear or believe me. She continued explaining why ‘third world’ was a derogatory phrase and not a good post-colonial way of thinking. I repeated that I agreed with her. When she continued to press on, I backed away. Afterwards, I thought that she had shown very little respect for one of the keynote speakers (myself) whose presentation had just excited a good deal of interest. Ah–she was psychologically programmed to go after those in positions of authority. The second conversation took place in New York City. I was interviewing a college graduate for a potential position. One young woman identified herself as a feminist—but then quickly told me she was a Muslim and that some of her female relatives wear hijab and that their decision was a private one that no government should abrogate. I said that given my work and given how strongly I’d bonded with a stellar group of Muslim feminists at the conference in Rome, I would welcome a Muslim feminist on the job. And, I agreed with her about the importance of separating religion from state–but then said that the matter was still exceedingly tricky. Said I: “One does not want the government mixing in matters of religion or telling women what to wear but as long as Muslim girls and women can be killed for refusing to wear hijab, how can we as feminists fully support it?” Throwing all caution to the winds, I referred her to my website and recommended some books including Nonie Darwish’s Cruel and Usual Punishment, and a new and rather elegant little book by Marnia Lazreg titled Questioning the Veil. Open Letters to Muslim Women. I should have kept my mouth shut. Read more here ...Source: Chesler Chronicles United Nations
Latest recipient of The Dhimmi Award
 She founds a new organization: Former Muslims United Not again. Ah, yes again and again until we have won this war of ideas.
Nonie Darwish, the warmest, sanest, least prejudiced Egyptian whom I know, has both been attacked and has not been defended by the administrative elite at the Whittier College Law School where she is scheduled to speak later today. According to Steven Emerson, the Muslim Student Association on campus defamed Darwish and tried to stop or at least delay her presentation. Not surprising. They specialize in such demonization and censorship campaigns. Darwish pleads the case of Muslim women whose human rights are seriously violated by shariah law. But the academic administrators at Whittier Law School have not strongly defended her right to speak, nor have they praised her work. This is unforgivable; according to Emerson, many happen to be women who are also feminists. Alas, this is also not surprising. I wrote an entire book about this phenomenon: The Death of Feminism. What’s Next in the Struggle for Women’s Freedom I have written about Darwish before. I admit it: I adore her for her courage. Darwish is also the founder of ArabsforIsrael—c’mon, this woman warrior has guts.
But, I now wonder whether this brou-ha-ha has anything to do with a press release that Darwish has just sent round. Darwish and others have formed a new organization: Former Muslims United. Darwish is an apostate (she converted to Christianity)—just like Magdi Alam who converted to Catholicism and now requires seven police officers around the clock– and just like Rifqa Bary, the Ohio teenager who has run away from her Muslim family and is now in state custody in Florida. The Former Muslim press release reads as follows: “Prominent former Muslims– apostates from Islam– will hold a press conference Thursday, September 24 to announce the launch of a new civil liberties organization, Former Muslims United, and the start of a national campaign to educate the American public and policymakers about the threat from authoritative Shariah– Islamic law– to the religious freedom and safety of former Muslims. At the press conference, Former Muslims United founders Nonie Darwish and Ibn Warraq (both internationally-respected authors and scholars) will release letters calling on the Department of Justice and the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights to investigate possible hate crimes and civil rights violations against apostates from Islam, including the circumstances of the current Florida case of 17-year old Rifqa Bary, a former Muslim. The letters are also signed by Former Muslims United co-founders Mohammad Asghar, Wafa Sultan and Amil Imani.” Darwish and Warraq will release the text of Former Muslim United’s groundbreaking “Muslim Pledge for Religious Freedom and Safety from Harm for Former Muslims,” copies of which will be received in the offices of dozens of Muslim leaders across America by September 25, the 220th anniversary of Congress passing the Bill of Rights. They will also distribute a list of the names of this first group of Muslim leaders to be asked to sign the Muslim Pledge. Additional Muslim leaders will be sent the pledge in the next month as the national campaign gets underway. The names of all pledge recipients will be listed at Formermuslimsunited.org.” Smart. Islamists are not the only ostensibly aggrieved people who can use civil rights law to their advantage. Darwish and the Former Muslims United organization can be reached at info@formermuslimsunited.org We, the people are not boots on the ground, we are not risking our lives as soldiers in combat zones. All we can do is risk our popularity by telling the truth, standing up to the Big Lies about America, Israel and the West, and opposing Islamist and leftist “politically correct” censorship. I congratulate Nonie Darwish for her leadership in the war of ideas. Source: Chesler Chronicles
 President Obama's desire to make the U.S. more accepting of Islam, and make Muslims around the world more accepting of the U.S., is too reliant on advisors with an extremist viewpoint. So says a Yemeni feminist who is disturbed by the President's ardent defense of women who wear the hijab. According to a translation by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), Elham Mane'a takes issue with Obama's appointment of Dalia Mogahed to his Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Mane'a, who writes for the liberal www.metransparent.com website, argues Mogahed does not offer a representative viewpoint. Obama's reference to the hijab in his June 5 Cairo speech proved Mogahed's negative influence, Mane'a writes. In the speech, Obama boasted that the U.S. has litigated cases "to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it." But the wearing of the hijab outside of a Muslim country, Mane'a writes, is a sign of inculcation and coercion, rather than free expression. Read more ...Source: IPT Blog
 by Daniel Greenfield More than 5000 women are victims of honor killings each year. Most of those women are Muslim, and while most of them are killed in Muslim countries-- more and more of them are being killed in Europe, Canada and America.
A 2007 study by Dr. Amin Muhammad and Dr. Sujay Patel in Canada's Memorial Hospital observed that honor killing spreads when those whose who practice it emigrate to Western countries. Honor killings however are only the final act in the drama of a Muslim woman's life. Before that she is expected to walk behind a man, to be a second class citizen, to cover herself as much as possible in order to deflect male desire and to take the blame for the sexual intentions that men have toward her.
She knows that if she fails to deflect male desire, she may suffer a variety of penalties from imprisonment to death. In countries like Saudi Arabia or Iran, those penalties are imposed by courts. In countries like Afghanistan or Pakistan, they are imposed by rough tribal justice. In the West, where there is no Islamic court system or tribal courts, they are imposed by the family.
The burka, the chador, the hijab or any of the other covering garments are assigned to Muslim women to "protect" them from men, and to protect men from them. These garments are meant to cover their "Awrah", which in Arabic means nakedness, fault or defect. While for a Muslim man "Awrah" is only the swimsuit region, a Muslim woman is entirely "Awrah".
Al-Qadhi Ibn-Al-Arabi Maliki states: “And all of a woman is ‘awrah; her body, her voice, and it is not permissible for her to uncover that unless out of necessity, or need such as witnessing in court, or a disease that is affecting her body…” [Ahkam Al Quran 3/1579]
Imam Al-Qurtubi stated went even further stating; “It is forbidden for a woman to speak when non-related men are present and it is forbidden for men to hear the voice of a non-mahram woman as long as there is no need for that.”
What that means is that all of a woman is "a zone of shame" and obscene. Even the sound of her voice is a form of "nakedness" or "lewdness". Various Muslim authorities claim that this applies to even a woman's fingernails and eyes. A woman who fails to dress this way is behaving obscenely and is open to being assaulted, as the Koranic verse which orders Muslim women to cover themselves makes clear.
H/T: Gramfan
 By Phyllis Chesler The outpouring of support for my position in favor of universal women’s rights both humbles and strengthens me. This struggle is not about me nor is it about Naomi Wolf who so unwisely went to war over one blog of mine which critiqued her written views about the Islamic veil and the oppression/repression of Muslim women. But now, the issue is also about liberal-left double standards vis-a-vis Free Speech, their incredibly thin skins when they are challenged, not personally, but politically. A different opinion calls for “apologies” and “corrections,” perhaps even for a dressing down and a public recantation. I also think that some people have a very hard time when they are exposed as less than perfect. Thus far, my two recent articles on this subject have received nearly 300 comments, most of which are on point, amazing, hilarious, brilliant, and deadly. They are still pouring in. I did not publish those comments which were gratuitously insulting to Wolf as a woman. No need for that when there are so many important issues involved and so many thoughtful comments. I urge you to read these comments. They “annoint me, my cup floweth over.” Readers: Bless you and thank you. Read more ...Source: PJMMore on the subject: Wolf Demands An Apology, Chesler Won't Back Down. The Ladies Exchange Their Views.The Burqa: Ultimate Feminist Choice? Naomi Wolf Discovers That Shrouds Are Sexy.
U.N. Inaction on Yemen
All Actions of the UN Human Rights System Critical of Specific States, 2008 Non-U.N. View of Human Rights in Yemen
Yemen, August 26, 2009 Child bride's nightmare after divorce
Nujood Ali today is angry and skips school but is still relieved her defiance paid off. Source: CNN
SANA'A, Yemen (CNN) -- It is midday and girls are flooding out of school, but Nujood Ali is not among them.We find her at the family's two-room house in an impoverished suburb of the city where Nujood is angry, combative and yelling. Tension surrounds the home like a noose.After much arguing with family members, Nujood finally grabs her veil and agrees to sit down with CNN. Her presence is grudging, although CNN had got permission in advance to see how the girl who rocked a nation by demanding a divorce was shaping up. Nujood is very different from the girl we first met nearly two years ago. Then, there was no doubt the 10-year-old was every inch a child. She was the very portrait of innocence: A shy smile, a playful nature and a whimsical giggle.That picture was very much at odds with the brutal story of abuse she endured as a child bride who fought for a divorce and is now still fighting. Nujood says she remains relieved and gratified that her act of defiance -- which led to appearances at awards shows and on TV -- had paid off. The story was supposed to end with the divorce and an innocent but determined girl allowed to fully embrace the childhood she fought so hard to keep.Instead, there has been no fairytale ending for Nujood. There was, though, a stunning transformation. Nujood went from being a victim and child bride to a portrait of courage and triumph. Her inspirational story was told and re-told around the world, but at home all was not well.In the fall of 2008 Nujood was recognized as Glamour Magazine's Woman of the Year, alongside some of the world's most impressive women. She even attended the ceremony in New York and was applauded by women from Hillary Clinton to Nicole Kidman. There is a tell-all book which is to be published in more than 20 languages, and the author says Nujood will receive a good portion of the royalties.Nujood's strength was celebrated by complete strangers. But what did all the fame do for the one person it was meant to transform? "There is no change at all since going on television. I hoped there was someone to help us, but we didn't find anyone to help us. It hasn't changed a thing. They said they were going to help me and no one has helped me. I wish I had never spoken to the media," Nujood says bitterly. There was never going to be a fortune. Generous people have donated thousands so Nujood could go to a private school, but she refuses to attend, according to Shada Nasser, the human rights lawyer who took on the child's divorce case."I know Nujood was absent from the school. I spoke with her father and her family. And I ask them to control her and ask her to go every day to school. But they said, 'You know we don't have the money for the transportation. Don't have the money for the food,' " says Nasser. She believes Nujood is being victimized by her own family because they believe Nujood's fame should bring them fortune. Nujood's parents say they've received nothing, and in the meantime Nujood stews wondering out loud how everything turned out this way. "I was happy I got divorced but I'm sad about the way it turned out after I went on television," she said adding that she feels like an outcast even among her family and friends.Nujood was pulled out of school in early 2008 and married off by her own parents to a man she says was old and ugly. And yet, as a wife, Nujood was spared nothing."I didn't want to sleep with him but he forced me to, he hit me, insulted me" said Nujood. She said being married and living as a wife at such a young age was sheer torture. Nujood described how she was beaten and raped and how, after just a few weeks of marriage, she turned to her family to try to escape the arrangement. But her parents told her they could not protect her, that she belonged to her husband now and had to accept her fate.CNN tried to obtain comment from Nujood's husband and his family but they declined.Nujood's parents, like many others in Yemen, struck a social bargain. More than half of all young Yemeni girls are married off before the age of 18, many times to older men, some with more than one wife. It means the girls are no longer a financial or moral burden to their parents. But Nujood's parents say they did not expect Nujood's new husband to demand sex from his child bride. To escape, Nujood hailed a taxi -- for the first time in her life -- to get across town to the central courthouse where she sat on a bench and demanded to see a judge. After several hours, a judge finally went to see her. "And he asked me, 'what do you want' and I said 'I want a divorce' and he said 'you're married?' And I said 'yes.'" says Nujood. Nujood's father and husband were arrested until the divorce hearing, and Nujood was put in the care of Nasser.Indeed, it seems the judge had heard enough of the abuse to agree with Nujood that she should get her divorce.But based on the principles of Shariah law, her husband was compensated, not prosecuted. Nujood was ordered to pay him more than $200 -- a huge amount in a country where the United Nations Development Programme says 15.7 percent of the population lives on less than $1 a day. Khadije Al Salame is working to help Nujood get her life back. Now a Yemeni diplomat, 30 years ago she too was a child bride. But when she left her husband, she did not have to endure the publicity that now haunts Nujood. She said: "It's good to talk about Nujood and to have her story come out, but the problem is it's too much pressure on her. "She doesn't understand what's going on. She's a little girl and we have to understand as a media people that we should leave her alone now. If we really love Nujood then we should just let her go to school and continue with her life, because education is the most important thing for her."To get her divorce, Nujood showed a character and strength not easily expressed by women in Yemen, let alone a 10-year-old child bride. But she will need to muster all that strength and more if she's to finally reclaim her life. Nujood told us she thought the divorce would be the end of her struggle and she's still angry that it turned out to be just the beginning. Posted: Thursday, August 27, 2009
Source: http://www.eyeontheun.com/voices.asp?p=975
 By Phyllis Chesler Women in chadors are really feminist ninja warriors. Rather than allow themselves to be gawked at by male strangers, they choose to defeat the “male gaze” by hiding from it in plain view. But don’t you worry: Beneath that chador, abaya, burqa, or veil, there is a sexy courtesan wearing “Victoria Secret, elegant fashion, and skin care lotion,” just waiting for her husband to come home for a night of wild and sensuous marital lovemaking. Obviously, these are not my ideas. I am quoting from a piece by Naomi Wolf that appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald a few days ago. Yes, Wolf is the bubbly, feminist author who once advised Vice President Al “The Climate” Gore on what colors he should wear while campaigning and who is or was friendly with Gore’s daughter. Full disclosure: I have casually known Wolf and her parents for more than a quarter-century. Wolf recently traveled to Morocco, Jordan, and Eygpt, where she found the women “as interested in allure, seduction, and pleasure as women anywhere in the world.” Whew! What a relief. She writes: “Many Muslim women I spoke with did not feel at all subjugated by the chador or the headscarf. On the contrary, they felt liberated from what they experienced as the intrusive, commodifying, basely sexualizing Western gaze. … Many women said something like this: …’how tiring it can be to be on display all the time. When I wear my headscarf or chador, people relate to me as an individual, not an object; I feel respected.’ This may not be expressed in a traditional Western feminist set of images, but it is a recognizably Western feminist set of feelings.” Read more ...Source: PJM
 Lorsque le Printemps de Prague a échoué en 1968, peu de gens croyaient que les graines de dissidence qui avaient été écrasées sous le poids des chars soviétiques fleuriraient 20 ans plus tard et entraîneraient la disparition de l'URSS elle-même. Un semblable été de mécontentement et de rébellion s'est épanoui à Téhéran en 2009, et je me risquerais à dire que cette fois ça ne prendra pas vingt ans avant que la structure fossilisée de l’État ne s’écroule. La raison ? Cette fois ce sont les mères et les filles de l'Iran qui se sont rebellées contre la République islamique d'Iran et qui sont descendues dans les rues pour mener les hommes. Pendant 30 ans, une nation entière a connu l'emprisonnement, la torture, le meurtre et, à l’insu du monde, le viol institutionnalisé de ses filles - et ce, au nom de l'islam. Aucune autre dictature, pas même les Saoudiens, n’a utilisé le viol comme instrument de domination comme l’ont fait les ayatollahs iraniens. Paradoxalement, le tout a été maquillé en acte de piété et de religiosité. Cette vérité commence à émerger au grand jour. Un membre de la milice iranienne des Basiji aurait parlé à Sabina Amidi, une journaliste indépendante pour le Jerusalem Post, de sa participation forcée au viol de jeunes iraniennes avant leur exécution. Le Basiji a révélé que ses supérieurs justifiaient cette pratique par l’argument douteux qu’en vertu de la charia, « il est illégal d’exécuter une jeune femme, quel que soit son crime, si elle est vierge. » Pour contourner cet obstacle, rapporte la source d’Amidi, les mollahs arrangeaient des mariages forcés entre les jeunes filles et des gardiens de prison la nuit précédant l’exécution. « La jeune fille est forcée d’avoir des rapports sexuels avec un gardien de prison – autrement dit, elle est violée par son «mari». » Lire la suite...
Source: National Post (Traduction française par Poste de veille)
 |
|
|
Copyright Muslims Against Sharia 2008. All rights reserved.
E-mail: info AT ReformIslam.org
|
|
|
And the UN passes the “Defamation of Religions” Resolution. 
Posts
