Please Help New English Review
For our donors from the UK:
New English Review
New English Review Facebook Group
Follow New English Review On Twitter
Recent Publications by New English Review Authors
The Oil Cringe of the West: The Collected Essays and Reviews of J.B. Kelly Vol. 2
edited by S.B. Kelly
The Impact of Islam
by Emmet Scott
Sir Walter Scott's Crusades and Other Fantasies
by Ibn Warraq
Fighting the Retreat from Arabia and the Gulf: The Collected Essays and Reviews of J.B. Kelly. Vol. 1
edited by S.B. Kelly
The Literary Culture of France
by J. E. G. Dixon
Hamlet Made Simple and Other Essays
by David P. Gontar
Farewell Fear
by Theodore Dalrymple
The Eagle and The Bible: Lessons in Liberty from Holy Writ
by Kenneth Hanson
The West Speaks
interviews by Jerry Gordon
Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited: The History of a Controversy
Emmet Scott
Why the West is Best: A Muslim Apostate's Defense of Liberal Democracy
Ibn Warraq
Anything Goes
by Theodore Dalrymple
Karimi Hotel
De Nidra Poller
The Left is Seldom Right
by Norman Berdichevsky
Allah is Dead: Why Islam is Not a Religion
by Rebecca Bynum
Virgins? What Virgins?: And Other Essays
by Ibn Warraq
An Introduction to Danish Culture
by Norman Berdichevsky
The New Vichy Syndrome:
by Theodore Dalrymple
Jihad and Genocide
by Richard L. Rubenstein
Spanish Vignettes: An Offbeat Look Into Spain's Culture, Society & History
by Norman Berdichevsky

These are all the Blogs posted on Thursday, 25, 2010.
Thursday, 25 November 2010
Muslim girl killed for love affair with Hindu

From The Hindustan Times

A Muslim man has been arrested for killing his teenaged daughter who was in love with a Hindu youth from the same village, police said on Thursday. Mushtakeem, a resident of Mawaithakuran village, (in Moradabad district, some 300 km from Lucknow)  strangled his 18-year-old daughter Rehana Parveen after she insisted on marrying her lover Bhoora Prajapati, 21, police said.

Prajapati and Parveen used to meet regularly in the fields on the outskirts of the village. But as Parveen had not been coming for the last few days, Prajapati approached police suspecting the girl could be in trouble. Police raided Mushtakeem's house and recovered his daughter's body from a locked room.

"Preliminary investigations indicate it's a case of honour killing. The father has confessed to the crime," police inspector Ravi Kumar told reporters on Thursday. "The father told us he committed the crime as he thought his daughter's marriage with the youth of a different community would bring a bad name to the family," he added. According to police, besides the father, the girl's family members could also be involved in the crime. "Investigations are on in this regard," said Kumar.

Posted on 11/25/2010 3:17 AM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
Thursday, 25 November 2010
Lebanon frees Muslim cleric Omar Bakri Muhammad on bail

From The BBC

The radical Muslim cleric, Omar Bakri Muhammad, who was sentenced to life in prison in Lebanon, has been released on bail pending a retrial. A military court ordered his release after he paid bail of around $3,300 (£2,100).

He was convicted in his absence earlier this month of forming a militant group to weaken Lebanon's government. He settled in Lebanon after being banned from returning to the UK, where he had lived for 20 years.

The retrial is taking place because Bakri Muhammad was not present at the initial trial. A judicial official told AFP news agency that the cleric would have to attend every session of his retrial.

This means unfortunately that he will be available to speak via satellite link after all at the International Islamic Revival Conference scheduled to take place somewhere in London on Saturday. Word is that the hall advertised is a decoy, an alternative given out is a tiny hut on a council estate intended for use by Brownies, homework clubs and the like and that, if the meeting takes place at all, it will be a completely different venue in another borough.

I do hope his new trial produces the same result.

Posted on 11/25/2010 3:22 AM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
Thursday, 25 November 2010
Hajj delegation cannot be funded by tax payers money’

The Muslim News are disappointed that the British Government didn't provide privileges to the pilgrims to this year's Hajj like the labour government has done over the last 10 years. Diddums - have you not heard of travel insurance for medical care like the rest of us use?

Last month's launch of the Foreign Office's annual Hajj delegation turned out to be a disappointment with the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition Government offering only consular assistance to British Muslim pilgrims.

Unlike the previous ten delegations under Labour, no Muslim volunteers were being sent and no health care was being provided by medical professionals. Foreign Office Minister, Jeremy Browne, announced Britain would only be sending one consular official from London to join two being temporarily seconded from the British Embassy in Saudi Arabia.

Browne denied that the reason for not taking a medical team was due to financial cuts, but argued that the delegation cannot be funded by taxpayer's money. "We have a responsibility to all taxpayers, whether they are Muslims or Christians, to ensure that we spend public money as effectively as possible," he told The Muslim News. How can the Government fund the delegation when they do not provide such assistance for other British citizens even when they go large numbers like for football or Olympics, he suggested.
Quite right - in fact football fans in particular are warned to 1) have full travel insurance and 2) not expect any help if they get into difficulties.

Browne told the assembled media and members of the invited Muslim community, that this year, unlike the previous ten delegations, no medical team will be sent as the Saudi authorities have now established 21 hospitals to provide health care to pilgrims.

In the past, the Foreign Office always contended that it benefitted from saving money due to the far greater costs to the NHS if a pilgrim returns ill, takes time off work and risks family and friends contracting any sickness brought back.

In 2000, Britain was trumpeted to be the first non-Muslim country in the West to offer facilities and provisions for their own pilgrims. But it has since been revealed by Baroness Warsi at the launch of the truncated delegation this year that the cost of the delegation came from the Foreign Office's counter-terrorism budget. She said she was "concerned" that the Hajj delegation was funded from this budget. But Lord Adam Patel who has been leading the delegations for the last 10 years said that the FCO only began using counter terrorism money from 2006

For the past 10 years Lord Patel led a delegation of 8 doctors who worked round the clock to assist British pilgrims and provide consular support. Lord Patel said that he was "disappointed". He said even though the Saudi authorities have more medical facilities, the pilgrims have to stand in long queues to get treatment and that the Saudi staff would have difficulty in communicating with many patients from the UK. Past Hajj delegations had doctors from diverse ethnic backgrounds.

Every year the Catholic churches send thousands of very sick people to Lourdes;  they don't expect or get government medical assistance, they provide their own. Unlike Lourdes the hajj isn't a healing pilgrimage. Quite the opposite, the sick and poor have exemption from the obligation to attend so, accidents and unforeseen circumstances notwithstanding, why would healthy people need medical attendants. As only Muslims can set foot in or around Mecca did this mean a subsidised Hajj for already well paid GPs? Inquiring minds want to know.

Posted on 11/25/2010 4:38 AM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
Thursday, 25 November 2010
Girl, 15, arrested over 'Facebook Koran burning video'

So much about this BBC report is making me cross. We know nothing about the girl other than her age, but I am very familiar with teenage girls and I would hazard a guess that this is not a mindless vandal but a girl who has thought about recent events and holds strong opinions.

A teenager has been arrested on suspicion of inciting religious hatred after allegedly burning an English language version of the Koran.The 15-year-old, who lives in the West Midlands, allegedly posted the video, filmed two weeks ago on her school premises, on Facebook.

The video was reported to the school and subsequently removed, police said. A 14-year-old boy was arrested on Tuesday on suspicion of making threats. Both have been released on police bail.

It is understood that the group who published that version of the Koran have since been to the school to talk to pupils. I bet they have

Note that we are not told what the boy threatened which makes me suspicious he was threatening her, and not speaking in support of her actions.

Note that this happened 'two weeks ago'. Two weeks ago the  BBC never mentioned the Muslims burning poppies on Armistice Day, other than as an aside while reporting a protest against it in Portsmouth as few days later. 

Note that the Metropolitan Police escorted those 30 grown men who burned poppies and chanted treason safely to the tube station while the West Midlands Police arrest one little girl.

And then the BBC trot out a dozy bint revert to bleat how sacred the koran is to Muslims.

Catherine Heseltine, chief executive officer of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee, said burning the Koran was one of the most offensive acts to Muslims that she could imagine.

She said: "The Koran is the most sacred thing to over a billion Muslims worldwide. You can see that in the way Muslims treat the Koran, washing before touching it and in many Muslim homes you will find it on the top shelf above all other books and we will never destroy the Koranic texts. (ahem - what do Saudi customs officers do when a traveller arrives with a non Wahabi Koran luv? They shred it, that's what!) We believe it is the word of God. God's guidance for us in this life,"

If and when I hear any more I'll let you know.

Posted on 11/25/2010 4:53 AM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
Thursday, 25 November 2010
'Gang of men' convicted of grooming and abusing girls

In other words, Muslim men exercising their entitlement to rape infidel girls of nine and above. From the BBC, which calls them "Asians":

A gang of men from Derby has been convicted of systematically grooming and sexually abusing teenage girls.

Many of the victims were given alcohol or drugs before being forced to have sex in cars, rented houses or hotels across the Midlands.

One girl described a sexual assault involving at least eight men.

The nine men were convicted during three separate trials, culminating in the convictions at Leicester Crown Court of the two ringleaders.

Reporting restrictions had been in place until the end of the third trial.

Twenty-seven girls came forward to say they had been victims, the youngest of whom was 12 and the oldest was 18. Convictions have been achieved for 15 of those.

Abid Mohammed Saddique, 27, and Mohammed Romaan Liaqat, 28 - both married with children - were said to be the leaders of the gang.

"Leaders of the gang" in the Gary Glitter sense. And being married with children does not lessen a Muslim man's entitlement to rape infidel girls.

Posted on 11/25/2010 7:09 AM by Mary Jackson
Thursday, 25 November 2010
Obama's hajj grandmother 'prayed for him to be Muslim'

RIYADH - US President Barack Obama's Kenyan grandmother says she prayed during a hajj pilgrimage to Mecca for the American leader to convert to Islam, a newspaper revealed on Thursday.

"I prayed for my grandson Barack to convert to Islam," said Sarah Omar, 88, in an interview with Al-Watan Saudi daily held in Jeddah after she had performed hajj.

The paper said that Omar was in Saudi Arabia on pilgrimage along with her son, Obama's uncle Saeed Hussein Obama, and four of her grandchildren. . .The family appeared to have been hosted by the Saudi government for hajj. Saeed thanked King Abdullah for his "kind hospitality," the paper said.

To be fair to President Obama I believe that Sarah Omar is not actually his grandmother but the senior wife of his grandfather, the woman who gave birth to his late father being a subordinate wife doomed to obscurity.

Posted on 11/25/2010 11:13 AM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
Thursday, 25 November 2010

The word "brand" sounds newer than it is, just like "newfangled". Matthew Parris has a new, if not brand new take on it in today's Times:

Had I the skills of that comic sage C. Northcote Parkinson, I would attempt a sequel to his masterpiece, Parkinson's Law, whose central thesis was that "work expands to fill the time available". Parkinson it was who demonstrated that the number of fighting ships in the Navy has varied in inverse proportion to the number of admirals: the Admiralty grows as the fleet dwindles.

I would take his thinking forward into a new century of corporate and political communications. My thesis would be that when hired to advise on improving the "brand" of an organisation, marketing professionals will usually find that clients already know and promote their strengths, but shrink from confronting their weaknesses. Therefore, the client will be professionally advised to identify and remedy brand weaknesses.

As the corporate image consultant is not hired to rethink the product itself, the advice will be to neutralise perceived weakness by messages of strength. Thus (for instance) sherry, which is thought as a fusty tipple, is marketed as cool. Instant coffee, which is naff, is advertised as classy. Tories, whose core philosophy is self-help, rabbit on about compassion.

From which emerges Parris's Law: the validity of a corporate message stands in inverse proportion to the insistence with which it is communicated. And Parris's Second Law is this: no branding professional will ever advise that professional branding damages a brand.

Parris's law certainly holds for IslamCo, branded aggressively as the Religion of Peace.

By the way, Parkinson backwards is Nosnikrap. Isn't that just sod's law?

Posted on 11/25/2010 11:52 AM by Mary Jackson
Thursday, 25 November 2010
Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff's Vienna Trial Begins

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff on Trial in Vienna

A tip of the hat to Mark Hass for sending us this report on the first day of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff's Orwellian show trial in Vienna.   We saw her pluck and strength of character during our NER interview with her. 

The incredible lengths  to which Vienna Public Prosecutor Office has gone to in conducting a Kafkaesque trial before an Austrian Court rivals Alice in Wonderland being tried before the Red Queen.  Remember  this famous exchange between Alice and the Red Queen:

No, no!' said the Queen. 'Sentence first - verdict afterwards.'

'Stuff and nonsense!' said Alice loudly. 'The idea of having the sentence first!'

'Hold your tongue!' said the Queen, turning purple.

'I won't!' said Alice.

'Off with her head!' the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. Nobody moved.

'Who cares for you?' said Alice, (she had grown to her full size by this time.) 'You're nothing but a pack of cards!'

Sabaditsch -Wolff, like Alice in Wonderland,  is being tried for her criticism of Islam in a contrived  matter brought by a literal pack of cards, the leftist Austrian publication NEWS and  members of the SPO who view her as a threat to their mantra of diversity given her  'intolerance' of an official religion under Austrian law that hardly tolerates any infidel including non-Muslim Austrians.

Having interviewed Sabaditsch-Wolff she has already show her mettle on the field of combat in the world of ideas. She is doing it for the future of her daughter Ella and her fellow Austrian citizens, as she knows the threat of Shariah Islamic law to hers and our free speech.

Citizen Warrior writes:

Elisabeth's Trial Has Begun

Wednesday, November 24

THE FIRST hearing in Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff's case took place yesterday (November 23rd, 2010) in the court of Vienna, Austria. Charges were brought against Elisabeth because of a seminar she taught.

An eight-hour recording of her seminar will be the central piece of evidence in the trial. The entire audio recording from the seminar will be played in court, permitting the prosecutor to explain in detail what cannot be permitted to be said in public, and why the "religiousness" of Islamic teachings makes it impermissible.Islam's prime directive, Sharia law, and the third jihad. Her case is similar to Geert Wilders', who is on trial in the Netherlands for similar reasons.

The defense will seek to prove the accuracy and truthfulness of what Elisabeth said in her seminar, thus focusing on the core question: Is it illegal to speak the truth about Islam?

My interest in Elisabeth's case is threefold: First, this is the front line in the war on freedom of speech waged against people who are trying to educate the public about

The second reason this case interests me is that Elisabeth used excerpts from the Citizen Warrior article, Why I Am Worried About Islam But Not Christianity, in her seminar. The content you've been reading is on trial. Read more about that here.

The third reason is that Elisabeth is a sweet, soft-spoken, kind-hearted woman, entirely devoid of hatred or bigotry, devoid of rabble-rousing rhetoric, who was simply teaching basic, established, mainstream principles of Islam, calmly, reasonably, in a classroom setting, and she is being charged with a crime for doing so!? The whole idea is an outrage.

The following is an edited version of a blow-by-blow report of the first day of Elisabeth's trial, brought to us by Henrik Clausen, as posted on the Save Free Speech website:

9:41: Austrian TV shows up with a camera crew.

The room has seats for 15, but 25 spectators are there. Austrian TV asks for comments from Elisabeth, but on advice of her lawyer, she says, "No comments now; talk to me after the hearings."

The judge informs Elisabeth about her rights: Anything she says can be used against her.

The public prosecutor makes a short summary of various conclusions from Elisabeth's seminar, and, taken out of the context from, they sound ominous, like speaking of a "Burqa ghost" (which you'll find out about in a moment), comparing her statements to those of Susanne Winter, mentioning that Muhammad married a child of six, as well as saying we risk eventually having a civil war.

Elisabeth's defense lawyer talks of the principles of gender equality, freedom of religion and the lack of reciprocity that exists in Islam (for example, other religions cannot be freely practiced in several Islamic countries). The lawyer mentions that Elisabeth grew up in Islamic countries and has experienced the situation of women there directly.

He continues to explain that the statements mentioned were taken seriously out of context, and that some were not public, thus not relevant to the case. And that we should play the entire eight hours of recordings to understand the context.

He proceeds to invoke three expert witnesses who will testify that Elisabeth has spoken the truth: Wafa Sultan, Hans Jansen, and Robert Spencer.

10:53: The judge asks if we are talking about "Islamic extremism" or about "Islam as such?"

Elisabeth explains that we are talking Islam as such, as defined by its scripture, and quotes Erdogan (Turkey's Prime Minister) that there is no moderate Islam anyway.

The judge accepts that we can play the tapes, then proceeds to ask about us being lied to 24 hours a day. Elisabeth explains the concept of taqiyya. The judge says: "That is your interpretation," to which Elisabeth responds: "No, this is the canonical interpretation."

Next question is: "Is Islam in a never-ending war with the West?"

Elisabeth refers to history and newspapers to document that yes, it is a never-ending war with the West and that jihad has at times been considered the sixth pillar of Islam.

11:15: The "burqa ghost" story is related. Elisabeth took a photo of a woman in a burqa in Vienna, and told about this in her seminars. It is difficult to figure out why the public prosecutor finds this offensive, not to mention illegal. The defense asks about this. Elisabeth explains a few things about freedom for women - all women - to decide for themselves.

A reference is then made to some debates Elisabeth participated in where she discussed child molestation, and says: Christian cardinals molest children in conflict with their religion, Muslims do it in line with theirs. As background, the marriage between Muhammad and Aisha is related, as documented by several Hadith authors.

Pedophilia is discussed, in light of Muhammad being the perfect example for Muslims, as stated in Quran 33:21. That means everything Muhammad ever did or said, which is in the hadith, is to be considered a model for behavior for orthodox Muslims.

Elisabeth explains what the hadith collections are, how they constitute an indispensable part of Islam, due to 33:21 and similar suras. And emphasizes that she is not making up statements, merely quoting canonical Islamic scripture.

11:34: The Judge opens a discussion by asking if we're talking of "all Muslims" here.

Elisabeth says no because most Muslims do not know what is in the Quran, which is in a language (Arabic) they do not understand, and thus place their confidence in the imams for interpretations.

Judge: "Is every Muslim a jihadist?"

Elisabeth: "No, not at all. But jihad is an obligation for Muslims. This is about the teachings of Islam, not about Muslims."

Judge: "But you said 'Muslims' in the seminars?"

Elisabeth: "Yes, but I said it in a context which is needed to understand the relevance of this."

Judge: "What percentage of Muslims are jihadis?"

Elisabeth: "I don't know. Not the majority. One thousandth is enough to be a problem, though."

Then the quote about "Islam is shit" is debated. Elisabeth points out that she was debating and using visual quotes (with her fingers). And she asks if it is punishable to say "Islam is shit."

12:06: The defense lawyer goes through some point of the charges, asking Elisabeth:

Lawyer: You said: "Muslims kill due to Islamic teachings. Christians also kill, but not due to their religious teachings." Are there not verses in the Bible that encourage killing?

Elisabeth: Not in the New Testament, and not actively used today.

Her defense lawyer explains the death threats against Ayaan Hirsi Ali and the security she needs. Elisabeth tells about the killing of Theo van Gogh and the Quran quotes used to justify that.

Lawyer asks: Are there child marriages in Islamic countries?

Elisabeth: Yes, for example Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Afghanistan. Also the late ayatollah Khomeini recommended pedophilia, and the current Iranian President Ahmadjinedad recommends his teachings. According to Islamic law, these marriages are legal and justifiable.

Lawyer: Are corporal punishments, like chopping off limbs, part of Islamic law?

Elisabeth: Yes, this is described, for instance, in Reliance of the Traveller

(Elisabeth and her defense lawyer have explained about the classical Sunni Islamic book, "Reliance of the Traveller," unwrapping a fresh copy in court.)

12:40: The lawyer continues to ask Elisabeth to explain various statements:

Lawyer: What is meant by, "We are decadent?"

Elisabeth: That's the point of view of Islamic fundamentalists.

Lawyer: What is meant by, "We do not want Sharia here, full stop?"

Elisabeth: Free, secular societies is what we want.

Lawyer: What is meant by, "Islamic law is not compatible with free societies, we need to understand this."

Elisabeth: Islam is a whole, and this whole is not compatible with free societies like the Austrian.

Laywer: Did you see any veiled Muslim men?

Elisabeth (laughing): No, this is an obligation just for women.

Lawyer: You were referring to Paris, Brussels, Rotterdam. What is the meaning of that?

Elisabeth: This is a reference to the no-go zones, where Sharia is effectively the law. There immigrant youth torch cars, throw stones at the police, etc.

Prosecutor: Are each and every one of these persons Muslims?

Elisabeth: The majority are.

Lawyer: What is meant when you say: "How many times have we been told that Islam is a religion of peace?" Is this an incitement to hate or violence?

Elisabeth: I do not mean to incite hatred or violence. We need to be informed, make people aware, inform our politicians and write letters to the newspapers.

Lawyer: What is meant by, "We do not want gender apartheid or polygamy."

Elisabeth explains polygamy in Islam, and the fact that this is a reality in Europe today. Elisabeth speaks about the First Amendment of the US Constitution, the absolute right to express ones' opinions, as a fundamental prerequisite for a sound democracy.

At this point, more people have arrived. There are 18 seats for the audience, 30-35 listeners total.

14:00: The news journalist, Dolna, was called as witness. Technicalities of her recording equipment are discussed by the judge, including the fact that of the first seminar, only a half hour was recorded.

The judge asked if some of the statements quoted were from breaks, not from the seminar proper. The reason this is important is that three or four people heard those comments, not the 32 or more, which is the criterion for a statement being considered "public." This is a crucial question for legal reasons, as only statements made to a large group can be punishable.

The judge dug further into the methods of the journalist. Why did the journalist quote statements made in the breaks that were not part of the lecture? The journalist answers: "For journalistic reasons."

Further, the judge asked if it was made clear in advance that the journalist would be recording the seminars. She responded that she had not told anyone, as her work constituted "investigative journalism."

The lawyer probed further into the issue of the quotes being part of the prepared seminar, or offhand comments in the breaks.

Next, the events concerning the opera, "Idomeneo" were discussed. The performance of this classical Mozart piece scheduled to be performed at the famous opera house, Deutsche Oper Berlin, was cancelled due to Islamic pressure. The director had added decapitation of Buddha, Jesus and Muhammad to the original play. Fear of riots or violence caused the play to be cancelled. The well-known German magazine Focus had, in that context, written that we should under no circumstances cave in to pressure like this.

This rounded off the day after roughly three hours of hearings. Since there is a need to play the complete recordings (eight hours) from Elisabeth's seminar, the next hearing is scheduled for January 18th.

Read more about Elisabeth's case, and find out what you can do to help her out: The Leading Edge of Freedom: How to Support Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff.

Posted on 11/25/2010 7:50 PM by Jerry Gordon

Most Recent Posts at The Iconoclast
Search The Iconoclast
Enter text, Go to search:
The Iconoclast Posts by Author
The Iconoclast Archives
sun mon tue wed thu fri sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30     

Via: email  RSS