History will not be kind to Barack Hussein Obama who aided and abetted regimes and jihad militias committing systematic genocide of non-Muslims in Muslim countries overthrown by Islamic supremacist revolutions.

Why isn't this on the front page of the New York Times?

Obama Accused of ‘Crimes Against Humanity’  By Raymond Ibrahim, CBN

According to Egyptian newspaper El Watan, a group of Egyptian lawyers has submitted a complaint charging U.S. president Barrack Hussein Obama with crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Court.

The complaint charges Obama of being an accessory to the Muslim Brotherhood, which incited widespread violence in Egypt both before and after the June 30 Revolution.

Along with Obama, the complaint reproduced by El Watan mentions several Brotherhood members by name, beginning with the leader of the organization Muhammad Badie, and other top ranking leaders such as Mohamed al-Beltagy, Essam al-Erian, and Safwat Hegazi, adding that “Obama cooperated, incited, and assisted the armed elements of the Muslim Brotherhood in the commission of crimes against humanity in the period from 3/7/2013-8/18/2013, in the Arab Republic of Egypt.”

According to the published text, the complaint begins by quoting Article 7/1 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court, titled “Crimes against humanity,” which is reproduced below:

Article 7

Crimes against humanity

1. For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:

(a) Murder;

(b) Extermination;

(c) Enslavement;

(d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population;

(e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;

(f) Torture;

(g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;

(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;

(i) Enforced disappearance of persons;

(j) The crime of apartheid;

(k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.

Next, the complaint shows how Muslim Brotherhood leadership violated some of the above definitions, for example, by torturing, mutilating, raping, and killing Egyptians in their “sit in” camps (first reported here,), with a highlight on the role the Brotherhood played in inciting violence and the killing of peaceful protesters around Itthadiya Palace back in December.

Above and beyond the accusations of crimes against humanity that the lawyer-drafted complaint cited by El Watan levels against the Brotherhood, one need only look to the fate of Egypt’s Christian minority, who were especially targeted by the Muslim Brotherhood—and thus, by extension, their supporter, Obama—to see numerous examples of nearly every aforementioned definition of crimes against humanity, as follows:

Religious Persecution and Apartheid (see h and j)

Right after Morsi was ousted, the Muslim Brotherhood, including its supreme leader, Muhammad Badie, and its spiritual leader, Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, as well as several of the other Brotherhood members mentioned in the complaint, publicly scapegoated the Christian minority for daring to support the popular June 30 Revolution (that is, for acting like equal citizens as opposed to cowed dhimmis as required by Islamic law). The aftermath of the atrocities committed against the Copts are well known (to those who do not exclusively rely on the so-called mainstream media), and include the torching, destroying, and plundering of at some 85 churches, some of which were ancient. Islam’s back flag was raised above some churches; anti-Christian graffiti littered the sides of other churches and Coptic homes.

Murder and Extermination (see a and b)

Among many others to be murdered in response to Brotherhood-incitement against the Copts, a ten-year-old girl was shot and killed while walking back from Bible class. In the Sinai, a young Coptic priest was shot dead in front of his church, while the body of another Copt was found mutilated and beheaded. Four other Christians were slaughtered by Muslims in Luxor province. Most recently, a church wedding was attacked, leaving, among others, two girls, aged eight and twelve, dead and riddled with bullets.

As for “extermination,” the Muslim Brotherhood and its supporters have long been threatening the Copts with annihilation if they ever opposed them. Back in December 2012, Safwat Hegazi (a leading Brotherhood member named in the complaint, publicly declared during a Brotherhood rally:

A message to the church of Egypt, from an Egyptian Muslim: I tell the church—by Allah, and again, by Allah—if you conspire and unite with the remnants [opposition] to bring Morsi down, that will be another matter [screams of "Allah Akbar!" followed by chants of "With our soul, with our blood, we give to you, O Islam!"]… [T]here are red lines—and our red line is the legitimacy of Dr. Muhammad Morsi. Whoever splashes water on it, we will splash blood on him” [followed by more wild shouts of "Allah Akbar!"]

Around the same time, and more to the point, Dr. Wagdi Ghoneim—another vocal Brotherhood agitator who earlier praised Allah for the death of the late Coptic Pope Shenouda cursing him to hell and damnation in a video he posted on YouTube—made another video telling Egypt’s Christians:

You are playing with fire in Egypt, I swear, the first people to be burned by the fire are you [Copts].” … The day Egyptians—and I don’t even mean the Muslim Brotherhood or Salafis, regular Egyptians—feel that you are against them, you will be wiped off the face of the earth. I’m warning you now: do not play with fire!… What do you think—that America will protect you? Let’s be very clear, America will not protect you. If so, it would have protected the Christians of Iraq when they were being butchered!

Ghoneim’s words have proven prophetic—an indicator that this Egyptian hatemongering sheikh, who was expelled under Hosni Mubarak, knows the conduct of America’s leadership better than most Americans. Along with Iraq’s and Egypt’s Christians, he could have mentioned the Christians of Syria as well, who are being decimated thanks to Obama’s support for al-Qaeda and other Islamic terrorists, AKA, “freedom fighters.”

Deportation, Extortion, Kidnapping, and General Abuse of Copts (see c, d, e, f, g, and i)

Since the Muslim Brotherhood publicly denounced the Copts, entire towns and villages have been emptied of Christians—for example, more than 100 Christian families from El Arish. After mentioning the mass destruction of churches during a recent conference, and speaking of a different incident, Dr. Sherif Doss, an Egyptian activist, said, “But worst of all, about 140 families were evicted from their own homes; and worse still is that, not only were they thrown out of their houses, but their shops and properties were robbed and destroyed… General Sisi has promised to rebuild the churches and this takes time to be done. But we can’t wait all that time for those people destitute and in the streets, with no place to live and nowhere to work…. These people are in a very bad condition. If you go and see these villages, you will be amazed—it is as if a nuclear bomb exploded there. People burned and plundered their homes without mercy.”

Similarly, Muslim Brotherhood supporters are extorting Copts, rationalized in the context of making them pay jizya—the money, or tribute, that conquered non-Muslims historically had to pay to their Islamic overlords “with willing submission and while feeling themselves subdued” to safeguard their existence, as indicated in Koran 9:29. For instance, the roughly 15,000 Christian Copts of Dalga village in south Minya province were recently forced to pay jizya. In some cases, those not able to pay were attacked, their wives and children beaten and/or kidnapped. As a result, some 40 Christian families had fled Dalga, joining the ever growing list of displaced Christians in the Middle East

Days before the June 30 Revolution, letters addressed to the Copts threatened them not to join the protests against Morsi, otherwise their “businesses, cars, homes, schools, and churches” might “catch fire”—which of course they all did. The message concluded by saying “If you are not worried about any of these, then worry about your children and your homes.”

Such threats, as mentioned, were hardly limited to anonymous letters. During a TV interview, Sheikh Essam Abdulamek, a then member of parliament’s Shura Council, warned Egypt’s Christians against participating in the June 30 Revolution against Morsi, threatening them by saying “Do not sacrifice your children” since “general Muslim opinion will not be silent about the ousting of the president [Morsi].”

And the children of Copts have certainly been targeted—both during and after Morsi’s tenure. Some, especially young girls, are regularly abducted, raped, and shamed into converting to Islam and “marrying” their rapists. Coptic boys have increasingly been abducted from the doorsteps of their churches and held for ransom. Recently, a 6-year-old Christian boy was murdered by his kidnapper— after the boy’s family paid the ransom. (Read more about the jihad on Egypt’s Christian children.)

------

In short, by simply focusing on the plight of Egypt’s Christians, almost every criterion of found under the category of “crimes against humanity”—including murder, extermination, deportation, torture, rape, disappearance, apartheid and religious persecution— are met.

Only one is necessary for the charge to stick.

As for the Obama administration’s support for the Brotherhood, if most Americans are clueless or indifferent about it, average Egyptians have long known and resented it—hence the many large placards and signs held during the June 30 Revolution calling on Obama to stop supporting terrorism and calling on Americans to wake up.

One need only follow the words and deeds of Anne Patterson, John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Hillary Clinton, et. al. to know that the U.S president is a firm supporter of the crimes-against-humanity-committing Muslim Brotherhood.

Of course, whatever the merits of El Watan’s report—here is another English-language article talking about apparently a different complaint of crimes against humanity leveled against Obama by Coptic activists—all these complaints seem futile, as the U.S. is not a signatory to the International Criminal Court.

However, all technicalities aside, the facts are clear: by any definition, the Muslim Brotherhood and its supporters have committed numerous crimes against humanity in Egypt, especially in the context of the Christian Copts; and by its ongoing support for the Brotherhood, the Obama administration is complicit. Remember this next time the Obama administration cites concerns about “human rights” violations as reason to involve the U.S. in war—as it recently tried to do in Syria, again, to support more Islamic terrorists who are committing even worse crimes against humanity.

 

     

• Email to a friend • Article Search • View comments •

The UN is worse than worthless, democracies and freedom loving nations allow dictators and sharia regimes to make a mockery of that which we civilized men hold most dear; human rights.

How can democracies and dictatorships co-exist in a world body successfully? They can't. Which is why the UN is such an abysmal failure. 

Comment on Saudi-Jordan Trade of UN Seats GENEVA, November 8, 2013 - UN Watch Organization

In reaction to news reports that Jordan's pull-out from next week's UN human rights council election (see below) was part of a deal that will see Jordan obtain the Security Council seat recently rejected by Saudi Arabia, UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer issued the following comment:

"It is appalling that seats on the world's top human rights body are being traded like merchandise, treated as trinkets by non-democracies. We are witnessing backroom deals of the most cynical kind, which show contempt for the official UN membership criteria requiring that candidates be elected on the basis of their record in promoting and protecting human rights."

(See full appeal below.)

___________

Top EU Lawmakers Urge Own Governments to Oppose China, Russia, Cuba, Saudi Arabia in UN Rights Council Election 

=strong>BREAKING DEVELOPMENT: JORDAN PULLS OUT, CREATING 'CLEAN SLATE' FOR CHINA, SAUDI ARABIA & VIETNAM

GENEVA, November 7, 2013 - TSee text below.

According to an exclusive report today by UN Watch, Jordan has pulled out of the race, which means that Asian group candidates China, Saudi Arabia and Vietnam no longer face any competition.

Today's open appeal, organized by the Geneva-based human rights group UN Watch, was sent today by an international coalition of 30 MPs and human rights activists to all EU governments, as well as to EU foreign affairs commissioner Catherine Ashton.

Signatories include European Parliament Vice-President Edward McMillan-Scott, Elmar Brok, Chair of the European Parliament Committee on Foreign Affairs, and former Belgian prime minister Guy Verhofstadt, who now heads the European Parliament's Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) party.

Other legislators joining the appeal include Baroness Deech of the British House of Lords, Baroness Ludford of the European Parliament, Canadian MP and former justice minister Irwin Cotler, and Emanuelis Zingeris, Lithuanian MP and head of the global Parliamentary Forum for Democracy.

Diplomats had predicted some difficulty for the Saudi bid, with UN delegates still upset over Riyadh's surprise rejection of its Security Council seat. Now with a closed slate, however, the Saudis are almost assured of winning a seat on the world body that holds primary responsibility over issues such as women's rights and religious freedom.

As part of the opposition campaign, UN Watch together with Human Rights Foundation organized a press conference this past Monday at UN headquarters in New York, where they presented a comprehensive report detailing why no less than 12 of 16 candidates fail to meet the UN's own basic criteria for membership on the human rights council.

 

UN Watch and Human Rights Foundation brought famous dissidents to testify at UN headquarters this past Monday, November 4th, before a gathering of diplomats, activists and journalists. Left to right: Chinese dissident Yang Jianli, Cuban dissident Rosa Maria Paya, Saudi dissident Ali Al-Ahmed, UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer, Chinese dissident Chen Guangcheng, HRF president Thor Halvorssen, and Russian dissident Masha Gessen.

The NGO event also featured passionate appeals from some of the world's most famous human rights dissidents, including blind activist Chen Guangcheng from China, Rosa Maria Paya of Cuba, Ali Al-Ahmed of Saudi Arabia, and Masha Gessen of Russia. (Click here for quotes from the event; and click here for the speech of Chinese dissident Yang Jianli.)

In anticipation of the Nov. 12 elections, UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer warns: "If the UN enables gross abusers to act as champions and global judges of human rights, it will be an insult to the political prisoners and other victims of those regimes. When the UN's highest human rights body becomes a case of the foxes guarding the henhouse, the world's victims suffer.

"China, Cuba, Russia, and Saudi Arabia systematically violate the human rights of their own citizens," said Neuer, "and they consistently vote the wrong way on UN initiatives to protect the human rights of others."

"For the UN to elect Saudi Arabia as a world judge on human rights would be like making a pyromaniac the fire chief," said Neuer.

 

     

• Email to a friend • Article Search • View comments •

It's not just Brits, but Muslims from all over Europe, North America, Africa are descending on Syria to wage jihad. But no worries, it's only a "rare few," just the "fringe," the  "loners"........ now click your red glitter shoes together and repeat after me: there is no global jihad, there is no global jihad. And if you wish hard enough *poof*

Hundreds of Britons fighting in Syria -- MI5 chief By The BBC, November 7, 2013:

The number of British Islamists who have gone to Syria to fight in the war there is in the "low hundreds", a senior UK intelligence official says.

Andrew Parker, head of domestic intelligence service MI5, told a parliamentary hearing the conflict was attracting al-Qaeda UK sympathisers.

Their interaction with militant groups abroad was a "very important strand of the threat" the UK faced, he said.

One in 10 foreign militants in Syria is believed to be from Europe.

Most of them come from Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and Libya. MI5 has previously said that up to 200 British fighters are in Syria.

Last month, BBC News learnt that a group of 20 young men from the UK were fighting against forces allied to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on the Turkish border.

According to the Centre for the Study of Radicalisation at King's College London, most British jihadists are in their 20s, university-educated and Muslims of British Pakistani origin.

Up to 20 people from Britain's Sudanese community and several ethnic Syrians from the UK have also gone to fight in Syria.

More than 100,000 people have been killed and about two million people have fled abroad since the uprising against Mr Assad began more than two years ago.

Syrian troops have retaken the rebel-held town of Sbeineh south of Damascus, state media and activists said on Thursday. The town was regarded as one of the most important rebel positions near the Syrian capital.

Elsewhere, international inspectors said they had verified one of Syria's two remaining chemical weapons production sites, using sealed camera footage to conclude that it had been dismantled and abandoned.

'Ease of travel'

"Syria has become a very attractive place for people to go for that reason - those who support or sympathise with the al-Qaeda ideological message," Mr Parker told the Intelligence and Security Committee in London.

"We've seen low hundreds of people from this country go to Syria for periods and come back - some large numbers are still there - and get involved in fighting.

"This is partly because of the proximity of Syria and the ease of travel there, but also because it is attractive as what they would see as a jihadi cause."

 

     

• Email to a friend • View comments •

"Anti-Muslim attitude" ..... in other words, defender of freedom.

French principal flees Qatar after claims of "anti-Muslim attitudes" Jihadwatch

He faced five years in prison for offending Islam. Note here again the absolute intolerance of dissent, the inability to deal with opposing points of view in any way other than to silence them forcibly. That same authoritarian impulse is present in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation's "Islamophobia" campaign, which seeks not to refute or debate the so-called "Islamophobes," or to demonstrate that what they say is false in any way, but simply to shut them down. The campaign to smear them as "hatemongers" and "bigots" goes hand-in-hand with this -- it doesn't prove them wrong, it just makes timid and ignorant people think they better run the other way rather than listen to them.

An update on this story. "French principal flees Qatar after claims of anti-Muslim attitudes," by Colin Randall for The National, November 7:

The principal of a French lycée in Qatar hurriedly left his job and the country in a deal struck by diplomats after being accused of having anti-Muslim attitudes and told he faced imprisonment.

Hafid Adnani, born in Algeria but not a practising Muslim, left Doha without his wife and daughters on the eve of the new school year in early September. They followed a month later.

As head of the Lycée Bonaparte, he had banned female pupils from wearing Muslim headwear and resisted pressure on foreign schools from Qatari authorities to introduce the teaching of Islam.

In each instance, he cited the law as it would apply in France, which requires that education be conducted on secular lines.

The case raises delicate questions about the extent to which France expects to enforce cherished secularist principles, based on its 1905 law separating of church and state, in institutions it runs in Muslim countries.

Mr Adnani appears to believe he was acting in accordance with his statutory duties, though French foreign ministry officials say such a school overseas commands no diplomatic status and is subject to local law.

The difficulties that led to his departure sit uneasily with determined efforts by Qatar and France to forge close links.

Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund owns the Paris Saint-Germain football club, having invested huge resources to re-establish it as a force in Europe. Among its other extensive business interests are luxury hotels in Paris and on the Côte d’Azur.

French media reports say Mr Adnani was advised by France’s ambassador to Doha, Jean-Christophe Peaucelle, to leave the country as soon as possible because his security could not be guaranteed.

According to one of the most detailed French reports, in the news magazine Le Nouvel Observateur, he had readily agreed to the Qataris authorities’ wish that Arab and Qatari history should be part of the curriculum but was adamant that a French school could not include religious instruction.

But the story of Mr Adnani’s sudden exit is blurred. Government officials in Paris insist it had nothing to do with France’s official policies on secular education but arose from a dispute with a colleague.

The principal himself has referred to the situation as “Kafka-esque and sad” in a rare public comment, having been urged by the French authorities to say nothing.

French reports list examples of disagreements caused by his stance on Muslim headwear.

In one instance, resolution seems to have been reached on friendly terms. A brother of Sheikh Tamim bin Khalifa Al Thani, the Emir of Qatar, reportedly asked whether his daughters could attend school in hijabs once they reached adolescence.

He is said to have accepted the head’s explanation of why this was not possible, indicating that he would transfer them to another school when the time came.

But when an Egyptian dentist was told his daughter could not remain in school wearing a headscarf, the matter went to court.

Taken before a Qatari judge, Mr Adnani was asked: “Are you a Muslim? Do you have something against Muslims?”

He was asked a similar question in a subsequent court appearance, a few days before he left Doha, when he was allegedly warned he faced five years in jail for offending Islam.

His response was that although he was of Kabyle origin, he was not religious and performed his professional duties as a representative of the French state. Mr Adnani, who left Algeria at 18, flatly denied being hostile to Islam.

Before his last court appearance, he was held briefly in a prison cell. He was released after the hearing and flew back to Paris in a “compromise” negotiated with Qatari officials by embassy staff....

 

 

     

• Email to a friend • Article Search • View comments •

Clinton disregarded the intel "because nobody believed that Osama bin Laden or the Taliban could carry out such an operation.” And now his wife, who stood by and listened as Americans were murdered on 911 in Benghazi, is Obama's heir apparent. I don't see how the free world can survive this treachery.

FITTON: Clinton White House ignored 9/11 warnings The Washington Times (thanks to Claude)

It took 11 years, but Judicial Watch recently received a response to a 2002 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request that revealed another major missed opportunity by the Clinton administration to prevent the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack, which is part of perhaps the most catastrophic failure in the history of U.S. intelligence.

The new document reads like a Robert Ludlum spy novel, replete with exotic locales and sinister plots. Its pages explode with intricate twists and international intrigue. The villains are palpably evil; their plans, pernicious and deadly. But the good guys seemed largely oblivious to their machinations.

The chilling details come from the Defense Intelligence Agency, which finally handed over an intelligence information report titled “Letters Detailing Osama bin Laden and Terrorists’ Plans to Hijack an Aircraft Flying Out of Frankfurt, Germany, in 2000.” The report is dated Sept. 27, 2001.

In early 2000, the documents informed America’s top intelligence analysts that al Qaeda had devised a sophisticated plan to hijack a commercial airliner departing Frankfurt International Airport between March and August 2000. The terrorist team was to consist of an Arab, a Pakistani and a Chechen, and their targets were U.S. Airlines, Lufthansa and Air France. The document pieces together an intricate plot directed by a 40-year-old Saudi, Sheik Dzabir, from a prominent family with ties to the House of Saud. It revealed that al Qaeda had actually penetrated the consular section of the German Embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan, relying on a contact referred to as “Mrs. Wagner” to provide European Union visas for use in forged Pakistani passports for the terrorists.

These revelations came from an unidentified source that provided U.S. authorities with copies of Arabic letters containing precise information about the al Qaeda plot. It was all laid out in minute detail.

So, how did the Clinton administration respond? In the incriminating words of the intelligence information report, advanced warning of the plot “was disregarded because nobody believed that Osama bin Laden or the Taliban could carry out such an operation.” Perhaps that explains why, for 13 years, the report was classified “secret” and hidden from public view until Judicial Watch forced its release in August of this year.

The report revealed that al Qaeda, the Taliban and Chechen Islamic militants all had substantial operating support bases in Hamburg and Frankfurt, Germany. It included the name, address and telephone numbers of an al Qaeda passport forger in Hamburg for the Taliban and other Afghan terrorists and their support personnel during January and February 2000. The report showed that the terrorists had established a secure, reliable transport route to Chechnya from Pakistan and Afghanistan through Iran, Turkey and Azerbaijan. It also revealed that in January 2000, bin Laden and Taliban officials held a two-day hijack planning meeting in Kabul, Afghanistan.

In short, nearly two full years before the horrific attack on the World Trade Center, the international Islamic terrorist cabal revealed its insidious hand for all the world to see. The details of names, addresses and other information from this report should have provided “actionable intelligence” for any number of U.S. anti-terrorist operations. Instead, every scintilla of the information “was disregarded because nobody believed that Osama bin Laden or the Taliban could carry out such an operation.”

This isn’t the first time the Clinton gang dropped the anti-terrorism ball. Judicial Watch previously obtained documents from the Department of State (“Terrorism/Osama bin Laden: Who’s Chasing Whom?” showing that as far back as 1996, the Clinton administration knew of and ignored bin Laden’s terrorist plans against the United States.

The New York Times, reporting on Judicial Watch’s find in 2005, noted: “State Department analysts warned the Clinton administration in July 1996 that Osama bin Laden’s move to Afghanistan would give him an even more dangerous haven as he sought to expand radical Islam “well beyond the Middle East,” but the government chose not to deter the move, newly declassified documents show.”

You can be sure the Clinton machine would prefer these revelations to go down the memory hole. But it is clear that both the failure to prevent the Sept. 11 attack and the Benghazi scandal can be added to the list of questions posed as that machine rolls on.

Tom Fitton is president of Judicial Watch.

 

     

• Email to a friend • Article Search • View comments •

Today world powers "accepted the framework" of proposals made by Iran in the Geneva talks. Devastating.  The march to a long and horrible war.

United with Israel:
We must share some tragic news regarding Iran.  Today, Iran's deputy foreign minister said that the P5+1 world powers, including the United States, have "accepted the framework" of proposals made by Iran in the Geneva talks.

The agreement would "slow down" elements of Iran's nuclear activity in return for the easing of sanctions on Iran.

Prime Minister Netanyahu said the Geneva proposals "would ease the pressure on Iran" in return for empty concessions that would still "allow Iran to retain the capabilities to make nuclear weapons". He called this a "mistake of historic proportions" which must be completely rejected.

We agree with Prime Minister Netanyahu that only a complete elimination of Iran's nuclear program is acceptable. Now is the time to keep the pressure on Iran by increasing the sanctions.

We URGE you to sign the petition to President Obama and world leaders to keep the pressure on Iran. Once you sign, it is critical to send it to everyone you know via email, facebook, twitter and any other means.

Click below to sign the petition. This is urgent and Israel needs your help now!
Sign here --> http://www.stopiran.org/

The international community must keep the pressure on Iran by imposing harsher sanctions and demanding that its nuclear program be completely dismantled. A nuclear Iran is a threat not only to Israel but to the entire free world.

     

• Email to a friend • View comments •

More of the radical transformation Obama promised. He backed these savages. He wanted to start a bomb campaign on their behalf. He backed off that one when he realized that no one was in front of him while he was "leading from behind."

"Al Qaeda begin to establish Islamist rule in Syria, with residents of a once liberal town now forced to follow the orders of jihadists" By Ted Thornhill, Daily Mail

• The 'Islamic State of Iraq and Syria' is torturing locals to impose their rule
• The extremist group has also banned women from seeing male doctors
• The town is being compared to Taliban-run communities in Afghanistan
• Even filming street scenes can result in arrest and torture

Al Qaeda begin to establish Islamist rule in Syria, with residents of a once liberal town now forced to follow the orders of jihadists The 'Islamic State of Iraq and Syria' is torturing locals to impose their rule The extremist group has also banned women from seeing male doctors The town is being compared to Taliban-run communities in Afghanistan Even filming street scenes can result in arrest and torture In the Syrian town of Raqqa, Bashar al-Assad’s hated regime has been replaced by something many regard as being even worse – an al-Qaeda-linked group that is torturing people for writing graffiti and abolishing women’s rights.

Raqqa used to be one of the most liberal towns in Syria, but chillingly, the extremist Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is using violence to impose their rule on the locals and stamp out the freedoms rebels fought for.

One man showed a TV news channel how he was left with horrific bruises and burns after jihadists beat him and tortured him with an electrical current for spraying graffiti.

This punishment for graffiti was also meted out by the Assad authorities ousted by the revolution, leaving many wondering what it's all been for.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2488380/Al-Qaeda-begin-establish-Islamist-rule-Syria.html#ixzz2k04ErvU2 Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

He told CNN: ‘Every 15 minutes, someone poured water on me, electrocuted me, kicked me, then walked out.’

 

Tortured: This man was beaten up and subjected to severe electric shocks for spraying graffiti

 

He went on to describe the anguish he suffered listening to others being tortured.

He added: ‘When a person is tortured in front of you, you feel responsible. That's the hardest. One guy still inside used to call me Dad as I taught him about democracy.’

Rebels who have voiced their opposition to ISIS have found themselves arrested and thrown in jail without trial.

The town’s women, meanwhile, have been ordered by ISIS via posters to ‘cover up their beauty’, according to CNN, and banned from seeing male doctors or even leaving home without a male relative.

One female activist drew comparisons between the once-liberal Raqqa and Taliban-ruled Afghanistan.

She told CNN: ‘They [ISIS] are closing hair salons, women can't go out at certain times. They spat on one girl for disobedience. It's like Afghanistan. Now people call Raqqa Tora Bora.’

The town’s freedom has been eroded to the extent that even filming can get you flogged. CNN obtained footage of the town from activists willing to risk their lives to show the world what is happening.

What's more, the group's activities have spread to surrounding areas. Posters warning that thieves will have their hands cut off have appeared in a nearby town.

Protests have taken place over the past few months and graffiti has appeared in Raqqa likening ISIS to the Assad regime and telling them to get out.

However, such is ISIS's iron grip that no one dares spray it or film it during the daytime.

ISIS is not about to be moved on and is strengthening its position by schooling young boys in the town in a radical approach to Islam.

Read the rest.

     

• Email to a friend • Article Search • View comments •

It's hard not to imagine Obama excitedly telling his Muslim Brotherhood team in the White House to bring the popcorn before he sat down to watch this video. Further proof of what I (and many of my colleagues) have warned of for years: the more you sanction this Islamic rogue regime, the hotter and faster the escalation.

These savages do not fear Obama. They laugh at this weak and reckless poser. Ever since he went on the charm offensive, the threats and their nuclear proliferation has increased exponentially. He rewards them for their brutality and disregard for international law. He sanctions their savagery.

This is the new era Obama is heralding in Iran; build your bomb shelters.

Where is Obama's condemnation of this inflammatory you tube video? Why isn't Obama going after this youtube video maker, as he did with the Muhammad video? Because he is on their side.

'Grand Day of Death to America' rally planned in Iran

Iranian TV airs animated strike on Tel Aviv, Dimona  by Haviv Rettig Gur, The Times of Israel, November 7, 2013

Iranian state television reportedly aired a computer-animated video that showed an imagined Iranian missile strike on Israeli cities including Tel Aviv and Dimona, malls and IDF bases.

The video was posted online by the pro-regime website Iran’s View, which said the four-minute clip was part of an “hour long documentary [that] includes a video simulation of Iranian respond [sic] to an airstrike by Israel against Iran’s nuclear facilities.”

The video glamorizes such a strike, showing computer-generated video of Iranian missiles being pointed upward against a backdrop of scenic skies and swelling musical accompaniment.

In the animated video, the missiles launch toward Israel, where some are destroyed by Israeli ground-based anti-missile systems reminiscent of the IDF’s Iron Dome, Arrow and David’s Sling batteries. But Israeli systems, depicted as a translucent dome over Israel, fail to stop all the missiles. The video then depicts the missile’s-eye view, zooming in on targets throughout the country using footage that appears to have been gleaned off online video-sharing and mapping sites.

The targets include a few military and governmental sites, including IDF Headquarters in Tel Aviv’s Kirya military base, at least one airbase, the Dimona nuclear installation in the Negev, and others. But it also includes civilian targets, such as a bank in Tel Aviv’s Rothschild Boulevard, the iconic Azrieli Mall and Ben Gurion International Airport.

According to Iran’s View, the full documentary was “about Iran’s missile capabilities in confronting external threats and responding to any strikes against its soil.”

“In March 21 [sic],” at a speech in honor of the Persian new year, “Iran’s supreme leader ayatollah [sic] Khamenei said his country will destroy Israel [sic] cities of Tel Aviv and Haifa if attacked,” the website noted.

     

• Email to a friend • Article Search • View comments •

Watching the media spin always amuses me. For example, the Muslim Brotherhood group Hamas-CAIR is described, without fail, as a Muslim advocacy group, despite the fact that they are the public face of jihadi groups whose agenda is, in the words of their director Ibrahim Hooper, that the “government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future."

AFDI is a human rights organization dedicated to freedom of speech, freedom of conscience and individual right. Freedom. The Boston Globe, of course, does not call us for comment.

Joe Pesaturo, spokesman for the MBTA, is lying again when he says that "T officials had reached out to the organization, asking them modify the advertisement to bring it into compliance with the T’s advertising." But it wouldn't matter. I am not changing our ad. A is A, said Aristotle. Truth is truth, said Pamela Geller.

Jihad is savage, whether it's against the Jews in their homeland or Christians in Egypt, Nigeria, Indonesia, Ethiopia, Iran, etc., or Hindus in Pakistan, Bangladesh and India, or the Bahais in Iran.  Truth is not demeaning.

Support our work. Contribute here.

 

Anti-Islamist group sues MBTA after subway ads deemed ‘demeaning’ By Matine Powers, The Boston Globe

An anti-Islamist advocacy group is suing the MBTA after the transit agency rejected a proposed subway advertisement on the grounds that it was “demeaning or disparaging.”

The ad, funded by the American Freedom Defense Initiative, a New York-based organization that seeks to combat a purported spread of Islamism in the United States, reads: “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel; defeat Jihad.”

MBTA officials rejected the ad Monday on the basis that it violated their advertising guidelines, and today said they would be willing to change their stance if the activist group modifies the ad.

But lawyers for the organization say they have received no overtures from the MBTA, and wouldn’t be willing to change the advertisement anyway.

The clash over the proposed subway poster comes on the heels of another controversial ad centered on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that prompted scrutiny from the MBTA. That advertisement, which first appeared on the T last month, depicts four maps that purport to show “the Palestinian loss of land” to Israel between 1946 and 2010. Text alongside the maps says: “4.7 million Palestinians are Classified by the UN as Refugees.” It was originally removed from the subway system when the T received a handful of complaints, but transportation officials later backpedaled on that decision, citing “a breakdown in our established procedures for handling complaints about specific ads.”

In response, the American Freedom Defense Initiative sought to put up 10 of their own ads in the same stations where the purportedly anti-Israel posters had appeared.

In a complaint filed Wednesday in US District Court, lawyers on behalf of the American Freedom Defense Initiative argued that the T applied its standards of appropriate advertising unequally betwen the two different ad campaigns.

In rejecting the American Freedom Defense Initiative’s advertisment, which riffs on statements made by the author Ayn Rand, the MBTA sought to censor the organization’s views, the complaint stated.

In contrast, the complaint continued, the decision to return last month’s purportedly anti-Israel advertisements to T stations “was motivated by a discriminatory animus against those speakers who support Israel in this conflict.”

Joe Pesaturo, spokesman for the MBTA, said T officials had reached out to the organization, asking them modify the advertisement to bring it into compliance with the T’s advertising guidelines.

“The MBTA is not opposed to groups expressing their points-of-view, but it must be done in a respectful manner that recognizes and appreciates the cultural diversity of a public transit environment,” Pesaturo said.

The T’s advertising guidelines prohibit posters that contain “material that demeans or disparages an individual or group of individuals.” They go on to say that an advertisement should be denied if it “contains material that ridicules or mocks, is abusive or hostile to, or debases the dignity or stature of, an individual or group of individuals.”

But Robert J. Muise, an attorney with the American Freedom Law Center, a public interest law firm representing the group, said the organization had not heard from T officials about modifying the ad, and have informed the T that they refuse to tweak the ad.

“Our clients have no interest whatsoever in changing the advertisement because there is no constitutional basis for the government to make such a demand,” Muise said.

The same advertisement ran on New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority system last year, after it sparked a heated court battle that was ultimately lost by the transit agency.

     

• Email to a friend • Article Search • View comments •

Silence is sanction.

Hillel proves yet again what an utterly worthless organization it has become in the face of growing hostility and flagrant antisemitism on college campuses. These Jewish groups say nothing in the face of annihilationists and calls for genocide, but freely criticize me for standing against it.

These sha (as in shhhhh, say nothing) Jews hide behind twisted rhetoric like this comment I just saw:

This may be part of therecent new strategy of the Israel advocacy folks in the US who argue that bringing attention to all of these offenses by arguing over each one is ineffective. They have instituted a new approach which discourages the point-counterpoint approach, but rather promotes a more positive educational goal.

This is cowardice. Fighting is ineffective?

Arging is ineffective, so they cede the field to the enemy. "Discouraging the point-counterpoint approach" is complete and utter defeat.

Hillel at York University says that fighting back has little effect on student opinion. They could not be more wrong. Responding to lies and setting the record straight is how you change public opinion. The more you sanction this vicious nazi-like propaganda, the worse it gets.

"Canada: Jewish Group Won't Take Action on Anti-Israel Mural" By Israel News, November 6, 2013 (thanks to Ury Weiss)

Hillel at York University decides not to take action against an anti-Israel mural, explains it has little effect on student opinion.

Hillel at York University in Toronto, Canada, has decided not to take action against an anti-Israel mural which hangs on the wall of the university’s student center, Shalom Toronto reports.

The mural, which was first exposed by Jonathan Dahoah Halevi on the Alternative Angle blog, appears to show a three-story Israeli structure over a mountainous agricultural area. Looking at the structure is a young, sturdy and muscular Palestinian Authority Arab, wearing a scarf around his neck on which “Palestinian territory” is drawn and holding two large rocks behind his back.

At the bottom of the mural are the words "justice" and “peace" in several languages.

The area of “Palestine”, as painted on the young man’s scarf, is all one color and makes no distinction between the borders of Judea, Samaria and Gaza and sovereign Israeli territory.

A similar picture of “Palestine” appears on the logos of PA-based terrorist organizations, notes Halevi, and it indicates what the Arabs define as the area of the historic State of Palestine - that is, all of Israel.

“The drawing also expresses the Palestinian demand for the liberation of all Palestinian territory, which means the State of Israel in its present borders from the ‘Israeli occupation’ by ‘restoring all Palestinian rights’ which, in Palestinian terminology, means the removal of millions of Jews from their homes for the purpose of resettling millions of Palestinians, most of whom live today in [Judea and Samaria], Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria,” wrote Halevi.

The two rocks that the Arab is holding in his hands symbolize what PA Arabs call the "peaceful resistance" to “Israeli occupation,” noted Halevi.

Throwing rocks at Israeli targets, both military and civilian, is not seen by the PA’s leadership and people as an expression of life-threatening violence, but as a legitimate means of expression.

Responding to the anti-Israel mural, Hillel at York University’s Director Tamara Caplan told Shalom Toronto that the group would not take action against it, as it believes the mural has had little impact on students’ opinion of Israel.

“We find it distasteful that a piece of art claiming to promote peace and justice depicts someone preparing to throw stones,” said Caplan.

“However, since the message is vague for the vast majority of students, we believe that it will have little impact on student opinion. This is confirmed by the fact that we have heard next to nothing about this mural from students. Hillel remains focused on proactive outreach that connects mainstream students to Israel in positive terms,” she added.

 

 

     

• Email to a friend • View comments •

Despite DoJ interference they failed to elect a Muslim Mayor in Hamtramck, Michigan.

On Monday, Deputy City Clerk August Gitschlag counted at least 170 people who streamed into Hamtramck’s City Hall, all informing his office they would not be in town on Election Day and needed absentee ballots.

The barrage of requests startled Gitschlag and his staff of one. Typically, when he worked during election seasons in Brownstown or Commerce Township, he would see no more than a handful of folks wanting to vote absentee the day before the election.

“This office gets like three of those kinds of requests” on Mondays, Gitschlag said.

Monday’s last-minute absentee ballot seekers all appeared to be of Arab or Bengali descent, Gitschlag said. (Detroit News)

The DoJ stepped in .... but failed to change the results of Hamtramck Mayor Karen Majewski's re-election win.

CBS enemedia did their part, propagating fears over "election bias."

The U.S. Justice Department says it will monitor Tuesday’s elections in Hamtramck and Detroit to protect  against discrimination “on the basis of race, color or membership in a minority language group.

The federal government announced the monitoring Monday. It didn’t cite specific reasons for the selection of these six communities for election day scrutiny.

It didn't have to cite "specific reasons" as they wage election jihad.

"Justice Department to monitor Detroit, Hamtramck elections" Detroit News (thanks to J Christian Adams)

Washington — The U.S. Justice Department said Monday it will monitor municipal elections Tuesday in Detroit and Hamtramck along with Orange County, N.Y., and Cuyahoga and Lorain counties in Ohio.

The department said monitoring is designed to ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination in the election process on the basis of race, color or membership in a minority language group.

During the 2012 elections, the federal government had about a half-dozen or so inspectors in Detroit monitoring polling stations and responding to complaints. The department will have a smaller presence for Tuesday’s election.

In Cuyahoga, Lorain and Orange Counties, the Department will assign federal observers from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management to monitor polling place activities based on court orders. The observers will watch and record activities during voting hours at polling locations in these jurisdictions and Civil Rights Division attorneys will coordinate the federal activities and maintain contact with local election officials.

In addition, Justice Department personnel will monitor polling place activities in Detroit and Hamtramck. Civil Rights Division attorneys will coordinate federal activities and maintain contact with local election officials. The department has previously monitored polling places in Hamtramck to ensure voters’ civil rights were upheld.

In 2000, Hamtramck agreed to revamp election procedures to ensure all voters were treated equally under an agreement reached with the Justice Department. The agreement resolved a government suit claiming violations of the Voting Rights Act aimed at Arab-American voters in the November 1999 election.

The agreement stems from an investigation that began after the Justice Department received complaints from Arab American voters in Hamtramck that their citizenship had been challenged by private citizens during the November 1999 general election. “As a result of those challenges, Arab American voters and other dark-skinned voters, such as Bengali-Americans, were required by pollworkers to take a citizenship oath prior to being permitted to vote. This requirement was not imposed on white voters,” the Justice Department said.

Each year, the department deploys federal observers to monitor elections across the country. To file complaints about discriminatory voting practices, including acts of harassment or intimidation, voters may call the Voting Section of the department’s Civil Rights Division at 1-800-253-3931.

     

• Email to a friend • Article Search • View comments •

More of the poison fruit of Post-American President Obama's pro-jihad foreign policy. Obama's sanction of Iran's nuclear weapons program has set off a nuclear arms race in the most unstable part of the world, driven by jihad and Islamic supremacism.

Saudi nuclear weapons 'on order' from Pakistan By The BBC, November 7, 2013 (thanks to Christian)

Saudi Arabia has invested in Pakistani nuclear weapons projects, and believes it could obtain atomic bombs at will, a variety of sources have told BBC Newsnight.

While the kingdom's quest has often been set in the context of countering Iran's atomic programme, it is now possible that the Saudis might be able to deploy such devices more quickly than the Islamic republic.

Earlier this year, a senior Nato decision maker told me that he had seen intelligence reporting that nuclear weapons made in Pakistan on behalf of Saudi Arabia are now sitting ready for delivery.

Last month Amos Yadlin, a former head of Israeli military intelligence, told a conference in Sweden that if Iran got the bomb, "the Saudis will not wait one month. They already paid for the bomb, they will go to Pakistan and bring what they need to bring."

Since 2009, when King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia warned visiting US special envoy to the Middle East Dennis Ross that if Iran crossed the threshold, "we will get nuclear weapons", the kingdom has sent the Americans numerous signals of its intentions.

Gary Samore, until March 2013 President Barack Obama's counter-proliferation adviser, has told Newsnight:

"I do think that the Saudis believe that they have some understanding with Pakistan that, in extremis, they would have claim to acquire nuclear weapons from Pakistan."

The story of Saudi Arabia's project - including the acquisition of missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads over long ranges - goes back decades.

In the late 1980s they secretly bought dozens of CSS-2 ballistic missiles from China.

These rockets, considered by many experts too inaccurate for use as conventional weapons, were deployed 20 years ago.

This summer experts at defence publishers Jane's reported the completion of a new Saudi CSS-2 base with missile launch rails aligned with Israel and Iran.

It has also been clear for many years that Saudi Arabia has given generous financial assistance to Pakistan's defence sector, including, western experts allege, to its missile and nuclear labs.

Visits by the then Saudi defence minister Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz al Saud to the Pakistani nuclear research centre in 1999 and 2002 underlined the closeness of the defence relationship.

 

     

• Email to a friend • Article Search • View comments •

What a great idea. Even better, Muslim groups like CAIR that support terrorist groups like Hamas ought to be forced to pay for the jihad they incite, and mosques tied to terrorists (like the Boston bomber's mosque -- The Islamic Society of Boston) ought to have to pay for damages as well. 

Russia's New Law: Relatives of Terrorists Pay The Bill For The Damages  

Russian parliament passes tough new anti-terror bill Counter Jihad Report 

Washington Post, by Associated Press, October 25

MOSCOW — Russian parliament’s lower house on Friday approved new legislation that toughens punishment for terrorism and requires terrorists’ relatives to pay for the damages caused in attacks.The document comes as Russia is preparing to host the Winter Olympics in Sochi in February amid concerns about security threats posed by an Islamic insurgency that has raged across the North Caucasus region.

The bill, quickly passed by the State Duma in a unanimous vote, is expected to see a similarly swift approval in the upper house and be signed by President Vladimir Putin to become law.The document says that training for terrorist activities, something which isn’t spelled out in the current law, is punishable by up to 10 years in prison. At the same time, it envisages that those involved in such training would be absolved of any punishment if they report it to the authorities.

For the first time, the new bill makes relatives of a terrorist responsible for paying damages resulting from an attack.

“We think that it’s a very important form of preventive measures and action against terror, because the terrorist would know that it would not be just him held responsible, including financial responsibility, but his relatives too,” said Nikolai Kovalyov, a lawmaker who was one-time chief of the main KGB successor agency, the Federal Security Service.

Tanya Lokshina, Russia program director at Human Rights Watch, criticized the new legislation, saying that making terrorists relatives liable for damages amounts to the introduction of collective responsibility.

“International law prohibits collective responsibility,” Lokshina told The Associated Press. “There is also no collective responsibility in the Russian law.”

 

 

     

• Email to a friend • Article Search • View comments •

A yellow star on Israeli food? What next -- arm bands with yellow stars?

Our friends at Irish4Israel are going out and buying dates and donating them to community groups. Their motto is "if BDS wishes to target a product,we will BUY it." More here and here.

Barry of Irish4Israel wrote me, "Ireland might be viewed as the most anti Israel country in Europe but we are a growing support group for Israel and we wont let BDS win."

Ireland: Israeli products marked with yellow sticker

A pro-Israeli activist residing in Dublin, Ireland, was shocked this week when he discovered that a Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) organization had taped yellow stickers on Israeli products reading "For justice in Palestine, Boycott Israel".

Sources in the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem said that the phenomenon is severe and it is not by chance that the BDS organization chose to express its protest with a yellow sticker – which is reminiscent of dark days of racism and incitement.

Ireland: Israeli products marked with yellow sticker by ivarfjeld

BDS movement places yellow stickers on Israeli products reading 'For justice in Palestine – Boycott Israel'. ‬‬
‪‪

Antisemitism repeats it self in Ireland and Europe.

Israeli Foreign Ministry : Yellow sticker – reminiscent of dark days of racism, incitement‬‬.

A pro-Israeli activist residing in Dublin, Ireland, was shocked this week when he discovered that a Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) organization had taped yellow stickers on Israeli products reading "For justice in Palestine, Boycott Israel".

 

The Nazis forced the Jews to wear yellow badges on their jackets.

This mark was a trap for all Jews, made by the Nazis.

Among the many items found carrying the yellow boycott sticker was a pack of dates from the Jordan Valley. One of the stickers read: "Organic dates – produce of West Bank; Israeli Settlement Produce."

Source: Ynetnews.com

My comment:

The Nazis wanted to boycott everything Jewish. It was the start of massive persecution of Jews in Germany.  The Jews lost their rights as citizens of Germany, and had to wear yellow badges. This was done to single them out in the society, and make it easy to collect them and send them to the gas chambers.

Islam has a similar view on Jews. The Koran teach all Muslims, that the Jews are the descendants of apes and pigs.  Hitler called them lower beings, or "under munch".  Still the Jews have gifted the World with almost 20 per cent the Nobel price winners. The people living under the despotic curse of Islam, has hardly gifted the world any innovations.

Do not act like the Nazis, and do not support the wickedness of Islam.

Stand up for Israel. Buy Jewish products, and support the state of Israel.

     

• Email to a friend • Article Search • View comments •

Aisha, Muhammad's favorite wife was six when he married her. Muslims are urged to follow Muhammad, "the perfect model." Until this unspeakable act is rightly denounced roundly by the Muslim world, child marriage is not going away anytime soon in Muslim countries.

Human rights: ‘Average marriage age for girls 13 in some rural areas’ By The Express Tribune, November 5, 2013 (thanks to The Religion of Peace)

LAHORE: Sixteen civil society organisations formally launched the Alliance against Child Marriages (AACM) Punjab on Tuesday to try and bring up the average age of marriage for girls, which is as low as 13 in some rural areas.

Almost half of Pakistani women are married by the age of 19 and half have delivered their first child by the age of 21, according to various studies conducted by women’s rights group Shirkat Gah, its communications director Fauzia Waqar said at the launch.

Waqar said that child marriages were a violation of basic human rights and the law. She said: “Our Constitution terms marriage as a legal contract between two adults. How can there be a marriage when an individual doesn’t even qualify to be an adult?”

The average age of marriage and first delivery, as well as the mortality rate, are much worse in rural areas, said Waqar. Early marriages often resulted in serious health risks for the girl. “These girls are not physically strong enough or mature enough to undergo a physical relationship and bear a child,” she said.

One study calculated that the average age of marriage for girls in Matiari and Jacobabad was 13. “These are children deprived of their right to a childhood,” she said.

Democratic Commission for Human Development Executive Director Tanveer Jehan said there was complete legal confusion regarding what age defined a child. According to the Convention on the Rights of the Child a child is an individual under the age of 18.

Jehan said while Pakistan had ratified the convention in 1990, there was no law protecting a child under the age of 18 from marriage. Article 25-A of the Constitution gave a child up to the age of 16 the right to an education, but children aged 16-18 were left out, she said.

Social Welfare Department Director General Malik Mohammad Aslam said that clerics who preside over nikah ceremonies had a responsibility to ensure that the bride and the groom were adults who knew what they were getting into. “How can a child decide on a matter so serious as marriage when he or she hasn’t even reached the age of maturity?” he asked.

Aslam said it the department had a mandate to provide social protection services to marginalised and vulnerable segments of society and these included children. He said that a technical working group was being set up to provide specific assistance in this regard.

Neelam Hussain, founding member of Simorgh Women’s Resource and Publications, said society at large was not bothered about underage marriage and Pakistanis generally lacked community spirit. “No matter how grave an issue, we as a society just can’t be bothered to take any steps unless we are directly affected by the issue,” she said.

Hussain said that child marriages were unacceptable. They deprived a child of the right to live and enjoy his or her formative years. “What is the difference between the rape of a seven-year-old and the marriage of a seven-year-old? The latter involves marital rape,” she said.

Hussain said that in her research she had found that individuals involved in child marriages were often involved in extra-marital affairs. “There is a growing incidence of such affairs because these people …. subjected to rape, violence and child bearing have become devoid of any emotional attachment with their partners,” she said.

Minister for Population Welfare Zakia Shahnawaz said child marriages could be brought to an end through education, particularly in rural areas. “Once educated, these children are more knowledgeable and aware of their rights,” she said.

 

     

• Email to a friend • View comments •

What real American leadership looks like and sounds like.

"US pressure and demands on Israel to make concessions must stop" By Michele Bachmann, The Jerusalem Post, November 4, 2013

The Obama administration has not called out the long, uninterrupted record of PA intransigence and extremism. It has, however, leaned heavily on Israel to make concessions.

President Barack Obama said that “Israel’s security as a Jewish and democratic state depends upon the realization of a Palestinian state.” He even inferred it had equivalent priority, while saying that “the United States will never compromise our commitment to Israel’s security.”

Yet, only some weeks earlier, the administration, contrary to public assurances that it supported Israeli-Palestinian peace talks without preconditions, pressured Israel to free jailed Palestinian terrorists to bring the Palestinian Authority to the negotiating table. This pressure is symptomatic of a larger, fundamentally flawed approach that has failed the cause of peace.

The administration rightly expressed concern that among the terrorists released by Israel was Al Haj Othman Amar Mustafa, who in 1989 murdered an American and former marine, Steven Frederick Rosenfeld. However, this begs the question why the administration has pressured Israel to free any terrorists at all.

If it is unwise and unjust to free someone who murdered an American citizen, it is equally unwise and unjust to free someone who murdered non-American citizens.

Indeed, why do we accept PA demands to free people who have committed the war crime of targeting civilians? And why are we pressuring Israel at all? We have frequently pressured Israel to concede, including things it never agreed to in signed agreements, while ignoring the Palestinians’ refusal to fulfill the vital concessions and reforms – arresting terrorists, outlawing terrorist groups, confiscating illegal weaponry, ending incitement to hatred and violence against Jews and Israel – they solemnly undertook in the 1993 Oslo and other signed agreements.

It is not Israel that has declared war on its Arab neighbors since its inception in 1948. It it is the neighboring Arab states which invaded Israel the day it declared independence.

It is not Israel that refused peace talks following the first Arab-Israeli war, it was its Arab neighbors.

It is not Israel that refuses concessions. Under the 1979 Israeli/Egyptian peace treaty, it uprooted 4,000 Israelis and returned all of Sinai to Egypt, including the airfields it had built and the oil fields it had developed.

We can’t recall any other country that ever gave back territory won in self-defense, especially containing a reliable source of oil.

Indeed, since the commencement of the Oslo peace process in 1993, Israel has made far-reaching, sometimes irreversible, concessions. In contrast, the Fatah party of Mahmoud Abbas, which controls the PA, has never even rescinded the 10 articles of its Constitution which call for Israel’s destruction and terrorism against Israel.

This has been the pattern since Oslo: Israel undertakes to withdraw from territory or hand over assets and authority – and does so; the PA undertakes to accept Israel, dismantle terrorist groups and prepare its public for peace – and does not do so.

Under successive agreements – the May 1994 Gaza-Jericho agreement; the September 1995 Oslo II agreement; the January 1997 Hebron agreement; the October 1998 Wye River Memorandum and the September 1999 Sharm el-Sheikh agreement – Israel withdraw from over 40 percent of the West Bank and nearly 90% of Gaza.

In the negotiations of 2000-2001, Israel agreed to the Clinton peace plan for Palestinian statehood in Gaza and over 90% of the West Bank, something not promised or undertaken in any previous agreement.

It agreed to uprooting many Jewish communities in the West Bank and the division of its holiest city and capital, Jerusalem.

And it agreed to cede the Jordan Valley, a strategically vital buffer zone protecting Israel’s narrow waist to the east – a massive security risk and unprecedented concession which Yitzhak Rabin himself had explicitly ruled out just before his death.

Yet, the PA did not accept the plan and instead launched a terror wave which claimed the lives of over 1,500 Israelis during the succeeding five years.

Israel still didn’t stop trying. In 2005, it unilaterally withdrew from the remainder of Gaza and four communities in the West Bank, uprooting over 10,000 Jews from their homes and thriving communities. In return, it received exponentially increased rocket attacks from Gaza – over 8,000 since the withdrawal – the results of which President Obama personally saw when he visited Sderot near the Gaza border in 2008.

In 2008, Israel made a further peace offer to Abbas: a Palestinian state in Gaza and on 94% of the West Bank, land swaps of adjacent Israeli territory to offset what Israel retained, and a capital in eastern Jerusalem.

Again, the PA neither agreed to this plan, nor made a counter-proposal of its own.

Palestinian refusal to accept statehood in 1937, 1947, 2000 and again in 2008 suggests that destroying Israel, not building a Palestine, is the Palestinian goal. After all, the terrorist groups’ hate education, glorification of suicide bombers and obscenely anti-Semitic mosque speeches by PA-salaried preachers continue to find a home in the PA.

The Obama administration has not called out this long, uninterrupted record of PA intransigence and extremism. It has, however, leaned heavily on Israel to make concessions.

This is wrong. This is counter-productive. This harms peace prospects. This does not serve American interests.

This is not America at its best. Above all, it is not the America that has declared under successive presidents, including President Obama, that it will stand by Israel when faced with threats, violence, extremism and non-acceptance. Israel faces all these right now.

The time has come for the United States to cease pressuring Israel into unmerited, dangerous, one-sided concessions. The Obama administration must demand Palestinian compliance with all obligations committed to under the signed Oslo agreements, and make future diplomatic and financial support for the PA conditional on their verifiable fulfillment.

We need – right now – a historic change in what has been a fundamentally flawed peace process. A change that would send a crystal clear message to the international community that no longer will the United States serve as a cudgel to beat and pressure Israel.


Timeline of Jewish & Israeli Concessions & Foreign Demands Since the 1917 Balfour Declaration


1920:
Arab attacks on peaceful Jewish settlements in northern part of British-controlled Palestine kill seven Jews. The British military administration urges the disbanding of the Zionist commission, created to assist the British authorities in giving effect to the Balfour Declaration promising the upbuilding of a Jewish national home in Palestine. The British military administration is replaced by a League of Nations Mandate.

1921:
Anti-Jewish riots in Jaffa, orchestrated by the British-installed Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el Husseini, claims the lives of 43 Jews. The British temporarily suspend Jewish immigration.

1922:
Britain removes all of Palestine east of the Jordan (78% of Palestine) from the territory of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine and transfers power to Emir Abdullah, who establish the Emirate (later kingdom) of Transjordan.

1929:
A campaign of false rumor and propaganda, orchestrated by the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el-Husseini, alleges that Jews have demonstrated at the Western Wall to curse Mohammed, that mosques have been attacked by Jews and that others will soon be attacked. A massive anti-Jewish pogrom convulses Palestine in which 133 Jews are murdered by Arab mobs. The British suppress the assaults, killing 110 Palestinian Arabs. The British Shaw Commission ignores evidence of the Mufti’s orchestration of the violence and recommends reducing Jewish immigration, thus blaming Jews for the murderous violence against them.

1937:
The Peel Royal Commission, investigating the Arab Revolt (1936-9) recommends the creation of a Jewish state in 20% of the British Mandate, with 80% of the Mandate to be placed under Arab control by incorporation into Transjordan. The Arab world rejects this and the Arab Revolt continues.

1939:
The British Chamberlain government calls the St. James Conference to be attended by the Zionist and Palestinian Arab leadership and that of neighboring Arab states. The Arab parties refuse to sit in the some room with the Zionist representatives and no solution is reached. The British impose a White Paper, restricting Jewish immigration to 15,000 per year for the period 1939-1944, with further Jewish immigration beyond that date conditional on Arab approval, which constitutes a breach of the League of Nations Mandate.

1947:
The United Nations proposes partitioning the British Mandate (the remaining 22% of Palestine) into Arab and Jewish states (78% having already been given to Transjordan). The plan is accepted by the Zionist movement but rejected by all Arab parties. Jewish communities in many Arab countries across the Middle East are attacked, hundreds being murdered. Arab militias and terrorist groups infiltrate Palestine and attack Jews. In May 1948, following the departure of the British administration, five Arab armies invade Palestine to destroy the fledgling of Israel. Six thousand Jews – one percent of the Israeli population – are killed in the ensuing war.

1949:
The Arab belligerents (other than Iraq) sign armistice agreements with Israel. All refuse to recognize Israel or negotiate a solution to the Palestinian Arab refugee problem created by the first Arab/Israeli war launched by the Arab states. The Arab war on Israel creates 700,000 Palestinian Arab refugees, most of whom are confined to Palestinian refugee camps in neighboring Arab states, only 50,000 of whom remain alive today, rather than resettled, as has been the solution to all other refugee problems. (The oft-heard figure of 4 or 5 million Palestinian refugees today includes, contrary to to all other refugee cases, not only the actual refugees themselves, but generations of their off-spring). The United Nations General Assembly passes Resolution 194, calling for the return of Palestinian Arab refugees within the context of an Arab/Israeli peace. All Arab states oppose the resolution and oppose peace with Israel.

1947–1950:
The majority of the 800,000 Jews in Arab lands are expelled or flee violence and persecution, most finding refuge in Israel.

1956:
Israel captures Sinai after a lightning campaign, following hundreds of assaults by Arab terrorists on Israeli towns and farms in southern Israel over seven years that claim the lives of 465 Israelis (28 in 1956 alone). The U.S. threatens to impose sanctions on Israeli if it fails to withdraw from Sinai.

1957:
Israel withdraws from all of Sinai, the Sinai is demilitarized and a the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) is stationed there it supervise the peace. The US guarantees Israel’s freedom of passage in the Straits of Tiran, thus guaranteeing Israel’s southern port, Eilat, against future Egypt blockade.

1967:
Egypt demands and UN complies in withdrawing UNEF from the demilitarized Sinai and moves in infantry and armored forces. Arab leaders call publicly for the destruction of Israel. Israel launches a pre-emptive strike when foreign powers fail to compel Sinai’s demilitarization and the rescission of the Egyptian blockade, conquering the West Bank (following Jordanian attack), the Golan Heights, Gaza and Sinai. Israel offers Sinai and most of the territories in peace proposals. The Arab states refuse, deciding at the Khartoum Conference on a policy of no negotiations, no recognition and no peace with Israel.

1973:
Egyptian and Syrian forces launch a surprise attack upon Israel on Yom Kippur. Israel turns the tide with a U.S. re-supply of weaponry but agrees to a ceasefire before reaching either Cairo or Damascus.

1979:
Egypt and Israel sign a peace treaty under which Israel returns the entire Sinai to Egypt, dismantles its communities and uproots 5,000 Jews, hands over its military airbases and Israeli-developed oil fields in return for Egyptian recognition, diplomatic and trade relations. Egypt maintains the peace but actively discourages Egyptian reconciliation with Israel and Egyptian professional bodies ban and impose penalties for contacts with Israel.

1993:
Israel and the PLO sign the Oslo accords and negotiate the establishment of a Palestinian Authority (PA). The Palestinians agree to recognize Israel, renounce terrorism, outlaw terrorist groups, confiscate illegal weaponry and end incitement against Israel and Jews.

1994:
Israel and the PLO sign the Gaza-Jericho Agreement, under which Israel agrees to withdraw its forces and administration from Jericho and most of Gaza. The Palestinians in turn undertake to recognize Israel and renounce the use of terrorism against it. Israel withdraws from Jericho and parts of Gaza and permits the creation of the PA; the Palestinians do not accept Israel or stop terrorism.

1995:
Israel and the PA sign the Oslo II Agreement, under which Israel undertakes to transfer further territories to PA control, including major Palestinian population centers. The PA undertakes, again, to end incitement and hostile propaganda against Israel and to prepare its public for peace, including through its educational system. Israel carries out all its promised withdrawals; the PA continues to connive in terrorism against Israelis and radicalize the Palestinian public.

1997:
Israel and the PA sign the Hebron agreement, under which Israel undertakes to relinquish control over most of Hebron and does so. The PA again undertakes to arrest terrorists, fight terrorism and educate the Palestinian public for peace, but does not.

1998:
Israel and the PA sign the Wye River Memorandum, under which Israel undertakes to withdraw from further territory in two phases; the PA undertakes, yet again, to take all necessary measures to fight terrorism, to confiscate illegal weaponry and to end incitement to hatred and murder against Israel. Israel fulfills its commitment by withdrawing from 13% of the West Bank in the first phase but refuses to go further when the PA does not carry out its commitments.

1999:
Israel and the PA sign the Sharm el-Sheikh Agreement, under which Israel undertakes to make further withdrawals from 11% of the West Bank in fulfillment of its remaining territorial commitment under the Wye River Memorandum, and to free 350 Palestinian prisoners. The PA undertakes again to act swiftly and decisively against terrorists. Israel fulfills its commitments to withdraw and release terrorists; the PA does not fulfill its commitments.

2000 – 2001
In the Camp David negotiations and the the subsequent negotiations leading to the Clinton Parameters, Israel agrees to Palestinian statehood in all of Gaza, over 90% of the West Bank, the uprooting of many Jewish communities in the West Bank, the ceding of the strategically vital Jordan Valley and the division of Jerusalem. The PA does not agree to this plan, makes no counter-proposal and launches a terrorist war against Israel which claims over 1,000 Israeli lives in the succeeding five years.

2003
The Roadmap peace plan does not call for new terrorism-free Palestinian leadership but calls for Israeli withdrawals from the areas it had re-entered since October 2000. It demands this Israeli withdrawal ahead of, not in response to, Palestinian action to end terrorism and acceptance of Israel’s right to exist. It also demands that Israel freeze Jewish construction in the West Bank –– something that had never been a feature of any of the signed Oslo agreements. Israel accepts subject to 14 reservations.

2005:
Israeli withdraws unilaterally from northern Samaria and Gaza, from which it is sustains over 8,000 rocket attacks.

2008:
Israel makes a further peace offer to to the PA, encompassing a Palestinian state on 94% of the West Bank, with land swaps of adjacent Israeli territory to offset what Israel retains, and all of Gaza with a capital in eastern Jerusalem. The PA does not accept the offer and makes no counter offer.

 

     

• Email to a friend • Article Search • View comments •

     

• Email to a friend • Article Search • View comments •