Category Archives: Phyllis Chesler

A few great SUN TV clips. Jihad in Canada by any other name; please and crypto climatology

Posted on by

(with apologies to Yucki. Try the Sun’s page here and see if it works)

1. While SUN TV has the guts to go farther than most in discussing the reasons for the Ecole Polytechnique shooting of 14 women by a Canadian Muslim because he didn’t believe women should be educated, they still avoid the truth. A truth that is so obvious that even the information on Wikipedia about Mr. Lapine, not his real name, he was born,  Gamil Rodrigue Liass Gharbi, and his Algerian jihadi father gives you enough information to work out why he killed all those women being educated about secular matters like engineering and science.

2. The discussion about climatology is no longer about science whatsoever and is now the domain of law fare. No wonder the left likes islam so much. They feel the same way with people who reason and ask questions.

3. One university in Ontario has a dedicated prayer room for only one religion. I wonder which one?

4. Phyllis Chesler joins Michael Coren on islamic antisemitism

 

A couple of articles on honour killings in Western nations as well as a solution!

Posted on by

First, an article from the Middle East Forum:

Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings

by Phyllis Chesler
Middle East Quarterly
Spring 2010, pp. 3-11

To combat the epidemic of honor killings requires understanding what makes these murders unique. They differ from plain and psychopathic homicides, serial killings, crimes of passion, revenge killings, and domestic violence. Their motivation is different and based on codes of morality and behavior that typify some cultures, often reinforced by fundamentalist religious dictates. In 2000, the United Nations estimated that there are 5,000 honor killings every year

[1] That number might be reasonable for Pakistan alone, but worldwide the numbers are much greater. In 2002 and again in 2004, the U.N. brought a resolution to end honor killings and other honor-related crimes. In 2004, at a meeting in The Hague about the rising tide of honor killings in Europe, law enforcement officers from the U.K. announced plans to begin reopening old cases to see if certain murders were, indeed, honor murders.

[2] The number of honor killings is routinely underestimated, and most estimates are little more than guesses that vary widely. Definitive or reliable worldwide estimates of honor killing incidence do not exist.

 

Morsal O, a 16-year-old German-Afghan girl, was killed in May 2008 by her 24-year-old brother Ahmad Sobair O. He stabbed her twenty-three times in a parking lot in Hamburg, Germany, because of her alleged impure moral conduct. Murder of teenage or young adult women by their fathers or other close male relatives is characteristic of classic honor killings and is not a pattern in non-immigrant Western populations.

Most honor killings are not classified as such, are rarely prosecuted, or when prosecuted in the Muslim world, result in relatively light sentences.[3] When an honor killing occurs in the West, many people, including the police, still shy away from calling it an honor killing. In the West, both Islamist and feminist groups, including domestic violence activists, continue to insist that honor killings are a form of Western-style domestic violence or femicide (killing of women).[4]They are not.[5] This study documents that there are at least two types of honor killings and two victim populations. Both types differ significantly from each other, just as they differ from Western domestic femicide. One group has an average age of seventeen; the other group’s average age is thirty-six. The age difference is a statistically significant one.

 

Families Killing Their Young Women

The study’s findings indicate that honor killings accelerated significantly in a 20-year period between 1989 and 2009.[6]This may mean that honor killings are genuinely escalating, perhaps as a function of jihadist extremism and Islamic fundamentalism, or that honor killings are being more accurately reported and prosecuted, especially in the West, but also in the East. The expansion of the Internet may account for wider reporting of these incidents.

The worldwide average age of victims for the entire population is twenty-three (Table 1). This is true for all geographical regions. Thus, wherever an honor killing is committed, it is primarily a crime against young people. Just over half of these victims were daughters and sisters; about a quarter were wives and girlfriends of the perpetrators. The remainder included mothers, aunts, nieces, cousins, uncles, or non-relatives.

Click to continue:

Now, the solution!

Phyllis Chesler busts the NYT for fake news supporting leftist causes. Again.

Posted on by

Remember the NYT? The newspaper that would appear to be complicit in the holomodor, the systematic genocide against millions of Ukrainians? Well they appear to have learned nothing from their backing of Walter Durante.

Here it is again:

To date, the New York Times has published at least ten articles (op-eds disguised as news, real op-eds, letters) about the film The Third Jihad, which first appeared in 2009. The NYT-dominated campaign led to coverage in the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Fox News, and other mainstream media venues.

Ordinarily, this would be very good news for the filmmakers. More than three years later and so much publicity — and yet, the price for so many negative film reviews involves being demonized and erroneously portrayed. In the NYT, the backers of the film are referred to as “deep pocketed” pro-Israelis, wealthy and/or religious philanthropists, who “have opposed a full return of the West Bank to Palestinians.”

Click to continue:

Will guilty verdict in Canadian ‘honor killing’ trial be a turning point for justice?

Posted on by

This article by Phyllis Chesler on yesterdays Shafia murder trial verdict I believe deserves more weight than most opinion on the matter as Ms. Chesler has very rare experience in terms of Afghan Islamic culture as evidenced by this 2006 and excellent article of hers which I pimp on this blog often, ‘How Afghanistan Shaped my Feminism‘. Please take the time and read this as well.

FOX NEWS:

On January 29, after a ten-week trial and fifteen hours of deliberations, a seven woman, five man jury returned with a verdict of guilty to first degree murder for all three Afghan-Canadians who were charged in the pre-meditated murder of four female members of the polygamous Shafia family.

The convicted are each facing 25 years without parole.

Mohammed Shafia, 58, Tooba Yahya, 42 (his second wife), and Hamed, 21, their son, were found guilty of conspiring to and of having murdered Mohammed’s first wife, Rona Mohammed Amir, 50, and Tooba Yahya’s three daughters, Zainab, 19, Sahar, 17, and Geeti, 13, because they refused to wear hijab, wore Western, sometimes “sexy” clothing, dared to have boyfriends, and, in their father’s words, “dishonored” and “betrayed” both “their family and Islam.”

On June 30, 2009, when the bodies of the dead girls and woman were discovered in the family’s Nissan in the Rideau Canal, the accused wept uncontrollably and went through an exaggerated public display of mourning.

Click to continue:

 

30 minute video on the new campus mentality at York U, Toronto Canada

Posted on by

The video below really is worth your time. Especially if you do not realize how bad it is on university campus now. The video below is a 30 minute version of the whole thing which can be seen here. Phyllis Chesler’s article where I found this clip is here.

ACL conference 30 minute version from Will McMaster on Vimeo.

Phyllis Chesler: ‘Turning a blind eye to Islam’s brutal treatment of women’.

Posted on by

From The National Post, Full Comment

Phyllis Chesler: Turning a blind eye to Islam’s brutal treatment of women

National Post, March 12, 2011 – 7:03 AM ET/Last Updated: March 12, 2011 5:10 AM ET

http://www.nationalpost.com/ Phyllis Chesler in New York City

My feminist generation believed in universal human rights — one standard for all. I still do. Therefore, I have taken a strong stand against the persecution of immigrant women and dissidents. I now submit affidavits on behalf of women who have fled the threat of such killings and who are seeking asylum in the United States.

Those of us who condemn the plight of such women, who are mainly Muslims and ex-Muslims, have been demonized in activist circles as “Islamophobes” and racists because we do not, in the same breath, blame America, the West or Israel for their suffering. Many Western academic feminists are so afraid of being condemned as “racists” that this fear trumps their concern for women’s rights in the Arab and Muslim world.

Islamic gender apartheid, which has penetrated the West, is characterized by normalized daughter- and wife-battering, forced veiling, female genital mutilation, polygamy, purdah (the segregation or sequestration of women), arranged marriage, child marriage and first-cousin marriage. Girls and women often are honour-murdered if they resist such practices, if they wish to divorce a dangerously abusive husband, or if they are viewed as too independent, too modern.

Today, at its most extreme, Islamic gender apartheid is characterized by acid attacks, public stonings, hangings, and beheading of women in Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia and Saudi Arabia — countries in which female rape victims are jailed, tortured and executed.

Feminists should be crying out from the rooftops against these practices. Some are. I am. Yet, many Muslims, as well as many intellectually “progressive” Western infidels, are not. They are welcoming the imposition of Islamic religious law, Sharia law, not only in the Middle East but also in the West. Continue Reading →

Phyllis Chesler: Victim blames herself for being raped and beaten by Muslim?

Posted on by

The other day, a pediatric nurse in New York City refused to dance with Mbarek Lafrem, a Moroccan man, in a New York City bar. What did Lafrem do? He followed her into the women’s bathroom where he attempted to rape and savagely beat her. The woman was found unconscious and is now hospitalized. She required 50 stitches to close just one of her lacerations; she also suffered a broken eye socket, a broken nose, skull fractures, and a busted jaw.

The media pointedly refrain from telling us that he is a Muslim, but with a name like “Mbarek” or ‘Mubarak,” what religion are we talking about? Lafrem now claims that she started it, that the nurse “berated him when he barged into the women’s restroom shortly after she’d rebuffed him on the dance floor.”

To a certain kind of man, from a certain kind of culture, women are always supposed to say yes, and when they say no they are provokers and deserve a beating. More: If the woman is a naked-faced infidel and dances with strange men in a public setting—she is, by definition, a prostitute and is not entitled to say no. Saying no is a “provocation” and deserves a beating. Or worse.

Now, let’s shuffle off to Buffalo, where Muzzammil ”Mo” Hassan—remember him?–is about to stand trial for beheading his wife, Aasiya Zubair Hassan. Guess what this monster’s claiming? That he’s the victim, that he was a “battered husband.” Guess what this crafty self-promoter has been doing from his jail cell? Writing letters to the media in his mother’s name in which he paints himself as the “abused” spouse. Mo’s letters also refer to an “epidemic” of battered men.

For the rest please visit this excellent site:

C’mon,I dare ya… take the terrorism quiz.

Posted on by

From Phyllis Chesler courtesy Pajamas Media.

Who, really, is behind the epidemic of global terrorism against civilians? Whom should airport security personnel view carefully—respectfully—but very, very carefully?

A friend just sent me the following “laugh until you cry” quiz. One hopes that the folks screening us at airports are given this quiz and are guided accordingly. Perhaps passengers should carry it with them; as they say: “Don’t leave home without it.”

1. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, young Israeli athletes were kidnapped and massacred by:

a. Darth Vader

b. Sitting Bull

c. Arnold Schwarzenegger

d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

2. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by:

a. Lost Norwegians

b. Elvis

c. A tour bus full of 80-year-old women

d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40 Continue Reading →

Links and news. Some worthy articles for today.

Posted on by

Posting has been light as both Grace and I had the privilege of attending a free speech conference in Ottawa today. Expect to see some videos and articles here from that in the near future. Among the speakers was John Robson, one of my absolute favorites in Canadian journalism as well as Barbara Kay who was also there. Videos will be snippets and up as the various groups allows. As I have been asked to edit some of the footage, there may be bits available soonish.

Here is a Phyllis Chesler article on the Swiss Minaret issue. Nothing much has happened yet as a result of the Swiss vote, but something will most likely. Phyllis points out how we never hear about proportional response when it comes to Muslims. Below, a section of it:

The Islamic world does not allow new synagogues or churches to be built. Further: Muslim fundamentalists currently persecute, torture, and murder those Christians who dare remain in the Middle East, and they kidnap, forcibly convert, and “marry” their very young daughters.

It is time to demand—or at least to expect–reciprocity. Otherwise, we are really being racist in having one (higher) standard for Westerners and another (much lower) standard for the barbarians.

Granted: The West is not as barbaric and intolerant as the Islamic world; we do not willingly wish to become intolerant. Yet, tolerating the intolerant is unwise, or as the Jewish sages tell us: Being kind to the cruel results in cruelty to the kind.

It would apper that now one is a ‘racist’ if one believes that national identity should be allowed and those who wish to impose foreign views on it should not do so. I bet that only applies though if the nation is white. No one seems to think its racist if an Arab state insists that no foreign ideas should even be considered, or if an African state like Zimbabwe actually throws people off of their land or out of their homes on the sole basis of skin color as they did to the white farmers. Then somehow that isn’t racist. But when French citizens feel that French national identity should have something to do with France well that is downright racist. Culture. Use it or lose it. h/t snaphanen

Kadhafi claims that the Swiss Minaret ban is an invitation to Al-queda to attack the Swiss. Kadhafi no doubt thinks that would be an appropriate response. Of course, it would only prove the Swiss, and by extension the rest of Europe who clearly would all ban the building of more minarets if given the chance, correct that a minaret is indeed a symbol of Islamic manifest destiny. If Muslims do terrorist acts on Switzerland for not allowing minarets, then we should be nuking meca for what they do not allow in terms of competing ideologies.H/T TROP

Here is one for ‘The Golden Age of Spain’ file. 9 men arrested for trying to murder a woman they accused of adultery Islamic style.

SPANISH police have arrested nine men suspected of seeking to have a woman killed after they accused her of adultery, claiming they were following Islamic law, authorities said.

The men were arrested on November 14 and seven have been held in jail, a police spokesman said.

According to police, the woman had been taken in March and held in an isolated house in Valls in northeastern Catalonia.

Authorities say the men set up a court there to judge her for adultery.

“These men had formed a kind of court to apply (Islamic) sharia law,” the spokesman said, adding the woman told authorities she was tried and sentenced to death.

She was later able to escape and report what happened to police.

What do you want to bet the BBC does not include this gem on their next feature on the wonders of Al Andaluz?

Lastly, ministers in the UK are told to avoid using certain words that might offend Muslims. Ok thats not news. We are used to that. I mean we all know that if you use words like ‘soap’ or ‘toothpaste’ you might really offend new Muslim immigrants but now even the words ‘Islamist and Fundamentalist’ are on the no speak list. I was kidding about soap and so on obviously but exactly what is it we are allowed to say or that doesn’t offend these tyrants? Oh yeah, welfare, dole, public housing and ‘not guilty on a technicality’ seem to be OK.

Here is a ten second video on English landmarks.


Oh yes and of course, ‘Schtick Muzzie’, Anjem Choudery is at it again with a subtle variation on his usual theme. This time he is trying to annoy the elderly with claims that Jesus would have wanted sharia law. I suppose his marching around with a photoshop of Buckingham Palace with an onion on top was wearing thin with his fan club. I certainly can’t say that I speak for Al Queda, but dollars to donairs I bet AQ and the rest of us do have one thing in Common.

We all think Anjem is a total schmuck.

(this is the one and only video where Anjem uses the classic Bin Laden ‘Jihad Flag’ for his background. We at Vlad are willing to bet he got a call that scared the kebab out of him for being a fake martyr and using that flag as a prop to annoy the yokels.)

Women, Islam, very low PH level fluids.

Posted on by

Warning, this video is harsh. Based on this excellent Phyllis Chesler article. Please click on over and read.

Two campus events of note. Nonie Darwish and Robert Spencer silenced.

Posted on by

US universities need to be redefined. This is a fairly urgent matter. it is one thing for the universities to become fundamentally different things than they have traditionally been, but it is quite another to allow them to be thought of and treated as bastions of intellectual freedoms and debate, of places where unfashionable ideas are allowed to be examined and debated for their actual merits, and most importantly, of the inheritors of our Greek intellectual heritage.

Please see these two examples of the new agenda and modus operandi of American Universities from this week alone.

From Socialists at the gate:

This evening at NYU I witnessed an act which was both disturbing and appalling. Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch, an erudite scholar on Islam and patriotic defender of our freedom was giving a talk on the ever-growing threat to the West of Islamists. In the midst of describing the ends of Jihad as promulgated by one of the foremost radical Islamic scholars of the 1970s, a grungy looking fellow stood up and yelled at Spencer “Should we just go bomb all the Muslims!?” and attacking him with other vitriolic and hysterical words. In creating this diversion, a couple members of the audience ran up and threw pies at Mr. Spencer and another panelist. The campus authorities quickly intervened, and as the officers dragged the cowards away from the stage, another (presumably accomplice) student filmed the the officers on his phone. Luckily, Spencer and his fellow panelist Elan Journo ended up largely unscathed.

This whole scene characterizes where we are in America today. A man gets attacked for merely repeating the words of a Muslim radical. Worse, American students are planted in auditoriums all across this country ready to quash any free speech that is not to their liking. This is especially dangerous when it comes to matters of Islam, because as Spencer later argued in his speech, by not allowing criticism of the religion, and worse censoring free speech, we are elevating Islam above our own culture. This plays right into the hands of the people who wish to impose Sharia law over us. How ironic that the leftists in this country are the useful idiots for a Jihad movement that wishes to crush all tolerance. Finally of course, it is most likely the police who will be in trouble because of a video probably bound for YouTube as we speak which will show the officers violently hauling out the innocent and naive college hippies.

For the rest of this article please click here:Here is a speech by Robert Spencer just so we all know who he is and what he might of said at NYU

And at least as insidious, perhaps more perhaps less, the difference is merely tactical. Is it worse to allow someone to speak to a degree then attack them in the manner above, or to make sure at the last minute that they do not get to speak at all:

From Phylis Chesler at Pajamas Media on the cancellation of Nonie Darwish:

In our time, a speaker must face a gauntlet of hostility and a menacing crowd if she wishes to speak in favor of Israel or to tell the truth about Islam.

That’s if she’s lucky. Most such speakers never get invited or when they do, their invitations are canceled.

Nonie Darwish, the author of Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law and Now They Call Me Infidel: Why I Renounced Jihad for America, Israel, and the War on Terror, has faced on-campus hostility and disruption before. Over the years, I have interviewed her about this a number of times. Like many of us, she has also sometimes been forced to have security guards with her when she speaks.

Nonie DarwishPhyllis Chesler and Nonie Darwish

This time, Nonie, who is the founder of Arabs for Israel, was invited to speak at both Columbia and Princeton. The official invitation at Columbia came from the very distinguished CAMERA, Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME), and from a new student organization there: Campus Media Watch, a group which is not yet quite up and running. Darwish flew from the West Coast, and was already all dressed up and ready to travel to Columbia when she got word that she’d been canceled.

“How humiliating is that? To come all this way, to be almost out the door, only to be told that they had to cancel my speech because campus security felt they could not protect me. Everyone is trying to blame someone else. Even the campus Republicans were afraid to sponsor me. SPME kept trying to fix it, but in the end, they could not.”

True, in 2006, President Ahmadinejad of Iran was not able to speak at Columbia because the notice given was too short. However, in 2007, Columbia University was able to provide security for him. And yet they could not provide it for Darwish. In 2006, Holocaust-denier Norman Finkelstein spoke at Columbia and in 2009, anti-Zionist, Israeli journalist Amira Hass spoke at Columbia–both without incident. Neither speaker was canceled. Next week, Noam Chomsky is speaking there. In Darwish’s view, “I doubt Chomsky will even need any security.”

For the rest of this article please click here:

Also, more can be read at Pam Geller’s site here where I found a lot of this

Thanks to SolsticeW13 for hipping me to the Darwish story