Tag Archive for: shariah

The Tale of Two Catholic Cardinals: Chicago’s Francis George & New York’s Timothy Dolan

Hope all is well on this “Feast Day of Our Lady of Sorrows” as we bring you a very interesting e-mail here for you – a look at the two former Presidents of the USCCB – Cardinal Francis George (pictured above) and Cardinal Timothy Dolan – a stark comparison of two completely different men; two different types of cardinals; and two leaders of large and popular archdioceses in our country.

Cardinal George closely oversees the archdiocese of Chicago with two keen eyes while Cardinal Dolan nonchalantly watches over New York City with a very sleepy eye. Both archdioceses have their fair share of crime; the abortion rates are high and both cities are always under the spotlight. But, while Cardinal George takes pride in preaching boldly from the Gospels and getting out in the streets to fight crime and the other evils of a big city like Chicago – without looking for the limelight – Cardinal Dolan plays it safe – hangs out with the Pro-abortion politicians, ministers Holy Communion to them, has taken the title of the grand Marshall at the controversial St. Patrick’s Day Gay parade – and lives for the limelight…Two completely different men – both cardinals, both archbishops. Both walking in different directions.

Friends: Please take a look at the below article from the bold and courageous Cardinal George as his views on Gay marriage, Obamacare and abortion – to name a few – are quite different than this successor, Cardinal Dolan.

Cardinal George’s comments are right on target and what the Catholic faithful should consider as Catholic doctrine, Catholic teachings. He has no problem telling it like it is, has the courage to back it up and goes as far as referring to those Catholics who do not adhere to these Catholic Church teachings as the “fake church”. A devout supporter of the “Holy Roman Catholic Church”, he could not have said it any better as I refer to this new church-goer as the Progressive American Catholic – a member of this fake church that the cardinal is referring to and the church-goer that Cardinal Dolan has catered to and is actually in the process of creating, as we speak…

This “Progressive American Catholic” is completely different than the “Holy Roman Catholic” and that is the crux of the problem in the United States today.

The Catholic Church has become divided. One comes from the liberal “church of nice” – where everything is relative and everything is accepted. The other comes from the Holy Catholic Apostolic Church – the one that Jesus built upon Peter, the Rock, whose foundation is solid and will last throughout eternity. Those are the Catholic Church teachings that Cardinal George relies on and lives by. Cardinal Dolan, on the other hand, finds himself in that “politically correct” church of nice – where mostly anything goes and being in front of the media is more important than saving souls. Again, two completely different church leaders with two different agendas and two different approaches – but, yet, represent the same Holy Catholic Church and the Vatican in Rome.

It will be very interesting to see what happens with these two different schools of thought as I for one, have had more than enough of Cardinal Dolan and the liberal controversies that he has brought to our beloved Catholic Church. Dolan has disgraced our Church way too many times and millions of Catholics around the country have also had enough and even many of Cardinal Dolan’s colleagues have not been too keen on his latest attention-getting shenanigans.

Meanwhile, keep focused on what Cardinal George is preaching and bringing to the pulpit. This is the type of church leader – courageous cardinal – that the Holy Catholic Church needs today. If more cardinals and bishops spoke and acted like this Holy Man of GOD, the Catholic Church would not be in the trouble it is in today. If they all spoke from the pulpits like Cardinal George and Cardinal Burke have been doing for years, then the Catholic Faithful would know what to follow, what church doctrine really is and what the real Holy Roman Catholic Church is all about. It’s time we all boldly stand together as One Body in Christ and bring our Church back to where it is supposed to be – the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church that Jesus founded over 2,000 years ago…Like EWTN’s fired up Catholic evangelist, Tom Peterson, said this past Wednesday evening at St. Jude Church in Tequesta:

CATHOLICS COME HOME…MAY MORE CATHOLIC CHURCH LEADERS LIKE CARDINAL GEORGE STEP UP AND LET THEMSELVES BE HEARD LOUD & CLEAR WHEN THEY SPEAK NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH! MAY CATHOLIC CHURCH LEADERS LIKE CARDINAL DOLAN STOP THEIR SELFISH & BLATANT ANTICS THAT CONTINUE TO DISGRACE OUR BELOVED HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH!!

Cardinal: U.S. ‘Creed’ on Gay Marriage Like Sharia Law

September 10, 2014 – 2:07 PM

By Michael W. Chapman

cardinalgeorge

Cardinal Francis George, head of the Catholic archdiocese of Chicago and a former president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. (AP)

(CNSNews.com) – Cardinal Francis George, head of the Catholic archdiocese of Chicago, said the levers of power in government, education, entertainment, and media are enforcing a “public creed,” a “fake church” that requires all citizens to approve of gay marriage and related sexual anomalies or be punished by the State, just “as Christians and Jews are fined for their religion in countries governed by Sharia law.”

Cardinal George, who was president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in 2007-10, made his remarks in his Sept. 7 column for the archdiocesean newspaper. In his commentary, the cardinal explains that America , despite social frictions at certain times, had always strived to ensure religious freedom and respect for different religions.

The State, in the past, had “kept its promise to protect all religions and not become a rival to them, a fake church,” said the cardinal.

But that has now changed, he said. “In recent years, society has brought social and legislative approval to all types of sexual relationships that used to be considered ‘sinful,’” he continued.  “Since the biblical vision of what it means to be human tells us that not every friendship or love can be expressed in sexual relations, the church’s teaching on these issues is now evidence of intolerance for what the civil law upholds and even imposes.”

“What was once a request to live and let live has now become a demand for approval,” said Cardinal George, whose archdiocese includes about 2.2 million Catholics.  “The ‘ruling class,’ those who shape public opinion in politics, in education, in communications, in entertainment, is using the civil law to impose its own form of morality on everyone.”

“We are told that, even in marriage itself, there is no difference between men and women, although nature and our very bodies clearly evidence that men and women are not interchangeable at will in forming a family,” he said.  “Nevertheless, those who do not conform to the official religion, we are warned, place their citizenship in danger.”

The cardinal then noted that Americans who objected on religious grounds to the Obamacare mandate on contraceptives, sterilizations, and abortion-inducing drugs, were chastised by many in the media, including the liberal Huffington Post, which claimed the opposition, and the six Catholic judges on the Supreme Court, raised “concerns about the compatibility between being a Catholic and being a good citizen.”

This was not the anti-Catholic voice of nativists, or the Know-Nothing Party, or the Ku Klux Klan, said the cardinal, but, “rather, the self-righteous voice of some members of the American establishment today who regard themselves as ‘progressive’ and ‘enlightened.’”

“The inevitable result is a crisis of belief for many Catholics,” said Cardinal George.  “Throughout history, when Catholics and other believers in revealed religion have been forced to choose between being taught by God or instructed by politicians, professors, editors of major newspapers and entertainers, many have opted to go along with the powers that be.

”This reduces a great tension in their lives, although it also brings with it the worship of a false god,” he said.  “It takes no moral courage to conform to government and social pressure. It takes a deep faith to ‘swim against the tide,’ as Pope Francis recently encouraged young people to do at last summer’s World Youth Day.”

The cardinal continued, “Swimming against the tide means limiting one’s access to positions of prestige and power in society. It means that those who choose to live by the Catholic faith will not be welcomed as political candidates to national office, will not sit on editorial boards of major newspapers, will not be at home on most university faculties, will not have successful careers as actors and entertainers.” “Nor will their children, who will also be suspect,” he said.

“Since all public institutions, no matter who owns or operates them, will be agents of the government and conform their activities to the demands of the official religion, the practice of medicine and law will become more difficult for faithful Catholics,” said Cardinal George.  “It already means in some States that those who run businesses must conform their activities to the official religion or be fined, as Christians and Jews are fined for their religion in countries governed by Sharia law.”

Cardinal George went on to argue that U.S. civil law has done much to weaken and destroy the family, which in turn has forced the State to impose more and more restrictions on people and their activities that are unloosed from the “internal restraints that healthy family life teaches.”

He also says that many of the “tenets of the official State religion” are largely dictated by elements of a certain social class, noting that “’same-sex marriage,’ as a case in point, is not an issue for the poor or those on the margins of society.” How the situation may end, said the cardinal, is unclear because there are many Americans, “even among the ruling class, who do not want their beloved country to transform itself into a fake church.”

Catholics and traditional Christians know by faith, said Cardinal George, thatChrist will return to judge the living and the dead and the church “will be there to meet Him.”

However, “[t]here is no such divine guarantee for any country, culture or society of this age or any age,” concluded Cardinal George.

The archdiocese of Chicago, established in 1843, serves about 2.2 million Catholics through 356 parishes, and with more than 1,400 priests and 1,600 women religious. The archdiocese operates 44 schools and 5 colleges, the latter educating 49,000 students. The archdiocese also oversees 17 Catholic hospitals, assisting 2.6 million people a year, and helps another 1.2 million people through 150-plus different charities.

Islam is the Face of Evil

“ISIS is not Islamic”, said  Barack Obama as he gave yet another vapid speech to say what he will or will not do next about the threat of Islam. What he said is both idiotic and a lie. ISIS calls itself the Islamic State.

Obama used the word “war” only once, but ISIS is all about war—an Islamic holy war that has been waged since 632 AD.

The one person neither named, nor blamed is the so-called prophet, Mohammad, yet everything being done by the jihadists today is being done in his name.

In his memoir, “Dreams from my Father”, Obama, in the preface to its second edition, wrote: “Nor do I pretend to understand the stark nihilism that drove the terrorists that day (9/11) and that drives their brethren still. My powers of empathy, my ability to reach into another’s heart, cannot penetrate the blank stares of those who would murder innocents with abstract, serene satisfaction.” And therein is the problem that he, as President, and we as citizens must address.

Political correctness is so dominant in the Obama White House that no one in the U.S. government dares say anything that might be deemed critical of a so-called “religion” that sanctions beheadings, amputations, stoning, kidnapping hostages, ransoms, polygamy, and slavery. To anyone deemed an infidel or unbeliever or a Muslim who questions anything about Islam, death is the only option other than dhimmitude, a second-class citizenship.

The pure evil of Islam was seen most recently in the two videos of American hostages being beheaded by the Islamic State, but despite decades of attacks on U.S. embassies, the taking of U.S. hostages in Beirut and Tehran, attacks in Bali, Madrid and London, and the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and on the Pentagon, Americans have been slow to realize the intensity and size of the threat that the Middle Eastern and North African nations represent along with wherever else a large Muslim population exists.


As the U.S. and threatened Middle Eastern nations hurtle toward a military confrontation with the Islamic State, the name it has given to territory it has seized from northern Syria and into Iraq, a new book, Fault Lines: The Layman’s Guide to Understanding America’s Role in the Ever-Changing Middle East, ($00.00, Elevate, Boise, Idaho, softcover) provides one of the best, short histories on U.S. involvement and why, at this point, its influence has reached a low point.

Liebich writes of the way the U.S. policy regarding the Middle East changed over the years, particularly in the wake of World War II and the Cold War that followed as the Soviet Union challenged us for the implementation of communism worldwide. Dependent on the flow of oil from the Middle East, much of our strategic interest in the region was based on exercising our influence, often bringing about the removal of leaders whom we regarded as a threat to that necessity. After 9/11 that went into overdrive.

Liebich notes that our concept of nation-building proved costly, not just in the lives of our troops, but which included $50 billion in Iraq “and it didn’t work. Before you can build a nation you have to have a nation and only the citizens of that nation can decide what kind of a country they want to have.” The problem the U.S. encountered was that “In the Middle East, people related much more to the Ummah (the Muslim community) and to their own tribes.”

The problem that George H.W. Bush and his son, George W. Bush, encountered was that “The Middle East is a part of the world where many odd alliances appear. One is never sure who is allied with whom and whatever one thinks may all change tomorrow.”

Liebich takes note of the “Arab Awakening” that followed the U.S. invasion of Iraq that deposed Saddam Hussein. It began “with so much promise” followed by “its subsequent descent into chaos, has drastically changed the geopolitical landscape in the Middle East and North Africa.”

Liebich says “My definition of a vital national interest is one that deals with an existential threat to the United States, and one for which the U.S. is willing to spill its blood and to spend its treasure in order to accomplish its objectives. By this definition, the U.S. has no vital national interest in events in the Middle East.” Written prior to the emergence of the Islamic State, a new existential threat is facing the U.S.

Liebich says our strategic interests in the Middle East for many years included access to stable supplies of oil at reasonable prices; support for the state of Israel; preventing adversaries or potential adversaries from coming to power or achieving influence in the region; improving life for the people of the region; and preventing terrorist attacks on U.S. territories and citizens.

“The region has become the epicenter for terrorist groups, some of which have ambitions for a global reach.” That alone will require a renewed military involvement by the U.S. as we are the only nation with the capacity to alter the facts on the ground.

It comes at a time when the U.S. is close to having developed its oil reserves to a point where the oil of the Middle East will not determine our policies, but it is that oil which other nations such as those of Europe depend upon. China and India need it as well so its protection by and for the West as well as the developing Asian nations affects our decisions. Even Russia whose economy is dependent on oil and natural gas has cast its support for Syria along with Iran.

Everything, though, depends on understanding the true nature and intent of Islam.

Liebich ends his book with a quote from Winston Churchill who said, “We can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all other possibilities.”

Right now, the right thing is the destruction of the Islamic State.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

RELATED ARTICLE: Sorry Mr. President, ISIS Is 100 Percent Islamic

Boston Muslim running Islamic State’s social media campaign

Ahmad Abousamra is a Muslim from the Boston area. He is the son of a doctor. He is a computer expert, a graduate of Northeastern University, where he made the dean’s list. If only we could alleviate the grinding poverty and social marginalization of young men like this, they wouldn’t turn to jihad.

“The American computer wiz running brutally effective ISIS social media campaign: College-educated son of top Boston doctor is on FBI Most Wanted list,” by Michael Zennie, MailOnline, September 4, 2014 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

A college educated American citizen with a knack for computers is believed to be one of the men running the brutally effective ISIS social media operation, which is helping to attract hundreds of fighters from across the world – including the U.S., Britain and Canada.

Ahmad Abousamra, 32, was born in France and raised in the upscale Boston suburb of Stoughton. His father is a prominent endocrinologist at Massachusetts General Hospital. He attended the exclusive Xaverian Brothers Catholic high school and made the Dean’s List at Northeastern University.

He graduated with a degree in a technology field then took a job at a telecommunications company.

U.S. officials tell ABC News that he is now putting his skills to work for ISIS, the brutal terrorist organization that has been effectively using 21st century methods like Twitter memes, Facebook posts, selfies and YouTube videos to promote its radical 6th century Islamic ideals.

In 2004, federal authorities say, Abousamra left his American life behind and traveled to Iraq in the hopes of fighting U.S. soldiers as part of Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

Instead, he was recruited to the groups ‘media wing.’

‘If you do have a European language ability, if you have computer skills, if you are quite clever and you come join ISIS, you are likely to be used for social media output,’ Peter Neumann, the director of the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation, told ABC.

When he returned to the U.S. in 2006, he was questioned by the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force. He was released without charge and slipped out of the country and back to Syria.

In 2009, he was charged with federal terrorism offenses. He is currently on the FBI’s Most Wanted list and the government has offered a $50,000 reward for his capture.

Most Wanted: The FBI is offering a $50,000 reward for the capture of Abousamra, who is wanted on federal terrorism charges

Most Wanted: The FBI is offering a $50,000 reward for the capture of Abousamra, who is wanted on federal terrorism charges

Brutally effective: ISIS has managed to use 21th century tactics to promote its brutal 6th century worldview

Brutally effective: ISIS has managed to use 21th century tactics to promote its brutal 6th century worldview. For a larger view click on the image.

Authorities now believe Abousamra is in charge of running social media for ISIS, according to ABC.

ISIS has shown remarkable sophistication with its online presence. When the group released its video showing the execution of journalist James Foley, it was simultaneously posted on dozens of online forums, Twitter accounts of other social media sites.

A slew of Twitter and Facebook accounts spread the group’s message by posting pictures of the brutal executions and torture that ISIS terrorist bestow on their enemies – all while staying a step ahead of Silicon Valley’s attempts to shut them down.

Jihadist fighters who join ISIS, meanwhile, project an image of a certain kind of twisted glamour, showing off their new life and posing with weapons and on military vehicles.

‘ISIS understands very well that in order for an act of terrorism to be effective, it needs to actually terrorize people,’ Mr Neumann told ABC.

‘The act of communication that follows the act of violence is almost as important as the act of violence itself.’

RELATED ARTICLES:

Islamic State propagandist was regular worshiper at Islamic Society of Boston

Ex-Muslim and son of imam: Islamic State following “steps of Islam’s prophet Muhammad to the letter”

600 Muslims from Britain now waging jihad for the Islamic State

Italy: 11 Muslims investigated for jihad activities, waging jihad in Syria

Islamic jihadists vow to free Iberian Peninsula from “Spanish and Portuguese occupation”

Obama: We will defeat the Islamic State like we did al-Qaeda

Report: More “Americans” Killed Fighting with ISIS in Syria

New Jihadi Entitlement Program — A One Way Ticket to Paradise

I have a plan to deal with American traitors who want to be Islamic jihadis.

RELATED ARTICLE: Muslim Sermon “ISIS Was Born From Hillary Clinton’s Filthy Womb”

EDITORS NOTE: The featured edited image originally appeared on Jihadmin.

Iraq is an American War

Like many Americans I advocated ending our participation in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. I was wrong. Being war-weary is no excuse for not realizing that we are in a very long war with the enemies of civilization and reluctant to being fully engaged in it.

On Monday, President Obama had to take a break from his Martha’s Vineyard vacation to make a short televised statement that, as far as he’s concerned, this is Iraq’s war and, though he did not mention him by name, Iraq’s former Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has got to get out of the way of the newly constituted Iraqi government. At this writing he’s refusing to do that.

You could see how unhappy Obama was when he had to authorize U.S. forces to engage again in Iraq, this time to slow the advance of the Islamic State’s (IS) forces on Erbil using air power while declaring that there would be “no boots on the ground.” He only took action when it was clear that an IS genocide was in the making. Only the U.S., England and France had the capacity to drop food and water, and provide aid to the refugees.

Both the President’s and his press secretary’s earlier statements emphasized the need for “Iraqi forces” to take the lead in opposing the IS, but unmentioned was the way two divisions of Iraqi forces fled from combat with them and left a treasure trove of U.S. weaponry, tanks, and vehicles. Those who did not escape fast enough were taken prisoner and killed. Crucifixions and beheadings are favored by IS along with killing Christian women and children, reportedly by burying them alive.

The Iraqi government is barely functional. Its military, despite years of equipping and training by U.S. advisors, were clearly reluctant to die for Iraq. Maliki had replaced many of the seasoned officers with political appointees. If there is anything left of the Iraqi military, there is little mention of it.

The military of the Kurds, one of America’s best allies in Iraq, has been begging the U.S. for military equipment, but the Obama administration waited to provide any until there was no other option. The government of Maliki—if it still is under his control—has denied the Kurds military aid and funds due them. If they survive IS, the Kurds have every right to declare themselves an independent state. Of strategic importance is an airfield that U.S. planes could use to attack IS, but Obama doesn’t want to do that in a way that will destroy them.

So that makes what is occurring there our war, an American war, just as the decision to respond in Afghanistan after 9/11 was an American war and the decision to depose Saddam Hussein as Iraq’s dictator was an American war. In both cases Americans learned that there was no real government to take charge if they left, so they stayed. Most Arab nations were and are run by monarchs or men who seized power. They have little experience with democracy and the divisions between Sunni and Shiites work against cooperation.

American forces stayed in Iraq until President Obama pulled them out. They are, as least in the skies above Iraq, back and there is a small contingent of “boots on the ground.” We have forces in Afghanistan, but as Obama told a West Point class, he will take them out in 2015. Telling the enemy when you’re going to leave is not taught to West Pointers any more than telling the enemy when and where you intend to attack.

Obama - Prophet of IslamObama’s disdain for our nation’s military is rivaled only by his devotion to Islam.

We have a President so lacking in any military experience or desire to use our military that he has been more than happy to let “sequestration” reduce our forces to the pre-World War Two level. That was a bad idea back then and is a worse idea today. Another bad idea is the reduction of captains and majors—some in war zones—that is being implemented. These are the leadership corps to whom non-commissioned officers respond.

His lack of regard for our nation’s military contributed to the neglect of the problems that were revealed in the Veterans Administration; problems Obama was aware of as a U.S. Senator before he ran for office declaring the conflict in Iraq “a dumb war.”

On August 12 The Washington Times reported “The president who spent years touting the withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq suddenly has had to distance himself from that action. At the White House on Saturday morning — less than 48 hours after authorizing airstrikes against Islamist militants and humanitarian air drops to save the lives of trapped Iraqi civilians — President Obama blamed his predecessor, George W. Bush, for the absence of American troops in Iraq and rejected the assertion that he could have left a small peacekeeping force in the war-torn nation.” How pathetic is that?

In the real world there are real enemies and using force to repel and destroy them is the essence of history. I doubt Obama has the character or the wisdom to engage the Islamic State with sufficient force to destroy it.

Attacking the Islamic State forces in Iraq and Syria is an act of self-defense for America in the same way the attacks on al Qaeda were and are self-defense. Better to do it in Iraq, Syria and anywhere else we must than to have to do it here.

With the anniversary of 9/11 just weeks away, it behooves us all to remember we were attacked on our homeland and a far more barbaric entity, the Islamic State, will surely attack us if we do not kill them first.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Dearborn residents on terrorist watch list second only to New York

“At 96,000 residents, Dearborn is much smaller than the other cities in the top five, suggesting that its significant Muslim population—40 percent of its population is of Arab descent, according to the U.S. Census Bureau—has been disproportionately targeted for watchlisting.” Hamas-linked CAIR is already manning the barricades over this, but after all, there is no effect without a cause. The idea that the Muslim residents of Dearborn were “disproportionately targeted for watchlisting” because of some official “racism” and “Islamophobia” is howlingly absurd. There is jihad activity among Muslims, including in the U.S., and so for authorities to be alert to that fact is entirely reasonable.

“Dearborn residents on terrorist watch list second only to New York, report says,” by Aysha Jamali, Press & Guide, August 5, 2014:

Dearborn School Board President Hussein Berry carries an American flag during an anti-terrorism protest at U.S. District Court in Detroit in 2010 during a hearing for Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the attempted bomber of Delta Flight 253 on Christmas Day 2009. File photo

Among the U.S. cities that have the most residents on the government’s terrorist watch list is one that stands out because of its comparatively small population: Dearborn.

Dearborn, a suburb of Detroit, was described by The Intercept, an online news site that reports on issues of national security, as having the second-highest concentration of people designated by the government as “known or suspected terrorists.”

The report said that Dearborn’s ranking, just behind New York City and ahead of Houston despite their significantly larger populations, has to do with its concentration of Arab and Muslim Americans.

Dearborn has the largest percentage of Arab Americans in the country, according to the report.

“At 96,000 residents, Dearborn is much smaller than the other cities in the top five, suggesting that its significant Muslim population—40 percent of its population is of Arab descent, according to the U.S. Census Bureau—has been disproportionately targeted for watchlisting,” the report said.

The top five U.S. cities on the watchlist for “known or suspected terrorists” are:

1. New York
2. Dearborn
3. Houston
4. San Diego
5. Chicago

RELATED ARTICLES:

CNN has two Israel-haters debate on Israel: no pro-Israel voices allowed
Colorado Muslima’s lawyer working on deal in jihad terror case

How Islam Built The Very Fabric of America

Did Islam really build America?

It’s a silly question to ask; of course we’re a Muslim nation with a deep Islamic tradition – it should be enough that Barack Obama says Islam built America. But, as everybody knows, the history books were written by Islamophobes.

Many Americans, especially the notoriously ignorant home and private schooled types, actually believe our country was built on a Christian tradition. Nothing could be farther from the truth. A quick tour of American history should put the argument to rest once and for all.

Let’s begin with the Muslim pilgrims on the Mayflower in 1620, who left England to seek religious freedom in the New World. On the way, they wrote the Mayflower Compact to institute Sharia Law in the Plymouth colony. The Mayflower Compact famously begins with, “In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent…” and then goes on to explain how they will expand the Caliphate.

In 1630, the great imam, John Hussein Winthrop, wrote “A Model of Muslim Charity,” a speech just peppered with quotes from the Qur’an. This is the speech from which we get the famous “Cordova on a Hill” metaphor, signifying what America stands for before the yet unconquered world.

Fast forward to 1639. Muslims settling along the Connecticut River wrote the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, a document widely believed to be America’s first constitution. It clearly states in the opening paragraph that their purpose is to “enter into Combination and Confederation together, to maintain and preserve the liberty and purity of Islam as taught by the Prophet (peace be upon him) which we now profess, as also, the discipline of the Mosques, which according to the truth of the said Qur’an is now practiced amongst us…”

Further along in the Orders, it stated that a candidate for governor had to be “always a member of some approved Mosque.” There can hardly be any doubt that the founders of our colonies were devout Muslims.

I hardly need mention the Muslims who signed our Declaration of Independence in 1776, when we separated from British rule to form the North American Caliphate which would later have 57 to 61 states. How much clearer could Thomas Mohammed Jefferson have been when he concluded the document with “And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of Allah, the Most Merciful, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”

After the Revolution, we wrote the Constitution, which opens with “We, the subjects of the Caliphate…” What’s more, the first amendment to the Constitution clearly reads, “Congress shall make laws coercing compliance with Sharia, and prohibiting the free exercise of any of the religions of the infidels; and defining freedom of speech, and of the press; and the right of the people peaceably to assemble to burn private property in protests, and to accept whatever the Grand Mufti decrees for a redress of grievances.”

It even contains the interesting phrase: “done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the Sheiks present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of the Blessed Prophet (peace be upon him) one thousand one hundred and eighty seven and of the Independence of the United Sheiks of America the Twelfth…”

There is so much more, so when Barack Obama says we’re a Muslim nation, he’s only repeating what every other president in our nation’s history has already proclaimed: that Muslims indeed built the “very fabric of our nation.”

Isn’t it time we burned all the history texts and documents that have been corrupted by infidels?

Contact the Muslim Brotherhood’s Department of Education in Washington today and demand that they start teaching our children the truth about America’s Islamic roots and traditions.

Kafir: The Worst Word in Any Language

The name Kafir is the worst word in any language.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/buGToaZ1Tls[/youtube]

There is Only One Way to Prevent Shariah from Destroying America

I am not going to spend hours and hours to answer this question.  America, Israel, Canada, and other non Islamic countries can be spared their destruction from the evils of the Islamic ideology by only one method.

I am not a war monger, not do I desire any form of violence, or want to see innocent children harmed by a war in their country.  I am providing my professional analysis of a very serious problem.  The problem is the Islamic ideology.  It is an ideology that lives, breeds, and grows faster than any known terminal form of cancer.

If we do not want America to be destroyed it is going to take Americans saying no to Islam.  Not just with bumper stickers.  Americans are going to have to demand the Islamic ideology and Shariah law to be labeled as an Islamic terrorist group.

Al Qaeda, Hamas, Boko Haram, and the dozens of other Islamic terrorist groups are just splinters from the Islamic ideology itself.  There is no good with such violent groups as the KKK, Al Sharpton’s organization, or the Islamic ideology.

Think back the last decade, how many days have gone by in which Islam and their murderers have not been in the world news.  In the name of Islam, their fighters have murdered thousands upon thousands of innocent men, women, and children.

Americans must stand up and fight the ‘Holy War’ Islamic leaders have always expressed their desire for.  The days of shaking hands and allowing Islam to spread in America are gone.  There are approximately 2300 mosques in America. Their numbers are growing and existing mosques are expanding in size.

How do Americans fight? 

Again this is my analysis, not my desire.  During the civil war Americans (due to politics) had to fight other Americans.  Politicians left Americans with no choice.  In 2014 after six long years of Socialist Obama, politics are again pitting Americans against people living in America.  The people within Islam are not Americans, regardless of what a court or politician dictates.  One can only be an American if he/she vows to put the U.S. Constitution as the supreme law of the land.  An American vows to give his/her life for America against enemies from the inside and out.

The Islamic ideology and it’s followers living in America do not support the U.S. Constitution over Shariah law.  If a Muslim tells you he/she does, they are lying to you. The only solution to save America is for America to be a land for Americans only or those who would give their life to support the U.S. Constitution. If a person does not meet this requirement then he/she should be considered an enemy of America.

Boko Haram, the group that kidnapped 300 innocent Christian children in Nigeria are practicing Islam as Mohammed and Shariah law dictate.  They are not radical. They are ‘Pure Muslims’ who desire to live in a land as Mohammed wanted.  They are just carrying out his commands. See:

Shariah Law: Family Stones Pregnant Lady

Muslim Clerics Resist Stopping Child Marriages 

Trolley Square, SLC, Utah: Murders By Muslim

On 12 Feb 2007, a Muslim left a mosque in Salt Lake City, Utah.  He proceeded to Trolley Square Mall and murdered 5 innocent people in the name of Islam. I had personally conducted research at this mosque and rated it at the highest level for the potential of violence. This mosque is about a one minute walk to the Shopping Mall.

A bit of interesting trivia:

  • How many people die on average each year due to ‘Guns’?  30,000
  • How many people die on average each year due to ‘Alcohol’?  88,000
  • How many people die each year due to ‘Tobacco’?  443,000
  • How many Babies’ are murdered each year in the name of ‘Abortion’?  1.7 million

Do readers truly believe politicians, our law enforcement, media, or liberals really want to save Americans from needless death?  Why do they choose to put guns as their number one enemy, when a hundred times more die from Alcohol or Tobacco?  A thousand times more innocent babies are killed by abortions each year in America than people killed by guns (30,000).

It would be more appropriate for these hypocrites to ban alcohol, tobacco, and stop murdering innocent children if they really care about human life. The fact is, sadly, they don’t care.

Minneapolis: From Hijab to Jihad

ows_139674139624040

Mayor Betsy Hodges donned a dark blue hijab as she addressed a group of business owners and elders at a Somali mall in south Minneapolis. Photo courtesy StarTribune.com.

Did Minneapolis’s democrat Mayor Betsy Hodges not get it? This was no game, not dress-up playtime or Carnival. Then I wondered if she ever found occasion to dress in the ethnic clothing of her city’s other ethnicities – the Germans, Swedes, Norwegians, Danes, English, Polish, Irish, French Canadians, Native Americans? Perhaps she had not done her homework about the Somali immigrants, and it took her only 100 days into office to don a hijab for an alliance.

Surely, she has heard all the recent news about the subjugation and severe treatment of women in the Islamic Middle East; the Honor Diaries film that the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is trying to suppress; the controversy over Brandeis University’s bestowing and then rescinding an honorary degree to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the pressure applied by CAIR that forced Disney to cancel a movie that Muslims find “offensive,” and more. Then why would she don the quintessential symbol of inequality and bondage – the shroud of the Islamic woman.

Interestingly, the mayor has a strong admiration for Wonder Woman, the most popular female superstar in figure-hugging, stars-and-stripes regalia, with bracelets that make her invincible. Hodges is a collector of Wonder Woman dolls and has recently hung a photograph of this shining symbol of strength and sexual equality on her office wall. Rather than emulate her heroine, however, she abandoned the image with which she allegedly identifies, this icon of bravery and justice, for cowardice and deceit.

Perhaps she is a Lost Soul, one without direction, without ties to ethics or principles, unstable in today’s culture and society. Unwilling or unable to stand up for American ideologies, she too easily acquiesced to the preferences or demands of the archenemy of humankind. Whether Hodges was clueless and diplomatically inept or has emerged with a heretofore concealed agenda remains to be seen, but both choices do not bode well for the office she holds.

What began as the 7th century Bedouin woman’s attempt at privacy and protection in the desert, these shrouds have become a symbol of woman’s indignity and servitude. As Nonie Darwish so aptly explained in her book, Cruel and Usual Punishment, woman has come to represent the totality of evil and inferiority in Islamic teaching. Considered lacking in intelligence and religion, women are seen as half, and sometimes a quarter, of man’s worth in a Shari’a court (Islamic law). They may be beaten by their husbands and forbidden to leave the house unless accompanied by a male relative. They may be killed by their fathers if the parent deems his honor compromised. In this oppressive society, women are the ones who preserve the honor of the male, so that he may avoid responsibility and disrepute for any unpleasantness or trouble.

Betsy Hodges Endorsement

Betsy Hodges campaign ad. For a larger view click on the image.

The hijabs and burqas serve the purpose of enforcing obedience to Shari’a and to men. With the obligation of defending their enslavement under constant threat of their own destruction, they may become very self-justifying when challenged. Some may even try to earn honor and respect by joining the radicals for violent jihad (holy war against the infidel). But there’s more. To cultures that relish freedom, these hidden women are deemed victims of sadism, forced to endure the insufferable heat of the subtropics under layers of clothing, and prevented from enjoying the summer sun and cool breezes. In fact, medical experts have noted that women so covered in northern climes, with less sunshine, are suffering more from osteoporosis from the lack of Vitamin D, and experiencing an increased risk of pelvic fracture during childbirth. Their newborn babies are more prone to getting seizures from the same deficiency.

Islamic law is concerned more with raping, beating, flogging, and stoning women than it is in honoring them. The Shari’a demand that women be covered from head to toe is also the Islamic way of solving the problem of male sexual temptations. Rather than teach the men self-restraint and respect, the onus is on the woman to hide herself, her sexuality, her body, her shame. Tragically, because there are women who want to appear as being obedient to their god and faith, it becomes the burden of other women to withstand being hated, ridiculed, or become targets of fatwas. Women face divisiveness or derision at every turn, and their society discourages, and even hinders, women from establishing friendships, particularly where polygamy is practiced.

Betsy Hodges Ad Campaign

Betsy Hodges Ad Campaign. For a larger view click on the image.

To have surrendered her dignity, self-esteem, pride in her American heritage and culture. goes beyond Hodges’ courtship of a voting bloc or fulfilling a promise to constituents. She is responsible for having her female police chief and city council representatives wear the hijab on February 28, proclaimed Hijab Day at City Hall. Rather than guide these new immigrants in becoming Americans, as previous ethnic groups have done, she is accepting their customs and laws over our own.

When the intruder or invader makes demands (no matter how subtle) that are met with compliance and submission from the host culture, this is conquest, not assimilation. I am deeply concerned as to how Hodges and her administration will address future demands, as they will surely be forthcoming – whether for Islamizing children in the classroom, serving only halal foods in the cafeterias, observing Islamic holidays on the city calendar, or all manner of accommodations in everyday life.

Hodges’ decision may well have been meticulously planned. Her hijab is stealth jihad.

RELATED STORIES:

Minneapolis Lesbian Police Chief Dons Hijab for “Hijab Day”
Minneapolis City Council creates Somali-American day
Connecticut: Lawsuit alleges Edible Arrangements favored Muslims over non-Muslims

ACTION ALERT: Presentation on Islamist Supremacism in Tampa, FL on January 16th by Dr. Jonathan Matusitz

On Thursday, January 16th, 2014, Dr. Jonathan Matusitz will give a free presentation titled “Islamist Supremacism in America” in Tampa. Dr. Jonathan Matusitz is an Associate Professor at the Nicholson School of Communication, University of Central Florida.

The presentation will begin at exactly 6:30 p.m. at Mulligan’s Irish Pub, 10550 Regents Park Drive, Tampa, FL 33647. This presentation is open to the public.

Dr. Jonathan Matusitz will cover the following:

“Islamist Supremacism in America”
Islam in America: Why Should Americans Wake Up?
Islam Not Just a Religion: Also a Political System & Global Movement
Understanding Sharia
Islamist Threat to America – At the Local Level
Islamist Threat to America – At the Academic Level
Islamist Threat to America – At the Political Level
Solutions to Stop the Islamist Threat to America

Terrorism & CommunicationABOUT DR. JONATHAN MATUSITZ

Dr. Jonathan Matusitz (Ph.D., University of Oklahoma, 2006) is currently a tenured associate professor in the Nicholson School of Communication at the University of Central Florida (UCF). He studies globalization, culture, terrorism and health communication. On top of having 95 academic publications and over 100 conference presentations, he taught at a NATO-affiliated military base in Belgium in 2010. Originally from Belgium himself, he moved to the United States in 2000. In 2012, he was honored with a prestigious teaching award by the College of Sciences at UCF.

In 2011, Dr. Matusitz’s research was cited by the U.S. Supreme Court. His most recent book, Terrorism & Communication: A Critical Introduction, was published in 2012 by SAGE. His research methodologies include qualitative interviewing, content analysis, semiotics and theoretical analysis.

Dr. Matusitz has taught the following courses at UCF: Terrorism and Communication (COM 4416), Intercultural Communication (COM 4461), Conflict Management (COM 4462), Group Dynamics (SPC 4426), Nonverbal Communication (SPC 4331), Organizational Communication (COM 3120), Communication and Human Relations (COM 3011), Communication Research Methods (COM 3311), Health Communication (COM 6025), and Honors Fundamentals of Oral Communication (SPC 1600).

Dr. Phyllis Chesler an American Feminist Fighting Sharia

In December 2003 we organized a summit with noted counter-Jihadists at a private university club in Manhattan. We were endeavoring to develop a concerted campaign in America to warn about the threat of Qur’anic doctrine and sharia to Constitutional guarantees of free expression, liberty and freedom. We had assembled notable figures from both academic and non-academic research sources to attend the conference. Among the attendees was Dr. Phyllis Chesler, noted radical feminist, author of bestselling books and peer–reviewed journal articles, groundbreaking pioneer in the fields of women’s studies and founder of the Women’s Psychology Association.

When we made our initial acquaintance with her, we also learned of what had propelled her doctoral studies in these fields. She had been virtually imprisoned under the Islamic law in purdah, a women’s enclosure, in a polygamous household in Kabul, Afghanistan with her US passport taken away. All because she had married a man whom she thought was a young bohemian like herself at a private college in the US who came from a privileged Afghan family. Her marriage to her Afghan Muslim husband culminated a tempestuous relationship between a young scholarship student from an Orthodox Jewish background and the debonair attractive young Muslim man who shared her un-orthodox views.  Her marriage to her Afghan Muslim came at a time in the early 1960’s when cross cultural encounters were both exotic and yet politically correct. That fantasy ended upon her arrival at Kabul Airport with the taking of her US passport and abrupt introduction to Medieval 10th Century purdah in her husband’s Afghan household. Her debonair husband abandoned her in the women’s enclosure controlled by her Afghan mother-in-law who sought to convert her from Judaism to Islam. She subjugated Chesler to totalitarian control of her person under Islamic sharia law in violation of universal human rights.

Chesler’s subsequent illness, flight back to America, and annulment of her marriage to her Afghan husband led to her professional pursuit of an academic program in feminism and advocacy of changes in women civil rights and equality. Her 1972 landmark best seller, Women and Madness capped her research and women’s psychoanalytic practice, becoming an iconic work in 20thCentury American feminism. She also went on to deepen her appreciation of Judaism and to fight for female equality in worship, Torah and Talmud study against the strictures of Orthodox Judaism. Her deepening involvement in her Jewish faith, including a second marriage (and divorce) with an Israeli and birth of her son Ariel, crystallized in another pioneering work in 2003,The New Antisemitism. That book drew groundbreaking attention to delegitimization and demonization of Israel and the Jewish people by leftists and Palestinian advocates. Her views expressed in The New Antisemitismhave grown in importance given contemporary compelling research on European and Islamic Antisemitism. Views that belatedly have been recognized by both American and World Jewish leadership.  You can view Chester’s oeuvre of published works and scheduled appearances in 2014 at her website, here.

At the December 2003 private conference many of us in the emerging counter-jihad activist community heard her discuss Islam as a system of gender apartheid under sharia knowing that she had directly confronted it. We urged her to take the time out of her feminist endeavors and write about the experience. She subsequently did in a chapter her book, The Death of Feminism: What’s Next in the Struggle for Women’s Freedom and a Middle East Quarterly article in 2006, “How Afghan Captivity Shaped my Feminism.” That is a reflection of the long lasting support of Daniel Pipes of the Middle East Forum where she made been made a Fellow. That exposure drew her into conflict with many leaders in the US and world feminist movement who took multi-cultural relativism as an article of faith that conflicted with what Chesler contended was the imperative of universal civil liberties in the face of Islamic anti-Western triumphalism.

Chesler’s academic research also extends to honor killing, female genital mutilation  and support for banning the burqa under doctrinal Islam. As a result she has been much sought after to provide expert testimony in court matters involving Muslim women in such matters. In a recent Fox News op ed, “Beneath Burqa-Bruised and Badly Beaten Teenager”, about a  recent violent occurrence reported in The New Zealand Herald she drew attention to  the precursors to violence committed against Muslim women. Using the extreme example of quadruple honor killings of a polygamous Muslim family committed by the convicted Afghan Canadian Shafia family, she drew attention to the moral equivalence of “omerta” in Muslim families. Chesler said “that sustained physical abuse and psychological cruelty often precedes or is correlated with a subsequent honor killing.” In the case of the savage beating of the Muslim teenager in New Zealand, hidden from public view by a burqa, Chesler commented that the police became aware that “members of the community in positions of power and trust knew that the abuse was serious but did not help the girl.” Given the increasing evidence of cases of FGM committed in the US by African and Muslim émigré families, legislators in more than 21 states have introduced legislation seeking tougher sentencing guidelines despite existing federal law that prohibits the horrendous procedure.

Praise for her work in these latest efforts for women and freedom from Islamic totalitarianism is reflected in  her abiding friendship with two noted former Muslims, Sudanese former Dutch politician Ayaan Hirsi Ali, author of Infidel and Nomad: From Islam to America: A Personal Journey Through the Clash of Civilizations and our NER colleague, Ibn Warraq, author of critical works on Islam, including Why the West is Best: A Muslim Apostate’s Defense of Liberal Democracy.

Chesler has maintained communications with her former Afghan Muslim husband despite their divorce. Five decades following her escape from Kabul she completed the long suggested a memoir of her confrontation with an Islamic household ruled by sharia, An American Bride in Kabul. Read our review of Chester’s latest book in the current edition of the New English Review. 

We recently were afforded the opportunity to renew acquaintances and interview Dr. Chesler about her Afghan memoir, professional career as a psychoanalyst in women’s health, commitment to Jewish women’s equality and her advocacy and expert testimony against Islamic doctrinal denial of women’s rights to their physical person, liberty and freedom.

Jerry Gordon:  Dr Chesler thank you for consenting to this interview.

Phyllis Chesler:  Thank you for inviting me.

Gordon:  What prompted you to write, An American Bride in Kabul?

Chesler:  Afghanistan and its people seem to have followed me into the future and right into the West. Islamic burqas are here in America, on the streets and in the headlines. One reads about Afghanistan daily in most major newspapers. This is the country where I was once held hostage; it is the country which sheltered Bin Laden after he was exiled from Saudi Arabia and Sudan. He hatched his 9/11 plot in an Afghan cave. And now, the entire civilian world is being held hostage by Al Qaeda and Al-Qaeda-like Jihadists. An eerie coincidence. Also, in my lifetime, Afghanistan has also literally turned into a Margaret Atwood dystopian novel—even darker and more misogynistic than The Handmaid’s Tale. Given the increasing persecution and subordination of Muslim women, I decided to connect my five long months in purdah to the surreal lives of Afghan and Muslim women today, including in the West.

The Al Aqsa Intifada of 2000 and 9/11 also changed the direction this book would take. How could I write about Afghanistan and Muslim women without also writing about Jihadic terrorism and its war against civilians, both infidel and Muslim, and against both Israel and the West?

Gordon:  What was seductive about Afghan reformist Abdul-Kareem during your courtship at college that led to your marriage as an Orthodox Jewish woman to a Muslim man?

Chesler:  I was a naïve eighteen year old, a full scholarship kid at a private college and there he was—dapper, charming, debonair, a Prince right out of my childhood fairy tales, a fellow bohemian, as secular as I had become, and so very attentive. In retrospect, he was shadowing me, monitoring me, but at the time, I was flattered and thought it meant that he loved me very much. We never discussed religion. In 1959, there were no college courses about Islam or about Islam’s historic imperialism, colonialism, conversion by the sword, and slavery. I thought Jews and Muslims were both “other” in America and therefore somehow similar. He promised me a Grand Adventure the likes of which only wealthy, mainly British travelers had experienced: Time in a place that was once the cross-roads of the known world. Also, just perhaps, like so many other Jewish dreamers, I also yearned for a mystical union between Isaac and Ishmael. Thus, I married Ishmael.

Gordon:  What happened when you reached Kabul and entered your Afghan husband’s polygamous household?

Chesler:  When we landed in Kabul, officials smoothly removed my American passport—pro forma for all foreign brides. I never saw that passport again. Suddenly, I was the citizen of no country and had no rights. I had become the property of a polygamous Afghan family and was expected to live with my mother-in-law and other female relatives in purdah. That means that I was not allowed out without a male escort, a male driver, and a female relative as chaperones. I had expected a life of travel and adventure but this marriage had transported me back to the tenth century and trapped me there without a passport back to the future.

Gordon:  Describe for us how purdah, sharia treatment of women, subjugated your freedom in your Afghan husband’s household?

Chesler:  I lived gender apartheid long before the Taliban or the war lords arose. My Afghan husband was not religious but his family was and so was the country he had not lived in for more than a decade. My mother-in-law kept trying to convert me to Islam. Polygamy was accepted. Half-brothers jockeyed and competed for their father’s attention and inheritance. Although the women had been unveiled by King Zahir Shah in 1958, the poor women of Kabul and the women in the provinces wore burqas or hid from stranger-men behind long veils. Everyone’s marriage was arranged, traditionally to a first cousin, but not necessarily. There were no “love matches” which were viewed as a filthy Western idea. I was a prisoner in fairly post purdah. I could not go out alone, without permission, a male escort, and a female relative to chaperone me. No one but me found any of this abnormal or horrifying.

Gordon:  How much of the denial of basic freedoms in what you witnessed in Kabul was tribal versus emblematic of Islamic sharia treatment of women?

Chesler:  Women were not the only ones who lived under royal Afghan tyranny and a much closed society. Male political dissent was punished; any man who could not manage his wife was in trouble and got his family in trouble. My Afghan husband had brought an infidel, Jewish, American woman to Kabul as his bride. He was already in trouble. The jails in Afghanistan were always filled with political dissidents, “Western” oriented dreamers and thinkers who were tortured and locked away for years. Once, long ago, Afghanistan was pagan, Buddhist, Zoroastrian, Hindu, even Jewish—but that all ended with the Arab conquest and the forcible conversion of the people to Islam. It is sometimes hard to say that Islam versus tribal culture and tradition are responsible for what we view as human rights violations and atrocities. Let’s just say that any indigenous barbarism or tribal customs that existed in Afghanistan pre-Islam was not tempered or abolished by Islam. In some cases, for example, the stoning of an alleged adulteress/rape victims, the persecution of religious minorities, polygamy, cross-amputations, rote recitation of the Qu’ran in Arabic without comprehension, physical punishment of children by mullah-teachers, etc. is very much a part of Sharia practices.

Gordon:  How did the experience and flight from Kabul impact on your lifelong pursuit of feminism and women’s rights?

Chesler:  I believe my feminism was forged in purdah in Kabul. That experience may also explain why I am not a cultural relativist and why I believe in universal human rights. Even if we cannot guarantee such rights in a Muslim country, we can do so for everyone who lives here in the West and in North America. I am not one of those academics who believe that it is a woman’s religious right to choose to wear a face veil (niqab) or burqa (ambulatory body bag/sensory deprivation isolation chamber). I also understood that while American women may be discriminated against economically, politically, legally, and in terms of physical and sexual violence, that we have the right to fight for our rights, without being stoned or be-headed; we have free public libraries, access to education and employment, we are not forced into arranged marriages. Thus, I always understood that America, despite all its flaws, is the best country in the world, not the worst.

Gordon:  When did you return to the study and observance of Judaism and what place does Jewish feminism have in gender equality?

Chesler:  I have always been a proud Jew. I helped create feminist Jewish rituals (Passover Sedarim, etc.) and stood against anti-Semitism starting in the early 1970s. But, when I prayed with the Original Women of the Wall for the first time in 1988, I was asked to open the Torah for the women for the first-time ever. It wedded me fatefully to this struggle which is now in its 26th year. I began to study Torah. I joined synagogues, both Conservative and Orthodox. I published a book with my chevrutah (Torah study partner), Rivka Haut, who is a serious Talmud scholar, about this legendary struggle. Recently, alas, this struggle has now been fatefully compromised by a group we call The Women of Robinson’s Arch, led by Anat Hoffman, the very woman who defamed Israel all over the United States for the last decade. I never used this injustice against Jewish women’s religious rights at the Kotel against Israel in the world media. Actually, come to think about it, if we were waging such a struggle in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, or Afghanistan we would all have been stoned to death a long time ago. I publish devrai Torah which may be found at my website under Judaism. Feminism born in the secular world has been used by religious Jewish feminists who have become rabbis, cantors, and Torah scholars—which is rather revolutionary.

Gordon:  What was your career path subsequent to you return to America that transformed you into a pioneering academic in women’s studies and later co-founder of the Association of Women in Psychology?

Chesler:  I returned to complete my last semester at college, spent nearly three years fighting my Afghan husband for a divorce, something he opposed, entered graduate school in psychology, and got a Ph.D in 1969. I was also active in the American civil rights movement and became a leader in the American feminist movement. My first book, Women and Madness(1972) became a classic work and a bestseller. I would say that this work has possibly changed the mental health professions and their clients by at least 20-25%. Thus, sexism remains in the diagnosis and treatment of both genders. But 25% is still something

Gordon:  In Sacred Bond: The Case of Baby M (1988) you championed the rights of a surrogate birth mother in a New Jersey case and subsequent law. What were your arguments and the opposing views of liberal feminists?

Chesler:  I had published With Child. A Diary of Motherhood (1979) and Mothers on Trial. The Battle for Children and Custody, (1986) which I expanded and updated in 2011. I saw the Baby M case as a new and more terrifying kind of custody battle which it was. Many liberal feminists, themselves or their daughters wrestling with infertility problems, wanted this option if needed, especially since adoption is so perilous an undertaking in terms of bureaucratic red tape and other problems. Also, such feminists were ambivalent about biological motherhood and truly believed that if a woman—any woman—broke a contract that this would be used against all women in terms of women changing their minds. This is ridiculous. Men and business people always demand changes to contracts. But if a contract is illegal and immoral, involves enormous exploitation and risk to the “surrogate” mother, where is the glory in upholding it? When the Vatican came out against surrogacy, I was accused of “being in bed with the Pope.” I rather liked that.

Gordon:  You experienced 9/11 in Manhattan as a defining moment. How did it impact you and change your feminist agenda?

Chesler:  Even before that, the Al Aqsa Intifada had galvanized me. Although, as noted above, I had organized against anti-Semitism since the early 1970s, this was a quantum leap forward or backward. I knew the bloody beast was back and that I would have to write about it and about how the western intelligentsia was making common cause with Islamists who hated Jews and the Jewish state. When 9/11 happened, I said: “Now we are all Israelis.” And so we are.

Gordon:  The New Antisemitism (2003) was among the first serious examinations of the demonization and delegitimization of the Jewish nation of Israel and the Jewish people. In the decade since the book was published what developments have occurred that confirm your warnings?

Chesler: Thank you for remembering this. At the time it came out, major Jewish organizations were indifferent or hostile. I was mocked as the “Jewish Cassandra.” Liberal Jews would not allow me to speak. I was not reviewed in the mainstream media. On campuses, I needed bodyguards. Now, a decade later, the leaders of Jewish organizations are saying precisely what I said long ago. These same people are now raising money to organize on campuses. They claim they are “on it,” are solving the problem. They are not—they cannot, and they are way too late. Israel still does not have a Ministry devoted to Cognitive Warfare. We, the Jewish people, do not have an Al-Jazeera of our own which broadcasts around the clock globally, covers many issues, and when it comes to Israel and the Middle East, simply tells the truth. Israel has effectively lost the war of ideas. I belong to a premier group of pro-Israel advocates who are brilliant, informed, at the ready, but we are soldiers without boots or weapons and most work without funding. The determined and excellent grassroots pro-Israel groups that have sprung up fight each other for limited funding and Jews continue to give large sums to organizations that take no risks, still have President Obama’s back, and will sacrifice Israel in a heartbeat in the belief that they will remain safe and prosperous in America. Too few Jews want to bear the burden of associating themselves with a country which has been so demonized and isolated. Ironically, misogynist Jews, often Orthodox, often haredi, can be counted on to have Israel’s “back.”  Kavod kaved. Glory is a heavy burden indeed.

Gordon:  What was the message in The Death of Feminism (2005) that led to your complete rupture with academic and leftist feminists and your defense of Muslim and ex-Muslim women’s rights and issues?

Chesler:  There has been no complete rupture. I remain a feminist; I have not renounced the cause of women’s freedom. Also, over time, privately, cautiously, some Second Wave feminists have told me that I am brave, that I am right, that they wish they had the courage to speak out. My closest allies today are Muslim and ex-Muslim feminists and dissidents and religious Jewish feminists. But politically correct journalists succeeded in keeping me as well as many others who share my views, off the mainstream/left stream airwaves and away from all the distinguished lecture podiums. Every so often, I get across the aisle. I will continue to talk to both sides of the aisle.

Gordon:  You have defined the treatment of women under sharia as gender apartheid. How can the West combat it?

Chesler:  Very simply by enforcing the laws of our land. But it is also not so simple. When daughters are beaten and death threatened, forced to veil against their will, they rarely “tell” authorities and when they do, proper action is rarely taken. No one (teachers, guidance counselors, child protective services, physicians) in the West wants to believe that a family will actually conspire to kill one of their daughters because she does not want to wear hijab, drop out of school, and marry her first cousin; or because she wants a higher education, wants to choose her husband, has infidel friends, wants to lead a Western life. Also, “rescuing” such a girl will mean putting her in the equivalent of a federal witness protection program and giving her a new, extended, adoptive Muslim family. This is labor intensive and costly and America is not yet ready to undertake this. Also, girls, even endangered girls, love their families they fear, and do not want to leave them.

Gordon:  Why have honor killings occurred with disturbing frequency in the West?

Chesler:  Although Hindus perpetrate honor killings as well, they do so mainly in one part of India, they do not bring this custom with them into the West. Only Muslims do so. I have published three studies in Middle East Quarterly in 2009, 2010, and 2012. I strongly suggest that your readers view them: Are Honor Killings Simply Domestic Violence (2009); Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings (2010), and Hindu vs. Muslim Honor Killings (2012).

Gordon:  Recently proposed state legislation has been introduced against the practice of female genital mutilation (FGM). How prevalent is FGM in domestic Muslim and African émigré communities in this country and would the adoption of the proposed anti FGM legislation make a difference?

Chesler:  This practice continues even though it is prohibited by Federal law. I have recently been told by an immigration lawyer that FGM is very widespread in the United States and that the greatest number of such women are in New York City. New York! This means that unlicensed butchers carry out this often lethal and life-scarring procedure right here, sometimes without anesthesia; that girls are sent back home for “vacation cuttings;” and that licensed physicians are performing this mutilation. The girls and their families all believe that without this mutilation, the girl is impure, tainted, and that no one will marry her and she will remain a shameful burden to her father. Legitimate physicians will not treat pregnant women who have been mutilated which means that when they give birth, it is with no pre-natal care and in emergency rooms staffed by physicians who do not know how to cut through the massive scarring or how to safely remove such scarring after the birth. By the way, I do not believe that the Qu’ran mandates such mutilation; the custom began primarily as an African tribal custom but has been spread via Islam to non-African countries such as Indonesia where the rates are increasing.

Gordon:  Under sharia doctrine domestic violence against women by husbands, male relatives and even female siblings is condoned for alleged unruly and disobedient behavior. Given that you are an expert witness in domestic cases involving Muslim and ex-Muslim women, has evidence of this surfaced in divorce, custody and spousal abuse matters?

Chesler:  I have submitted affidavits to judges on behalf of girls and women in flight from being honor killed and in search of asylum. I have also learned that my work has been relied upon in a number of high profile prosecutions of honor killers in the West. This is a great privilege. Western style domestic violence sometimes results in femicide but not always. Honor killings are not like domestic violence. Mothers, fathers, aunts, uncles, brothers, sisters, and cousins do not conspire to kill a teenage girl in the West. An honor killing is a family conspiracy or collaboration to do just this, although sometimes the victim is a battered wife. In both cases, the girl’s or the woman’s alleged disobedience is seen as shaming her family and ruining their standing in the community.

Gordon:  Thank you Dr. Chesler for this engrossing interview with insightful observations on the treatment of women under Islam.

Chesler:  Thank you for this opportunity to discuss these issues.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review.

Rep. Rooney (FL-16) Goes After Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

Two Members of the House Armed Services Committee, Congressmen Tom Rooney (R-FL) and Duncan Hunter Jr. (R-CA), sent a letter to General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff questioning why Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Matthew Dooley was given a negative Officer Evaluation Report (OER) on the grounds his instruction of a course on Radical Islam was offensive to Muslims and Islam.

Their letter dated October 10, 2012 states in part:

“It appears that LTC Dooley led this course well within the scope of NDU’s professorial guidelines, as NDU’s own Faculty Handbook states: “Academic Freedom at National Defense University is defined as freedom to pursue and express ideas, opinions, and issues germane to the University’s stated mission, free of limitations, restraints, or coercion by the University or external environment.”

It is our understanding that LTC Dooley did not violate any established University practices, policies or DoD regulations to merit a negative OER.”

The Congressmen’s letter concerns actions taken by General Dempsey earlier in the year when he publicly excoriated Lieutenant Colonel Matthew Dooley at a May 10, 2012 news conference claiming the course LTC Dooley was teaching at the Joint Forces Staff College (JFSC) was offensive to Muslims. General Dempsey caused LTC Dooley to be fired as an instructor, ordered his course, Perspectives on Islam and Islamic Radicalism, to be discontinued and that all material considered offensive to Islam be scrubbed from military professional education within JFSC and elsewhere within his command. General Dempsey further ordered that LTC Dooley be given a negative Officer Evaluation Report—the death knell for a military career.

Click here to read entire letter.

Rep. Rooney was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2008. Prior to that time, he served four years in the United States Army Staff Judge Advocate (SJA). During his years in SJA he served as Special Assistant to the U.S. Attorney at Fort Hood, TX prosecuting all civilian crimes on post. In 2002, Tom was selected to teach Constitutional and Criminal Law at the United States Military Academy at West Point.

Prior to his election as a congressman from California, Duncan Hunter Jr. served as an officer in the Marine Corps. He served three combat tours overseas: two in Iraq and one in Afghanistan.

The Congressmen’s letter asks “[W]hy the DoD was compelled to further discipline LTC Dooley by jeopardizing his reputation and his future in the service.”

LTC Matt Dooley

LTC Matt Dooley attended the United States Military Academy at West Point, where he graduated and received his commission as a Second Lieutenant, Armor Branch in May 1994. His assignments included deployment to Bosnia, Kuwait, and Iraq for a total of six operational and combat tours over the course of his career. He served as a Tank Platoon Leader, Tank Company Commander, Headquarters Company Commander, Aide-de-Camp (to three General Officers), and Instructor at the Joint Combined Warfare School. He is a graduate of the Command and General Staff College as well as the Joint Forces Staff College.

The Thomas More Law Center, a national nonprofit public interest law firm, based in Ann, Arbor, Michigan, represents LTC Dooley.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center observed, “The purpose of the Army is to fight and win wars. So what happened to LTC Dooley is more than a personal miscarriage of justice. When instructors are prohibited from teaching military officers about the true threat posed by Islamic Radicalism, it is a threat to our national security. Our warfighting potential is thus being crippled by the political correctness and appeasement of radical Muslims currently in vogue at the upper echelons of the Pentagon.”

A review of LTC Dooley’s OERs going back several years, including his OER as an instructor with JFSC, paint a picture of an outstanding officer with unlimited potential:

“LTC Matt Dooley’s performance is outstanding and he is clearly the best of our new instructors assigned to the JFSC faculty over the last six months. . . . A must select for battalion command. . . . LTC Dooley possesses unlimited potential to serve in positions of much higher authority.”

“MAJ Dooley is unquestionably among the most dedicated and hard working officers I have ever known.… Unsurpassed potential for future promotion and service.”

“Our soldiers deserve his leadership.”

“This officer possesses unlimited potential for future assignments. He must be promoted ahead of his peers and selected for Battalion/Squadron Command at first opportunity.”

“Superb performance.”

“Matt is a consummate professional with unlimited potential;”

LTC Dooley’s awards and decorations include the Bronze Star Medal, the Meritorious Service Medal with two Oak Leaf Clusters, the Joint Service Commendation Medal, the Army Commendation Medal with three Oak Leaf Clusters, the Army Achievement Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal with Star, Medal, the Iraq Campaign Medal with Two Stars, both the Global War on Terrorism Service and Expeditionary Medals, the Armed Forces Service Medal, the NATO Medal, the Parachutist Badge, the Air-Assault Badge, and two Army Superior Unit Awards.