Horror in Pakistan: Pregnant Woman Stoned by Family

 02-450x337by Arnold Ahlert:

Those looking for the real war on women–as opposed to the one promoted by the American left and their media enablers—should focus their attention on Pakistan and Sudan. In the former nation, a 25-year-old pregnant woman has been stoned to death by members of her own family, with her father dubbing the atrocity an “honor killing.” In the latter nation, a 27-year-old woman has been sentenced to death for refusing to renounce her Christian faith. She was also pregnant, and has given birth while awaiting her sentence to be carried out. The common thread in both cases is as predictable as it is disturbing: the religion of Islam and the endemic mistreatment of women practiced by far too many of its followers.

Farzana Parveen was killed in broad daylight by nearly 20 members of her family before a crowd of onlookers outside the High Court in the eastern city of Lahore, Pakistan. As she walked up to the court’s main gate with her husband Mohammad Iqbal, relatives waiting for the couple’s arrival fired shots in the air and attempted to snatch her away. When she resisted, the attackers, who included her father, two brothers and her former fiancé, started beating her and her husband, before escalating the attack with bricks obtained from a nearby construction site.

Parveen subsequently sustained severe head injuries and was pronounced dead at the hospital, according to police.

All of the attackers but her father, Mohammad Azeem, escaped. He surrendered to the police and admitted taking part in the killing. He had no remorse. “I killed my daughter as she had insulted all of our family by marrying a man without our consent, and I have no regret over it,” the father was quoted as saying by police investigator Rana Mujahid.

Parveen had been engaged to her cousin, but married Iqbal instead, following an engagement of several years. In response, her family registered an abduction case against Iqbal, and Parzeen was to appear in court to argue that she had married him of her own free will, according to her lawyer Mustafa Kharal. Arranged marriages are the norm among conservative Pakistanis. Marrying for love is a transgression that ostensibly dishonors the family.

Iqbal, who started seeing Parveen following the death of his former wife with whom he had five children, claimed the couple was “in love.” He further alleged that her family wanted to extract money from him before allowing the marriage to take place. Instead, “I simply took her to court and registered a marriage,” Iqbal explained.

Parveen’s murder is hardly an anomaly. According to Pakistani rights group the Aurat Foundation, as many as 1,000 Pakistani women are killed every yearby their families in such honor killings. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan released a report last month revealing that 869 women were murdered in honor killings in 2013, but the Aurat Foundation insists the number could be far higher because the totals are based solely on newspaper reports. The Pakistani government does not compile any honor killing statistics.

Read more at Front Page

Also see:

Where Does Naomi Wolf’s Hypocrisy End, Or Does It?

nwFront Page, by :

Naomi Wolf has joined the Hamas chorus by attacking feminist hero Phyllis Chesler with being a Zionist agent. How facilely Wolf has adopted the language of Jew-haters the world over — an even more bitter irony coming from someone who has written an entire book comparing democratic America to Nazi Germany.

And Chesler’s sin? To have dared to challenge the Left’s party line of defending the Islamic mutilators of adolescent girls, and practitioners of gender apartheid. But then again, this isn’t anything new for Wolf, seeing that she is on the record as finding the burqa sexy.

In her recent article, “Brandeis Feminists Fail the Historical Moment,” Phyllis Chesler criticized Brandeis’ phony feminists for their complicity in the University denying an honorary degree to Ayaan Hirsi Ali.  In a response on her Facebook page, Wolf joined the anti-Semites of the Mearshimer-Walt-Blumenthal set, claiming that Chesler has no mind of her own but is merely a puppet of the organized Jews:

“She is funded these days by pro-Israel advocacy organizations that support journalists and writers to advocate ‘the party line’ in terms of hardline anti-Islam and right-wing policy outcomes regarding Israel.”

This is pretty crude even for a brain-dead Marxist.

Wolf goes on to complain that Chesler,

“has made some outlandish, grossly factually incorrect attacks on me whenever I write anything that encourages Western readers to have a deeper understanding of Islam.”

What she means is a more grovelling supine attitude of appeasement towards barbaric Islamic attitudes and practices. When Wolf encourages people to have a “deeper understanding” of Islam, she is not alluding to caring more about the horrifying Islamic practices of female genital mutilation, honor killing, forced marriage and veiling, acid attacks practices against Muslims in the name of a perverse view of Islam. Chesler has already answered Wolf’s sick attack with a little tongue in cheek acidity:

“Naomi: Are you on the payroll of the public relations crisis management team Brandeis has reportedly hired? Are you now or have you ever been funded by George Soros? Or merely by the Democratic Party? Is Al Gore, for whom you once consulted, and who sold his cable channel to Al-Jazeera, backing you? Is he supporting your Woodhull Institute? Or are the Jordanian royals helping you? I know you visited with them and wrote about them very favorably.”

Wolf’s attack on Chesler is an extension of the collision that occurred between the two a few years back, after Wolf went on a political pilgrimage to the Muslim world and returned singing the praises of the burqa. Chesler dismantled Wolf’s embarrassing fairy tales of the female gulag that Islam has constructed for nearly a billion women with such precision that one wonders why Wolf is now even bothering stepping back into this mismatch. Unlike Wolf, Chesler is a true scholar of Islam and as the former bride of a Muslim in Afghanistan, she has first-hand experience of the horrors of Islamic gender apartheid.

Naomi Wolf is a sad emblem of the pathetic state of the Left and of its pseudo feminist wing: ignorant, arrogant, bigoted, anti-Semitic, anti-American and an embarrassing fifth column for the Islamic barbarians of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.

CAIR’s Jihad against Honor Diaries

20120418_CAIR_FSMby ANDREW C. MCCARTHY:

Honor Diaries is an important film that explores the brutality and systematic inequality faced by women in Muslim-majority societies. It features both believing Muslim women, like Dr. Qanta Ahmed (whose compelling essay about the film was published here at National Review Online yesterday), and former Muslims like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the renowned author and human-rights activist.

The purpose of Honor Diaries is to empower women by shining a light on the hardships they endure – including “honor” killings (i.e., murders over the perception of having brought shame to the family by violating Islamic norms), beatings, genital mutilation, forced marriage – particularly of young girls - and restrictions on movement, education, and economic opportunity. The film highlights authentic Muslim moderates struggling against the dead-end of Islamic supremacism.

So naturally, the Council on American-Islam Relations (CAIR) does not want you to see it.

At Fox News, Megyn Kelly has been covering the film anyway, despite CAIR’s howling. The segments that aired on Monday and Tuesday are available on Megyn’s website, here and here.

CAIR is a Muslim Brotherhood creation, conceived as the primo American public-relations firm for Islamic supremacists, particularly Hamas – a task CAIR pulls off by masquerading as a “civil rights” organization.

Hamas, as I recounted in The Grand Jihad, is a formally designated terrorist organization under federal law. It is also the Brotherhood’s Palestinian branch. In the early Nineties, the Brotherhood established a “Palestine Committee” to promote Hamas in the United States, an agenda topped by fundraising and efforts to derail the 1993 Oslo accords – the futile, Clinton administration-brokered attempt to forge an Israeli-Palestinian peace settlement. CAIR’s founders, Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmed, attended a three-day summit in support of Hamas in Philadelphia in 1993, much of which was wiretapped by the FBI. CAIR was established shortly afterwards. By summer 1994, the Palestine Committee was listing CAIR in internal memoranda as one of its “working organizations.”

We’ve discussed CAIR here many times, including in my 2009 column about the FBI’s long-overdue severing of “outreach” ties with the organization. It is infuriating that the Feebs and the wider government thought it was worth canoodling with CAIR in the first place, but the Bureau officially ended the affair after the 2008 Holy Land Foundation terrorism-financing trial, in which several Hamas operatives were convicted. CAIR, though unindicted, was shown by the Justice Department to be a co-conspirator. In sum, prosecutors established that the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) was the primary Hamas fundraising arm in the United States. Like CAIR, HLF was identified by the Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee as one of its “working organizations.” As terrorism researcher Steve Emerson has shown, CAIR got $5,000 in seed money at its inception from HLF, and thereafter helped raise money for HLF. The federal government shut HLF down in 2001 because of its promotion of terrorism.

Although Honor Diaries has been widely acclaimed and screened internationally, CAIR has been agitating against it. As reliably happens when CAIR plays its tired “Islamophobia” card, universities across the nation cower – especially universities with active Muslim Students Association chapters. (As we’ve observed before, the MSA is the foundation of the Muslim Brotherhood’s infrastructure in the United States.) Starting with the University of Michigan at Dearborn, several schools have now decided not to screen the film after all.

Why it is “Islamophobic” to condemn violence and abuse against Muslim women is not entirely clear to me. It is, however, clear to Linda Sarsour, a “community organizer” and “immigrants’ rights activist” who is celebrated on President Obama’s website, WhiteHouse.gov, as a “Champion of Change.” As reported on The Kelly File, this particular “champion” reacted to Honor Diaries by tweeting:

How many times do we have to tell White women that we do not need to be saved by them? Is there code language I need to use to get thru?

Thoughts like Ms. Sarsour’s make for depressing reading, but clearly she is referring to some of the filmmakers, who happen to be white women (the others include white men and a black woman, Ms. Hirsi Ali, the Somali-born executive producer who was raised as a Muslim). The film has also been promoted by yet another highly accomplished woman, Brooke Goldstein, the human-rights attorney and filmmaker who directsThe Lawfare Project; and by the Clarion Project, a New York-based organization that promotes moderate Islam and publicly challenges “extremist” Islam.

The community organizers at CAIR have obviously read a bit farther along in Rules for Radicals than Ms. Sarsour. Rather than racist tweets, they couch their character assassination of the film’s backers in the poll-tested sensitivities of everyday Americans, pretending to endorse the film’s message while telling you not to watch it. They issued a statement on Monday that Megyn Kelly aired:

American Muslims join people of conscience of all faiths in condemning female genital mutilation, forced marriages, ‘honor killings,’ and any other form of domestic violence or gender inequality as violations of Islamic beliefs. If anyone mistreats women, they should not seek refuge in Islam. The real concern in this case is that the producers of the film, who have a track record of promoting anti-Muslim bigotry, are hijacking a legitimate issue to push their hate-filled agenda.

Right. Women are being brutalized but our “real concern” should be the “track record” of some film producers. Beyond CAIR’s say-so that it is “hate-filled,” this purportedly dark track record is not described. But, after all, who would know more about what counts as “hate-filled” than a PR flack for a terrorist organization whose charter vows to annihilate Israel by violent jihad?

On Tuesday night, CAIR’s Chicago branch dispatched Agnieszka Karoluk, one of its “senior communications coordinators,” to Fox in order to regurgitate CAIR’s statement. Questioned by Megyn Kelly, Ms. Karoluk gave a dizzying explanation: CAIR, we’re told, agrees that Honor Diaries raises vital issues, opposes the abuse of women just like the film does, and is not really happy that colleges are canceling screenings (even though CAIR put out a smiley-face tweet when the first cancellation was announced). But CAIR is “disgusted” by the Clarion Project because it is - all together now - “Islamophobic.” Ms. Karoluk declined to say what makes it so (of course, to get into that would bring attention to episodes of Islamic extremism Clarion has exposed). So because Clarion likes the film, you shouldn’t watch it even though its content is accurate and significant – got it? Confronted by Brooke Goldstein about CAIR’s own record, Ms. Karoluk predictably replied, “I’m not here to talk about CAIR, I’m here to talk about the film” . . . and then continued to avoid talking about the film.

It is no doubt true, as CAIR’s statement asserts, that American Muslims substantially join the rest of us in condemning the abuse of women. CAIR, however, is in no position to speak for American Muslims – and in fact speaks for very few of them. Even if one were inclined to accept CAIR’s statements at face value, Honor Diaries is about the abuse of Muslim women; it is not about the filmmakers. If CAIR truly condemned these misogynistic practices it would be encouraging people to see the film. Instead, as Dr. Ahmed told Megyn, “They claim to be defending the vulnerable whereas they’re actually silencing exposure about the vulnerable.”

But there is no reason to take CAIR’s statements at face value. Under the old adage that actions speak louder than words, the inescapable fact is that CAIR does not condemn the horrific abuse of women in Muslim-majority countries. It is feigning condemnation in hopes of rendering people more receptive to CAIR’s actual message, which is: Avoid Honor Diaries because anyone who exposes atrocities committed by Muslims is unworthy of consideration, no matter how valid the exposition.

And I can prove it.

CAIR has a very close relationship with another Muslim Brotherhood creation, the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) – an Islamic-supremacist think-tank we’ve also discussed in these pages (see, e.g., here). As Steve Emerson points out, disclosure forms IIIT filed with the IRS show thousands of dollars in contributions to CAIR. IIIT was also a major financial backer of Palestinian Islamic Jihad operative Sami al-Arian, whom CAIR continued to champion even after his guilty plea to a terrorism charge.

As I’ve previously recounted, IIIT is one of the influential Islamic academic outfits that have endorsed Reliance of the Traveller, the English translation of the classic sharia manual, `Umdat al-Salik. Indeed, the endorsement, written by IIIT’s then-president, Taha Jabir al-`Alwani, is included in the introduction section of the published manual. Dr. Alwani, a revered figure in Muslim Brotherhood circles, highly recommended Reliance as both a “textbook for teaching Islamic jurisprudence to English-speakers” and a legal reference for sharia scholars.

Here are just some of the things Reliance teaches about the treatment of women under Islamic law (with supporting citations to sections of the manual):

Read more: Family Security Matters

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

Phyllis Chesler

Phyllis Chesler

By :

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more at Fox News

Phyllis Chesler, Ph.D is an Emerita Professor of Psychology and Women’s Studies, a Fellow at the Middle East Forum, the author of thousands of articles and of fifteen books, including “Women and Madness,” and “An American Bride in Kabul.” She archives her articles and may be reached through her website:www.phyllis-chesler.com

Islamophobia in action? ‘Honor Diaries’ screening shut down by CAIR

download (90)Fox News,  March 31, 2014, By :

CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) is at it again. This time they have succeeded in shutting down a screening of the film, “Honor Diaries,” at the University of Michigan, Dearborn last Thursday night, claiming that the film is ‘Islamophobic.’

“Honor Diaries” is a recently-released documentary profiling nine Muslim women and their horrific experiences in Islamic societies living with practices such as female genital mutilation, honor violence, honor killings and forced marriage at young ages.

CAIR started a Twitter campaign a few days ago against the film, calling it ‘Islamophobic,’ the term groups such as CAIR use not to mean prejudice or fear against the religion, but a fabricated term used to denote anything unflattering to Islam.

It’s a tactic used by CAIR and others to successfully and often indefinitely quiet any criticism of Islam, even when it’s shining light upon the practice of honor violence and depriving young women of education, two central themes in the film.

And most of the time it works. We see it in cases such as this one, where individuals like those organizing this film screening become fearful at the thought of offending a minority group.  Because offending others is very anti-American; but then again, isn’t stifling free speech?

Who is being offended when we are talking about mutilation and women setting themselves on fire to escape marriage before puberty?

How can any interest group protest the profiling of violent and grotesque practices against women?

Well, CAIR has been careful to say that while these subjects do need to be addressed, they shouldn’t be profiled by “Islamophobes” or by the Clarion Project, the group funding the film.

Clarion’s previous film projects include “Iranium,” the “Third Jihad” and “Obsession.” More importantly, as far as CAIR is concerned and in further delegitimizing Clarion’s work, it’s headed by Raphael Shore, a Canadian-Israeli rabbi.

But CAIR isn’t doing the dirty work here or even its own research.  The group is relying on the facts and arguments presented by Richard Silverstein, a progressive blogger who discredits the film on his blog: “One has to ask why a film about the purported abuse of Muslim women was produced by Jews, and ones with a distinct ideological agenda at that.”

CAIR links to his blog on Twitter to make the case: A Jew can’t be profiling human rights abuses against Muslim women.

But how much longer can we as a society allow a group, that is meant to constructively guide and promote the integration of a religious group, instead bully those who are only trying to expose its dangerous and extremist practices?  When they attempt to cover up these crimes, are they not as guilty as the perpetrators?

As a council, CAIR is meant to be a bridge facilitating relations between the American and Islamic communities. Instead, they are creating the rifts and enlarging the gaps.

Shouldn’t CAIR be first in calling out these inhumane practices if they are looking to protect the name of Islam and its people?

The Huffington Post did both an article and video segment on “Honor Diaries,” just after the film’s debut on March 8 in honor of International Women’s Day.

The Huff Post championed its cause and echoed its important message, as a film raising awareness about human rights and misogyny, not one defiling Islam.

“CAIR has done what they do best: deflect the issue. Since they don’t address the issue of violence head on, why let anyone else bring it up?” Raheel Raza, one of the activists featured in the film, told me.

Raza, originally from Pakistan, now lives in Canada and is an author, speaker, president of the Council for Muslims Facing Tomorrow and founder of Forum 4 Learning, a group promoting religious diversity and interfaith harmony.

“If they lobby to have the event cancelled, then they have effectively swept it under the carpet and for them it doesn’t exist. This is why it’s so important to see ‘Honor Diaries’ and break the barriers of silence and constipated political correctness,” Raza said.

The danger in allowing a group like CAIR to strong-arm a university into canceling an important screening is two fold.

First, it becomes our duty as a society to never allow the ideology of one group to overpower the rights of another just by throwing around an overused, loaded word: ‘Islamophobic.’

Americans have become extremely tolerant of varying opinions, religions, philosophies, etc. We are careful not to offend and alienate. But what will political correctness cost us as a society? To what degree is political correctness no longer correct but used just as a weapon to censor and control the dialogue?

Secondly, the appalling practices such as female genital mutilation, honor violence, honor killings and forced marriage at young ages.of this film must be exposed and people must become aware of them. It is the responsibility of every free individual to know about and to actively oppose these practices in modern times.

Unfortunately, these awful acts are not just examples of Islamic violence in Middle Eastern or African countries. In fact, one of the characters of the film lives in the UK.

And to take this further, it’s already at our doorstep here in the United States.

Of course we are called ‘Islamophobic’ every time this inconvenient fact is raised, but U.S. courts have had to apply international law bans to keep Sharia Law out of the courtroom when  Muslim families have wanted to apply Islamic law against their children and others.

A painful example that comes to mind is the story of Amina and Sarah Said, sisters who were born and lived in Texas, and shot and killed by their father in 2008 for having non-Muslim boyfriends.

Every time we lose a single opportunity, such as a screening of this film, to raise awareness about these barbaric practices, it’s another smug victory for the extremists, the child oppressors, and the women abusers among us.

It was CAIR that cried, ‘Islamophobia.’ And that’s what it should remain — a false cry. And very much like the fable of the boy who cried wolf, these baseless allegations will increasingly be seen as background noise and not as a distraction from the truth or a stifling in the message of films such as “Honor Diaries,” working to expose heinous human rights crimes and violence against women.

CAIR may try to intimidate those delivering the message, but fear will not indefinitely quiet the truth seekers. Reality will only become louder with time.

Lisa Daftari is a Fox News contributor specializing in Middle Eastern affairs

*************

Megyn Kelly did a powerful segment on this tonight with Brooke Goldstein and Qanta Ahmed:

 

International Women’s Day — why America’s politically correct feminists dishonor human rights

burqaBy :

As a young bride, I once lived in a harem in Afghanistan. It was a nearly fatal adventure but I survived, escaped, and learned about gender and religious apartheid long before the Taliban.  My firebrand American feminism was probably forged in purdah in the early 1960s. However, something called me Eastward and I have remained involved with the Islamic world.

Today, decades later, I work with Muslim and ex-Muslim dissidents and feminists. They do not understand why Western feminists do not stand with them as they oppose normalized honor based violence, extreme state violence (think Iran, Saudi Arabia), and utter lawlessness when it comes to the torture and murder of girls and women.

Why would intelligent and educated Western feminists remain blind to such crimes in America?

Most recently, a law has been proposed in Afghanistan that will make it impossible for a woman whose family has beaten, tortured, or tried to kill her, to lodge a complaint of any kind. Such complaints are seen as endangering family unity. Orwell would understand this.

But why would intelligent and educated Western feminists remain blind to such crimes in America?

To their credit, American feminists exposed and opposed violence against women and championed a woman’s right to bodily integrity and  have done heroic humanitarian work in war zones, including Afghanistan. Some have critiqued the Afghan burqa (a sensory deprivation isolation chamber and ambulatory body bag) as a symbol of barbaric misogyny.

But feminists have been taken in by the false campaign against “Islamophobia,” (which does not really exist), and have backed President Obama’s approach to the Muslim world: Appeasement, flattery, a refusal to back the bravest Muslim dissidents who are fighting against barbaric totalitarian regimes, and a wholesale acceptance of Muslim women’s subordinate status in the United States.

Like Islamists, they believe that American tolerance and separation of religion and state mandate acceptance of face veiling and non-interference with close family monitoring, normalized daughter-beating, forced marriage to a first cousin, polygamy, and female genital mutilation (FGM) which exist in America, under the radar.

According to Archi Payati ,Deputy Director of Sanctuary for Families/Immigration Intervention whether they are done here or abroad, “the New York metropolitan area is the capital for (women who have had) illegal FGM procedures.”

Some Western feminists insist that the Islamic veil (niqab and burqa) is sexy, mysterious, and comfortable; others view the veil as a religious or privacy right.

Many Muslims do not.

While it is potentially perilous to involve the state in mandating what a woman cannot wear i.e. banning the burqa — feminists do not realize that women are honor killed for refusing to veil properly and that for nearly a century Muslim women fought for or were granted the right to be naked-faced in Egypt, Turkey, Persia, Jordan, Lebanon, the Maghreb, and Afghanistan.

In addition, some Western feminist academics and activists are reluctant to take a stand against honor killing in the West lest they be accused of racism or “Islamophobia”—even though the victims are women of color.

Their alleged anti-racism trumps their concerns with women’s rights. They are multi-cultural relativists who have sacrificed universal standards of human rights on the altar of “political correctness.”

As the author of three studies about honor killing, I know that this crime is rarely reported and even more rarely prosecuted. It is pandemic in Muslim countries and in parts of Hindu India. The United Nations continues to use statistics from the year 2000 which cite that “5,000 women are honor murdered each year.”

A Pakistani Human Rights Commission documents that 943 Pakistani women were honor murdered in the year 2011 alone. Statistics are elusive for North America but, in Middle East Quarterly, I have documented an escalation of such crimes based on media reports, public trials, and interviews.

Over the last quarter-century, high profile honor killings have taken place in Missouri, Ohio,  Illinois, New Jersey, Georgia, Florida, New York, Arizona, and Texas, and in Canada, from coast to coast. The majority are Muslim-on-Muslim crimes, a minority are Sikh-on-Sikh crimes.

I have worked with American and Canadian detectives, prosecutors, judges, and juries who have been warned they will be labeled “Islamophobes” if they describe the crime of honor killing as such.

Read more at Fox News

Phyllis Chesler, Ph.D is an Emerita Professor of Psychology and Women’s Studies, a Fellow at the Middle East Forum, the author of thousands of articles and of fifteen books, including “Women and Madness,” and “An American Bride in Kabul.” She archives her articles and may be reached through her website: www.phyllis-chesler.com

Also see:

Documentary Shines a Light on Honor Killing

NRK-Emmy-til-Deeyah-440x350By :

In the low-quality police video that shows her giving a statement about her husband’s brutal, chronic physical abusiveness, she looks more beautiful than any movie star. Born in 1985, Banaz Mahmod was a Kurdish Muslim whose parents, having been granted asylum by the U.K., took her from Saddam’s Iraq to a pleasant-looking neighborhood in London. The usual “cultural clash” resulted. In 2002, when Banaz’s older sister, Bekhal, started acting like an ordinary English girl, her brother lured her to a remote location and tried to strangle her to death. When she freed herself with a good kick and challenged him – saying, “Look what you’re doing, you’re trying to kill me!” – he “started to cry like a woman” and explained that their father had put him up to it. Bekhal, taking the hint, cleared out, cutting off all ties to her family and community.

Banaz wasn’t so lucky. At age seventeen, her parents married her off to an illiterate chap, Ali, who was “literally just off the plane from Iraq” and whom she’d only met once. From the beginning, he routinely beat and raped her. When she complained to her parents, they took his side. (Her father loved Ali, considering him “the David Beckham of son-in-laws.”) In 2005, after three years of abuse, Banaz finally left Ali and went to the police. In the extensive excerpts from the police video that are featured in the harrowing documentary about her short life and violent death, Bajaz: A Love Story, which won an Emmy earlier this month, Banaz described Ali’s mistreatment of her in detail, noting that one beating had dislocated her wrist and that after one too many kicks in the head she wasn’t able to “remember things so good.”

On the police videotape, we see her asking: “Now that I’ve given this statement, what can you do for me?” She was told that there’d be an inquiry. There never was. It took the police three months to write up her statement. She returned five times, to no avail. As officials admit in the documentary, the police committed a “landslide of mistakes,” missing “all the signs that she was in grave danger.” Banaz missed the signs, too – which, frankly, could hardly have been more obvious. Even after her father tried to strangle her – she managed to escape, scaling a fence, collapsing on the floor of a nearby café, and ending up at a hospital where doctors said they’d “never seen anyone so frightened in their life” – she was persuaded to return home, apparently still unable to fully process the fact that her father was determined to murder her, and assuming, in any case, that if he tried to do so, her mother would somehow manage to protect her.

After leaving her husband, Banaz found a boyfriend, Rahmat. They tried to keep their romance secret. But one day a fellow Kurd spotted them kissing on a street. A phone call was made; a family “council of war” ensued. And the family dishonor was dealt with in the usual fashion. Only a few months after her police interview, Rahmat reported Banaz missing. The police investigation was led by detective Caroline Goode, the documentary’s main talking head. Although over fifty people had been involved in Banaz’s murder, and although “dozens, if not hundreds,” of Kurds in London knew what had happened to her, “not a single member of the community helped us,” recalls Goode, who states flatly that there was a widespread conspiracy “to pervert the course of justice” by giving false testimony and providing false leads.

Despite the stonewalling, however, Goode had an important ally: Banaz’s sister Bekhal, who testified against her family and who appears in the documentary in a full veil – not for religious reasons, but for protection, because she now lives in hiding. Banaz had been strangled to death by three cousins, and at least one of them had also anally raped her – a fact about which he afterwards bragged in a phone call taped by the police. Banaz’s father, uncle, and the three cousins, including two who’d fled to Iraq (and who, according to the film, were the first Iraqi nationals ever to be extradited anywhere), were given life sentences.

The heroes of Banaz: A Love Story are the victim’s sister, Bekhal, who by testifying defied not only her family but the entire Kurdish community, and Goode, who was determined to put the perpetrators behind bars and who, during her investigation, came to feel she’d become a sort of surrogate mother to the slaughtered girl “because she wasn’t loved by her own parents” and because “someone should love her.” The other, unseen hero of this film is the filmmaker herself, another astonishingly beautiful young woman named Deeyah.

Born in Oslo to parents from Pakistan and Afghanistan, Deeyah, as I learned from a profile in Dagsavisen last weekend, started performing on Norwegian TV as a little girl – leading to “brutal threats” from other Muslims – and at age eighteen recorded a song that hit #1 on the Norwegian charts. Not long after that triumph, she was assaulted at a concert and fled Norway for Britain. But there, too, she was the target of Muslim threats. So she moved on to Atlanta, where she spent almost six years and found success as a music producer. (She only recently returned to the U.K.) The Dagsavisen profile is headlined “Betrayed by Norway” because, as Deeyah puts it, “My heart was broken by Norway.” Growing up, she was exposed to plenty of rhetoric about and examples of women’s equality and freedom of speech – but she also experienced firsthand the indifference of mainstream Norwegian society to the rights of women and girls in Muslim communities. This systematic refusal to challenge misogynistic Muslim norms – a refusal that she attributes to a terror of being called racist, but that, as she points out, is itself racist – was what set her on the road to activism.

For those who aren’t familiar with the basic facts about honor culture, Banaz: A Love Story is a useful primer. Like most such films, to be sure, it shies away from the words “Muslim” and “Islam.” When Banaz says on the police videotape, twenty-two minutes into the documentary, that “for a Muslim female it is very hard to get a divorce,” it is the first reference to her religion in the entire movie; in discussing the contexts within which honor killings take place, Deeyah’s talking heads prefer to use terms like “tribal,” “culture,” “village culture,” “Asian,” “Iraqi,” “Pakistani,” or “Middle Eastern” – anything but “Islam.” One of the interviewees insists that honor killing is “not an entirely Muslim phenomenon and it’s a danger to think so.” No, it’s not entirely a Muslim phenomenon – it occurs, though at drastically lower rates, in some non-Muslim cultures, mainly in the Middle East. But the overwhelming majority of honor killings are committed by, and in the name of, Islam – which, if you’re even remotely familiar with the views of women promulgated in the Koran, is hardly surprising.

In any event, Banaz is far more than just a primer on honor culture. It’s an emotionally wrenching piece of work that takes viewers far beyond the grim statistics. One would have to be less than human to watch it and not feel – even if it’s for the thousandth time – a raw, burning outrage at the whole sick concept of honor culture. Imagine a family having a “status” based on the “virtue” of its female members! Imagine a “community” in which every loser family is so obsessed with its “status” in the eyes of all the other loser families that that “status” needs to be maintained at any cost, including the death of its own supposedly beloved children. Imagine a “culture” in which a family’s “status” can mean so much and a loved one’s life so little! There’s a term, folie à deux,for a madness shared by two people, usually living together in relative isolation from others; I didn’t realize until I just looked it up that it’s an actual psychiatric diagnosis, and that the DSM also recognizes such broader variations as folie à trois, folie en famille, and folie à plusieurs. When entire communities, convinced beyond a doubt that they are doing Allah’s work, conspire without hesitation to enable and cover up the barbaric killing of an innocent girl, how much more does it take, one wonders, to justify labeling what they think of as their faith as a mental disorder?

Read more at Front Page

 

Banaz A Love Story ©Fuuse Films:

 

For more on honor killing go to http://counterjihadreport.com/category/honor-killings/

 

Canadian Muslims Protest “Honor Killing” Label As Racist

by Abigail R. Esman
Special to IPT News

Our Tax Dollars At Work: National Park Service Produces Videos Praising Islam’s Contributions To Women’s Rights

download (44)by Mara Zebest:

No joke. Your tax dollars paid for Obama’s National Park Service to make videos that praise Islam’s contributions to women’s rights. Indoctrination thrown in as added bonus and no explanation given as to why this is a function of the National Park Service.

Islam and women’s rights? Really? Are they referring to all those women’s rights like honor killings, stonings, gang rapes, the loss of independence to travel, hijabs and burqas… those women’s rights? Maybe a more accurate and honest overview (along with less taxpayer cost) could have been achieved by providing a free movie download showing The Stoning of Soraya M.

 

 

The Independent Journal Review reports the following:

Another example of your hard-earned tax dollars at work! Apparently, the National Park Service has a ton of money lying around and thought that maybe producing some pro-Islam videos might further their mission to provide national parks to Americans.

Seems legit.

So they hired a media person to visit the AnNur Islamic School in Schenectady, NY and got the real truth about Islam. Which may surprise you.

Read more at Gateway Pundit

 

TRIFECTA – Jihadists Execute Sisters and Mother for Dancing in the Rain

Noor Basra and Noor Sheza

Noor Basra and Noor Sheza

Two sisters in Pakistan made the mistake of dancing and playing in the rain. It earned them a death sentence from local jihadists. What does Trifecta think of these honor killings? Find out:

 

Islam: Root Cause of Grooming and Rape Wave

oxford-guilty-450x280By :

Packs of rapists and groomers seems to be epidemic in the UK. Their common denominator is their religious and cultural background. As a psychologist, I am not surprised that this horrific phenomenon emerges among immigrants from Islamic countries. Just as any other religion and culture, Islam and Muslim culture nurture certain psychological traits that influence values and behaviour.

Abuse in Muslim culture

The Quran’s description of women as inferior to and the property of men not only removes womens’ basic human rights; it also influence men’s view of them. As a result, Muslim cultural traditions have for centuries treated women as second class citizens, forced to marry and have sex with men against their will, and living under a constant death threat should they dishonor their family by violating the misanthropic Sharia laws.

The brutal treatment of innocent young girls may be shocking to those who do not know how women are treated in Muslim countries, but it would be naive to think that people change their habits and views and raise their children to integrate into what in their eyes are blasphemous customs just because they cross a national border.

The statistics speak for themselves. Research suggests that 91 percent of the between 7,000 and 20,000 honor killings each year are committed by Muslims. On top of this statistic come the countless cases of non-deadly honor crimes. In Britain alone, the police estimate that 17,000 cases of honor-based “forced marriages, kidnappings, sexual assaults, beatings and even murders take place every year.” In Turkey, 42 percent of women are victims of physical or sexual abuse. In Morocco, the share is 82 percent. In Egypt, 99.3 percent of women have experienced sexual harassment. Etc.

Read more at Front Page

Violence Against Women in Islam: Report by the Dutch Party for Freedom

Ghazala Khan

Ghazala Khan

G-Khan-murder

By Andrew Bostom:

Images above,  and the following text, via Pamela Geller, summarizing open sources“The killing of Ghazala Khan in Denmark by her brother may be the only instance where an “honor” killing has been photographed while being perpetrated. This  picture was captured on cell phone camera and shows the woman’s brother aiming the gun at his sister, lying on the ground. Her fiancee, also seen, was wounded, but survived. The killing was planned by her entire family, and Pakistani taxi drivers were used as spies to spot her and alert her family.”

****

 

Geert Wilders’ Party for Freedom (PVV) has just released a compendious, seminal report on the doctrinal rationale for Islamic misogyny, and its violent consequences for Muslim women in The Netherlands. The report can be downloaded in pdf format, here.

The report argues that,

… in Islam women are victims of various crimes, such as child marriages, forced marriages, confinement, honor-related crimes including murders, forced sex, genital mutilations. The PVV report, which the party has presented to the Dutch authorities, concludes that Islam is the cause of the anti-female violence.

Geert Wilders, leader of the PVV, concludes:

Islam legitimizes violence against women, and even orders it. That is the core of the problem… If we want to root out this misery in the Netherlands, then female Muslims will have to liberate themselves from the prison of Islamic violence and [to] choose freedom.

I have reproduced the full text of the report, below.

***

 “Why do the human rights activists ignore their suffering as though they do not even exist? Why isn’t the cry of these millions of women heard, and why isn’t it answered by anyone, anywhere? Why? Why? Why?” [1]

Wajeha al-Huwaider

 

[1] Wilders, G. (2012) Marked For Death. Islam’s War Against the West and Me. Washington: Regnery Publishing

Introduction

With the mass immigration of recent decades, Islam has made its appearance in our society. And that has meant the arrival of an ideology which is alien to us. Western values such as individual liberty, freedom of speech, separation of church and state, and equality between men and women are achievements that do not exist in Islam. The growing influence of Islam in our society puts those freedoms under pressure. We witness increasing violence against homosexuals, censorship, Islamic anti-Semitism, serious threats against politicians, and even the assassination of a critic of Islam.

But it is not only the non-Muslim world that is faced with the excessive violence and the urge of Islam to curtail freedoms. Within Islam, violence and submission are the rule. The main victims are women. The Dutch government, instead of focusing on countering the Islamization process, combating this violence, and urging women to renounce Islam, gives in and facilitates absurd projects such as separate integration, separate swimming lessons and even separate theater performances. Giving in, looking away or leaving these women to their fate — as the politically correct Netherlands does — is not a solution.

In Islam, women are inferior beings who are subordinated to men in various ways. “Child marriages,” forced marriages, anti-female violence, confinement and shielding women from the outside world, honor-related violence, forced sex and genital mutilation are some of the forms of violence that large groups of Muslim women have to deal with. Within Islam, violence against women is not only legitimized, it is even mandatory.

The lack of attention given to the deplorable situation of women within this ideology and the still dominant, politically correct attitude among politicians and civil servants — which disconnects Islam from the violence against women within Islam — prompted the PVV group in the Dutch House of Representatives to write this report.

This publication presents the position of women in Islam in relation to violence. By letting the Islamic sources speak for themselves, we observe that the endlessly repeated assertion that the above-mentioned abuses have no connection with Islam is not based on facts. Islam legitimizes violence against women, and even orders it. That is the core of the problem. Various studies show that this violence (including forced isolation, honor-related violence and female genital mutilation) is widespread, in the Netherlands as elsewhere.

If we want to root out this misery in the Netherlands, then female Muslims will have to liberate themselves from the prison of Islamic violence and to choose freedom.

G. Wilders (Chairman of the Party for Freedom)

J.J. van Klaveren (MP, Party for Freedom)

The Hague, April 2013

Read more

Canadian Left Calls for ‘Neutrality’ on Honor Killings & Female Genital Mutilation

clitorectomyBy :

Cultural relativism has reached a new point of absurdity in Canada when the “barbarity” of female genital mutilation and honor killings is questioned and becomes a controversy.

A recently introduced manual by the Government of Canada intended to teach newcomers about Canadian values and Canadian society has been met with ongoing hostility from left-wing Canadians and politicians over the choice of words in describing female genital mutilation and honor killings. Jinny Sims, the immigration critic of the opposition New Democratic Party of Canada, suggested the word “barbaric” might “stigmatize some cultures.”

Aside from official protestations, everyone can imagine the type of cultural relativist rhetoric that has been used to attack the Conservative government for releasing this guide. The blogosphere has been filled with “liberal-minded” Canadians continuing in the same vein as Ms. Sims, suggesting the term “barbaric” is somehow discriminatory or offensive to a particular group. However, reasoned thought on the matter should conclude on the exact opposite; that it is offensive to those forced to endure such ordeals to call them anything but barbaric. Unfortunately, sensitivity towards this group (as per usual) is ignored.

Taking up the relativist banner was also none other than Justin Trudeau, front-runner for leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada, and son of the infamous Canadian Prime Minister who brought multiculturalist policy to Canada. He attacked the Conservatives for using the term “barbaric,” and suggested that the term was a “pejorative” and that “there needs to be a little bit of an attempt at responsible neutrality.”

Read more at Front Page

Also see:

Justin Trudeau’s Islamist Revival (counterjihadreport.com)

The Islamization of Italy

by Giulio Meotti

The Italian authorities have capitulated to hatred.

It began when thousands of Muslims marched in front of Milan’s Duomo to protest against Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, burning Israeli flags and chanting anti-Jewish slogans, Joaquin Navarro-Valls, John Paul II’s spokesman for 22 years, defended the “freedom of expression” of the Muslims who burned the Star of David.

Last week, Italian education minister Francesco Profumo proposed that Islam be taught in public schools alongside the traditional teaching of Catholicism, while Bishop Mariano Crociata, secretary general of the Italian Episcopal Conference, announced that the Vatican is in favor of building new mosques in Italy.

The European Bishops met with European Muslims in Turin to proclaim the need for the “progressive enculturation of Islam in Europe.”

Italy’s Terrorist Legacy

Sheikh Abu Iyad is the major Islamist wanted for the terror attack against the U.S. consultate in Benghazi, Libya. It was just been discovered that two of his handmen are Sami Essid Ben Khemais and Mehdi Kammoun. They both lived in Italy between Milano and Gallarate and they spent seven years in Italian prisons for terrorism.

Italy leads the ranking in Europe as paradise for “martyrs,” imams of hatred and terrorists involved in major terror attacks.

Twenty-nine of the suicide bombers in Iraq and Afghanistan came from Italy.

Eight of the terrorists jailed in Guantanamo Bay are Italians.

Hussien Saber Fadhil, who has been called “the caliph,” is the Iraqi arrested in Venice and considered the Italian link with al Qaeda. He sent money to the Palestinian Arab terror groups as well.

The most well known “Italian” terrorist is Abu Farid Al Masri, the suicide bomber who destroyed the United Nations’ building in Baghdad in 2003, killing dozens of civilians.

From Milan came Kamal Morchidi, who blew himself up at the Rashid Hotel in Baghdad, nearly killing then-US undersecretary Paul Wolfowitz.

The Growing Italian Islamization

The terrorist proliferation is a symbol of growing Italian  Islamization: There were 600,000 Muslims in Italy in the year 2000, over 1,300,000 in 2009, over 1.5 million today, and they are expected to get to 2.8 million by 2030.

The southern island of Sicily is about to become the site of a shining new multi-million Euro mega-mosque paid for by Qatar.

The Mosque of Rome, which accommodates more than 12,000 people, is one of the largest mosques in Europe. It is there that the imam, an Egyptian Islamist, was suspended after preaching jihad.

There are now an estimated 500 mosques in Italy, and 70 % of these are controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood, not to mention thousands of informal Islamic prayer centers and Koranic schools.

In Italy, a new Islamic place of worship is established on the average of every four days.

Honor Killings: A New Episode Every Week

And every week there are new episodes of violence against Muslim women committed in the name of Sharia, Islamic law:

Bouchra, 24, was stabbed to death in Verona by her husband because she refused to wear the veil and was living “like a Westerner”;

Kabira, 28, was stabbed to death by her husband because she wanted to wear “Western clothes”;

Darin Omar was killed by her husband because she had got a job in a call center;

Hina Salem was suffocated with a plastic bag by the family, beheaded and buried with her head facing La Mecca because she dated an Italian boy and refused a forced marriage;

Saamali Fatima was killed on a highway at Aosta;

Malka, 29, was strangled by her husband for her “Western” habits;

Fatima, 20, was stabbed to death by her boyfriend for being “too independent”;

Sobia was poisoned by family members;

Naima was stabbed by her husband because she wanted back her children seized in Morocco;

Fouzia was strangled by her husband under the eyes of their three-year old daughter, her body abandoned in a public garden, because she had begun to follow a “modern lifestyle”;

Sanaa Dafan was slaughtered by her father in Pordenone for a relationship with an Italian boy;

Amal, 26, beaten by her husband simply because she wanted to go to the hairdresser.

Anti-Semitism Grows alongside Multiculturalism

Anti-Semitism grows alongside this horrible “multiculturalism.”

The Italian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood released a version of the Koran that contains remarks describing Jews as morally duplicitous and as a people of rejects and swindlers. In several of the footnotes interpreting the text, the commentator, an Italian convert to Islam, suggested Jews are responsible for their own misfortunes and accuses them of being “champions of moral duplicity” who consider as  “acceptable any wickedness toward non-Jews.”

Meanwhile, the Italian judges are apologetic about hatred. Ucoii, the largest Islamic organization in Italy, published an ad in many mainstream newspapers titled, “Nazi Bloodshed Yesterday, Israeli Bloodshed Today.” An Italian court ruled that the Nazification of Israel came under “freedom of expression” and was not a case of incitement to hatred.

Read more at Radical Islam

Worst Anti-Muslim Hate Crime in America was Committed by Muslim

By Daniel Greenfield at Front Page

When Shaima Alawadi was found beaten to death in her own dining room with a tire iron, CAIR and countless Muslim organizations rejoiced, and not just for the usual reason that Muslims rejoice when a woman is murdered, but because they had their own living dead proof that Islamophobia was the biggest problem in America since German Measles.

A note lying on the floor read, “Go back to your country, you terrorist;” which clearly meant that Shaima Alawadi’s murder was a hate crime, probably by someone who spent a lot of time reading Robert Spencer, joining militias and working on a Kibbutz.

There was talk of organizing a One Million Hijabs for Shaima Alawadi march, which in Saudi Arabia is just known as another Wednesday. Muslims and useful idiots began uploading photos of themselves in Hijabs with signs reading “I Am Shaima”.  A Sojourners blog used the murder to compare Islamophobia to the Holocaust and the Rwandan genocide.

The truth about the murder of Shaima Alawadi was that she wasn’t murdered by someone who hated Islam, but by a Muslim, in keeping with the teachings of Islam which permit husbands to beat their wives.  Shaima Alawadi was indeed murdered because of her Hijab, not because of prejudice against her Hijab, but because of the misogynistic culture that the Hijab represents.

Like so many Muslim women, Shaima Alawadi was murdered in an honor killing by her husband. Like so many Muslim women, she was forced into an arranged marriage at a young age, 15, and lived an unhappy life. Like so many Muslim women, she perpetuated the generational oppression of women, passing on the same misery to her unhappy daughters. And like so many Muslim women, when her desire for freedom conflicted with the Islamic patriarchy, she was murdered for it.

According to court documents revealed in the New York Times, Alawadi’s eldest daughter, Fatima, was found in a car with a 21-year-old man. After her mother picked her up, Fatima said “I love you, Mom” and jumped out of the car going 35 m.p.h., sustaining injuries. While recovering in the hospital, Fatima told authorities that she was being forced to marry a cousin in Iraq — not the man with whom she’d been in the car. Alhimidi, Alawadi’s husband, is in Iraq with his two eldest children (Fatima and her brother) for her funeral. They are expected to return the U.S. later this month.

This is the true hate crime here. Not American hatred of Muslims, but Muslim hatred of women and Muslim women participating in the oppression of other Muslim women until the dam breaks.

There ought to be a one million march of Hijabs for Shamia Alhimidi, empty Hijabs commemorating the Muslim women murdered by their husbands and their brothers, those who committed suicide, jumping out of cars, drinking acid or hanging themselves.

And it’s time for us to wake up to the meaning of the Hijab and the Koran.

One final note

Alzaidy told the newspaper her father and Alawadi’s husband had previously worked together in San Diego as private contractors for the U.S. Army, serving as cultural advisers to train soldiers who were going to be deployed to the Middle East.

A Muslim man who beat his wife to death with a tire iron and then tried to blame the crime on Americans is who we were using as a cultural adviser. And it makes sense. Because that is the culture of the Muslim world.