Why REAL Men + REAL Women should vote for George W. Bush
Because John KKKerry is a dominated by his ugly ***** wife who would be
the "real president" *and* First ***** if KKKerry is elected.
That would mean bad times for men, maybe official enslavement and
castration of men by the FemiNazis.
And, of course, Teresa being the FeminNazi ***** that she is, would not
be ready, willing or able to fight off terrorism, so the terrorists
would win, too.
So REAL MEN -- and REAL WOMEN -- VOTE FOR GEORGE W. BUSH!
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
George W. Bush Protects Women + Children from Terrorists Foreign +
Domestic
The W stands for Women, and George W. Bush will appoint TOUGH JUDGES who
will PUNISH rapists, murderers, wife-batterers and other domestic
terrorists.
By contrast, girly-boy John KKKerry opposes the death penalty, girly-boy
John KKKerry supports rights for dirty muslim terrorists and criminals,
and girly-boy John KKKerry promises to appoint LIBERAL judges to the
U.S. Supreme Court.
Girly-boy John KKKerry wants us to be "sensitive" about terrorists'
"feelings" because girly-boy John KKKerry wants to win the "hearts and
minds" of dirty arab muslims. Hello! Dirty arab muslims who kill
innocent babies and children have NO hearts and NO minds!
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The Case of Anne Marie Murphy: Are Pregnant Irish Girls Bombs?
What Demon-KKK-Rats like "Chappaquidick" Kennedy don't want you to know
Soccer Moms! Remember the poor Irish girl who was knocked up by an arab
sub-animal immigrant and then sent on a plane with (unbeknownst to her)
a bomb set to explode in flight. Thankfully, the plot, which was
pre-9/11 and yet another example of muslim terrorism, was foiled thanks
to excellent Israeli intel and profiling. See CBS 60 Minutes II,
"Profiling dirty arab terrorists works," 2002/01/16; see also, BBC News,
"Foiling dirty arabs," 2002/07/05.
"In 1986, Anne Marie Murphy, a young Irish woman, was planning to take
an El Al flight from London to Tel Aviv to meet the parents of her
fiance, a Palestinian. Murphy, who was pregnant, had no idea that the
man she was planning to marry had hidden plastic explosives and a
detonator in one of her suitcases. Israeli profilers interviewing Murphy
found out about her boyfriend, got suspicious, and then discovered the
bomb before the jumbo jet took off."
"[S]ecurity experts ... point to an attempt in 1986 by a Jordanian to
send his Irish girlfriend on to an El Al flight with a bomb concealed in
her hand luggage without her knowledge. / The woman, Anne-Marie Murphy,
was preparing to board an Israel-bound flight at London's Heathrow
airport, when she was quizzed by a ticket agent trained to screen
passengers. / Since the agent thought her story didn't add up, screeners
re-examined her baggage, which an X-ray had cleared and found seven
pounds of explosives in the lining."
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Another White FemiNazi ***** Says Freeing Women from Shari'a Law Is
"Imperialist"
Duke Feminist Gives Thumbs Up To Taliban
By Cinnamon Stillwell
September 27, 2004
Afghanistan's Taliban was one of the most oppressive regimes in the
world, and doubly so when it came to women's rights. For years, various
activists expressed concern about the situation of Afghan women and
supported the efforts of RAWA, the Revolutionary Association of the
Women of Afghanistan [1], to try and affect reform. So when the
opportunity arose to overthrow that brutal regime, it was expected that
RAWA activists would naturally back the insurrection.
However, it turned out these activists were more opposed to U.S.
military intervention than they were in favor of getting rid of the
Taliban, even if it meant that Afghanistan's women remained in a state
of perpetual slavery. And among those who subscribe to such views is
Duke University Professor Miriam Cooke. Cooke is a Professor of Asian
and African Languages and Literature and President of the Association
for Middle East Women's Studies, an international organization staunchly
opposed to what they call on their website the "new imperialism,"[2] and
a disciple of the theory of post-colonialism. [3] Cooke is also a strong
proponent of "Islamic feminism."[4]
Islamic feminism holds that Muslim women should enact social change from
within the confines of their own culture and religion. Western powers
are viewed as having purely imperialistic designs and, as a result,
their intervention is unwelcome. Such is the "logic" that caused Cooke,
a longtime proponent of Muslim women writers, activists, and
intellectuals, to oppose the U.S. overthrow of the Taliban, as well as
the democratization of the Middle East.
During a talk at a forum on the future of Iraq at the John Hope Franklin
Center on March 26th, 2003, [5] Cooke rejected the liberation of Afghan
women as a reason to go to war. Rather than being grateful for calling
attention to the suffering of fellow women, she castigated First Lady
Laura Bush for her radio address on behalf of the women of Afghanistan.
Cooke accused Laura Bush of furthering "the imperial project in her
highly gendered appeal to a world conscience."
Of course, this never was the principal reason for overthrowing the
Taliban, but rather a welcome side effect. As for the al-Qaeda terrorist
training camps dotting the Afghanistan countryside, Cooke said nothing.
She is equally silent today on the ten million Afghans who are now
registered to vote - forty percent of them women - in the upcoming
election.[6]
In the same talk, Cooke mocked "the campaign to democratize the Middle
East," that she claimed, "deployed women as victims to save or to
empower." Empowering Muslim women would seem to be a good thing, but
according to Cooke, if Western interests are involved, women's
liberation is no longer valid. Cooke opposed the war in Iraq for this
very reason, fatalistically predicting that Iraqi women would end up
"like the Shiite women who were driven out of their homes in southern
Iraq in March, 1991, to enter refugee camps in Saudi Arabia and then
went on to exilic futures outside the Middle East."[7]
In fact, none of this happened and the numbers of asylum-seekers from
Iraq and Afghanistan have been drastically reduced from pre-war
levels.[8] Most importantly, no longer are Iraqi women captive to Saddam
Hussein's rape rooms, or to having their husbands taken away in the
middle of night.[9] And six female ministers in the new Iraqi government
demonstrate that women are making strides in that country.[10] But for
Cooke, none of this seems to matter. All that matters is keeping those
nasty "imperialists" (America) at bay.
So what exactly does Cooke have to offer to Muslim women as a concrete
course of action to better their lives? It turns out, not much. Not only
are her ideas vague and overly academic, all too often she falls back on
concepts steeped in the terminology of Islamism. For instance,
throughout her career, Cooke has written extensively about the idea of a
"women's jihad."
During a lecture at Wellesley College in November, 2003, Cooke
elaborated on this concept. [11] This jihad, she maintained, is not for
an "Islamist state," but rather for "an Islamic community." Subscribing
to a pacifist model, she insisted that women's role within the Islamic
world should be "drawing attention to the consequences of war, not
advocating violence." Yet somewhat contradictorily, she also sanctioned,
"the defense of the community when attacked by outsiders." Which
outsiders exactly she was referring to is unknown; but it's a safe guess
that American soldiers and their allies were involved.
Indeed, Israeli civilians appear to be fair game for this "women's
jihad." When Wafa Idris, a 27-year old Palestinian woman, perpetrated a
suicide bombing, killing an 80 year-old man in January, 2000, Cooke's
thesis about women and war were put to the test. But Cooke managed to
justify this atrocity by falling back on her old "blame the
imperialists" mindset. In typically garbled language, Cooke said, "for
those of us who really are concerned with women's role in the Arab
public square, in the way in which women have been trying to empower
themselves vis-a-vis the U.S., vis-a-vis old colonial powers, vis-a-vis
their own men, the situation has become so desperate that now women's
participation in war is a mark of absolute hopelessness. [12]
As usual, Cooke jumps through hoops to blame anyone other than the
culture that created suicide bombers - female or otherwise. And she
conveniently overlooks the use of sexism in Palestinian society to
coerce women into becoming suicide bombers as penance for the shame of
having sex out of wedlock, being raped or unable to marry.
Beyond teaching her own courses, Cooke is very active in Duke's Islamic
Studies Department. She is co-director of the university's Center for
the Study of Muslim Networks (CSMN), [13] as well as being involved in
the 2003-2004 Carolina Seminar on Comparative Islamic Studies.[14] She
accompanied a group of students on a trip to Lebanon in 2002 [15] and
has taken part in various local film festivals in the past few
years.[16] As such, Cooke has a lot of influence over the way Duke
students experience Islamic culture and particularly its relationship to
women.
Unfortunately, instead of learning about women's liberation, these
students are receiving a lesson in women's oppression, and especially
oppression caused by the United States. And as long as Islamic studies
professors like Miriam Cooke serve as apologists for backwardness and
repression, they will continue being part of the problem instead of the
solution.
NOTES
[1] Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA):
http://rawa.fancymarketing.net/index.html
[2] Association for Middle East Women's Studies:
http://www.amews.org/announcements/valmessage.htm
[3] Kay S. Hymowitz, "Why Feminism is AWOL on Islam," City Journal,
Winter 2003. City-Journal.org:
http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_1_why_feminism.html
[4] Omaima Abou-Bakr, "Islamic Feminism? What's in a Name?" Association
for Middle East Women's Studies, MEWS Review Articles, Winter/Spring
2001: http://www.amews.org/review/reviewarticles/islamicfeminism.htm
[5] Miriam Cooke, "Crusade! I Mean Democracy! You Know: Women!" Duke
News, April 3, 2003: http://tinyurl.com/4mj3c
[6] "Powell on Afghanistan," Voice of America, September 20, 2004,
VOA.com: http://tinyurl.com/5xh6x
[7] Miriam Cooke, "Crusade! I Mean Democracy! You Know: Women!" Duke
News, April 3, 2003: http://tinyurl.com/4mj3c
[8] Jeff Jacoby, "What's Going on in Iraq?" June 21, 2004. Townhall.com:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/jeffjacoby/jj20040621.shtml
[9] Office of International Women's Issues, "Iraqi Women Under Saddam's
Regime: A Population Silenced," Fact Sheet, March 20, 2003. U.S.
Department of State: http://www.state.gov/g/wi/rls/18877.htm
[10] "Iraqi Women Celebrate Larger Presence in New Government," Agency
France-Presse, June 15, 2004. Yahoo!News.com http://tinyurl.com/7x5lr
[11] Nitya Nayar, "Cooke Discusses North African Women's Notions of
Jihad," The Wellesley News, November 13, 2003:
http://www.wellesley.edu/Newspaper/archives/10137/articles/10137n5.html
[12] Arts & Sciences and Trinity College News, Miriam Cooke, June 2003:
http://www.aas.duke.edu/news/faculty/cooke.php
[13] Center for the Study of Muslim Networks, Duke University:
http://www.duke.edu/web/muslimnets/csmn_about.html
[14] Carolina Seminar on Comparative Islamic Studies, Upcoming Events on
the Middle East and Muslim Civilizations, 2003-2004:
http://www.unc.edu/depts/islamsem/2004.htm
[15] "Learning in Lebanon," Duke Magazine, May-June 2002:
http://www.dukemagazine.duke.edu/dukemag/issues/050602/depgaz3.html
[16] David M. Lewkowict, "Staff, Students 'Duke' It Out Over Film
Festival," March 12, 2003, FoxNews.com:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,80849,00.html
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Feminists Silent on Freedom for Iraqi Women by Lisa De Pasquale
http://www.cblpolicyinstitute.org/silenceoniraqiwomen.htm
The transfer of sovereignty to the Iraqi government marks a new day for
Iraqi women. Thanks to the courageous action taken by the Bush
administration and its allies, Iraqi women have renewed freedom. The
administration has insisted that women receive educational and small
business opportunities, as well as active participation in government.
For months radical feminists have been silent on the plight of Iraqi
women. Instead this hypocritical bunch has condemned the war in Iraq and
its subsequent liberation of women simply because the war is supported
by conservatives.
In March feminists gathered in front of the White House to protest
military action against Saddam Hussein. The protest was called "Code
Pink: Women's Pre-Emptive Strike for Peace." On the other side of the
world, Iraqi women were being denied the most basic (Indian)n lived in
fear knowing that Iraqi law freely allowed male relatives to murder them
in the name of honor. In Iraqi prisons, women were raped and tortured
for being related to Iraqi opposition activists. Videotapes of the acts
were sent to the families.
Despite obvious human rights violations and limits on freedom,
feminists, led by the National Organization for Women, ignored Saddam
Hussein's reprehensible treatment of women. Under the Saddam Hussein
regime Iraqi women were not allowed to work outside the home. Feminists,
on the other hand, talked about America's "tyrants" and the threat of
"tyranny in our homes, our workplaces and our schools."
Radical feminists witnessed a legitimate case of tyranny and violence
against women in Iraq, but they remained steadfastly against policies
and actions taken by America and the Bush administration that helped
these women. NOW President Kim Gandy stated, "The real terrorism is the
Bush administration's disregard for international law and destruction of
civil liberties at home. This has become an issue of one dictator versus
another."
Feminists are more comfortable allowing Iraqi women to endure torture
than supporting the Bush Administration. For example, a report by
Amnesty International documented the beheading of 50 young women in
Baghdad. The report also said, "The heads of these women were hung on
the doors of their houses for a few days." Saddam's son Uday led the
group of men who beheaded the women and terrorized their families.
The US State Department reports that human rights organizations receive
continuous testimony on the psychological trauma women have suffered
after being tortured and raped by Iraqi military personnel. Despite this
overwhelming evidence, feminists in the US praised Iraq and cited a
suspicious United Nations report that said Iraq "scored highest in
women's empowerment." Before the capture of Saddam, NOW stated in a
press release posted on their website that Iraqi women "currently enjoy
more rights and freedoms than women in other Gulf nations, such as Saudi
Arabia."
At an International Alliance for Justice press conference in 2002, Safia
al-Souhail, an Iraqi woman whose father was murdered for opposing
Saddam, said, "We are here begging the support of the free world to
liberate us from the nightmare we have been living in for the past three
decades." Al-Souhail also said, "Disarmament alone will not end our
suffering. This regime should be indicted for its crimes against
humanity."
NOW and their cohorts were deaf to these women's pleas and still condemn
the war in Iraq. Feminists invent problems in the US and ignore the real
problems faced by women around the world. NOW accuses President Bush of
"reversing women's rights here and abroad." Feminist Majority leader
Eleanor Smeal odiously said that the Bush Administration "needs to
construct a foreign policy as if women mattered."
The deceptively titled March for Women's Lives in April brought
thousands of feminists and leftist supporters to Washington, DC. Rather
than march against the atrocities and violence against women in Iraq and
other countries around the world, feminists waved coat hangers and
demanded taxpayer-funded abortions. Cybill Shepherd held a sign that
said, "Too bad John Ashcroft's mother didn't believe in abortion." Amid
"Fire Bush," "Tarts for Choice" and other placards feminist icon Gloria
Steinem told the crowd, "This government is the greatest danger on
earth!"
Echoing the hateful and hysterical rhetoric, Senator Hillary Clinton,
with no apparent sense of irony regarding the previous administration,
said she was there to criticize President Bush for "not upholding laws
against sexual harassment and discrimination."
These radical feminists' stance on military action in Iraq and the
global war on terrorism illustrate how they have consistently fallen
short of their purported mission to "eliminate sexism and eliminate all
oppression." Their motives are clearly political and not based on
advancing the rights of women around the world. When faced with a war
that liberated the Iraqi people, a majority of whom are women, feminists
would much rather turn a blind eye to the horrors of Saddam than support
America and the Bush Administration.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
CIA + FBI Must Connect Dots on muslims' Sexist Terrorist Psychopathology
KKKlinton's FEMINIST Ambassadress stopped FBI Special Agent John O'Neill
"A coincidence is a scientific anomaly."
-- Gil Grissom, CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, Season 3, Episode 12
Political correctness is only hampering intelligence and law enforcement
work. A brave, female FBI Special Agent knew that there was something
wrong with an unemployed dirty arab taking flight schools in Minnesota.
Years before, as documented by CBS' 60 Minutes, the Philippines gave
Sandy "National Archives Burglar" Berger specific, credible information
about another dirty arab terrorist plot to hijack 6 planes and crash
them into CIA headquarters. Alas, the unqualified goon Sandy "National
Archives Burglar" Berger, who hates Asians and female FBI Special
Agents, promptly kept that information from the CIA and FBI -- and
destroyed documents from the National Archives.
But wait, there's more.
As documented in PBS Frontline's "The Man Who Knew," Clinton's FEMINIST
Ambassadress to Yemen prevented the FBI's top terrorism expert, Special
Agent John O'Neill, from investigating the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole.
In disgust, John O'Neill retired from the FBI to work at the World Trade
Center. It is no coincidence that John O'Neill was murdered on 9/11, as
the evidence shows that KKKlinton's goons gave away top secret targeting
information about O'Neill's whereabouts to al-Qaeda operatives.
* * *
Sexist "honor" crimes give insight into muslims' terrorist
psychopathology
Burned Alive
By Souad. Warner, 225 pp., $24.
Sunday, August 15, 2004
Andrea Simakis
Plain Dealer Reporter
From almost the moment it happened, the question hung in the air like
smoke from the wreckage of the World Trade Center. Who could do such a
thing?
We soon knew who orchestrated the carnage on Sept. 11, 2001. We saw the
faces of the men who carried out the attacks. The foreign syllables
rolled off our tongues as if we'd known them all their lives: Osama bin
Laden, al-Qaida. But what was in their hearts? What allowed them to turn
planes to missiles and murder thousands?
The question remains a hole in American intelligence. Hot rhetoric "They
hate freedom, therefore they hate us" doesn't explain the easy violence
of Sept. 11 or the bombings as frequent as sunrise in Iraq. Neither do
new hardcovers by White House and CIA insiders riding best-seller lists.
A better answer might be found in a new, unpolished but haunting memoir
that, on its surface, has nothing to do with international terrorism.
"Burned Alive," subtitled "A Victim of the Law of Men," offers real
insight into the culture and psyche of bin Laden, his supporters and
followers without ever mentioning his name.
The Palestinian-born author, Souad (writing under a pseudonym to protect
herself from vengeful relatives), is one of the few survivors of Jamirat
el Sharaf, a crime of "honor" in which families kill their girls and
women in countries throughout Asia and the Middle East.
.....
For Souad, a slap or kick was common if the water for her father's tea
took too long to heat. More serious infractions picking a tomato before
it was ripe or falling asleep while milking the cow drew his cane across
her back or licks from his belt.
Sometimes, he dragged her across the floor by the hair, a favorite
method of discipline among men in her clan. Souad argues that such
treatment was the norm for women of her village. She also maintains that
the pathology that passed for filial ties in her household wasn't
unique; she didn't have an especially sadistic father or a Medea for a
mother. Everyone, she writes, acted that way.
Chastity and blind obedience were keys to survival. Even the appearance
of sexual impropriety was enough to start the town gossips clucking.
Inside Souad's insular, tribal community in the occupied territories,
words were sharper than sticks, deadlier than stones.
"Did she go out alone? Or was she seen speaking to a man?" Souad
wondered, years after watching her brother strangle to death one of her
sisters with a black telephone cord. There was no funeral, no burial.
She simply disappeared. "Was she denounced by a neighbor? It doesn't
take much at all before a girl is seen by everyone as a charmuta [*****]
who has brought shame to the family and who must now die to wash clean
the honor not only of her parents and her brother but of the entire
village!"
Souad never learned what sin her sister had committed because girls
shared no confidences. "They're too afraid of speaking, even among
sisters," she writes. Revolt was unthinkable.
"If your father points to a corner of the room and tells you to stay in
that corner for the rest of your life, you won't move from there until
you die. If your father places an olive on a plate and tells you that
today that's all you'll have to eat, you eat only that olive. It is very
difficult to get out of this skin of consenting slave. You're born into
it as a female."
Although she knew that to lose her virginity before marriage carried a
death sentence, Souad agreed to forbidden trysts with her beloved in the
sun-bleached fields where she tended her father's sheep. But when she
told her handsome boyfriend that she'd missed a period, he abandoned
her. In desperation, she bashed her belly with a rock, hoping to abort
her deadly secret. Nothing worked. Soon, even her drab, loose-fitting
dress couldn't hide the growing bulge.
Her parents held a family meeting and coolly selected an assassin, then
left the house so the murderer could be alone with his victim.
She was doing laundry in the courtyard when her bother-in-law Hussein
arrived.
"Hi. How goes it?" he said, chewing on a blade of grass, smiling. "I'm
going to take care of you." For a second, Souad thought he would spare
her. She lowered her head, ashamed to look at him, her forehead pressed
against her knees. Then she felt a cold liquid running over her head.
Suddenly, she was on fire.
"It is like a movie that has been speeded up, images racing past. I
start to run in the garden, barefoot. I slap my hair, I scream. I feel
my dress billow out behind me. Was my dress on fire too? . . . I smell
the odor of grilled meat."
Somehow, she clambered over the garden wall and landed in the street.
Two women tried to put her out, beating the flames with their scarves.
They dragged her to the village fountain, immersing her in its cool
water.
The fire fused her chin to her chest. But despite horrific burns and
doctors who neglected to give her proper care, Souad stubbornly refused
to die, even giving birth to a son alone in a dark hospital room. Word
of her miraculous survival reached Jacqueline, a Western aid worker with
a Swiss foundation devoted to rescuing victims of honor crimes and other
religious and cultural customs that target women.
Jacqueline charmed hospital staff, convincing them to at least disinfect
Souad's wounds. Later, she visited Souad's parents, who were in mourning
because their daughter was still alive. She persuaded them to allow her
to take Souad, and the girl's tiny son, to Europe.
.....
Often hard to read, as painful and raw as Souad's charred flesh, the
book has more than a few chilling parallels to "The Handmaid's Tale,"
Margaret Atwood's imagined world where women are little more than slaves
and breeders, beaten and executed for the slightest infraction. But
Souad's burns and just-as-disfiguring psychological scars aren't
fiction. Although there are no reliable statistics about the number of
honor killings committed each year, hundreds of women in Iran and
Jordan, Pakistan and Turkey, Iraq and Saudi Arabia are murdered by the
men in their lives as courts and police look the other way.
Souad's harrowing life and near-death teaches that a society that
encourages men to oppress, terrorize and kill its daughters and sisters
and wives, martyr them on the altar of male ego, is capable of any
cruelty.
When a videotape of Sept. 11 hijackers passing through security at
Dulles airport was released weeks ago, talking heads marveled at their
cool. How could they board the flights so carelessly, as if going on a
routine business trip?
Their nonchalance should have come as no surprise. It was as easy as
dousing a pregnant girl, her head bent to her chest as if in prayer,
with gasoline.
Simakis is a writer for The Plain Dealer Sunday Magazine.
http://www.cleveland.com/entertainment/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/entertainment/1092479615270830.xml
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
.
|
