Wednesday, August 6, 2008

The Olympics = The United Nations: Why even bother?



Via MEMRI

Women do indeed have it bad under Shari'a. We in the west seem blissfully unaware of it, even when its grisly, unjust practices are in our own backyards. So many think they are being tolerant, when in fact, they are just being cowards. Honor killings. Not a problem. That's THEIR culture.
And so, a generation of young women is lost due to the ridiculous sense of pride and shame within the family. And the west just shrugs. Whatever. Not news. Next up, please.

Olympics. In China. This ought to be fun. Remember Mehboba?
She has asked for asylum in the west, so that she can continue to train and participate in the Olympics. Without the fear of being slain. I really hope to see her compete, even if she should lose badly. She will have won a victory of sorts. What would really be a victory for her, is if she could just come to America (without a male relative) and train to compete for US. As an American. A victory by her would be stinging sand in the eyes of the Taliban, and more enjoyable than watching Bunker Busters and Daisy Cutters blast away at Osama's caveman camps.




The slick, Madison Avenue marketing of Islam to western women is hideous in its cover up....so to speak... of the realities that women live with under Islamic rule. Thanks to the Middle Eastern Media Research Institute and the internet, however, we can know without excuse those realities. But what to do with this knowledge when you get it. Firstly, it's important to know what you believe, and why you believe it. Secondly, it's important to stand up to those in academia and the press, and the gullible masses, even if you are a lonely voice crying out in the wilderness.
Waheja al Huwaidar is one such lonely Saudi voice.
From MEMRI special dispatch 1604, June 1, 2007:

"There Are Five Types of Shackles, or Jails, For the Woman - if She Manages to Escape One, She Might Enter Another"

Wajeha Al-Huwaidar: "Saudi society is based on masters and slaves, or, to be more precise, masters and maids, because the masters are the men, and the slaves are the women."

[...]

"The ownership of a woman is passed from one man to another. Ownership of the woman is passed from the father or the brother to another man, the husband. The woman is merely a piece of merchandise, which is passed over to someone else - her guardian. How do you recognize a maid or a slave? The decision making is out of her hands. All the decisions are made by the master. Women today are not allowed to make any kind of decision - not about marriage, work, studies, medical treatment, leaving the house, or traveling."

[...]

"I believe that in general, for the Saudi woman, every day is a new battle. She needs to find ways to live on the face of this earth without colliding with the law, with men, with society, with the religious clerics, or with the political establishment. She is besieged. There are five types of shackles, or jails, for the woman - if she manages to escape one, she might enter another. The first is the tribe, then comes the family, then the religious institutions, the political establishment, and finally, society. Wherever you go, you encounter a battle. What are you to do? Within every Saudi woman, there is a Scheherazade. Imagine Scheherazade trying every night to stay alive until the next night. That's how I see the Saudi woman. Some might say that I am exaggerating, but..."

Interviewer: "Some say your perspective is a bleak one."

"The Woman is Raised to Fear Man and Society"

Wajeha Al-Huwaidar: "It's not bleak. I am being realistic. I know that some of our women live in prosperity and freedom, and I am one of them, but to what extent? To what extent do you own what you possess? Nadine, hypothetically speaking, if whoever gave you that freedom decided to take it away from you - would you have the ability to escape this punishment?"

[...]

"The woman is raised to fear man and society."

Saudi author Khaled Al-Ghanami: "So why does she accept this upbringing?"

Wajeha Al-Huwaidar: "Because she stands to lose a great deal, if she rebels. When a man rebels, he might collide with the political establishment only. But when a woman collides with several institutions. Ultimately... I don't know if you've noticed, but when a woman begins to become liberated, she is not respected by society, but when a man raises the banner of liberation, and calls for equality and liberalism, he is highly respected and is always given prominence. Even the state shows respect for a man who speaks freely, but it shows no respect for a woman who speaks freely. She pays the price on every level - her family, religion, and society. Ultimately, I think women are greatly feared. When I compare the Saudi man with other Arab men, I can say that the Saudi is the only man who could not compete with the woman. He could not compete, so what did he do with her?"

Khaled Al-Ghanami: "Why couldn't he compete?"

Wajeha Al-Huwaidar: "Because he has great fear of the woman. The woman has capabilities. When women study, they compete with the men for jobs. All jobs are open to men. 90% of them are open to men. You do not feel any competition. I'm not competing with you for your job. Saudi men do not face competition from non-Saudi men, who are also considered of lower status. The Saudi is a man who has never known the meaning of exerting efforts in order to realize a dream. That is the Saudi man. I am not talking about all men, but about most of them. If you do not face competition from the Saudi woman, and not from the non-Saudi man, you have the entire scene for yourself. All positions and jobs are reserved for you. Therefore, you are a spoiled and self-indulged man."



The weakness of Muslim societies, and ultimately their downfall is...their men. Their indolent, non challenged, lazy society of tea-drinking do nothings. Women dream, want, hope, for lives that are as fulfilled as womens' in the West, and they can see it. How long will it be til they achieve it, as well?

Please note the use of Whitney Houston's voice in the above video. Powerful. Singular. Female. FREE. Perhaps if Ms. Houston knew exactly just how powerful her voice was in the veiled ears of her Muslim sisters, she might clean up her act and look outside of herself and kick the demons off her back.

Addendum: From Faith-Freedom.org

By Manda Zand-Ervin

The U.N's Disdain for Women

On June 12th in Iran, nine women - who had called for a protest against the arrest of their friends - were arrested themselves. This demonstration was to have occurred on the anniversary of last year's mass arrests of women activists who had attempted to collect one million signatures against the anti-women laws in Iran.

For over a decade, the women of Iran have been using every method of peaceful protest against Shar'ia law, the guiding law of the land, even though the protests were stopped every time they began. As Shar'ia applies to women, these laws restrict - in a draconian way - women's mobility and rights. For example, in Iran, the law oppresses women by such indignities as counting women's testimony as only half that of men, and by such barbarity as stoning women to death for adultery. So it is critical that these brave women prevail in their protest against such cruelty and backwardness. But instead of respectfully observing and noting the protests - like them or not - as politicians do in the United States, the Iranian regime arrested the protest leaders in raids to their homes at 5:00 a.m., beat them up and dragged them to Iranian prisons while all the roads to the planned demonstration location (and to the women) were blocked by paramilitary forces.

Iranian women started by voting overwhelmingly for the Mullah Khatami in 1996 who promised them reform but, once he was elected, betrayed them. Since then, these valiant Iranian women have tried every possible path to get their rights back but they have ended up with nothing more than prison terms. Facing the fact that the regime would not reform its anti-woman Islamic laws, and the paramilitary forces would not allow any assembly or demonstration of their demands, a group of women set out to collect one million signatures against the oppressive Islamic laws to make their point.

So on June 12, 2007, a half dozen women started out to collect one million signatures and, by the end of the week, they had hundreds of volunteers helping in the collection of the signatures. In no time, the regime learned about the effort and ordered the arrest of the women and the confiscation of all their collected signatures. The Iranian human rights activists in Western democracies have been petitioning, writing and talking about this issue ever since but there is no response nor, appallingly, is there any support from any Western women's group. It is just as shocking that even the UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) has been thoroughly indifferent to this particular offense as well as, generally, to the oppressive regime itself: the Islamic Republic of Iran, which has stripped Iranian women of all their human rights and left them defenseless as underclass and oppressed citizens.

Thousands of women from the Americas, Europe, Africa and Asia gather together every year to discuss violence against women but the real problem is discussed only superficially. The biggest and worst oppressors of women in today's world are Islamic theocratic regimes, yet there is no mention of their gross violations of the human rights of 800 million women throughout the world, and that includes the women of Iran.

Western women have no need for the UN Commission to defend their rights. They are not only fully emancipated and empowered; they are living in the free democratic societies that will allow them to speak up if they so desire. In Iran, it is the opposite.

The singular need and mission for the UN Commission on the Status of Women is to defend and secure the human rights of women who live under the tyranny of patriarchal hierarchies and who have no face, nor any voice. Yet most unfortunately, the Commission - in a shameless and disgusting way - does not deign to defend such suffering. CSW has demonstrated repeatedly that it is not concerned about the women who are deprived of their most basic humanity. No one within the Commission has an interest in discussing the abuse of women by these oppressive laws and, in fact, they all turn a blind eye to the plight of Iranian women.

And then there is the UN auxiliary organization, UNIFEM, whose slogan on their letterhead is, "Say NO to Violence against Women" next to the beautiful face of Ms. Nicole Kidman, their honorary chair.

UNIFEM even goes out of its way to solicit money from the oppressors of women, like the Islamic Republic of Iran itself, even though they know full well that Iran is perhaps the most wanton violator of the human rights of women. Iranian women have been struggling for three decades to get their human rights back from this dreadful Islamic regime, yet they are being ignored by the world.

In an ideal humanitarian world, one would expect UNIFEM to have a list of such immoral governments and indict them in the international arena for their inhumane laws. In an ideal world, UNIFEM and the United Nations would punish and pressure these regimes that oppress women, but instead they solicit bribes from them.

Is it wrong to assume that if UNIFEM receives money from a gender apartheid government, it is expected to be silent about that government's gross violations of women, and also to be silent about their children's rights? Is it logical to believe that if UNIFEM criticizes these regimes, they will not receive that regime's largess the next year around? And if they continue to receive funds from such oppressive regimes, is it logical to assume that UNIFEM must have understood such unspoken expectations?

One thing we know for sure: the Islamic Republic of Iran is expecting reciprocity for the undisclosed large amounts of money that they contribute to the apparently corrupt UN.

How could - or why should - any woman anywhere in the world, whether or not she lives under such onerous oppression, have any faith or any trust in the UN, or in its Commission on the Status of Women, or in its auxiliary organization, UNIFEM? In this question lies the disturbing truth that the UN's disdain for Iranian women threatens women worldwide. The only thing that stands between the fate of any other woman on earth and the fate of Iranian women is the wrong politician, or regime, in place.

Perhaps the reason that no one pays attention to the struggles of Iranian women is because the international organizations and European governments are all choosing their own short-term economic interests over and above the human rights of the women and children of Iran.

And why not? After all, what is the value of a human life compared to that of money?


Western women need to wake up and help, and quit bitching about their "unequal" pay rates. In other words: Put up or shut up.

Once more, in case you didn't get the message. From a real liberator of women:

8 comments:

  1. The Vocalise is breathtaking, Jewel. I must have listened to it thrice. I thought the essay was wonderful, but I couldn't focus because of the music. Just what I needed was another diversion, so I checked out the way cool myflashfetish site, and next thing you know I'm constructing playlists and customizing widgets. Thanks. I feel some infidel music coming up.

    As for your last comment at my joint, dear--Wow! No wonder you're nuttier than Chinese chicken salad. I thought my upbringing was weird. My mom did share the piano, at least. Of course, I could outplay her at seven, so how would she claim it was hers?

    Aisha, LOL. Your dad sounds like my little bro indeed, 'cept his hottie is I believe twenty-two. Course, he's fifty-one, so possibly he's even sleazier and more confused than Daddy, who at least was a horny thirty-something.

    BTW, I have one of those Kawai keys somewhere. Used to be way handy. Yeah, LOL. No one ever suspects they're universal keys. I had a supper club once go crazy trying to track me down when I accidentally left the baby locked. I laughed like mad, because they took several days to find me, presuming I had THE key (how exactly could I have arranged that, since it was their piano?). All they had to do was get one at the music dealer.

    Or they could have used the one in the bench all along.

    Anyway, I'm going to listen one more time and hit the sack. I'm supposed to get the Flight 93 memorial blogburst tonight, but it hasn't arrived yet, and the music has laid me low for today anyway. I'm done, except for losing myself yet again in the loveliness of that pensive and haunting theme.

    More later.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey, how'd ya get the YouTube video to fit? You CAN adjust the width in the code downwards, but it just chops the side off. It doesn't look like you did that. It just fits this time. I thought at first you must have changed the content area width, but I looked down and saw that the last YT vid still extends into the sidebar.

    I checked the imbed code and it's still 425 px wide, which hasn't seemed to fit here in the past. What's different about this?

    Inquiring minds want to know.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for the compliments, Haid. I did indeed have a wierd and highly entertaining, plausibly marketable upbringing. I too am distracted by this piece of music. It is one of my favorites. In fact, I think there is no better combination than one cello with a piano. It is almost erotic and ethereal at the same time. My father, expert arranger that he is, put together a fine duo with a lovely, albeit lesbian cellist, and they were set to record some of his favorite jazz...Ellington, and her lover beckoned, and lo, he lost his cellist. Heartbreak all around. It was such a good partnership, too.
    In other jazz news, Clark Terry is much better and has hired my brother in law to do some arrangements for him, and be the producer on what may end up being his last album. How's that for the breaks!
    Now, as for the code, indeed, I was having a hard time, but then I read the code, and where you go to past the html in (edit mode for Blogspot) the height and width will appear twice. Once at the beginning...ignore this. Go to the end of the code and adjust. I just changed the width from 425 to 400, and that was all! I hope it helps

    ReplyDelete
  4. Here is what the code reads, minus the tags at the beginning and end:

    object width="425" height="344"param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ziAVG4UAwV4&hl=en&fs=1">param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ziAVG4UAwV4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="400" height="344"

    ReplyDelete
  5. See how I just changed the width in the second instance? I found that if I changed it both places, Blogger wouldn't accept that, so I changed just the second instance of the width from 425 to 400.
    Also, if you like this piece of music, I have news: I ordered a cd through ebay from Russia. It is a remastered recording of Sveshnikov's conducting of the Moscow State Choir in 1965, singing Rachmaninoff's Vespers. Recorded on vinyl for Melodiya in 1965 was no small feat in a Communist country. It was also released on a combination Columbia/Melodiya joint production. I have heard several versions of this piece of music and by far, without any disagreement among Rachmaninoff buffs, this exceeds them all. You won't be able to listen without weeping. Possibly the most soulful music ever written. I can't wait to upload it to the little gizmo in the side bar.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Huh. Who'da thunk it? I haven't played with the code in a long time, cuz my content area on HD is exactly 427 px, perfect for YT vids. Good for you, though, since it must have been so annoying with your narrower content area. Are you going to go back and fix all your published vids, now that you know the trick?

    Just kidding.

    The Clark Terry thing intrigues. You'll have to let me know how that progresses.

    Looking forward to the Rachmaninoff, which is my favorite. I can still remember and play most of the Moments, which I learned in high school, even though I don't own a copy of the sheet music any longer.

    Speaking of which, gotta run, before I listen to the Vocalise yet again. So off to work. Oy.

    More later.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm starting to play the social networking game (for whatever it's worth, which so far isn't much) but I did go and "fave" your blog on Technorati. I didn't even know I was on there, but I saw a referral from there in my stats, so I went there, registered, and claimed my blog. You can find my Tech fave button in my footer.

    All family Hell breaking loose here. Kids. They'll be the death of us all, if radical Islam doesn't get us first.

    I'll probably be unavailable for a while.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Geez, I hope you have extry ammo. I was school clothes shopping today, and I noticed an increase in the Arabic speaking population. I noticed both a lot of Christians (they were wearing jewelry, crosses, and fashionable clothing, no headscarves) and Muslim -frumpy with extra covering up. At any rate, I understood a number of words. Baba, urid! (I want Daddy.)

    ReplyDelete

Don't just sit there, say something!