Hamas Bragging - Subtitled

Ummmmm -

Nice, huh? See what Israel has to deal with? These people have NO care for anyone, their own people least of all. This is what WE deal with as well in fighting terrorists in Afghanistan, Iraq, and where ever ELSE.

I don't see ANY other group putting their old people and little kids on the front lines - just the Muslims ...

Was that racist? Oh, sorry, just pointing out the obvious .....

Hamas Legalizes Crucifixion for Christians

"Well, while disgusting, this should NOT be surprising .... Islam in Palestine has a history of disgusting. Wonder if they will be having their children drive the nails just like they put bombs on them, then send them out to blow themselves up? This should be a real heads up to people - Hamas has been targeting Israel for the last 8 years solely because of their faith. Why anyone should be upset with Israel for finally defending themselves is beyond me. G'd Bless Israel, I hope they put a stop to all this very soon."

The original story can be seen at:
.. --> attribution -->The Jewish World Review

Both Iran and its Hamas proxy in Gaza have been busy this Christmas week showing Christendom just what they think of it. But no one seemed to have noticed.

On Tuesday Hamas legislators marked the Christmas season by passing a Sharia criminal code for the Palestinian Authority. Among other things, the code legalizes crucifixion.

Hamas's endorsement of nailing enemies of Islam to crosses came at the same time as it renewed its jihad. Here too, Hamas wanted to make sure that Christians didn't neglected as its fighters launched missiles at Jewish day care centers and schools. So on Wednesday Hamas lobbed a mortar at Erez crossing point into Israel just as a group of Gazan Christians were standing on line waiting to travel to Bethlehem for Christmas.


While Hamas joyously renewed its jihad against Jews and Christians, its overlords in Iran also basked in jihadist triumphalism. The source of Iran's sense of ascendancy this week was Britain's state-owned Channel 4 network's decision to request that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad give a special Christmas Day address to the British people. Ahmadinejad's speech was supposed to be a response to Queen Elizabeth II's traditional Christmas Day address to her subjects. That is, Channel 4 presented his message as a reasonable counterpoint to the Christmas greetings of the head of the Church of England.

Channel 4 justified its move by proclaiming that it was providing a public service. As a Channel 4 spokesman told the Jerusalem Post, "We're offering [Ahmadinejad] the chance to speak for himself, which people in the West don't often get the chance to see."

While that sounds reasonable, the fact is that Westerners see Ahmadinejad speaking for himself all the time. They saw him at the UN two years in a row as he called for the countries of the world to submit to Islam; claimed that Iran's nuclear weapons program is divinely inspired; and castigated Jews as subhuman menaces to humanity.

They saw him gather leading anti-Semites from all over the world at his Holocaust denial conference.

They heard him speak in his own words when he called for Israel to be "wiped off the map."

And of course, over the years Ahmadinejad has often communicated directly to the British people. For instance, in 2007 he received unlimited airtime on British television as he paraded kidnapped British sailors and marines in front of television cameras; forced them to make videotaped "confessions" of their "crime" of entering Iranian territorial waters; and compelled them to grovel at his knee and thank him for "forgiving" them.

The British people listened to Ahmadinejad as he condemned Britain as a warmongering nation after its leaders had surrendered Basra to Iranian proxies. They heard him -- speaking in his own voice -- when he announced that in a gesture of Islamic mercy, he was freeing their humiliated sailors and marines in honor of Muhammad's birthday and Easter and then called on all Britons to convert to Islam.

Yet as far as Channel 4 is concerned, Ahmadinejad is still an unknown quantity for most Britons. So they asked him to address the British on Christmas. And not surprisingly, in his address, he attacked their way of life and co-opted their Jewish savior Jesus, saying, "If Christ was on earth today undoubtedly he would stand with the people in opposition to bullying, ill-tempered and expansionist powers."

He then reiterated his call for non-Muslims to convert to Islam saying, "The solution to today's problems can be found in a return to the call of the divine prophets."

The fact of the matter is that Channel 4 is right. There is a great deal of ignorance in the West about what the likes of Ahmadinejad and his colleagues in Iran, Syria, Hizbullah and Hamas stand for. But this isn't their fault. They tell us every day that they seek the destruction of the Jews and the domination of the West in the name of Islam. And every day they take actions that they believe advance their goals.

The reason that the West remains ignorant of the views and goals of the likes of Hamas and Iran is not that the latter have hidden their views and goals. It is because the leading political leaders and foreign policy practitioners in the West refuse to listen to them and deny the significance of their actions.

As far as the West's leaders are concerned, Iran and its allies are unimportant. They are not actors, but objects. As far as the West's leading foreign policy "experts" and decision makers are concerned, the only true actors on the global stage are Western powers. They alone have the power to shape reality and the world. Oddly enough, this dominant political philosophy, which is based on denying the existence of non-Western actors on the world stage, is referred to as political "realism."

The "realist" view was given clear expression this week by one of the "realist" clique's most prominent members. In an op-ed published Tuesday in Canada's *Globe and Mail* entitled, "We must talk Iran out of the bomb," Richard Haas, the President of the Council on Foreign Relations argued that given the dangers of a nuclear-armed Iran and the dangers of a US or Israeli strike against Iran's nuclear installations, the incoming Obama administration must hold direct negotiations with the mullahs in order to convince them to end their nuclear weapons program.

In making this argument, Haas ignores the fact that this has been the Bush administration's policy for the past five years. He also ignores the fact that President George W. Bush adopted this policy at the urging of Haas's "realist" colleagues and at the urging of Haas himself. Moreover, Haas bizarrely contends that in negotiating with the mullahs, the Obama administration should offer Iran the same package of economic and political payoffs that the Bush administration and the EU have been offering, and Teheran has been rejecting since 2003.

Even more disturbingly, Haas ignores the fact that Teheran made its greatest leaps forward in its uranium enrichment capabilities while it was engaged in these talks with the West.

So in making his recommendation to the Obama administration -- which has already announced its intention to negotiate with the mullahs -- Haas has chosen to ignore Iran's statements, its actions, and known facts about the West's inability to steer it from its course of war by showering it with pay-offs.

Haas and his colleagues in the US, Europe and on the Israeli Left are similarly unwilling to pay attention to Hamas. In an article in the current edition of *Foreign Affairs*, Haas and his colleague Martin Indyk from the Brookings Institute call on the Obama administration to either ignore Hamas, or if it abides by a ceasefire with Israel, they suggest that the Obama administration should support a joint Hamas-Fatah government and "authorize low-level contact between US officials and Hamas." The fact that Hamas itself is wholly dedicated to Israel's destruction and Islamic global domination is irrelevant.

Similarly, Haas and Indyk assume that Syria can be appeased into abandoning its support for Hizbullah and Hamas, and its strategic alliance with Iran. Syrian President Bashar Assad's views of how his interests are best served are unimportant. Both Assad's statements of eternal friendship with Iran and his active involvement in Iran's war effort against the US and its allies in Israel, Iraq and Lebanon are meaningless. The "realists" know what he really wants.

Muslims aren't the only ones whose views and actions are dismissed as irrelevant by these foreign policy wise men. The "realists" ignore just about every non-Western actor. Take Iran's principal Asian ally North Korea for example.

This week North Korea's official news agency threatened to destroy South Korea in a "sea of fire," and "reduce everything treacherous and anti-reunification to debris and build an independent, reunified country on it," if any country dares to attack its nuclear installations.

North Korea made its threat two weeks after Kim Jung Il's regime disengaged from its fraudulent disarmament talks with the Bush administration. Those talks -- the brainchild of foreign policy "realists" Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Assistant Secretary Christopher Hill -- were based on the "realist" belief that the US can appease North Korea into giving up its nuclear arsenal. (That would be the same nuclear arsenal that the North Koreans built while engaged in fraudulent disarmament talks with the Clinton administration.)

After Pyongyang agreed in February 2007 to eventually come clean on its plutonium installations (but not its uranium enrichment programs), and to account for its nuclear arsenal, (but not for its proliferation activities), Rice convinced President George W. Bush to remove North Korea from the State Department's list of state sponsors of terror and to end its subjection to the US's Trading with the Enemy Act this past October. And then, after securing those massive US concessions, on December 11 Pyongyang renounced its previous commitments, walked away from the table and now threatens to destroy South Korea if anyone takes any action against it.

North Korea's behavior is of no interest to the "realists" however. As far as they are concerned, the US has no option other than to continue the failed appeasement policy that has enabled North Korea to develop and proliferate nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. As the Council on Foreign Relations Gary Samore said, "I think we're sort of condemned to that process because we don't really have any alternative."

Samore and his colleagues believe there are no other options because all other options involve placing responsibility for contending with North Korea on non-Western powers like China, South Korea and Japan. More radically, it involves holding North Korea itself accountable for its actions and making it pay a price for its poor behavior.

As the "realists" claim that the US has no option other than their failed appeasement policies, back in the real world, this week military officials from the US's Pacific Command warned that North Korea may supply Iran with intercontinental ballistic missiles. These warnings are credible given that North Korea has been the primary supplier of ballistic missiles and missile technology to Iran and Syria and has played a major role in both countries' nuclear weapons programs.

Defending Channel 4's invitation to Ahmadinejad, Dorothy Byrne, the network's head of news and current affairs, said, "As the leader of one of the most powerful states in the Middle East President Ahmadinejad's views are enormously influential. As we approach a critical time in international relations, we are offering our viewers an insight into an alternative world view."

When you think about it, broadcasting Ahmadinejad really would have been a public service if Byrne or any of the delusional "realists" calling the shots were remotely interested in listening to what he has to say. But they aren't. So far from a public service for Britain, it was a service for those who, unbeknownst to most Britons, are dedicated to destroying their country.

Islamic Sharia-ruled countries want to control YOUR freedom of speech and expression in free western countries VIA a UN resolution. This is should concern all people everywhere.



Contact your Representatives and Senators - let them know this is UNACCEPTABLE.

You can do this by following this link:

http://www.actforamerica.org/index.php/contact-congress

We can no longer afford apathy -

Peace
Silence Is Acceptance ~Stop the Hate

This three-part series from the ACLJ, a Christian organization, is interesting to hear. It stems from the introduction of the Defamation of Religion articles being introduced to the United Nations. I do agree with ACLJ's interpretation of what will most likely happen should this pass.

If you are a Christian, or if you are another religion that believes strongly that all religion should be left to the individual, and not regulated by governing bodies, you will want to give a listen to what the ACLJ has to say, and perhaps take part in their petition to oppose this legislation in the UN, and other world community bodies.

Since the leader of the Anglican church in England has taken sides with Islam on this and many other issues (I am dumbfounded as to WHY), I think that organizations that oppose much legislation with Islamic backing like this SHOULD be supported by you and I - and all the citizens of the world.

No one religion should be allowed ANY say over how other religions are treated in the world - everyone has the right choose their religion, and speak about that choice, and even SHARE those beliefs with others without fear.

Please let's not give Islam ANY more incentive or legal avenues to enforce their "no tolerance of other faiths" policies in the world.

I believe that supporting ACL, and other organization them, is positive, no matter what your personal beliefs are - if we all want to keep the freedom to practice those beliefs -

Christians * Jews * Hindus * Atheists * Moderate Muslims * Buddhists *
and ALL others Too many to list)

Let's all stand together to preserve our basic right to believe as we wish without persecution.

Peace to ALL

Silence Is Acceptance
Stop the Hate

Indulgence of Islam is harming society

This story can be viewed at: Telegraph

Islam is the fastest-growing religion in Britain: the number of Muslims has grown from 1.6 million to two million since 2000. Moreover, every major public institution has changed its policies to accommodate the demands of Islamic "community leaders". The Government, the Opposition, the police, schools, the Church of England, the BBC and now Channel 4 are all helping Muslims construct a parallel Islamic state.

Early next year, the think tank Civitas will publish a survey of 100 British Muslim schools. Entitled When Worlds Collide, it will argue that some of them are pushing pupils into ghettos. Young women, in particular, are forbidden to pursue career opportunities. "Every year, an incalculable number of Muslim young women are lost to the wider world," says the report. One school website links to al-Qaeda; another directs pupils to a scholar who advocates the murder of Jews.

Until recently, these radical mullahs were blamed for turning disaffected youths into bombers. But, in August, a leaked MI5 report revealed that Islamist terrorists tend not to be obvious religious extremists. The Muslim community usually knows nothing about them.

For years, the Government has offered Muslim leaders self-governance in return for information about "dangerous" elements. But if terrorists cannot be accurately identified, this is a waste of time. Unelected community leaders extend control over Muslims, yet society is no safer.

Self-censorship is crucial to this growing separatism. The BBC's director-general, Mark Thompson, says that Muslims should be treated more sensitively than Christians.

In America, Random House cancelled publication of Sherry Jones's novel The Jewel of Medina, about Mohammed's six-year-old bride Ayisha. But Martin Ryna of Gibson Square in London did agree to publish. Three men were subsequently charged with conspiring to damage his home. Islamic groups have threatened Borders bookshops with violence if they sell the novel.

Although most Muslims do not condone such attacks, many support the proposal that Islam should enjoy privileged status. After the 7/7 terrorist murders, the Home Office commissioned reports from Muslim working parties. Their recommendations included "Muslim teacher accreditation" to ensure special treatment for Muslim children; Muslim oversight of policing methods; and a new verbal etiquette in which Islamist terrorism should be referred to as "criminal" rather than religiously inspired. There were also hints that British Muslims should be allowed an unofficial veto over foreign policy.

In the event, the Government backed away from the more extreme demands. Others have been quietly met. A National Association of Muslim Police was set up in 2007 and is regularly consulted by senior officers.

Government ministers rarely put the words "Islam" and "terrorism" in the same sentence. Conservative front benchers follow the same practice, except when addressing the Conservative Friends of Israel. "I have been told off by three members of the shadow cabinet for using the phrase 'Islamist terrorism' when I have appeared with them," says Douglas Murray, director of the Centre for Social Cohesion.

The major development, however, has been the encroachment of Sharia law into public life. Last February, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, declared that British Sharia was "inevitable." In fact, instruments for expanding it already exist. A network of Muslim Arbitration Tribunals (MATs) has been set up with Home Office support. In theory, these bodies are just a form of "alternative dispute resolution". They are "unable to deal with criminal offences", says the MAT website. Yet it also confirms that they can "assist" the police with domestic violence, sometimes "with a view to reconsidering criminal charges".

MATs also deal with wills, where Sharia discriminates against females. The Government is also anxious to attract Muslim investment by regulating British Islamic banking; the only way to do that is to grant legal recognition to Sharia.

According to Murray, "what we are seeing is the state deferring to a seventh-century Arabian tradesman as a source for secular law". He was speaking on Christmas Eve. The next day, Ahmadinejad spoke to the nation. Yesterday it was reported that Baroness Butler-Sloss, one of Britain's most senior legal figures, wants Sharia divorces to be enshrined in law. For the first time in decades, religion is moulding public life in this country; but that religion is not Christianity.

Please sign the International Petition to Stop Sharia Law in free western countries, and reverse it where it has gained legal foothold.

http://www.shariapetition.com

http://www.onelawforall.org

Silence Is Acceptance Stands

SIA

Silence Is Acceptance maintains these premises to be true, please feel free to share them with your hecklers and others who need enlightenment:

1. It's NOT racist to recognize behaviour that threatens free society, and then to CHALLENGE that behaviour.

2. Islam is NOT a race, so challenging behaviour within its organization cannot BE racist.

3. Islam is a not merely a religion, but an ideology whose Sharia Law is NOT compatible with western societies. This has been upheld by various worldwide councils.

4. We also maintain that IF moderate Islam exists, that moderate Muslim people would be the strongest influence in assisting the cause of stopping Sharia Law from gaining legal foothold in the west, and reversing it wherever it has managed to do so.

5. We realize that challenging Islam is nearly impossible from those countries ruled by Sharia, however, we are still waiting for moderate Muslims in the west to challenge Islam as a group.
We hold western Muslim groups responsible for their continued silence.

Peace

Friday, December 26, 2008

.. --> Begin .post -->

The original article can be found at: Gateway Pundit
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/12/mumbai-terrorists-sexually-humiliated.html

The Mumbai terrorists sexually humiliated their victims in the Taj before killing them.
Even the Rabbi and his wife at Nariman House were sexually assaulted and their genitalia mutilated.

The victims of the Mumbai attacks were sexually humiliated before they were slaughtered.
Beeqube reported, via LGF:

Disturbing photographs made available to this newspapers by police sources indicate that several of the guests at the Taj Mahal Hotel during the siege November 26 were sexually humiliated by the terrorists and then shot dead.

Police sources confirm that even as the terrorists were engaged in a fierce combat with NSG commandos, they were humiliating their hostages before ending their terrifying ordeal.

Foreign guests were their particular target. Eight of the 31 killed at the Taj were foreign nationals.

Photographs taken by a police forensic team after the hotel was sanitised yield a gruesome picture of some of the guests in the nude.

These bodies were found away from the hotel's swimming pool which makes it clear that they were not those guests who were taken hostage from the poolside.

"Even the Rabbi and his wife at Nariman House were sexually assaulted and their genitalia mutilated," said a senior officer of the investigating team, not wishing to be quoted.

This is truly sick - and WAY under-reported ... These sickos need the light shone on them we can so the world can know. These people did NOT die a merciful death .. They died horribly, painfully, slowly, and with great humiliation.
These attacks were at aimed strictly at Westerners - UK and US citizens, as well as people of Jewish faith.

We cannot stay quiet about this as a people, This is beyond unacceptable.
Send a message loud and clear -
Please support the Global Campaign to STOP Sharia Law at
Stop Sharia Now One Law For All.org

Please support our soldiers who sacrifice all to keep us safe!

One Small Voice

If we join all of our small voices together, they will become one world voice - loud enough to be heard and listened to.
Each voice DOES matter, in its words, but in its silence as well; many times silent voices are louder then the speaking ones.

Please let your voice be heard by saying NO to allowing Sharia Law to govern in ANY form in the free world - signing the petition at shariapetition.com.

This petition is open to everyone from every country.

Together, we can ensure that our laws will remain free and equal for everyone!

Remember

As we celebrate this Christmas, please remember our young men and women who are in harm's way and so far from their families.

Dear Soldiers,

Please know you are not forgotten, and that you are loved.
Thank you for what you do for each one of us, you are special!
We look forward to the day that you return home,
and pray for your safety each and every day.

Peace to you and yours

Silence Is Acceptance

Woman Gang Raped in SF Because of Being Gay

Edit

Full News Story - 2:39am

SAN FRANCISCO – A woman in the San Francisco Bay area was jumped by four men, taunted for being a lesbian, repeatedly raped and left naked outside an abandoned apartment building, authorities said Monday.

Detectives say the 28-year-old victim was attacked Dec. 13 after she got out of her car, which bore a rainbow gay pride sticker. The men, who ranged from their late teens to their 30s, made comments indicating they knew her sexual orientation, said Richmond police Lt. Mark Gagan.

"It just pushes it beyond fathomable," he said. "The level of trauma — physical and emotional — this victim has suffered is extreme."

Authorities are characterizing the attack as a hate crime but declined to reveal why they think the woman was singled out because of her sexual orientation. Gagan would say only that the victim lived openly with a female partner and had a rainbow flag sticker on her car.

The 45-minute attack began when one of the men approached the woman as she crossed the street, struck her with a blunt object, ordered her to disrobe and sexually assaulted her with the help of the other men.

When the group saw another person approaching, they forced the victim back into her car and took her to a burned-out apartment building, where she was raped again inside and outside the vehicle. The assailants took her wallet and drove off in her car. Officers found the car abandoned two days later.

The woman sought help from a nearby resident, and she was examined at a hospital. Although the victim said she did not know her attackers, detectives hope someone in the community knows them. One of the men went by the nickname "Blue" and another was called "Pato," according to authorities.

Richmond police are offering a $10,000 award for information leading to the arrest of the attackers.

Gay rights advocates note that hate crimes based on sexual orientation have increased nationwide as of late. There were 1,415 such crimes in 2006 and 1,460 in 2007, both times making up about 16 percent of the total, according to the FBI.

Avy Skolnik, a coordinator with the New York-based National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs, noted that gay, lesbian and transgender crime victims may be more reluctant than heterosexual victims to contact police.

"Assailants target LGBT people of all gender identities with sexual assault," he said. "Such targeting is one of the most cruel, dehumanizing and violent forms of hate violence that our communities experience."

Skolnik said the group plans to analyze hate crime data to see whether fluctuations may be related to the gay marriage bans that appeared on ballots this year in California, Arizona and Florida.

"Anytime there is an anti-LGBT initiative, we tend to see spikes both in the numbers and the severity of attacks," he said. "People feel this extra entitlement to act out their prejudice."

___

Associated Press writer Haven Daley in Richmond contributed to this report.

Add Comment

When will we, as a people, STOP hating?
When will we teach our children better than this?

When hatred and violence are so prevalent in the world, how dare we allow this hatred to fester in our own country ....

Silence Is Acceptance ~ Stop The Hate

Saudi Judge OKs Marriage of Girl, 8 9:43am

Sharia In Action ~

Does ANYONE in Europe or the US want THIS happening in their country?

Please sign the petition at shariapetition.com
_____________________________________________________________________

(Saudi Arabia) Last Saturday, a Saudi judge reviewed a case filed by the mother of an eight-year-old girl seeking to annul the girl's arranged marriage to a 47-year-old man.

[T]he judge, Sheikh Habib Abdallah al-Habib, dismissed a petition brought by the girl's mother because she "is not the legal guardian of the girl," the woman's lawyer Abdullah al-Jutaili said.

"Therefore, she cannot represent her daughter in these proceedings," al-Jutaili said.

Her parents are separated, he said.

According to the lawyer, the girl's father arranged the marriage in order to settle his debts with the man, who is "a close friend" of his.

The judge did ask for a pledge from the husband, who was in court, not to consummate the marriage until the girl reaches puberty, according to al-Jutaili.

The judge ruled that when the girl reaches puberty, she will have the right to request a divorce by filing a petition with the court, the lawyer said.

Therefore, it appears that the case was dismissed because the girl's mother doesn't have standing. Apparently, since the eight-year-old is now married, the mother no longer has a right to intervene in her life.

Hey, but there's nothing to worry about since the 47-year-old pledged to hold off on sex with the girl until she reaches puberty. It seems that pledges by middle-aged child molesters are relied upon in Saudi Arabia. Of course, since the girl was traded for the payment of debts, the issue of treating a person as chattel was apparently ignored by the court.

By Mike Pechar at 07:53 AM | Comments (5) | Trackback | digg this

Moderate Muslims failing to combat extremism, says Islamic Foundation

Very interesting article -

Original article can be seen at :
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3683481/Moderate-Muslims-failing-to-combat-extremism-says-Islamic-Foundation.html

Moderate Muslims have failed to do enough to combat the rise of extremism, a leading Islamic commentator has said.

Last Updated: 2:53PM GMT 08 Dec 2008

Dilwar Hussain, head of the policy research centre at the Islamic Foundation, said Muslims did not challenge sufficiently strongly so-called "preachers of hate".

"Much could be said about Britain's foreign policy mistakes in stoking injustice, leading to anger and frustration," he said in a report published by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR)

"But to blame only such foreign affairs for terrorism is not nearly enough.

"Muslims did not challenge strongly enough the preachers of hate and the peddlers of simplistic, yet nihilistic, solutions that were able to tap into that anger and frustration.

"Nor did they create adequate religious institutions or leadership that could connect with young people and educate them in an idiom they would understand, something that could have protected them when challenged by extremists' discourse."

In his essay, Mr Hussain argued for the development of a liberal brand of Islam tailored to British conditions.

His remarks were made in the report Faith in the Nation, a collection of essays by leading figures from the five largest faith communities about areas such as British identity and faith.

The report, with a foreword by Prime Minister Gordon Brown, includes essays by the Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu, and Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Westminster.

Co-editors Zaki Cooper and Guy Lodge, said: "Faith-based activities, that are consistent with the core principles of British democracy, can make an important contribution to the life and cohesion of communities and provide vital sources of civic mobilisation and social campaigning."

Video for International Sharia Petition

Please sign the petition at:

http://www.shariapetition.com
Everyone may participate in this petition

We reject Sharia law because it is discriminatory, cruel and barbaric and demand an end to Sharia law across the world. We unequivocally support the struggle of people everywhere whether in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia or in Britain and the West, to oppose Sharia and live in secular societies, where at a minimum religion is a private matter and separate from the state, legal and educational systems and universal human rights and citizenship rights are guaranteed.

Send our governments the message that Sharia Law is not acceptable in Western culture


Information about One Law:
http://www.onelawforall.org

One Law * Equal * Free

Jewish convert to Islam Joseph Cohen -
aka, Youssef al-Khattab - RevolutionMuslimCom (YouTube)
protesting at Columbia U.

Pictures are worth a thousand words .....

I can only shake my head -

Female doctor from London beaten, held captive by relatives in Bangladesh for forced marriage

How many others like Humayra Abedin are there in the U.K.? Or would asking that question be "Islamophobic?"

"London doctor is held as forced marriage hostage," from The Independent, December 7 (thanks to Fugue):

British lawyers were this weekend working frantically to rescue a London doctor who has been beaten and held captive in Bangladesh in an attempt to force her into marriage. Dr Humayra Abedin, known as Dorothy to her friends, this weekend faces being forced to marry a complete stranger, unless efforts by lawyers to free her, using new powers, succeed.

Dr Abedin is being held hostage by her family in the Bangladeshi capital Dhaka, where she is thought to have been gagged, bound and violently beaten to get her to comply with her parents' wishes. The 33-year-old trainee GP is depressed, suicidal and without hope, according to an email she managed to send to a close friend last Friday. This is the first time friends have heard from Dr Abedin for more than three months.

Her parents and uncle were yesterday served with a Forced Marriage Order issued by the British High Court on Friday. Dr Abedin, who has worked as a doctor in the Britain since 2002, is among the first cases to be heard under the Forced Marriage Act which came into force on 25 November. The move came after the family ignored orders from the Bangladeshi high court to bring Dr Abedin to court.

The new legislation allows judges to issue protection orders to prevent forced marriage and help to rescue victims who have already been married off. Those convicted of forcing people into marriage can be jailed for up to two years.

Anne-Marie Hutchinson, the barrister from Renaissance Chambers acting for Dr Abedin, said: "There are real concerns for the safety of this young woman. It is understood that she is to be married this weekend. The Forced Marriage Act offers protection to all residents of this country. It makes it clear that because she lives here it is not just a domestic matter for the Bangladesh authorities."

While the Act is not enforceable in Bangladesh, lawyers for Dr Abedin are confident it will strengthen the resolve of the authorities in Dhaka.

The only child of Mohammed Joynal Abedin, a retired businessman, and his wife, a housewife, Dr Abedin trained as a doctor in Bangladesh and then came to England in 2002 to study at Leeds University. She has since set up home in Leyton, east London ,while working in hospitals across the capital. Dr Abedin is described by friends as an intelligent young woman who loves Bollywood films and Hindi music. She is only a year away from qualifying as a GP.

Her Muslim family became incensed after she developed a close friendship with a Hindu Bangladeshi man she met in London. Since May, they have made several attempts to keep her away from him and to force her into marriage. The Metropolitan Police launched an inquiry at the end of June, after she was held captive in her flat by her mother and uncle, who visited for several days. Her case has also been taken up by Interpol.

Her family duped her into returning to Bangladesh in August, by claiming her mother was seriously ill. They then hid her passport and plane ticket, and have held her captive since 5 August. She has been subjected to physical and psychological violence and denied contact with friends or lawyers. There are also unconfirmed claims that Dr Abedin has been admitted to a psychiatric hospital at the wishes of her parents, who have insinuated in court that her relationship with a Hindu man is a sign of mental illness. [...]

Posted by Marisol at 1:02 PM | Comments (19)
Email this entry | Print this entry | Digg this | del.icio.us

Melanie Phillips

Discussion of Free Speech Vs, Muslim Hate Speech in Britain