Sunday, October 26, 2014

Warning: Hillary Clinton's Hidden Radicalism !


I've visited Chicago a few years ago. It's a beautiful city and what an awesome waterfront along Lake Michigan. However, I just have to laugh when I think of the level of radicalism and corruption in Chicago politics. Here is the line-up of famous Chicago reprobates:

James Daley, Saul Alinksy, Barack Hussein Obama, Michelle (Robinson) Obama  Hillary Rodham Clinton, Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, Jesse Jackson Sr and Jr (the latter being a federal prison resident), Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, Louis Farrakhan, David Plouffe, and of course Al Capone. Now combine that with the number of incarcerated former politicians and the fact that in June of this year, the Communist Party of the United States held its 30th convention in Chicago.  A regular alphabet soup of the scum-of-the-Earth.

So therefore, it actually should come as no surprise to find out Hillary Clinton and famed leftist Jewish community organizer, Saul Alinsky, exchanged correspondence. For your reference, Alinsky's infamous book, Rules for Radicals, is dedicated to Lucifer. (I guess, after being told to ''Go to Hell'' so many times, Saul figured he'd get Carte Blanc with this dedication.)

As reported by the Washington Free Beacon,  ''Previously unpublished correspondence between Hillary Clinton and the late left-wing organizer Saul Alinsky revealed new details about her relationship with the Chicago activist and shed light on her early ideological development (indoctrination?). Clinton met with Alinsky several times in 1968 wile writing a Wellesley College
thesis about his theory of community organizing.

Clinton's relationship with Alinsky, and her support for his philosophy, continued for several years after she entered Yale law school in 1969, two letters obtained by the Washington Free Bacon show. (The Hillary Letters: http://www.scrbd.com/doc/240077031)  Both Barack and Michelle Obama had strong links with Alinsky as well, and I exposed their connection in OBAMA: Lucifer is my Home Boy! (September 13, 2012)  read it on this page:  http://back-doc.blogspot.com.au/2012/09/obama-lucifer-is-my-homeboy.html and The Very Radical Racist Background of Michelle Obama! (November 8, 2013) http://back-doc.blogspot.com.au/2013/11/the-very-radicl-racist-background-of.html

The last thing America needs is another left wing ideologue espousing progressive socialist policies. The problem for Hillary Clinton is that she's tried very hard to hide her radicalism - as a matter of fact, she's doing everything possible right now to distance herself from ol' brother  Barack. However, she's not trusted by the progressive Left or the rest of America either. Oh yes, there will be a number of Generation Xers and Ys that'll wet there panties wanting to vote for a female president regardless of her sordid background. It was these same idiots who voted Obama in....TWICE !

We all know, or should all know, that Hillary Clinton is a shrewd deceptive operator, not personable and willing to tell a lie at the drop of a hat. Plus, the Clintons have more scandals following them than the days are long - hmm, sounds like a familiar tune of the past six years. See my recent blog listing Barak Obama's White House scandals. After all, they were all spawned from the same corrupt social organizing machine. They are just serious rivals.

The Free Bacon reports the letters it obtained ''are part of the archives for the Industrial Areas Foundation, a training center for community organizers founded by Alinsky, which are housed at the University of Texas at Austin.''  On July 8, 1971, Clinton reached out to Alinsky, them 62, in a letter sent via airmail, paid for with stamps featuring Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and marked ''Personal.'' It read, ''Dear Saul, When is that new book [Rules for Radicals] coming out - or has it comeand I somehow missed the fulfilment of Revelation?  I have just had my one-thousandth conversation about Reveille [for Radicals] and need some new material to throw at people,'' she added (a reference to Alinsky's 1946 book on his theories of community organizing. In this 1971 letter, Clinton assured Alinsky that she had ''survived law school, slightly bruised, with my belief in and zest for organizing intact.''

A self-proclaimed radical, Alinsky advocated guerrilla tactics and civil disobedience to correct what he saw as an institutionalized power gap in poor communities. His philosophy divided the world into haves - middle class and wealthy people - and have nots - the poor. He took an ends-justify-the-means approach to power and wealth redistribution, ad developed the theoretical basis of community organizing. ''The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold on to power,'' wrote in his 1971 book. ''Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.''

So does Hillary Rodham Clinton - indeed the progressive socialist Left - really give a stuff about middle income America? Trust me they don't. You and those Xers and Ys are the bourgeoisie (those of the middle class that worked and risked their future to build a business to succeed) against which the proletariat (the workers who are too lazy to make an effort to rise above their labour-for-hire mentality)  must struggle and ultimately overthrow. What Alinsky believed in was anathema to that of the fundamental principles and values of America. His message was easily an American communist manifesto of sorts.

The Free Beacon says, ''according to the letter, Clinton and Alinsky had kept in touch since she entered Yale. The 62 year-old radical had often given her advice on campus activism. The Beacon
adds, ''Clinton's connection to Alinsky has been the subject of speculation for decades. It became 
controversial when Wellsley College, by request of the Clinton White House, sealed her 1968 thesis from the public for years. Hillary had asked for the thesis to be sealed -sounds familiar huh -because it showed the extant to which she internalized and assimilated the beliefs and methods of the scumbag Alinsky. Gay Leftist, David Brock ( Media Matters for America) referred to her as ''Alinsky's daughter'' in his1996 book, The Seduction of Hillary Rodham.

The Way I See It.....there's a saying down South the ol' folks use -- people will know you by the company you keep -- something Americans missed when it came to Barack Hussein Obama's radical friends and mentors. (See my 3 postings Barack Obama's Un-Holy Trinity (Mentors of Ill-Repute! - August 31 and September 2, 2012)

I found it absolutely hilarious how the Left went after Mitt Romney for supposedly ''bullying'' some kid back in high school or something. They went after him for having a dog ride on a car roof/ However, here we go with the logical idea that a cancer festers in Chicago, and I can bet not a single leftist progressive media outlet is covering this story - check out how they stayed silent about the Federal government exonerating New Jersey bully-boy Governor Chris Christie in the ''Bridgegate'' scandal.  God Help America !!!





Wednesday, October 22, 2014

Houston's Lesbian Mayor Turns Tyrant !


Jesse Lee Peterson, author, television and radio host and lecturer has always said ''Don't give power to a radical homosexual.''  Case in point: the city of Houston.

In an unprecedented attack against religious freedom and free-speech rights, Houston's idiot citizens voted in Mayor Annise Parker (photo right), an open lesbian. She recently issued subpoenas demanding pastors turn over sermons dealing with homosexuality and any remarks they've made in opposition to that city's ''non-discrimination'' ordinance, which in part allows transgendered men to use ladies restrooms. ( I'm not sure if this covers She-Males )

Why would the mayor want to silence Christians? After all, aren't LGBT people all about ''tolerance''.
Well, no. Mayor Parker and her radical, (don't you hate that they usurped the word ''gay'' from us normal folk?)  queer activists want to criminalize and censor anyone who speaks out against the perverse LGBT agenda and the hell with the First Amendment!

LGBT groups and the left-wing media have campaigned to portray homosexuals, and now transgender people, as minorities bullied by Christians. (Have these Homos ever tried living in the Middle East?) As a result, the LGBT agenda has a foothold in the popular culture. Homosexuals have ascended to positions of power.

LGBT activists across America are proposing bizarre laws that are blurring gender lines. Ass-kissing California Democrats passed AB 1266 (co-ed bathroom law). which allows transgendered boys to use girl's bathrooms and locker rooms. Despite this all-out effort by the far left to portray the LGBT lifestyle as ''normal'', there is growing evidence revealing the disturbing truth.

Dr Paul R. McHugh, (photo left) the Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Hospital said that transgenderism is a ''mental disorder.''  Dr McHugh also reported on a new study showing that the suicide rate among transgendered people who had reassignment (sex change) surgery were 20 times higher than the suicide rate among non-transgender people.


Dr McHugh further noted studies from Vanderbilt University and London's Portman Clinic stating that 70-80 per cent of children who had expressed transgender feelings ''spontaneously lost those feelings'' over time. He stated; ''So if kids weren't being pressured to embrace being transgendered, most would eventually get beyond the feelings.''  But you won't hear about these findings in the mainstream media because it threatens their whole concept that LGBT people are ''born'' that way.

Jesse Lee Peterson
Christian pastors threaten the LGBT's scheme to normalize abhorrent behaviour. Peterson says, ''If we don't stop the attack on these Houston pastors, the left will surely be emboldened to use Gestapo-like tactics against any other group that opposes them, and we'll end up like Canada.'' The Left-scum in Canada is silencing conservatives by criminalizing Free Speech. The criminal prohibitions on speech or so-called ''hate speech'' laws are used to silence and stifle a single (traditional values) viewpoint.

If these homos want to go after intolerance, why don't they target mosques and imams? Islam has harsh edicts against homosexuality. Maybe a few beheadings will help them focus on a worse problem than they have with Christian pastors. They won't go after Muslims because they need them as part of their coalition to take down the Christians. Weakness emboldens Evil. I see a leadership vacuum and a lack of effective activism within the conservative Christian movement today, and that has emboldened the filth on the left.

The Way I See It.....Christians may not agree on everything, but they can certainly agree on the need to protect their freedoms and family. But one doesn't win playing defense all the time. For proof that playing defense is a losing strategy, just look at the Republican Party. GOP leaders are so afraid of being called ''racists'' that they're letting Obama have his way. Meanwhile, Obama is constantly putting them under pressure by going on offense with his evil agenda. It doesn't have to be that way.

Despite a major push by ratbag LGBT groups to equate their agenda to the civil rights movement, a 2013 Pew Center study shows that 49 per cent of blacks oppose same-sex marriage. (And there's another word the LGBT's besmirched rather than calling their unnatural joining a ''Union" ) But if
black churches don't conform, liberals are going to eventually destroy their churches. The black church needs to enter into this fight. But there seems to be a notion that there something unChristian about going on the offensive. ''Don't believe this lie!'' Peterson demands.

There's no reason to lose this fight....it's not an option. Many Christians have unforgiveness and anger in their hearts but don't realize it. Peterson adds; ''The left is angry too, but their training complements their anger. They have no qualms about being malicious to advance their godless agenda.'' On the other hand, too many Christians don't know how to go on the offense. Turning the other cheek doesn't mean not fighting back. It means to forgive your enemy while you're kicking his tail!  If the tactics Christians are using do not result in a victory, then something is wrong. For many Christians victories these days are relatively few. It's time they stop playing defense and take the fight to the enemy starting with that dyke mayor.

The Astonishing Mendacity and Incompetance of Barack Obama !


''mendacity'' adv.  addicted to telling lies (Random House Dictionary)

I covered a lot of this before in a previous blog posting, which I'll leave you to search for in amongst the 450 postings I've written. I am just going to up date things and give you a quick tour relating to  the title above. Remember these pearls of deceit?


        "Of course you can keep your health coverage, and your doctor. And we'll cover everyone while your premiums plummet.''

         Meanwhile, al-Qaeda is ''decimated'' and these Islamic State guys are just the jayvee team. In fact (fact?), they're not even Islamic -- although they may not be quite a 'secular' as the Muslim Brotherhood. Just extremists. (Extreme about what?  Don't ask!)    "My advisors say that jihad is just a 'purification of the self ' ...or at most, 'workplace violence' that involves some beheading to satisfy the Quran's commands,'' was the Presidential verdict.

         ''Benghazi?  A spontaneous 'protest' incited by a video. ''I was not told it was a terrorist attack....except by the Secretary of Defence a while after it started''  Long before he responded by....going to Vegas, where he promptly announced al-Qaeda was ''on the path to defeat.''

         ''Rest assured that the State Department's top priority is the safety of American personnel although we did reduce security after our facility was attacked and our ambassador, Chris Stevens, and his three security men were killed.'' It's common knowledge, Obama missed over 50% of the State Department's security briefings over his past term and this half one.

        ''And rest assured that Eric Holder's Justice Department would never let guns walk.'' Except for the thousands its Fast and Furious program transferred to violent gangs --who've used them in
who knows how many crimes, including the murder of a Border Patrol agent Brian Terry (photo).

         Still, at least there's ''not a smidgen of corruption at the IRS'', where citizens are harassed, especially if they are Tea Party members. Where evidence keeps disappearing, and the official at the center of it all takes the Fifth to avoid giving incriminating testimony.

         Then there is the NSA's secret warrantless mass surveillance programs of which the IRS and the DEA's Special Operations Division (SOD) share culled information. Obama repeatedly has assured Americans that the NSA does not collect the private information of its ordinary citizens. That statement is not true.

         Worse, DEA and IRS agents were told to lie by the administration, to lie to judges and defence attorneys about their use of NSA data, and about the very existence of SOD. Last year, at a press conference, President Obama reassured the nation that ''America isn't interested in spying on ordinary people.''  In other words, do not worry, because the information will only be used for narrow counterterrorism or broader foreign intelligence purposes. But the latest revelations show that these assurances too are a lie. The United States is now a mass surveillance state!

         Lack of his foreign leadership showed Obama to be indecisive, even afraid with an inability and unwillingness to face the many threats developing over these past three years. Mainly, not pushing the dreadful Nouri al-Maliki and his Iraqi government harder to allow a residual force to remain when troops withdrew in 2011. He was so obsessed with getting out of Iraq which he campaigned for in 2008 that he created a vacuum in terms of the ability of Iraq stabilize itself, and it's out of that vacuum that ISIS began to breed.

         With Afghanistan, Robert Gates  (photo right), Obama's first Secretary of Defence, writes in his book, ''Obama doubted his mission in that country and was sceptical if not outright convinced it would fail.''  What shocked him was his announcement of a date Obama said he  would pull the troops out, thereby giving the Taliban a perfect incentive to wait for the day after the exit to retake the country. Gates says, ''From the very beginning the president was more concerned about leaving Afghanistan than having a strategy on the ground.''

         No matter...that's old news. Just take heart that Ebola is not coming to the United States....um, well, if it does come there will be no outbreak....but, er, ''if there is an outbreak, we have careful protocols and healthcare professionals fully trained to deal with it.''  With 35 countries already having flight bans for anyone flying from the three African countries most affected, Obama says, ''I don't think it's necessary at this time.''

         OK....even if the protocols don't work and the professionals don't have adequate training, we''ll have a rigorous monitoring program for anyone who is exposed....or maybe a self-monitoring program for people who will isolate themselves....unless of course, we tell them to go ahead and hop on a plane. Well, look, at least we can promise there won't be a ''serious'' outbreak.


        This week the president cancelled a fundraiser and returned to the White House to deal with the crisis. He made a statement and came cross as about three days behind the story -- ''rapid response teams'' and so forth. He then, to prop up  his poor leadership, he appointed an Ebola Czar, which was something he previously rejected, to coordinate the government's response to the deadly virus. He announced that Democratic operative  Ron Klain (photo left) would be the new Ebola Czar. ''He'll control the message better than most people would, which is really important from a health standpoint even though he does not have any medical experience.'' said an anonymous White House official.  Another 'Spin-Doctor'' has been added to the White House staff!

       As you guessed it. President Obama , once finished with his announced appointment, quickly flew out and returned to his busy fundraising schedule. It reminded some people of the statement in July, during another crisis, of the president's communications director, who said that when the president rushes back to Washington ''it can have the unintended consequence of unduly alarming the American people.''  Yes, Americans are such sissies. Actually, when Mr Obama eschews a fundraiser to go to his office to deal with a public problem they are not scared....only surprised.


The Way I See It......mendacity and incompetence rules supreme in the Obama administration. With two more books released, one by Hillary Clinton and the other by Leon Panetta (photo right), giving an insight into what it was like working in the White House, up close and personal with a leaderless president. Panetta lands a hammer blow on his old boss; ''He approaches things like a law professor in presenting a logic of his position. My experience in Washington is that logic alone doesn't work. Once you lay out a position, you are going to roll up your sleeves and you have to fight to get it done. In order for Presidents to succeed, they cannot just....when they run into problems....step back and give up.''

I sense that Panetta is right about Obama's unwillingness to fight. Lately, the President's body language has too often conveyed disgust and cynicism. He seems defeated by the trivial pursuits of the media and his opponents. He does not have the sunny conviction necessary to carry the country through a period of near biblical plagues and wars. His policies and popularity (down to 41%) have been crippled by his dour political sense. A basic law of politics: ''this cannot last'', has been lost on him.  But I have no idea what comes next. God help America!

Wednesday, October 15, 2014

Horror of Kobani: The Savagery of ISIS Laid Bare !


Survivors of the fighting in Kobani have described the horrors they witnessed as Isis militants took control of parts of the town from Kurdish forces. These refugees, staying in Suruc, Turkey, have told The Daily Mail how relatives and neighbours were beheaded by the militants, while another spoke ''hundreds'' of decapitated corpses in the besieged town.

Armin Fajar, 38, father-of-four who left Kobani and crossed the border to Suruc, said ''I have seen tens, maybe hundreds, of bodies with their heads cut off. Others with just their hands or legs missing. I have seen faces with their eyes or tongues cut out - I can never forget it for as long as I live.''  Belal Shahin, another refugee in Suruc, told MSNBC, ''Isis came into the villages. They beheaded people as well as animals. They took some animals and the girls; they left nothing alive. Even animals don't do what Isis is doing. They are doing these things and it's not acceptable to our religion.''

ISIS militants have laid siege to the town for nearly four weeks and fought their way into it in the past week. On Friday, the UN Syria envoy warned the hundreds still trapped in Kobani will be ''massacred' by the militants if the town falls, where only a small corridor remains open for the people to flee. More than 200,000 have already escaped across the border to Turkey but up to 700 remain inside the town. Some good news came from a video yesterday showing fighting in the streets of Kobani, showing Kurdish fighters holding their ground and even catching attackers in an ambush, killing 36, of which all were foreigners.

The battle for the Syrian town has also sparked major protests in Turkey against its perceived inaction, with the media showing its tanks lined up on a border hilltop overlooking Kobani. But
Turkey faces a deadly dilemma. The Turks could be forced to take military action in a conflict they have been trying to avoid with Isis. The hesitation of President Tayyip Erdogan (photo right) is based on the fact that ISIS is holding 44 of its diplomats, taken at the Turkish consulate in Mosul many months ago, with the threat of being killed if Turkey enters the conflict.

As ISIS is pouring reinforcements into Kobani, there is a growing mismatch between the opposing sides while the Turkish government still refuses to allow a corridor between the border and Kobani to allow Kurdish volunteers from Turkey and Syria to join the fight, prompting the Kurds to accuse Ankara of siding with the Islamic State.  ISIS could force Turkey's hand, if it takes Kobani and threatens a religious shrine in a Turkish enclave there. (see photo left) This is the Tomb of Suleyman Shah, the grandfather of the founder of the Ottoman Empire. The territory surrounding the complex, about the size of two football fields, is physically located inside Syria but considered Turkish territory. Turkey has told ISIS that any attack on the tomb and the 60 elite special forces guarding it would
constitute an attack on Turkey. This move that could draw NATO into the fight to defend Turkey, a member of the 28-nation Western military alliance.

The underlying problem is that Ankara sees the Kurds as a greater danger than the Islamic militants. Turkey is also concerned about the gains the Kurds have made in the Syrian civil war.  For 30 years now, Turkey has battled a self-rule insurgency, mounted by the Stalinist Kurdistan Workers' Party, or PKK, and the Kurdish People's Protection Unit (YPG) which is an offshoot of the PKK. Turkey opposes actions that boost the strength of the Kurds, potentially giving the PKK additional leverage to push for autonomy in Turkey. There is now a faltering peace process with those 15 million-strong Kurds, but PKK activists said if Kobani falls, then the peace process will be finished. Turkey is sort of stuck between ''a-rock-and-a-hard-place.''

The fight for Kobani will test U.S. strategy that at a pussy President Obama's insistence has been limited to air strikes, depending on uncertain local allies on the ground to do the actual fighting. U.S. officials say they are angry that Turkey has refused to do more to avert a slaughter, largely because of its own bloody history with the Kurds. The second piece of the U.S. strategy involves training as many as 5,000 moderate Syrian rebels per year to fight ISIS on he ground. But that's a long term Bashar Assad than in combating ISIS.
Turkish Tanks Overlooking Kobani from Turkish Border
gambit with no guarantee of success, in part because many of the rebels are more interested in fighting their three year old civil war against Syrian strongman

ISIS has frustrated air strikes by abandoning key outposts - which would be easier to hit - and breaking into smaller units. The terrorists are also moving into civilian areas they know the coalition won't bomb - especially without intelligence from on-ground scouts. Obama has refused to dispatch such spotters as part of his ban on U.S. ground troops in the conflict. Former CIA Director General Michael Hayden stated that many of the targets in Syria hit by U.S. air strikes were ''easy targets'' and that obtaining good intelligence for choosing air strike targets is a major problem.

The Way I See It.....the U.S.-led game of ''whack-a-mole'' has been under way across much of Syria and Iraq since the end of September -- and so far the moles are winning. ISISs success helps explain why, last week, the U.S. began deploying AH-64 Apache helicopters against the militants. The low-and-slow gunship is better than a jet bomber for attacking moving targets. But helicopters are more vulnerable to ground fire than jet. ISIS recently shot down a pair of Iraqi choppers, killing all four pilots aboard. For a President who wants to defeat ISIS without ground forces, the options are
dwindling.

UPDATE:   A few hours ago Kurdish fighters took down the Black Flag of ISIS from a hill, Tell Shair, they captured overlooking Kobani. ISIS militants erected it at the beginning of their siege to intimidate the Kurdish defenders and it became the goal to retake the hill and kill as many of the Islamic filth the flag represented.

A History of Attempts to BAN the Burqa !

                           
Of course we should not ban the burqa or the niqab. We do believe in Freedom don't we? But it is because we do believe in Freedom that we should still feel free to criticize those shrouds of oppression. Australia's Prime Minister Tony Abbott last week weighed in, confessing he found the burqa ''a fairly confronting form of attire.''

In 2011, Senator Cory Bernardi called for the burqa to be banned in Australia, branding it ''un-Australian''.  Last week, he called on Tony Abbott this time to make the decision, now that there is renewed scrutiny on the Muslim community and its surreptitious support of the Islamic State. Unfortunately, even though many countries around the world have succeeded in banning the loath-some garment, the PM looks like he is reluctant to stir things up presently, so the debate about the burqa continues.



To put some perspective on the matter, it is important to know that the Quran has no requirement that women cover their faces with a veil, or cover their bodies with the full-body burqa or chador (also known as chadri in Central Asia).

The full chadri covers the wearers entire face and head except for a small region about the eyes, which is covered by a net or grille. Burqa is an Arabized Persian word of purda (or parda) meaning curtain and veil, which has the same meaning in Persian.

In other styles, like the niqab, the veil is attached by one side, and covers the face only below the eyes to be seen. The more simpler covering are the head scarfs hijab, shayla or al-amira. Many Muslims believe that the collected traditions of the life of Muhammad, or hadith, require both men and women to dress and behave modestly in public.

The Burqa/ Niqab Situation Around the World:

In Afghanistan:, it is officially not required under the present regime, but local deadshit warlords still enforce it in the southern regions. Chadri use in the remainder of the country is viable and is gradually declining. Due to political instability, women who might otherwise be inclined to wear the chadri must do so as a matter of personal safety.

In Pakistan:  the use of the burqa is primarily predominant in Pashtun territories along the border areas, especially in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas. However, in the remaining majority of the country, its use has greatly declined over time. However, the burqa observances remain localized and most women who observe burqa use within these areas, do not do so when they travel out of the area.

In India:  the burqa is common in many areas of the Muslim population -- old Delhi, for example. It seems the obligation of a woman to wear a burqa is dependent on her age: young, unmarried women or young, married women in their first years of marriage are required to wear the burqa. However, after this the husband usually decides if his wife should continue to wear it.

In Indonesia:  the term jilbab is used without exception to refer to the hijab. Under Indonesian National and Regional law female head-covering is entirely optional and not obligatory. The hijab is a fairly new phenomenon in Indonesia. The sole exception where the jilbab is mandatory is in Aceh Province, which was granted special autonomy and instigated Islamic Sharia based law.

In Malaysia:  Muslim women may choose whether or not to wear the headscharf, except it must be worn visiting a mosque. It is forbidden to wear the full-face niqab as the Supreme Court cites, ''it has nothing to do with a women's right to practice her Muslim religion because Islam does not make it obligatory to cover the face.''

In Bangladesh:  There are no laws the require women to cover their heads. In recent times there has been a rise in number of women wearing the hijab. The ruling secular government has increased there are reports of  harassment and repression against those who wear the hijab which is seen as a symbol of Islam. This goes against the vision the government has of creating a secular Bangladesh.

In Iran :  The Reza Shah banned the chador and all hijabs in 1936, as incompatible with his modernizing ambitions. During the reign of the last Shah traditional clothing was largely discarded by the wealthier urban upper-class women in favour of western clothing, although women in small towns continued to wear the chador. Niqabs and burqas are very uncommon in Iran, limited mostly in small Arab and Afghan communities in the south and east.

In Saudi Arabia:  The vast majority of traditional Saudi women are expected to cover their faces in public. The Saudi niqab usually leaves a long open slot for the eyes. Many Saudi women use a headscarf along with the niqab or another simple veil to cover all or most of the face when in public.

In Egypt:  Since 1926, the veil gradually disappeared. However, the veil has had a resurgence,
concomitant with the global revival of Muslim piety. Now about 90% of Egyptian women currently wear a head-scarf.  Small numbers wear the niqab but the secular government does not approve and there has been even some restrictions of wearing the hijab, which it views as a political symbol.

In Jordan:  There are no laws banning the headscarf in public. Veils covering the face as well as the chador are rare. The hijab is increasingly becoming more of a fashion statement than a religious one with Jordanian women wearing colourful, stylish scarves along with western style clothing.

In Lebanon:  The wearing of headscharves has become more common since the Israeli invasion in the 1980s. Observance of this custom ranges from no headscarf at all to just a regular hijab and/or a chador,

In Syria:  Syria's Minister for Higher Education, announced that the government would ban women from wearing the Burqa at universities and public buildings. Among the prohibited garments would be the niqab, but not the hijab or related garments that do not cover the entire face. He stated that the face veils ran counter to the secular and academic principles of Syria.

In Turkey:  Being officially a secular state, the burqa and hijab are banned in universities, libraries, government and public buildings in 1980. The law was strengthened more in 1997 but under the conservative party (AKP) there has been some unofficial relaxation in recent years. In cities like Istanbul and Ankara most women do not cover their heads. In 2008, the Constitutional Court reinstated the ban which was widely seen as a victory for the Turk's separation of state and religion.

In Morocco:  The burqa and the hijab are not encouraged by governmental institutions and are frowned upon by urban middle and higher classes, but as yet not forbidden by law. As it is not traditional, to wear one is considered rather a religious or political decision.

In Tunisia:  In 1981, women with headscharves were banned in schools and government buildings. Then in 2006, the authorities banned it public places. The government described the headscarf as a sectarian form of dress which came uninvited to the country. In January, 2011, after the revolution took place, the headscarf was authorized and the ban lifted.

In Europe:   Italy was the first, in 1975, by an anti-terrorism law, to pass a law forbidding women wearing any dress that hides the face. In France, since 2004, wearing the burqa was not allowed in public schools, being judged religious symbol like the Christian cross. This was followed in 2010 with the banning of burqas and niqabs in public areas. Also in 2010 the Belgium parliament passed a bill banning any clothing that would obscure the identity of the wearer in public. In 2012, in the Netherlands followed suit with the banning of the burqa and niqab as clothing that would hide the wearer's identity.. This would pertain to public transport, health care, education and government buildings.

The United Kingdom:  Is a separate case because a 2011 poll indicated that 68 per cent of British people supported banning the burqa and niqab in all public places. With 2,786, 685 Muslims living in the U.K. and making up 4.4 per cent of the population, there is a political spinelessness bordering on appeasement to this ethnic community. So, for now, if ever, a ban on burqas and face-covering clothes has been ruled out by the current Conservative-Liberal Democrat government and the pussys in he previous Labour government.


The Way I See It.....I agree with Sheikh Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, (photo right) perhaps the foremost spiritual authority in Sunni Islam and Grand sheikh of al-Azhar University, Sunni Islam's highest institution of religious learning, was reportedly ''angered''  when he toured a school in Cairo and saw a teenage girl wearing a niqab. Asking the girl to remove her face veil, he said, '' The niqab is a tradition; it has no connection with religion.''  He instructed the girl never to wear the niqab again and issued a fatwa (religious edict) against its use in schools.

As early as 1899, the Egyptian intellectual Qasim Amin published his landmark book, The Liberation of Women, which argued that the face veil was not commensurate with the tenents of Islam and called for its removal. In 1923, the feminist Hoda Hanim Shaarawi, who established the first feminist association that called for uncovering the face and hair, became the first Egyptian woman to remove her face veil (niqab).

There's enough precedent over the last century for banning the Burqa and Niqabs in Australia. As a secular country there should be no guilt feelings on the part of our government to ban any religiously motivated face-covering in public. As ex-president of France, Nicolas Sarkozy so aptly put it;  ''In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut of from all social life, deprived of all identity.''

Sunday, October 5, 2014

NO...They aren't Victims and the Left is Reckless to Feed that Confected Fury !


By Gerard Henderson
Gerard Henderson (photo right) is an Australian author, columnist and political commentator. He is the Executive Director of the Sydney Institute, a privately funded Australian current affairs forum.

There is something dangerous in the pandering of the Race Discrimination Commissioner, who indulges what he should reject:
 
On Tuesday, The Age published an opinion piece by Race Discrimination Commissioner Tim Soutphommasane that was essentially a fudge. He began by conceding that “all of us are rightly disturbed by the prospect of terrorist acts on Australian soil; counter-terror raids in Sydney and Brisbane, and the shooting of Muslim teenager Numan Haider in Melbourne, have highlighted community concern”.

Soutphommasane’s reference to the shooting of Haider by Victorian Police failed to mention the evidence that the deceased had wounded with a knife and attempted to murder two counter-terrorist policemen. The Race Discrimination Commissioner also declined to remind The Age readers that Haider’s family had migrated from Afghanistan to ­settle in Australia and that he obtained a good ­education, had a job and a car, and lived in a fine house. Haider was no victim.
Soutphommasane
Soutphommasane went on to argue that “Muslim Australians are entitled to a fair go”. This suggests that they do not get a fair go already. It’s another way of saying that Muslim Australians are victims. 
This led to writer Gabrielle Lord contacting the Australian Human Rights Commission to express her disappointment with the Race Discrimination Commissioner’s comments, which she interpreted as “largely a reprimand to the non-Muslims of Australia”.
Lord’s position is that “rather than chiding non-Muslims for their suspicions, fears (and on occasions bigotry), a Race Relations Commissioner would surely be better advised to address those Muslims in our community who bear a lethal hatred and contempt towards all of us non-Muslims and tell them this will not be tolerated”. 
Too many commentators on the Left have been reckless in feeding the absurd paranoia and victimology that is so marked in parts of Muslim Australia, and which feeds the dangerous notion that Australia is at war with Islam - and vice versa.

Note how Soutphommasane’s preferred narrative would only feed into that of, say, Tahmid Mirza:
Tahmid Mirza, 21-year-old Deakin University student by day.....jihadi by night, [is] one of the 10 most-followed jihadist propagandists among English-speaking foreign fighters… In April, King’s College’s International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence named his Twitter account in the top 10 “disseminators” of propaganda followed by English-speaking foreign fighters. The think tank said the ­account was followed by 48.6 per cent of the 190 foreign fighters it had studied online.
Mirza, taken in from Bangladesh and given a good education, security and access to taxpayer-support, nevertheless prefers to see himself as another victim:

''I am with all the sincere Mujahideen, whether from AQ (al-Qa’ida) or ISIS… We should not delay in establishing an Islamic State or applying the shariah whenever the Muslims have authority.... [Australians] don’t give me ‘security,’ why on earth have many Muslims been harassed, betrayed and in fact lied to by the government and the so-called ­‘security’ intelligence? I love the nature and the landscape (of Australia), that’s about it… You fear terror attacks back home? Your government should stop destroying other people’s homes then. It’s not rocket science now is it?'' 

These sort of threats from immigrants in our on country are opposite to what Australians have seen in previous war efforts. We were assured that immigrants from lands we're fighting in are loyal to their new country. But many Muslim spokesmen now don't assure us of the loyal of their followers but warn of - or threaten - the very opposite.

A month ago, when we woke up to news of another Islamic State beheading, this time Stephen Sotloff, that very day Muslim leaders again put out a statement condemning...Tony Abbott. This time, it was from the Australian National Imams Council. Again it blamed the West for jihadism: ''One of the main causative factors for local radicalisation in the West has been the western governments' military involvement in the Middle East.''  And there was this warning: ''If the Australian government is serious about reducing the terror threat locally, then it must review its foreign policy decisions with regard to this region.'' That sounds like an outrageous threat. Name one other ethnic or religious group here that warns Australia to change its foreign policies or face violence from its members. Western governments around the world could be pushed into an internment program for these so-called ''alien immigrants,'' even though it has been universally denounced in the past as human rights. 

The Way I See It......the more the Muslim community slowly reveals where it sympathies lie, the more Australians could start to compromise their Judeo-Christian goodwill, but above all, they will not tolerate its Left media and politicians pandering to Muslims sense of victimhood. If the Muslim community feels put upon, it is only through their collective posture of denial of their leaders that makes it so.  They must  speak out that modern civilisation can't tolerate the people following the violence and brutality that is expressed in the Qur'an. Islam is at a cross-roads, it's 7th Century ideology should be reformed now or thrown on the camel dung heap of history, there is no middle ground anymore.


Saturday, October 4, 2014

The Ugly Face of ''Moderate'' Muslims in Australia


by Larry Pickering (cartoonist, political commentator and satirist)   (http://pickeringpost.com)
Larry Pickering
 

The vast majority of Australians are confounded as to why their politicians are failing to apportion blame to the teachings of Islam. Well, there are two reasons why and both are fast wearing thin.
 
The first is an electoral one. Islam has been able to skew up to 20 Federal seats in Labor’s favour and Prime Minister Tony Abbott's Coalition is fearful of their success in more elections to come. 

Why is Bill Shorten’s Australian Labor Party (ALP) of preference for Islam?  That’s an easy one; lots of social benefits that’ll keep them happy, loyal voters with only a blind eye to watch them. 
 

Muslims are mostly unemployable, they pray five times a day, take Friday arvos off to listen to Mullahs promote our demise and have made an art-form of rorting welfare systems world-wide. This leaves them with plenty of time on their hands to plot their hosts’ destruction. 

I heard of a recent investigation by Centrelink, in Brisbane’s western suburbs, that was positively shocking but nicely resolved by snaring lawyers from the local office of Shine Lawyers that were holding meetings and giving legal advice to the local Muslim community on how to maximize their welfare benefits. Here is the modus operandi that these legal ‘’traitors’’ were instilling into our welcomed immigrants: 

First thing a Muslim immigrant does on arrival is call the local friendly Islamic doctor and got himself on a disability pension. His disability is usually no more an aversion to work. Then he needed to get his wives and nine kids here, family reunions are an Islamic gold mine. 

Now he needs to apply for housing somewhere near all the other Muslim families and this is where it gets interesting. The mother(s) of his kids apply to Child Welfare authorities complaining of not being able to care for the children and she needs assistance, but she has this terrific idea... “there’s  a lady up the road who
would make a wonderful carer, and guess what? She is my sister and she already knows the children.”  You can’t get better than that eh? 

So now, on paper at least, the sister up the road is bedevilled by 18 kids and needs to offload 9 of them so she complains to child welfare that she too can’t cope, “but there’s another lady up the road who would make a wonderful carer....”. Get the idea?  I mean the Government hands over $200 per child, per week, in this merry-go-round of welfare fraud and everyone’s happy. 

By the time this scam goes up and down just one western Sydney or Brisbane street there are financially secure Islamic families everywhere, and all on a total of at least $3,000 a week! Why wouldn’t Australia be their port of preference? 

But why aren’t they always caught defrauding the system? Well, that has a simple answer too. They swap their cars and swap their names... Muslims have multiple names to defraud authorities anyway. And if the authorities try to clamp down on the scam there’s always a friendly Islam sympathetic solicitor who will recommend some free legal aid. In the meantime nothing has changed in the street except the level of social benefits has skyrocketed. 

The Federal welfare budget on these thieves has now exploded at the expense of needy Aussies. 

The other reason politicians fail to blame Islam is that the last thing they want is to get mainstream Islam offside. They hope to get “moderate” Muslims to cooperate in catching “radical” Muslims. How naive. How bloody stupid! How damned dangerous! This infection of Political Correctness in our society has to STOP !  Stop this denial of reality. Let them know our Judeo-Christian heritage is not going to turn-the-other-cheek anymore and if you can’t be an honest, law-abiding citizen….as John Howard said, "Get Out!!'' 

The most radical of Muslims are their leaders. Muslims will never integrate….it’s in the Qur’an.  We can keep trying to ignore their ‘’jihad-by-stealth’’ until we get it overwhelmed or get misled by some “appeasement chatter” by the media and by then it’s too late. 

The Way Larry Sees It…..we can refuse to learn from the Islamic disasters in France, Belgium, the UK and the Netherlands, or we can do something about the scourge now. 

1.      Stop building mosques.

2.       Stop Islamic immigration.

3.       Ban insidious Sharia law.

4.       Stop the welfare rorts.

5.       Arrest those who incite violence.

6.       Stop the Halal certification extortion racket that finances their terrorist activities and,

7.       Stop the PC and 18C nonsense that exhibits our weakness and emboldens Islam’s worst. 

Australians in general are not rednecks but we are well and truly over it. We want our leaders to act like leaders before we see an ISIS, or IS flag hanging from Australian flagpoles and Aussie heads on fences.