American Apostates from Islam Affirm Their Freedom

by Baron Bodissey

Nonie Darwish is a well-known former Muslim. She was born in Egypt, converted out of Islam, and now lives in the United States. But even here — in a country where freedom of speech and freedom of religion are constitutionally guaranteed — she faces intimidation and harassment for daring to leave Islam.

As Phyllis Chesler wrote yesterday:

Nonie DarwishNonie 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.

This is a process that has become all too familiar in recent years as courageous apostates from Islam have been abandoned by both civil libertarians and feminists. The hypocrisy of the progressive Left is now completely exposed: the human rights that they have putatively championed for all these years are not universal. When Islam walks through the door, the Left falls suddenly and mysteriously silent about the right of Muslims to choose their own destiny.

However, America’s former Muslims aren’t waiting for the approval of the Left to assert their freedom. They’ve organized a new group called Former Muslims United under the leadership of Nonie Darwish, Mohammed Asghar, Amil Imani, Wafa Sultan and Ibn Warraq:

Former Muslims United was formed in September, 2009 by a group of leading American apostates from Islam — Nonie Darwish (Director), Mohammed Asghar, Amil Imani, Wafa Sultan and Ibn Warraq — to educate the American public and policymakers about the need for Muslims to repudiate the threat from authoritative Shariah to the religious freedom and safety of former Muslims. Our national campaign for civil rights and physical safety for former Muslims was launched with the creation of a pledge for Muslim leaders to sign — “ The Muslim Pledge for Religious Freedom and Safety from Harm for Former Muslims.”

The first group of Muslim leaders were sent pledges to coincide with the date September 25, 2009.

I’ll have more to say about the Pledge below. But first, some excerpts from the group’s mission statement:

1. Develop a legal framework for and ensure the civil of American individuals and organizations to provide sanctuary for former Muslims without being subject to legal penalties or threats.
2. Call on all Muslims and their spiritual leaders to reject, publicly and without reservation or exception, all Sharia doctrine that permits or calls for punishment or discrimination against former Muslims, including intimidation and threats against person or property. This rejection of violence applies to individuals, Sharia authorities, Muslim courts or other Sharia bodies, governments, and quasi-governmental bodies.
3. Form a support group to empower and give comfort to former Muslims enabling them to stand up for their religious liberties under the US Constitution.
[…]
7. Demand Muslim leaders reject and denounce all Islamic literature which calls for death or other punishments for former Muslims.

The members of Former Muslims United are tackling the most urgent issue that can be faced by those who have chosen to leave Islam. In any country where there are significant numbers of Muslims, apostates face the risk of death at the hands of their former fellows. Islam permits — indeed, it requires — the death penalty for apostasy, as well as for other crimes such as blasphemy and adultery.
Continue Reading →

UN Watch and National Post on Naomi Klein

From U.N. watch:

in the space of two weeks, anti-globalization activist and best-selling author Naomi Klein, the preeminent figure of the radical left, published a lengthy essay justifying the U.N.’s disastrous Durban II racism conference, and helped organize a boycott of this week’s Toronto International Film Festival — for the crime of showing Israeli films. The New York Times reports that celebrities who signed Klein’s boycott letter include Harry Belafonte, Viggo Mortensen and Julie Christie. However, Jerry Seinfeld, Natalie Portman, Sacha Baron Cohen, Lisa Kudrow, Patricia Heaton and Lenny Kravtiz countered with an ad supporting inclusion of Israeli films, and opposing blacklists. While Jane Fonda initially joined Klein’s boycott, she has now apologized for endorsing its “inflammatory” words.

The following editorial by UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer, in today’s National Post of Canada, exposes Naomi Klein’s irrational rage — and reveals an ugly episode from her past that she has been carefully hiding.

National Post

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

The strange, enduring rage of Naomi Klein

When it comes to Israel, she has always acted out of intense emotion, hysteria and anger

Hillel Neuer,  National Post

Abbas Momani, AFP, Getty Images
Naomi Klein attends a Palestinian boycott in the West Bank village of Bilin, near Ramallah, in June.

GENEVA — Supporters of liberal democratic values may have a hard time understanding why anti-globalization activist Naomi Klein has recruited Jane Fonda and other stars to boycott the Toronto International Film Festival for the crime of showing films from Tel Aviv, a symbol of tolerance in a region of tyranny.

Klein has never called for a boycott of films or any other products from the dozens of Arab and Islamic countries that systematically subjugate their women, torture dissidents and persecute religious and ethnic minorities.

She was not moved to protest when the city of Toronto twinned with Chongqing, nor when it established a “friendship relationship” with Ho Chi Minh City, despite the widespread human rights abuses in both China and Vietnam.

Nor has she ever called for the boycotting of films from the many Western democracies, including Canada, whose soldiers are fighting Islamist terrorists in Afghanistan or Iraq.

Klein’s singling out of Israel — particularly its most liberal city and cultural sector — has no rational basis.

This should come as no surprise. For while Klein’s statements and writings on Israel pose as sober analysis, the truth is that she has always acted on this subject out of intense emotion, hysteria and anger, rather than rational thought, facts or logic. Continue Reading →

Bruce Bawer in Ottawa, a review

The Freethinking Film Society, a Canadian organization committed to providing the nation’s capital with interesting conservative/libertarian films, played host last evening to the much anticipated appearance of journalist Bruce Bawer, author of Surrender-Appeasing Islam, Sacrificing Freedom at the National Library, Archives of Canada to an enthusiastic audience.

The evening opened with a thoughtful introduction of panel members by Fred Litwin of the Free Thinking Film Society, and his blog Gay and Right, and with another to Mr. Bawer from Marc Lebuis creator of Canada’s most influential French language, anti-Islamist blog Point de Bascule. Also in attendance was James Cohen, the Canadian vice-president of the International Free Press Society, a vitally important global group which defends the universal right of free expression and combats those who would threaten it. The speaking panel consisted of four members, all of which brought remarkable qualifications, specific areas of expertise and varying political partisanship– award winning journalist and author Terry Glavin; David B. Harris, former chief of strategic planning for CSIS and currently a Senior Fellow for terrorism/national security at the Canadian Coalition for Democracies; renowned author Bruce Bawer and Marc Lepuis. It was easily recognizable from the start that despite the differences in their political views, the most potent of  similarities between each of these men was a shared and cogent understanding of the very real and direct threat radical Islam presents to universal human values, and to the principle of individual freedoms.

I choose the words universal and human deliberately and carefully, as these terms reflected the basic undertone of the lecture. Each member thoughtfully reinforced the need to concentrate on the human face of this struggle, to reevaluate the usefulness of the popular concepts of left and right political partisanship we have so securely wrapped ourselves in and, to instead, abandon their usage and unite against those engaged in the furious pursuit to coerce and shift the world toward ‘Dar-al-Islam’. It is also important to understand that countless Muslims the world over do not subscribe to the prescription of submission handed them by the fascist elements that live among them. Many suffer greatly with some, bravely seeking  freedom from persecution and enslavement by this hateful and intolerant ideology. It is within this recognition the panel made clear, that we share the most common of ground, where all of us can stand united in direct and strong opposition to extremism.

Mr. Bawer illustrated effectively that we are living in the midst of a jihad most of us do not recognize. We have come to believe that the world suffers only from violent jihad; terrorist plots to murder fueled by an intense hatred of  western values by seventh century crackpots in suicide gear, self-imploding at the behest of foaming and slathering Imams in far away lands. While it is true that terror attacks happen with great frequency, a simultaneous but less spectacular attack is in motion. Far more dangerous than a street lined with bloodied body parts is the quiet jihad, the stealth jihad of the ‘polite’, bridge-building kind which is being played out in quiet neighborhoods, institutions and courtrooms across the western world. This type is patient, cunning and deceitful, culturally informed, well financed and legally savvy. Foolishly so, we are complicit in it’s advancement by both complacency and capitulation through our romantic attachment to such things as cultural-relativism, diversity projects, and multicultural policies. We have become dangerously vulnerable and as Mr. Bawer pointed out, they know it.

Islamists simply do not care which political office holds the power of the day as western legal codes are in and of themselves contrary to Islam. Left, right and the principle of democracy are man-made ‘illegal’ notions, a beyond-the-pale bastardization of the laws of Allah. These gross deeds can only be corrected by employing the scripture of the Quran as brought to the world by the prophet Muhammed in the form of sharia, the only law suitable for all of mankind.

Mr. Harris pointed to the increasing infiltration of the Islamist element seen increasingly in a vast array of institutions. Today in Canada as in western Europe, the political fascism of Islam has found a comfortable and protected footing among a variety of departments, banking institutions, political offices and inter-faith groups. His earnest call that we should insist upon the permanent crushing of section 13(1) of the HRC code received wide applause. Terry Glavin highlighted the moral bankruptcy of the feminist movement while in their staunch pursuit to defend the western woman, many routinely abandon the very same human needs asked of by an Afghan mother struggling against her male aggressors. Mr. Lepuis wondered why Imams in some Montreal mosques continue to stridently condemn Canada to a packed house of primarily second and third generation Muslims and why some honour killings are being committed at the hands of men who have been raised and educated in western nations. Each had cited circumstances clearly reflected in Bruce Bawer’s writing and each had reinforced truths found in Surrender.

Asked to review the speaking engagement given by Mr. Bawer and the accompanying guest panel, I entered the room like most other audience members. I left amazed and moved by three things:  the unflinching bravery of Mr. Bawer and his devotion to reach out to those of us who seek to understand the growing threat of radical Islam and the operation of stealth jihad; the unity, comradeship and professionalism in common purpose held by the panel members to work in tandem against radical Islam and, the realization that we are not defending western values as much as we are defending human and universal ones.

Thank you to Fred Litwin at The Free Thinking Film Society for bringing Mr. Bawer to Ottawa for such an important event. Thank you to Mr. Harris, Mr. Glavin and Mr. Lepuis for their thoughtful analysis, expertise and professionalism and to James Cohen of the International Free Press Society for his attendance. Most of all, thank you to Mr. Bruce Bawer for his courage in writing such a book of importance and necessity, one which helps us to understand the threat of jihad by way of  fundamentalist Islam.

Below, please find a video of Bruce Bawer’s excellent lecture in full. The video of the panel discussion is rumored to be ready and posted within a day or so and should be visible in this post as well, below Dr. Bawer’s lecture.

Link: Bruce Bawer Speech part one

Grace for VTB:

Afghanistan passes new pro rape law

I took two, recent BBC clips found through Bill Warner’s most excellent  bulletin on abuse of women and added an article from today’s Guardian.UK on top. It gets a little busy at times so I will repost the whole Guardian article below the video.

I think we in the coalition fighting in Afghanistan really need to ask some hard questions about why we are there and what our objectives are exactly. Just at the moment, I have a hard time justifying spending one penny or risking on Canadian life on anything other than killing taliban.

Eeyore

Women-in-Islamic-dress-we-001

Afghanistan has quietly passed a law permitting Shia men to deny their wives food and sustenance if they refuse to obey their husbands’ sexual demands, despite international outrage over an earlier version of the legislation which President Hamid Karzai had promised to review.

The new final draft of the legislation also grants guardianship of children exclusively to their fathers and grandfathers, and requires women to get permission from their husbands to work.

“It also effectively allows a rapist to avoid prosecution by paying ‘blood money’ to a girl who was injured when he raped her,” the US charity Human Rights Watch said.

In early April, Barack Obama and Gordon Brown joined an international chorus of condemnation when the Guardian revealed that the earlier version of the law legalised rape within marriage, according to the UN.

Although Karzai appeared to back down, activists say the revised version of the law still contains repressive measures and contradicts the Afghan constitution and international treaties signed by the country. Continue Reading →

Canada really needs to assess it’s role in Afghanistan

Not for the first time, Vladtepesblog asks what exactly is Canada’s role in Afghanistan? What is it we seek to achieve? If we are propping up a government that is fully committed to sharia law, I say we destroy terrorist infrastructure and methods of raising money such as opium cultivation with tons of Agent Orange and leave them with a warning that if they attack Canada or it’s allies again we will launch major ordinance against them from which they will not recover.

Eeyore

pervez2502_17371t

From Jihad Watch:

September 8, 2009

Afghanistan: Clerics fume as student journalist convicted of “blasphemy” is freed by secret pardon

An unexpected turn in the case of Sayed Pervez Kambakhsh. Perhaps Karzai decided he needed to do something “moderate”-looking in a hurry. “Clerics and hardliners vent their fury at Pervez release,” by Kim Sengupta for the Independent, September 8:

Conservative and religious groups in Afghanistan reacted with fury yesterday to the news that Sayed Pervez Kambaksh, who was sentenced to death for promoting women’s rights, has been freed.

After President Hamid Karzai secretly pardoned the 24-year-old student, hardliners called for an urgent ulama, a meeting of Islamic scholars, to organise protests against the decision.

Mr Kambaksh’s brother, Sayed Yaqub Ibrahimi, said he was “very glad, very happy” at what had happened, and human rights organisations and a number of liberal parliamentarians welcomed the news.

The fate of Mr Kambaksh became a cause célèbre after his plight was revealed by The Independent. A petition to secure justice secured more than 100,000 signatures and the Afghan government came under pressure from Western leaders to free him.

Mr Kambaksh’s original death sentence was set aside by Afghanistan’s Supreme Court. But the judges ruled that he must serve at least 20 years in prison. Following the presidential amnesty he is now starting a life with a new identity in another country after 20 months of incarceration.

Mr Ibrahimi said: “We are all very happy that so much progress has been made with Pervez and I want to thank all the people who have helped in this. I have to be careful about what I say but, of course, Pervez should never have been put in that position, it was wrong. The family is very glad he is out.”

But yesterday in Kabul, Maulavi Hanif Shah Hosseini, a prominent mullah, declared: “Kambaksh committed a crime against the Koran and the people who conspired so that he escaped the law have also committed a crime.

“All the decisions to help this man who disrespected Islam are coming from the foreigners. But the decision to follow along with this came from Karzai and the Afghan government and we disown them. We are going to call for a gathering of the ulama to decide what to do. We are not going to make a big stand against this and any trouble will be the fault of people who helped Kambaksh.”

Qari Rahmatullah, MP for Kunduz, said: “This just shows that our country is not independent. Our policies are dictated by outsiders. Why should a man be allowed to insult Islam and then just walk away?” And he added: “Good Muslim people will be unhappy about this and Mr Karzai will have difficulties if the voting [in the election] goes to the second round.”

A number of reports suggest Karzai has covered his bases there.

Does god hate women? An excellent piece by Nick Cohen

BURKA_MAIN
Burka-clad women walk in the old city of Kabul (AFP/Getty)

A while ago, a BBC producer phoned to tell me I had written a “controversial” book. I knew that already, and gathered from the teeth-sucking sound coming down the line that she did not approve.

“So,” she continued, “we’ve lined up four guests to argue against you.”

I told her to go away — maybe I used a stronger term — and then thought about her predicament. As a biased broadcaster, she wanted to hear my book denounced, but she could not risk organising a one-on-one debate. Maybe I would have come out on top. More probably, some listeners would have agreed with me, others with my opponent, as is the normal way of things. By arranging her show to make it four against one, however, she could maintain the illusion of impartiality while creating the impression in listeners’ mind that the consensus was overwhelmingly against arguments she found uncomfortable. In the interests of “balance” and of letting “everyone have their say”, she would fill 80 per cent of the airtime with advocates of her own political position. I have watched out for rigged debates ever since. They are the surest signal the BBC dares send that an idea does not deserve a hearing in polite society.

Ophelia Benson did not quite get the four-on-one treatment when she appeared on Radio 3’s cultural talk show Nightwaves to discuss a “controversial” book she has co-authored with Jeremy Stangroom. They gave her a mere two opponents, and the presenter tried to be fair. Still, when one adversary stopped disparaging her, the other started, as the BBC flashed warning signs to listeners to ignore her.

If they missed the point, the press banged it home. The Independent denounced Benson and Stangroom “as inflammatory in the extreme”; authors who produce “torrents of invective” and “show no desire to go beyond name-calling and distortion.” The Guardian accused them of “crudeness and lack of insight”. It was “staggered anyone wanted to publish” them, and concluded that only a base desire to make money could explain the release of a “profoundly intellectually dishonest”, “hysterical” and “bizarre” work. My own newspaper, the Observer, was slightly more temperate, but not so the casual reader would notice. Benson and Stangroom were not original thinkers but had “trawled through newspaper articles”. They “splutter with righteous anger”, their style “clunky”, “hammering” and “repetitive”, their arguments “flimsy” and “deadening”.

Readers who imagine that Benson and Stangroom were on the receiving end of the fullest stomach-load of bile literary London has brought up this year because they were making the case for white supremacy or the return of the death penalty do not understand the dark turn Western thought took between the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Benson and Stangroom’s book is Does God Hate Women?, which the predecessors of today’s critics would have hailed as a feminist classic.

“So does God hate women?” it asks.

Well, what can one say. Religious authorities and conservative clerics worship a wretchedly cruel unjust vindictive executioner of a God. They worship a God of 10-year-old boys, a God of playground bullies, a God of rapists, of gangs, of pimps. They worship — despite rhetoric about justice and compassion — a God who sides with the strong against the weak, a God who cheers for privilege and punishes egalitarianism. They worship a God who is  a male and who gangs up with other males against women. They worship a thug. They worship a God who thinks little girls should be married to grown men. They worship a God who looks on in approval when a grown man rapes a child because he is “married” to her. They worship a God who thinks a woman should receive 80 lashes with a whip because her hair wasn’t completely covered. They worship a God who is pleased when three brothers hack their sisters to death with axes because one of them married without their father’s permission.

Please go to Standpoint Mag to read the rest of this excellent article.

Clerics furious over release of women’s rights journalist

From The Independent.

Clerics and hardliners vent their fury at Pervez release

Conservatives threaten backlash over student who promoted women’s rights

By Kim Sengupta in Kabul

Tuesday, 8 September 2009

Sayed Yaqub Ibrahimi, brother of Sayed Pervez Kambaksh, thanked those who had helped secure the young journalist's release
PIERRE VERDY/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

Sayed Yaqub Ibrahimi, brother of Sayed Pervez Kambaksh, thanked those who had helped secure the young journalist’s release

Conservative and religious groups in Afghanistan reacted with fury yesterday to the news that Sayed Pervez Kambaksh, who was sentenced to death for promoting women’s rights, has been freed.

After President Hamid Karzai secretly pardoned the 24-year-old student, hardliners called for an urgent ulama, a meeting of Islamic scholars, to organise protests against the decision. Continue Reading →

The burqa as liberating choice? not so says Chesler

From the Chesler Chronicles/Pajamas Media.

August 31st, 2009 8:10 am

The Burqa: Ultimate Feminist Choice?

Naomi Wolf Discovers That Shrouds Are Sexy

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. Continue Reading →

31 minute film on hate speech on campus USA

This video is really only about 31 one minutes and then it repeats.

Link: Hate Speech on Campus 09c

PJTV history of political correctness. This is truly excellent.

Please take the twelve minutes to watch this superb analysis of modern American leftism and it’s genesis. At the end of this short clip, they suggest going to youtube and searching for a documentary which is broken into three parts on the history of political correctness as a deliberate strategy for undermining western civilization. I took the liberty of finding them and adding them here so no need to search. Please enjoy and send the link far and wide. I believe this needs to be commonly known.

Also, please consider joining and supporting PJTV

Eeyore

PJTV The Narative plus History PC from Vlad Tepes on Vimeo.

Varallo Sesia, Italy says no to burqini, loves bikini

Italian city bans burqini

“We don’t have to be tolerant all the time”. “Imagine a western woman bathing in a bikini in a Muslim country. The consequences could be decapitation, prison or deportation. We are merely prohibiting the use of the burqini”. Mayor Gianluca Buonanno, of Varallo Sesia, Italy.

http://www.whydemocracy.net/house/news/files/imagecache/weblog/files/images/Burqini.gif http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_wW9TmD1IBxc/SiBV1zF_X9I/AAAAAAAAA1I/rrWgKWT_3Fc/s400/sabina+gadecki+bikini1.JPG

THE anti-immigration mayor of a northern Italian city has barred Muslim women from wearing the controversial body-concealing swimsuit known as a burqini, it was reported.

Women wearing the garment made up of a veil, a tunic and loose leggings face a fine of 500 euros ($850) if spotted at swimming pools or riversides in the northern Piedmont town of Varallo Sesia, said the ANSA news agency today.

“The sight of a ‘masked woman’ could disturb small children not to mention problems of hygiene,” mayor Gianluca Buonanno was quoted as saying.

“We don’t have to be tolerant all the time,” he said.

Justifying the move, Mr Buonanno said: “Imagine a Western woman bathing in a bikini in a Muslim country. The consequences could be decapitation, prison or deportation. We are merely prohibiting the use of the burqini.”

Last week a swimming pool in Paris refused entry to a burqini-clad Muslim on similar grounds, adding to tensions over Muslim dress in France.

The incident came as French MPs conducted hearings on whether to ban the burqa after President Nicolas Sarkozy said the head-to-toe body covering and veil was “not welcome” in France, home to Europe’s biggest Muslim minority.

Mr Buonanno belongs to Italy’s Northern League, a party allied with the centre-right People of Freedom led by Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. It has backed several initiatives hostile to Muslims.

The Belgians still don’t get it

First, a machine translation of the story (with a h/t to jdamn)

Disturbed man attacks beauty salons in Jette

The police Jette has a mentally disturbed 30-year-old man arrested who had attacked some beauty salons on the Charles Woeste. The man was different salons in and went as he recited verses from the Koran. In the last room, he suddenly grabbed a table and chair and hurled it to the manageress.

The police could pick him a little further. He appeared very confused and in his interrogation the man said he was sent by Allah to women who wear makeup and the Quran do not respect them or punish. After consultation with the Brussels public prosecutor, the man was transferred to the psychiatric ward of a nearby hospital. 20/08/09 11u42

So what is it the Belgians don’t get? this man is not mentally ill, he is Muslim and acting as Muslims are commanded to act towards women who show any inclination to act as other than property. Just as ‘Marc Lepine’ did in Montreal when he gunned down all those girls at ecole polytecnique for studying engineering.

(Thanks to a geographically litterate reader, I corrected this from Holland, where the original tip pointed to, back to Belgium where this actually happened.)