"I have not yet begun to fight!"

Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976?Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use. Unless you are in this field of investigative journalism, especially covering extremely sensitive subjects and potentially dangerous subjects as well, you simply cannot understand the complexities and difficulties involved with this work that I face every day.

Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Sex Education For Muslim Youths And Their Parents Dr. Shahid Athar

Sex Education For Muslim Youths And Their Parents

Dr. Shahid Athar

Abstract

Sex Education of children and youth is a sensitive but important aspect of their learning. At present Muslim children are getting secular sex education at schools and getting, the wrong messages from the media. In this article pro and con of American sex education and Islamic concept of sexuality and marriage are discussed. Finally a curriculum is proposed for Islamic sex education to be given at home or Sunday Islamic school.

Key Words: Sex Education, Teenage Pregnancy, Sex in Islam and Marriage.

In The Name of Allah, Most Kind, Most Merciful Allah says in Quran:

"Say: Are they equal to those who know, and those who do not know?"

Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) has said:

"Blessed are the women of the Ansar (citizens of Medina). Shyness did not stand in their way seeking knowledge about their religion"

Although Quran has given so much emphasis on acquiring, knowledge, and in the days of Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) Muslim men, and women were never too shy to ask him questions including those relating to private affairs such as sexual life, for Muslim parents of today sex is a dirty word, they feel uncomfortable in discussing sex education with their children, but do not mind the same being taught at their school, by secular or non-Muslim teachers (of even opposite sex), by their peers of either sex, and by the media and television, (an average child is exposed to 9,000 sexual scenes per year). These parents should know that sex is not always a dirty word. It is an important aspect of our life. Allah who cares for all the aspects of our life, and not just the way of worshipping Him, discusses in Quran, reproduction, creation, family life, menstruation and even ejaculation. And Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) who was sent to us as an example, discussed with his companions many aspects of their sexual life including sexual positions. The main reason Muslim parents do not or cannot discuss sex education with their children is because the way they have ben brought up, ignorant and maybe they are not comfortable with their own sexuality or its expression. They leave Islamic Education to the Sunday school, and sex education to the American schools and the media.

What Is Sex Education And Who Should Give It?
Is sex education about knowing the anatomy and physiology of human body, or about the act of sex, or about reproduction and family life, or about prevention of sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancy? Is giving sex education equal to giving permission of engaging in sex? One sex educator at my son's school told the parents "I am not planning to tell your children whether or not they should not engage in sex, or how to do it but in case they decide to do it they should know how to prevent sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy". At present the sex education is incomplete as it does not cover the morality associated with sex, sexual dysfunctions and deviations and the institution of marriage.

One of the basic questions is , do children need sex education? Do you teach a duck how to swim or just put it in water and let it swim. After all, for thousands of years men and women are having sex without any formal education. In may traditional civilizations, sex education starts after the marriage with trial and error. Some couples learn it faster than others and do it better than others, due to difference in sexual perception and expression of one partner. In my opinion having dozen children is not necessarily a proof of love. An appropriate and healthy sex education is crucial to the fulfillment of a happy marriage.

With regards to the questions who should impart sex education, I believe everyone has to play his or her role. The parent as a whole have to assume a more responsible role; especially the father has a duty to be able to answer his son's questions and the mother to her daughter's. We can hardly influence the sex education at school or by the media which I call "VD- AIDS And Teenage Pregnancy Education", but we can supplement that with some ethical and moral dimension and add family love and responsibility. Apart from these sources, some role can be played by Sunday school teachers, the family physician, the pediatrician and the clergy. Within a family the elder sister has a duty towards the younger one and the elder brother has for the younger one.

Sex Education In American Schools
In every American school, public or private, sex education is being given from grade 2 to 12. The projected 1990 cost to the nation will be $2 Billion per year. Teachers are told to give the technical aspects of sex education without telling the students about moral values or how to make the right decisions. After describing the male and female anatomy, and reproduction, the main emphasis is on the prevention of venereal diseases and teenage pregnancy. With the rise of AIDS, the focus is on "Safe Sex" which means having condoms available each time you decide to have sex with someone you don't know. With the help of our tax dollars, about 76 schools in the country have started dispensing free condoms and contraceptives to those who go to school health clinics. Very soon, I can foresee there will be vending machine in the school hallways and "children" could get one condom each time they need to engage in sex. The role of parents is minimized by American sex educators and sometimes ridiculed. In one of the sex education movies I was made to watch as a parent at my son's school "Am I Normal?", the young boy whenever he asks a question about sex to his father, the father (is shown as a bum and a slob) shuns him away and diverts the topic. Finally the boy learns it from a stranger, and then is shown going into a movie theater with his girlfriend.

The secular sex education devoid of morality promoted by educators like Dr. Sol Gordon is in many ways unacceptable to our value system. The examples of Dr. Gordon's beliefs are:

a. Nudity in homes (in shower or bedroom) is good and a healthy way to introduce sexuality to smaller (under 5) children, giving them opportunity to ask questions. In the same book he also states that 75% of all child molestations and incests (500,000 per year) occur by a close relative (parent, step parent or another family member) in a familiar surrounding.

b. A child's playing with genitals of another child is a "naive exploration", is permissible and not a reason for scolding or punishment. He is also aware that boys as young as 12 have raped girls as young as 8. He does not tell us when this "naive exploration" becomes a sex act.

c. "Children caught reading 'dirty' magazines should not be made to feel quilty, but parents should use it as a chance to get some useful points across him or her about sexual attitudes, values and sex exploitation." Like charity, pornography, should start at home !!

d. " If your daughter or son is already sexually active, instead of telling them to stop it, the parents moral duty is to protect their health and career by providing them information and means for contraception and avoiding VD". Educators like Dr. Gordon do not believe that giving sexual information means giving the go ahead signal for sex. I just wonder as to why some folks after being, told the shape, color, smell and taste of a new fruit, and pleasure derived form eating it, would not like to try it? These educators say that even if your child does not ask any questions about sex, parents should initiate the discussion using i.e. a neighbor's pregnancy, a pet's behavior, advertisements, popular music or a TV show. I wonder why these educators are obsessed with loading children with sexual information whether they want it or not.

The More They Know It - The More They Do It
The sex education in American schools has not helped decrease in the teenager the incidence of VD or teenage pregnancy. This is because it has not changed their sex habits. According to Marion Wright Elderman President of Childrens Defense Fund in a recent report, "out of every 20 teens, 10 are sexually active but only 4 use contraception, 2 get pregnant and one gives birth. In 1982, John Hokins study found one out of every five 15 year olds, and three 16 year olds are sexually active . The incidence increased to 43% in 17 year olds, 46% of 16 year olds, 29% of 15 year olds were sexually active . Now it is estimated that about 80% girls entering college had sexual intercourse at least once. Going to church does not help either. Some 1400 teenagers, mostly white, attending conservative Evangelical Church were sent questions about their sex life. 26% of 16 year olds, 35% of 17 year olds, and 43% of 18 year olds said they had sexual intercourse at least once. 33% that responded also said sex outside of marriage was morally acceptable.

Hazards of Early Sex
The health hazards of early sex include sexual trauma, increase in incidence of cervical cancer, sexually transmitted diseases and teenage pregnancy.

A variety of injuries are possible and do happen when sex organs are not ready for sex in terms of full maturation. Some of these injuries have a long lasting effect." Cervical cancer has been thought to be related to sex at an early age and with multiple partners. Dr. Nelson and his associates in his article of epidemiology of cervical cancer calls it a sexual transmitted disease."

Teenage Pregnancy
About one million or more teenage girls become pregnant every year, 80% of them are unmarried. Out of this I million, about 500,000 decide to keep their baby, and 450,000 are aborted (or ? murdered), 100,000 decide to deliver and give the baby for adoption. In 1950 the incidence of birth from unmarried teenagers was only 13.98%, but in 1985 it increased to 59%. It is a myth that teenage pregnancy is a problem of black and poor. To the contrary 2 out of 3 teens getting pregnant now are white, suburban and above the poverty income level. The pregnancy rate (without marriage) in 54,000 listed Navy women is 40% compared to 17% to general population. What is the life of those who have teenage pregnancy? Only 50% complete high school, more than 50% of them are on welfare. They themselves become child abusers, and their children when grown up have 82% incidence of teenage pregnancy. 8.6 billion dollars are spent every year for the financial support and health care of teenage mothers.

The sexual revolution of 60's has affected another dimension of health care. In 1985 alone , 10 million cases of chlamydia, 2 million gonorrhea, 1 million venereal warts, 0.5 million genital herpes and 90,000 syphilis cases were diagnosed." The plague of AIDS" is adding a new twist to our fears. About 52,000 cases have been diagnosed in the USA alone and 50% of them have already died. The disease is growing at a rate of one case every 14 minutes," and so far there is no good treatment. Father Bruce Ritter of New York, who operates shelters for runaway children, says the biggest threat to the Nation's 1 million runaway is the threat of AIDS now.

There are many reasons children get involved in sex". Most common being the peer pressure. Their common response is "since everybody is doing it". One of the reasons is their desire for sexual competence with adults and a way to get ahead. Another common reason is their lack of self esteem which they want to acquire and improve by becoming a father or mother. Sometimes it is due to lack of other alternatives to divert their sexual energies. It could also be due to lack of love and appreciation at home. Detacthment from home can lead to attachment elsewhere. The sexual pressure on them is everywhere, at school from their peers, from the TV where about 20,000 sexual scenes are broadcasted annually in advertisement, soap operas, prime time shows and MTV. The hard core rock music nowadays fanned the flames of sexual desires. Most of the parents do not know what kind of music their children are listening. If they care, and listen to hard rock songs, they will know what they are singing some of these songs that have pornographic words and sentences which made Kandy Stroud, a former rock fan, beg parents to stop their children from listening to what she calls "Pornographic Rock". Music affects our mood by activating Melantonin, the hormone from the pineal gland in the brain which is turned on by darkness, turned off by flashing light. It is the same gland which has been thought to trigger puberty, and affects reproductive cycle, and sex mood.

What Is The True Role Of Parents?
For their failures (i.e. teenage pregnancy), the American educators are putting the blame, as usual, on the parents. In fact in Wisconsin and many other states the grandparents of a baby born to a teenager are responsible for the financial support of the child. Remember parents are not needed if their teenage daughter needs contraceptives or abortion. Faced with such hypocrisy, the parents job is to instil in their teenagers mind what is not taught in sex education classes i.e. reason not to engage in sex, reason not to get pregnant etc. At the same time, they should divert their energies to some productive activities like community work, sports, character growth, or Sunday schools. Another role of parents is to help their children make the right decisions. In Islam anything which leads to wrong is also wrong. Therefore parents should control the music children are listening, the TV program they are watching, the magazines they are reading, and the dress (which may provoke the desire in the opposite sex) they are wearing. While group social activity should be permitted within supervision, dating should not be allowed. When American teenagers start dating, sex is on their mind.

In fact 25% of college freshman boys during a survey responded by saying that if they have paid for the food, and the girl does not go all the way, they have a right to force her to have sex. Many of the rapes occur at the end of the date and are not reported. Anything which breaks down sexual inhibition and loss of self control i.e. alcohol, drug, petting or just being together for two members of the opposite sex in a secluded place should not be allowed for Muslim teenagers. Kissing and petting is preparing the body for sex. The body can be brought to a point of no return.

In summary, the Muslim parents should teach their children that they are different from non-Muslims in their value system and way of life. Having a feeling and love in your heart for someone else of the opposite sex is different and beyond check, while expression of the same through sex is entirely different and should be under control. Muslim children should be told that they don't drink alcohol, eat pork, take drugs, and they don't have to engage in pre-marital sex either.

Islamic Concept Of Sexuality
Islam recognizes the power of sexual need, and the subject is discussed in Quran and the saying of Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) in a serious manner, in context with the marital life and family life . Islam does not consider women (or men) an object of sexual pleasure but with a legal frame work of relationship fulfilling the will of God. While the sex outside marriage is a punishable sin, sex with one's spouse is an act of worship. The Islamic laws regarding sex are fixed and do not change with peer pressure or changing values of society. Virginity at the time of marriage is considered a virtue in Islamic morality, but a disadvantage in the West. No wonder less than 10% of American brides are virgin.

Mention Of Creation, Reproduction And Sex In The Quran
1. "Did We not create you from a sticky fluid?, Which We laid up in a safe abode, for a known term. Thus We arranged, how excellent is Our arrangement".

2. "So let man consider from what he is created. From a gushing fluid that issues between the lion and the ribs.

3. "Verily We created man from a product of wet earth, then placed him in a drop in a safe lodging, then We fashioned the clot into a little lump, then We fashioned the lump into bones, then We clothed the bones with flesh, and then produced it as another creation. So blessed be Allah, the best of creators". Commentary: The seminal fluid has all the ingredients (protein, carbohydrate, minerals) as earth has. The order of embryology given 1400 years ago when no microscope, X-ray of ultrasound were available is the same as discovered now. Western scientists recognized sperm in 17th century and thought it to be a miniature pre-formed man".

4. "Your women are a tilth for you, so enjoy your tilth the way you wish, and make an introduction to yourself.

Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) said:
1. "When one of you have sex with your wife it is a rewardable act of charity". The companions were surprised and asked, "but we do it out of our desire, how can it be counted as a charity?". The Prophet replied "if you had done with a forbidden women, it would have been counted as a sin, but if you do it in legitimacy it is counted as a charity?".

2. "Let not the one of you fall upon his wife like a beast falls. It is more appropriate to send a message before the act" .

3. "Do not divulge secrets of your sex with your wife to another person, nor describe her physical feature to anyone".

Concept of Adultery (Fornication or Zina) in Islam
Allah says in Quran:
1."Do not come near to adultery. Surely it is a shameful deed and Evil, opening roads to another evils ".

2. "Say: Verily, my Lord has prohibited the shameful deeds, be it open or secret, sins and trespasses against the truth and reasons" .

3. "Women impure are for men impure, and men impure are for women impure and women of purity are for men of purity, and men of purity are for women of purity".

Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) has said on many places against adultery as one of the three major sins. However the most interesting story is that of a younger man, who came to him and asked his permission for fornication, since he could not control himself. The Prophet dealth with him with reasoning and asked him if he will approve of someone else doing illegal sex with his mother, sister, daughter or wife. Each time the man said 'no' then the Prophet replied that the woman with whom you plan to have sex could also be somebody's mother, sister, daughter or wife. The man understood and repented. The Prophet prayed for his forgiveness.

Adultery is a crime not against one person but against the whole society. It is a violation of marital contract. 50% of all first time marriages in this country result in divorce in 2 years, and the main reason for divorce is extra- marital affairs of either husband or wife. Adultery which includes both pre- marital and extramarital sex is an epidemic in this society. Nobody seems to listen to the Bible which says frequently "Thou shalt not do adultery". The Quranic approach "Do not approach adultery" is more sensible. What it means that not only illegal sex is prohibited, but anything which leads to illegal sex is also illegal. These things include dating, free mixing of sex, provocative dress, nudity, obscenity and pornography. The dress code both for men and women is to protect them from temptation and desires by onlookers who may lose self control and fall into sin.

"Say to the believing men, that they should lower their gaze
and guard their modesty; that will make for greater purity,
and God is well acquainted with all they do". "And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty. ..". Concept of Marriage In Islam
Islam recognizes the strong sexual urge and desire for reproduction. Thus Islam encourages marriage as a legal sexual outlook and as a shield from immorality (sex without commitment). In Islam the marriage of a man and woman is not just a financial and legal living arrangement, not even just for reproduction, but providing with a total commitment to each other, a contract witnessed by Allah. Love and joy of companionship is a part of the commitment. A married couple assumes a new social status and responsibility for himself, his wife and his children and for the community.

Allah says:
"Among His signs is that he created consorts for you from
among yourself, so that you may find tranquility with them,
and (He) set love and compassion between you. Verily in
this are signs for people who reflect."

Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) said:

I. "Marriage is my tradition. He who rejects my tradition is not of me".

2. "Marriage is half of the religion, the other half is being God fearing".

In Islam there is no fixed rule to the age of marriage. It is becoming fashionable for Muslim young men not to marry until they have completed their education, have a job, or reached age 26-30 or more. Similarly Muslim young girls say they want to marry after age 24 - why? When asked, they would say "I am not ready for it" - not ready for what? Don't they have normal sexual desire? If the answer is, yes, then they have only one of the two choices (a) marry or (b) postpone sex (abstinence till they marry). "Let those who find not the where withal for marriage,
keep them self chaste till God find them the means from His
Grace" .

Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) said:
"Those of you who own the means, should marry, otherwise should keep fasting, for it curbs desires".

The western concept for delaying marriage is different from ours. When I suggested to one of my sexually active young female patient, she bluntly said "I don't want to sleep with the same guy every night."

Role Of Muslim Parents And Muslim Organizations
I am not proposing that all Muslim youth be married at age 16. But I must say that youth should accept the biological instinct and make decisions which will help a more satisfied life devoted to the career rather than spending time in chasing (or dreaming about) the opposite sex. Parents should help their sons and daughters in selection of their mate using Islamic practice as a criteria and not the race, color or wealth. They should encourage them to know each other in a supervised setting.

a) To provide a platform for boys and girls to see and know each other without any intimacy.

b) Offer premarital educational courses to boys and girls over 18, separately to prepare them for the role of father and husband and of mother and wife.

The father has a special role, mentioned by Prophet Muhammed "one who is given by God, a child, should give it a beautiful name, should give him or her education, and training and when he or she attains puberty, she should see to it that he or she is married. If the father does not arrange their marriage after puberty, and the boy or girl is involved in sin, the responsibility of that sin will lie with the father". (Reported in Mishkat, page 271).

The Curriculum For Islamic Sex Education
Islamic sex education should be taught at home, starting at an early age. Before giving education about the anatomy and physiology, the belief in the Creator should be well established. As Destoevsky puts it "without God everything, is possible" meaning that the lack of belief or awareness of God gives an okay for wrong doing".

The father should teach the son and mother should teach her daughter. In the absence of a willing parent, the next best choice should be a Muslim male teacher (preferably a physician) for boys and a Muslim female teacher (a nurse or physician) for a girl at the Sunday Islamic school.

The curriculum should be tailored according to the age of the child and classes be held separately. Only answer to a pertinent question be given. By this I mean that if a 5 year old asks "how did I get into mom's tummy", there is no need to describe the whole act of intercourse. Similarly it is not necessary to tell a 14 year old how to put on condoms. This might be taught in premarital class just before his or her marriage.

The Curriculum For Sex Education Should Include:

a)  Sexual growth and development

     * Time table for puberty

     *Physical changes during puberty

     * Need for family life



b)  Physiology of reproductive system

     *   For girls - organ, menstruation, premenstrual syndrome

     *   For boys - the organ, the sex drive



c) Conception, development of fetus & birth



d) Sexually transmitted disease (VD/AIDS) (emphasize the lslamic aspect).



e)   * Mental, emotional & social aspect of puberty

     *   Social, moral and religious ethics

     *   How to avoid peer pressure

Sex Education After Marriage
This article is not intended to be a sex manual for married couples, though I may write such someday. I just wanted to remind the reader a short verse in Quran and then elaborate.

"They are your garments, and you are their garments".

Thus husbands and wives are described as garments to each other. A garment is very close to our body, so they should be close to each other, a garment protects and shields our modesty, so they should do the same to each other, garments are put on anytime we like, so should they be available to each other anytime, and a garment adds to our beauty, so they should praise and beautify each other.

For husbands I should say this. Sex is an expression of love and one without the other is incomplete. One of your jobs is to educate her in matters of sex especially in your likes and dislikes and do not compare her to another woman.

For wives I want to say this. Man's sexual needs are different from woman's. Instead of being, a passive recipient of sex, try to be an active partner. He is exposed to many temptations outside the home. Be available to please him, and do not give him an excuse to make a choice between you and the hellfire.

1. The Holy Quran, Chapter 39, Verse 9 (A. Yusuf Ali Translation).



2. Sahih-Al-Bukhari - Collection of Ahadith -, Volumn I Book of

     Knowledge, Page 97, Translated by M. M. Khan.



3. Time Magazine, Report On Sex Education, Nov. 24, 1986.



4. Gordon, Sol and Dickman, Irving R "Sex Education - The Parents

     Role." Public Affairs Pwnphlet No. 549.



5. Richard, D. "Teenage Pregnancy and Sex Education In Schools

     What Works and What Does Not work" - San Antonio Pregrnancy

     Center, 1986.



6. Mast, C.K. "Sex Respect: The Options of True Sexual Freedom."

     Bradley Illinois, Respect Line.



7. Zamichow, Nora et Al. "Teenage Sex" - Ladies Home Journal, Oct.,

     1986.



8. "Children Having Children" - Time, Dec. 9, 1985.



9. Hatcher, Robert and J. Adams - "Solving The Teenage Pregnancy."

    Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality, March 1980.



27. Mahmoud Abu Saud "Sex Roles In Muslim Families of USA" ATP

     publication, 1979.



28. The Holy Quran: Chapter 77, Verse 20-24.



29. The Holy Quran: Chapter 86, Verse 5-7.



30. The Holy Quran: Chapter 23, Verse 12-14.



31. Lyons, Albert S. and R. J. Petrucelli - "Medicine - An Illustrated

       History" Page 432, Published by Abrams.



32. The Holy Quran: Chapter 2, Verse 223.



33. "Muslim" Collection of Ahadith.



34. "Muslim" Collection of Ahadith.



35. "Muslim" Collection of Ahadith.



36. The Holy Quran: Chapter 17, Verse 32.



37. The Holy Quran: Chapter 7, Verse 33.



38. The Holy Quran: Chapter 24, Verse 26.



39. Imam Ahmad Quoting Abu Omama - page 30-31 "Modesty And

     Chastity In Islam"-By M. Z. Nadvi, Islamic BookPublisher, Kuwait.



40. The Holy Quran: Chapter 24, Verse 30-31.



41. The Holy Quran: Chapter 30, Verse 21.



42. Collections of Ahadith by Bukhari & Muslim.



43. Collection of Ahadith by Al-Tabarani and Hakim.



44. The Holy Quran: Chapter 24, Verse 33.



45. Collection of Abadith by Ibn - Massoud.



46. The Holy Quran: Chapter 2, Verse 187.

Back

Back To Islam Awareness Homepage

Latest News about Islam and Muslims

Contact IslamAwareness@gmail.com for further information

The British child brides: Muslim mosque leaders agree to marry girl of 12... so long as parents don't tell anyone Two imams were prepared to officiate wedding of underage girl More than 1,000 of the 8,000 forced marriages of Britons each year are believed to involve girls of 15 or under

The British child brides: Muslim mosque leaders agree to marry girl of 12... so long as parents don't tell anyone

Two imams were prepared to officiate wedding of underage girl
More than 1,000 of the 8,000 forced marriages of Britons each year are believed to involve girls of 15 or under

British Muslim clerics are willing to carry out sharia marriages involving child brides as young as 12, an investigation has found.
Two imams said they would be prepared to officiate at the wedding of an underage girl to a man in his twenties, despite fears the pair would later have sex.
The revelations have led the Home Office to confirm that such ceremonies will be examined in the Government’s forthcoming Bill to outlaw forced marriages.

Secret marriages: Some Muslim religious leaders consent to marry a girl of 12 if she consents - and her parents keep it a secret (stock image)

Child bride: An Imam at the Husaini Islamic Centre in Peterborough agreed to the marriage of a 12-year-old girl - but only if she consented to the nuptials

More than 1,000 of the 8,000 forced marriages of Britons each year are believed to involve girls of 15 or under, with one case last year allegedly involving a girl of five.
The clerics were approached by man posing as the father of a 12-year-old who wanted her to marry to prevent her being tempted into a decadent Western lifestyle.
Imam Mohammed Kassamali, of the Husaini Islamic Centre in Peterborough, stressed the need for secrecy with such a ceremony.
He allegedly said: ‘If it (the marriage) was not possible, I would have told you straight away... I would love the girl to go to her husband’s houses (sic) as soon as possible, the younger the better.

More...

‘Under sharia (Islamic law) there is no problem. It is said she should see her first sign of puberty at the house of her husband.
‘The problem is that we cannot explain such things (the marriage) if the girl went tomorrow (to the authorities).
‘The other thing is the underage thing and if tomorrow the girl is, let’s say coerced or forced into this, and she goes and reports it to the police then she will put all of us into the problems.’

Campaigners argue that children can't decide whether they want to be married (posed by model)

He also urged the father to encourage the newlyweds to ‘delay the togetherness’, meaning postpone having sex.
Abdul Haque, a retired imam who still officiates at weddings at Shoreditch mosque, East London, reportedly agreed to carry out the ceremony after evening prayers on Wednesday.
‘Tell people it is an engagement but it will be a marriage,’ he told an undercover Sunday Times reporter.
‘In Islam, once the girl reaches puberty the father has the right, the parents have the right, but under the laws of this country if the girl complains and says her marriage has been arranged and she wasn’t of marriageable age, then the person who performed the marriage will be jailed as well as the mother and father.’
He explained how the Prophet Muhammad had married a seven-year-old girl before adding: ‘We are his followers, and that is what you have to explain (to your daughter).’
It is not illegal for clerics to perform Islamic marriages, even when one or both of those marrying are under 16.
Such marriages are not recognised in British law, so civil formalities can take place only if both are over 16.
Islamic law allows a couple to have sex after marriage but, as the legal age of consent is 16, a husband can be prosecuted for rape if he has sex with an underage girl.

Secret: Another retired Imam - who worships at the Shoreditch Mosque in east London - was happy to marry a 12-year-old girl but only if her parents told no-one about it

The Forced Marriage Unit, set up in 2005, dealt with 1,468 cases last year with 205 involving children under the age of 15.
Farooq Murad, of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: ‘We are strongly opposed to it on the basis that it is illegal under the law of the land where we are living and even under sharia it is highly debatable.’
After being confronted, Kassamali said he would not have performed the marriage without the girl’s consent and would have sought legal advice. Haque declined to comment.
The Home Office said: ‘Child marriage is totally unacceptable and illegal. Perceived cultural sensitivities and political correctness cannot and will not get in the way of preventing and uncovering such abuse.’

From “The Battle of Algiers” to the Intervention in Mali: French Imperialism, Resistance Movements and False Flag Terrorism

Gillo Pontecorvo’s 1966 movie ‘The Battle of Algiers’ was an award winning film based on the Algerian War (1954-1962) between the Algerian independence movement called the National Liberation Front (FLN) who launched a Guerilla War against French occupation. Algeria eventually won its independence on July 5th, 1962.
Algerian nationals were treated as second-class citizens who were discriminated and humiliated by French nationals in their own country. The film takes place during a rebellion against French colonial rule in Algeria between 1954 and 1957.

The opening scene of the film portrayed an Algerian national who was just tortured by the “Paras” or French paratroopers in order to obtain information on a suspected individual who was one of the leaders of the resistance named Ali la Pointe. The FLN targeted French nationals, Algerian nationals who collaborated with French authorities and the military and police with numerous assassinations and bombings. French troops used lynching, torture and murder to intimidate FLN insurgents and their supporters. The film shows how a resistance can take place from a population that can initiate an armed resurrection against colonial rule. In the movie, French police bombed a building in retaliation for the mass shootings of police and military personnel. The bombing took place by the home of an elderly Algerian Man (who was innocent and at the wrong place at the wrong time) accused of murdering a French policeman. The bomb killed scores of people including women and children. The FLN responded with similar bomb attacks in the French sector where the targets were bars, restaurants, race-tracks and an Air France office. Many French civilians were killed by the bombings. It allowed the French military to assume control over all areas of Algeria especially the Casbah, where attacks were taking place.

‘The Battle of Algiers’ is similar to the situation in Mali and Algeria where French Special Forces with Western backing intervened with the Malian military in northern part of Mali on January 11^thin town of Diabaly and Konna, two small towns North of Mopti, which was overtaken by Islamist rebels linked to Al-Qaeda on the orders of French President Francois Hollande to protect Mali’s government along with French and Malian citizens. The fighting has caused thousands to flee to neighboring countries of the Western African region namely Mauritania, Burkina Faso, Guinea Bissau, Niger, Togo and Algeria. On January 16^th,a hostage crisis took place in Algeria concerning a natural Gas Complex in the Sahara Desert. Hollande said it was linked to the Islamist rebels of Mali which caused the lives of more than 23 hostages and the 32 Islamist militants by the Algerian military forces in a botched raid on the complex. This action undertaken by western-Backed Al-Qaeda gives France “Carte Blanc” to operate in North Africa with military action to combat terrorism. France is in West Africa because it has abundant resources. The French government does not care about democracy or terrorism in Africa since they have been pillaging many African nations since the 17^thcentury. So why they does France care about Mali’s security situation concerning Al-Qaeda? France is under Washington’s orders to use its military power to occupy Northern Africa. France also has economic interests within the region that includes natural resources, one of them being gold. France also has economic problems with rising unemployment and the possibility to have austerity measures imposed on their citizens in the near future by the European Union.

The Battle of Algiers Scene-French Military marches into Algiers Whether terrorist attacks are used as a weapon for the purpose of resisting foreign occupation or carried out by the government such as the Reichstag Fire in 1933 committed by the Nazi regime to blame the Communists, Western governments can use military action to fight terrorism. The consequence of the military use of force against civilian populations results in retaliatory attacks against their occupiers. In a scene from ‘The Battle of Algiers’ one of the leaders of the FLN was asked questions on their Guerilla war tactics during a press conference after he was apprehended by French forces:
Journalist: “Mr. Ben M’Hidi … Don’t you think it is a bit cowardly to use your women’s baskets and handbags to carry explosive devices that kill so many innocent people?”
Ben M’Hidi: “And doesn’t it seem to you even more cowardly to drop napalm bombs on unarmed villages, so that there are a thousand times more innocent victims? Of course, if we had your airplanes it would be a lot easier for us. Give us your bombers, and you can have our baskets”
A people’s rebellion against foreign occupation is always seen as terrorism or as a crime against humanity according to Western media. Armed resistance against foreign occupation was recognized by United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/3246 (XXIX) on November 29th, 1974:

3. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the peoples’ struggle for liberation form colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation by all available means, including armed struggle;
7. Strongly condemns all Governments which do not recognize the right to self-determination and independence of peoples under colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation, notably the peoples of Africa and the Palestinian people;

Ben M’Hidi’s statement was correct considering that France used Napalm bombs in Vietnam against an anti-French Resistance called the Viet Minh during the First Indochina War. It is known as the Anti-French Resistance War in Vietnam which took place between December 19, 1946 and August 1^st, 1954. It resulted in the deaths of over 90,000 French and 200,000-500,000 Viet Minh and between 125,000-300,000 civilians. The FLN was the resistance against French colonial rule which has happened in many countries throughout the world including Vietnam who experienced foreign occupation by France for more than 60 years.
In March 1954 the National Liberation Front (Front de Libération Nationale, FLN) was created by Algerian exiles in Egypt to counter French occupational forces in Algeria. On November 1 the FLN launched coordinated attacks on public buildings, military installations, police stations and communications facilities.
By 1956, the FLN had an estimated 40,000 members who turned to guerrilla warfare against a superior military force that had more advanced weapons with hit-and-run tactics. FLN targeted Europeans, Muslims who were considered collaborators, military and police personnel with methods of terrorism that involved bombings, targeted assassinations and kidnapping. That same year, France committed more 400,000 troops to the Algerian crisis and responded with Counterterrorism measures such as torture, threatened FLN family members and used undercover agents to penetrate the FLN to spread false allegations and rumors to divide and conquer the organization. They also recruited and trained Muslim irregulars, known as the Harkis to use guerrilla tactics with shotguns to counter the FLN. France even used Napalm on both FLN members and civilians. It was similar to Israel’s use of White Phosphorus shells on the Palestinians during the 2008 Gaza War.
As the war continued false flag operations were conducted through the Direction de la Surveillance du Territoire (DST) or the Directorate of Territorial Surveillance. They were part of the French National Police. False flag operations are when governments are involved in “covert operations” or carefully planned and executed operations that are secret and that is concealed from the public so that the operation would seem as if they were carried out by other groups or individuals rather than the government themselves who committed the act in the first place. Journalists Roger Faligot and Pascal Krop published DST: Police Secrete in 1999 and explained that DST was an intelligence agency that focused on counterespionage and counterterrorism tactics that was responsible for the creation of the Organization of the French Algerian Resistance (ORAF). ORAF was a group that was financed and trained by the DST to commit false flag terror attacks with the “aim of quashing any hopes of political compromise”. ORAF targeted members of the FLN and committed numerous terrorist attacks on civilians which blamed the FLN in many cases. France wanted to keep Algeria as a colony, but the majority of the population resisted foreign occupation. The war caused 1.5 million casualties according to the FLN and French officials declared more than 350,000 casualties of war. The Algerian War was complex. It claimed the lives of many French and Algerian civilians that included women and children, the police and military personnel. All parties were responsible for the atrocities including the French Paramilitary and the Police, Harki, the Organization of the French Algerian Resistance (ORAF) and the FLN.
However, regarding the situation of Mali and Algeria, terror attacks can spread to Europe. In a US News & World Report article titled “The French Intervention in Mali Is Necessary, But Risky” stated that “Military operations in northern Mali are likely to radicalize the population, spark a race war, and spread the conflict to neighboring countries. They also are unlikely to yield a long-term solution.” This is exactly what the French government wants, an excuse to re-occupy Mali and Algeria as colonial possessions. The Mali intervention is necessary for corporate interests, not for the interests of the Malian people. The radicalization of the Mali population is possible and can cause a blowback to France in the form of a terrorist attack. This would allow France to clamp down on its own citizens because more protests are expected in the coming months since the French economy is in decline due to the European debt crisis. When there is a terrorist problem, the French government would offer the solution to protect its citizenry. When Imperial powers unleash their militaries on the local population to combat terrorism, organizations such as the ‘Ansar Dine’ were most likely used to commit the terror attacks. They are linked to an Islamic organization affiliated with Al-Qaeda known as the Al-Qaeda Organization in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) created by the West during the Soviet-Afghan War when they were called the “Mujahideen”. Members of ‘Ansar Dine’ come from Mali, Algeria and Nigeria. When Western powers use military force to fight terrorist organizations, the population gets caught in the crossfire, many innocents are killed causing a radicalization of the population to retaliate. They create hatred among the people who would eventually become the resistance against the occupation. This becomes an opportunity for the west.

French Troops in Mali on January 16, 2013
But the situation in Mali and Algeria is created by the west to re-conquer territories that was once controlled by the same forces since the 17th Century that are intervening in the North-African region today. ‘The Battle of Algiers’ serves as a reminder that there are legitimate resistance fighters against foreign occupation as there are terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda created by the West to commit terrorist acts as a pretext for invasion to supposedly “protect” French and Malian civilians and it’s government, but that is far from the truth. Its about Mali’s resources.
‘The Battle of Algiers’ is a movie, but it should also serve as a history lesson on how governments use the excuse of terrorism to their advantage. The point is that France, who is backed by the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM) would use any means necessary to re-occupy Mali and Algeria in order to exploit their resources for French, American and British corporations. France is under the Anglo-American establishment and it has been ordered to invade North-Africa regardless of the consequences. Terrorism whether used by legitimate resistance movements against foreign occupation or by the government to blame their enemies can justify their actions. They can use their military and police to occupy a country, exploit the resources and take away the people’s rights. France is allied with the United States and Great Britain in the War on Terror. Western powers want to re-take Africa, Latin America, the Middle-east and Asia so that they can dominate the world. It does not end with Mali and Algeria, so expect more wars in the coming years. Imperialism is a cancer on our planet that enforces colonialism and commits false flag terrorism to justify their military occupation. Either way, they both lead to war. France and its Western allies will find a way to occupy North-Africa and that is unfortunate.

Qatar, Sponsor of Islamist Political Movements, Major Ally of America Qatar and U.S. : Collusion or Conflict of Interest?

Qatar, Sponsor of Islamist Political Movements, Major Ally of America

Qatar and U.S. : Collusion or Conflict of Interest?

In his inaugural address on January 21, U.S. President Barack Obama made the historic announcement that “a decade of war is ending” and declared his country’s determination to “show the courage to try and resolve our differences with other nations peacefully,” but his message will remain words that have yet to be translated into deeds and has yet to reach some of the U.S. closest allies in the Middle East who are still beating the drums of war, like Israel against Iran and Qatar against Syria.

In view of the level of “coordination” and “cooperation” since bilateral diplomatic relations were established in 1972 between the U.S. and Qatar , and the concentration of U.S. military power on this tiny peninsula, it seems impossible that Qatar could move independently apart, in parallel with, away or on a collision course with the U.S. strategic and regional plans.

According to the US State department’s online fact sheet, “bilateral relations are strong,” both countries are “coordinating” diplomatically and “cooperating” on regional security, have a “defense pact,” “ Qatar hosts CENTCOM Forward Headquarters,” and supports NATO and U.S. regional “military operations. Qatar is also an active participant in the U.S.-led efforts to set up an integrated missile defense network in the Gulf region. Moreover, it hosts the U.S. Combined Air Operations Center and three American military bases namely Al Udeid Air Base, Assaliyah Army Base and Doha International Air Base, which are manned by approximately 5,000 U.S. forces.

Qatar, which is bound by such a most intimate and closest alliance with the United States , has recently developed into the major sponsor of Islamist political movements. Qatar appears now to be the major sponsor of the international organization of the Muslim Brotherhood, which, reportedly, disbanded in Qatar in 1999 because it stopped to view the ruling family as an adversary.

The Qatar/Brotherhood marriage of convenience has created the natural incubator of Islamist armed fundamentalists against whom the U.S. , since September 11, 2001, has been leading what is labeled as the “global war on terrorism.”

The war in the African nation Mali offers the latest example on how the U.S. and Qatar , seemingly, go on two separate ways. Whereas US Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, was in London on January 18 “commending” the French “leadership of the international effort” in Mali to which his country was pledging logistical, transportation and intelligence support, Qatar appeared to risk its special ties with France, which peaked during the NATO-led war on Libya, and to distrust the U.S. and French judgment.

On January 15, Qatari Prime and Foreign Minister, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem al-Thani, told reporters he did not believe “power will solve the problem,” advised instead that this problem be “discussed” among the “neighboring countries, the African Union and the (U.N.) Security Council,” and joined the Doha-based ideologue for the Muslim Brotherhood and their Qatari sponsors, Yusuf Abdullah al-Qaradawi – the head of the International Union of Muslim Scholars who was refused entry visa to U.K. in 2008 and to France last year – in calling for “dialogue,” “reconciliation” and “peaceful solution” instead of “military intervention.”

In a relatively older example, according to WikiLeaks , Somalia ’s former president in 2009, Sharif Ahmed, told a U.S. diplomat that Qatar was channeling financial assistance to the al-Qaeda-linked Shabab al-Mujahideen, which the U.S. listed as “terrorist.”

In Syria, for another example, the Brotherhood is the leading “fighting” force against the ruling regime and in alliance with and a culprit in the atrocities of the terrorist bombings of the al-Qaeda-linked Al-Nusra Front, designated by the United States as a terrorist organization last December; while the Brotherhood-led and U.S. and Qatar-sponsored Syrian opposition publicly protested the U.S. designation, the silence of Qatar on the matter could only be interpreted as in support of the protest against the U.S. decision.

Recently, Qatar has, for another example, replaced Syria , which has been on the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism since 1979, as the sponsor of Hamas, whose leadership relocated from Damascus to Doha , which the U.S. lists as a “terrorist” group, and which publicly admits being the Palestinian branch of the Brotherhood.

Qatar, in all these examples, seems positioning itself to be qualified as a mediator, with the U.S. blessing, trying to achieve by the country’s financial leverage what the U.S. could not achieve militarily, or could achieve but with a much more expensive cost in money and souls.

In the Mali case, the Qatari PM Sheikh Hamad went on record to declare this ambition: “We will be a part of the solution, (but) not the sole mediator,” he said. The U.S. blessing could not be more explicit than President Obama’s approval of opening the Afghani Taliban office in Doha “to facilitate” a “negotiated peace in Afghanistan,” according to the Qatari Foreign Ministry on January 16.

However, a unilateral Qatari mediation failed in Yemen, a Qatar-led Arab mediation in Syria has similarly proved a failure two years on the Syrian crisis, the “Doha Declaration” to reconcile Palestinian rival factions is still a paper achievement, the Qatari mediation in Sudan’s Darfur crisis has yet to deliver, the Qatari “mediation” in Libya was condemned as intervention in the country’s internal affairs by the most prominent among the post-Gaddafi leaders, and in post-“Arab Spring” Egypt Qatar dropped its early mediation efforts to align itself publicly to the ruling Brotherhood. But in spite of these failures, Qatar ’s “mediation” efforts were successful in serving the strategy of its U.S. “ally.”

Hence the U.S. blessing. The Soufan Group’s intelligence analysts on last December 10 concluded that “Qatar continues to prove itself to be a pivotal U.S. ally… Qatar is often able to implement shared U.S.-Qatari objectives that Washington is unable or unwilling to undertake itself.”

The first term Obama administration, under the pressure of “fiscal austerity,” blessed the Qatari funding of arming anti-Gaddafi Islamists in Libya, closed its eyes to Qatar’s shipment of Gaddafi’s military arsenal to Syrian and non-Syrian Islamists fighting the regime in Syria, “understood” the visit of Qatar’s Emir to Gaza last October as “a humanitarian mission,” and recently approved to arm the Qatar-backed and Brotherhood-led Egypt with 20 F-16 fighter jets and 200 M1A1 Abrams tanks.

This contradiction raises the question about whether this is a U.S./Qatari mutual collusion or it is really a conflict of interests; the Obama administration during his second term has to draw the line which would give an explicit answer.

Seemingly nowadays, Doha and Washington do not see eye to eye on Islamic and Islamist movements, but on the battle grounds of the “war on terror” both capitals could hardly argue that in practice their active roles are not coordinated and do not complement each other.

Drawing on the historical experience of an Iranian similar “religious” approach, but on a rival “Shiite” sectarian basis, this Qatari “Sunni” Islamist” connection will inevitably fuel sectarian polarization in the region, regional instability, violence and civil wars.

Given the U.S./Qatar alliance, the Qatari Islamist connection threatens to embroil the U.S. in more regional strife, or at least to hold the U.S. responsible for the resulting strife, and would sustain a deep-seated regional anti-Americanism, which in turn has become another incubator of extremism and terrorism and which is exacerbated by the past “decade of war,” which President Obama in his inaugural address promised to “end.”

Traditionally, Qatar, which stands in the eye of the storm in the very critical geopolitical volatile Gulf region, the theatre of three major wars during the last three decades, did its best to maintain a critical and fragile balance between the two major powers which determine its survival, namely the decades-old U.S. military presence in the Gulf and the rising regional power of Iran.

In 1992 it signed a comprehensive bilateral defense pact with the United States and in 2010 it signed a military defense agreement with Iran, which explains its warming up to closer ties with the Iran – supported Islamic anti – Israel resistance movements of the Hezbullah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories and explains as well Qatar’s “honey moon” with Iran’s ally in Syria.

However, since the eruption of the bloody Syrian crisis two years ago, the Qatari opening up to regional pro-Iran state and non-state powers was exposed as merely a tactical maneuver to lure such powers away from Iran. In the Syrian and Hezbullah cases, the failure of this tactic has led Qatar to embark on a collision course with both Syria and Iran, which are backed by Russia and China, and is leading the country to a U-turn shift away from its long maintained regional balancing act, a shift that Doha seems unaware of its threat to its very survival under the pressure of the international and regional conflicting interests as bloodily exposed in the Syrian crisis.

During the rise of the massive Pan-Arab, nationalist, socialist and democratic movements in the Arab world early in the second half of the twentieth century, the conservative authoritarian Arab monarchies adopted the Brotherhood, other Islamists and Islamic political ideology and used them against those movements to survive as allies of the United States, which in turn used both, spearheaded by al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, against the former Soviet Union and the communist ideology, to their detriment after the collapse of the bipolar world order.

However history seems to repeat itself as the U.S.-backed Arab monarchies, spearheaded by Qatar, are resorting to their old tactic of exploiting the Islamist ideology to undermine and preempt an Arab anti-authoritarian revolution for the rule of law, civil society, democratic institutions and social and economic justice in Arab countries on the periphery of their U.S. protected bastion in the Arabian peninsula, but they seem unaware they are opening a Pandora’s box that would unleash a backlash in comparison to which al-Qaeda’s fall back on the U.S. will prove a minor precedent.

Nicola Nasser is a veteran Arab journalist based in Bir Zeit, West Bank of the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories.

* nassernicola@ymail.com

Building a Pretext to Wage War on Iran? Washington Cooks Up a “Nuclear Fairy Tale”

In a 155-page report, four US nuclear experts have called upon the Obama administration to impose tougher economic sanctions against Iran and resort to overt operations through using warplanes and missiles on Iranian nuclear sites.
Apart from the fact that morbid mindset of this nature only helps fan up chaos and serves as an impetus to widespread pandemonium in the region, any mention of any such policy let alone an adoption of it will gradually terminate in an endless array of military legitimizations.
Co-authored by Mark Dubowitz, who runs Zionist-controlled Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD) and David Albright, a physicist who heads the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) and who is responsible for concocting lies and myths about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction and drawing the country into an abysmal vortex of destruction and devastation, the report can be but seen in the light of yet another overtly brash attempt by the US to push ahead with further militarism in the Middle East.
Dubbed as ‘U.S. Nonproliferation Strategy for the Changing Middle East,’ the report falls short of mentioning any other Middle Eastern countries, which may be seeking a nuclear weapons program, and instead focuses heavily on the Islamic Republic of Iran. The authors of the conspiratorial report urge Washington to “undertake additional overt preparations for the use of warplanes and/or missiles to destroy Iran’s nuclear capabilities with high explosives” and “increase Iranian isolation, including through regime change in Syria and deepening Iran’s diplomatic isolation.”
Naturally, the words have been deliberately and carefully chosen in the report. By ‘overt preparations’, the authors explicitly admit that the US government has in the past used ‘covert operations’ as well i.e. assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists and infiltrating and disrupting the computer systems. Somewhere in the report, the authors unambiguously refer to Washington’s sabotage activities in Iran. They say, “Press reports indicate that sabotage has been used to slow the Iranian nuclear program, including through infiltration and disruption of procurement networks and cyberattacks designed to inflict physical damage to the program. Judicious use of this tool should be included in continued U.S. efforts to constrain the Iranian nuclear program.”
Iran will save itself, the report says, only if it accepts the terms set by the authors. In other words, Iran has to kowtow to the terms set by the report which are as follows:

1) Suspension by Iran of the following proliferation-sensitive nuclear activities: (a) all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development, to be verified by the IAEA; and (b) work on all heavy water-related projects, including the construction of a research reactor moderated by heavy water, also to be verified by the IAEA;

2) Provision by Iran of such access and cooperation as the IAEA requests to be able to verify the suspensions and to resolve all outstanding issues, as identified in IAEA reports;

3) A full accounting and resolution of all outstanding questions about Iran’s past and any current (as of the time of agreement) nuclear weapons related activities;

4) Complete closure of the Fordow facility and any other deeply buried enrichment facility that is either complete or under construction; and

5) Iran’s binding agreement to intrusive and comprehensive inspections that are at a minimum as stringent as those outlined in the IAEA’s Additional.

If truth be told, these terms are nothing new and only reek of a Zionist influence contaminating the already decomposing American policy. On May 9, 2012, just ahead of the May 23 talks in Baghdad, where six world powers were slated to sit down with Iranian officials and resolve the so-called nuclear issue, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the talks will be successful only if Iran agrees to “halt all uranium enrichment, ship its current stockpile of enriched uranium out of the country and dismantle an underground enrichment facility near the city of Qom (Fordow).” Interestingly, when the IAEA-Iran meeting took place in May, these three demands were exactly (but not coincidently) put on IAEA’s agenda and the Iranian side was demanded to abide by these if it sought any resolution of the issue.
What strikes the mind as reasonably acceptable is that the authors are no political well-wishers; rather, they are indeed so morbidly obsessed with paving the way for another ravaging war in the Middle East that they are trying to cook up another fairy tale as David Albright and his ‘company’ did in Iraq.
In point of fact, similar lies were told about Iraq before the US invaded the country. US intelligence agencies announced in 2003 that Iraq “could be planning a chemical or biological attack on American cities through the use of remote-controlled “drone” planes equipped with GPS tracking maps”. They even said that these “vehicles have already been, or could be, transported” inside the United States. Add to this a more blatant lie: Iraq could be ‘months away’ from building nuclear bomb. Analysts at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) said in 2002 that Saddam Hussein could be “months” away from assembling a nuclear bomb and has stockpiled possibly thousands of liters of deadly anthrax”.
Former US president George W. Bush who was extremely keen on launching a war came up with ‘new evidence’ which he said showed Iraq’s ‘continued appetite’ for nuclear bombs. His evidence: Iraq had tried to buy thousands of high-strength aluminum tubes which Bush said “were used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon”. Bush presented this as a document to the UN. However, UN weapons inspectors conducted investigations for weeks and were quite confident that the tubes were never meant to be used for enriching uranium (See Iraq, Lies, Cover-Ups, and Consequences By Rodney Stich p. 141).
The Iraq war was waged on the strength of a heap of lies disseminated by all and sundry in the US government and that which claimed the lives of over one million people. The bitter irony is that those who are responsible for playing havoc with the lives of a million people are not surprisingly fettered by shackles to await a sore chastisement as the essence of humanity necessitates it; instead, they are free and to crown it all, they are even allowed the latitude to continue with their myths and engage in yet another military mischief.

Reality Check: There are more terrorist groups active in the US than any other country in the world

Canadian Security Intelligence Service report. Party on, Obama. No worries, the second coming says it's all just "workplace violence."

Terrorism CSIS, January 21, 2013 (thanks to R)
Many Canadians may be surprised to learn that, with the exception of the United States, there are more terrorist groups active in Canada today than in any other country in the world. Their presence can be attributed to Canada's proximity to the United States, one of the world's pre-eminent terrorist targets, but also to the fact that Canada is an attractive place to live and do business because of its openness, and its respect for human rights and freedoms. With so many terrorist groups in Canada, people might wonder why the media are not reporting the occurrence of serious violence in Canada on a regular basis. While some Canadians have been victims of large-scale terrorist attacks-most notably in the 1985 bombing of an Air India flight from Toronto and the 2001 destruction of New York's twin towers-Canada, as a country, has not often been targeted specifically for attack. For this reason, many people have come to equate terrorism with the violence and tragic events that occur in foreign countries.
The most visible aspect of terrorist activity is physical violence; however, the absence of violence here at home does not mean the absence of terrorist activity. Most activities in Canada support actions elsewhere linked to homeland conflicts, and are relatively subtle in nature. These activities include:

providing a convenient base for terrorist supporters and operatives;

fundraising;

lobbying through front organizations;

propagating hate and ideologies that incite and perpetuate violence;

recruiting fighters for wars and conflicts abroad;

procuring weapons and materiel;

coercing and manipulating immigrant communities;

facilitating transit to and from the United States and other countries, and

other illegal activities.

Violence on Canadian Territory The absence, to date, of terrorist violence on Canadian territory does not preclude the possibility of a terrorist attack. Canada's solidarity with the United States and other Western democracies in the fight against terrorism has rendered Canada a potential target. For this reason, the intelligence, law enforcement and security communities have been working in close collaboration to identify and apprehend terrorists and thus prevent a terrorist attack from ever occurring in Canada.
Identifying and apprehending terrorists is more challenging than ever. Sunni Islamic extremists such as the members of the Al Qaeda network, for example, are often well-educated in specialized fields such as computer science, biochemistry and engineering. They are security-conscious, well-funded and resourceful. They use sophisticated technology, enhanced by encryption and steganography (the concealment of the existence of messages), to communicate worldwide and to transfer funds electronically. Furthermore, they are masterful at exploiting the media to influence public opinion, and at using democratic institutions to further their cause or to avoid just penalty.

Domestic Terrorism
While CSIS dedicates most of its counter-terrorism resources to religious extremism, which the Government of Canada considers to be the most serious threat to the safety of Canadians, the Service also continues to monitor individuals and organizations that might be involved in other forms of terrorism, such as:

state-sponsored terrorism;
domestic terrorism (which includes the threat or the use of violence by groups advocating for issues such as the environment, anti-abortion, animal rights, anti-globalization, and white supremacy, and the dissemination of militia messages by groups in the United States); and
secessionist violence.

WHITE HOUSE INSIDER: Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi Testimony – “Complete Bullsh-t”

by Ulsterman on January 23, 2013 with 0 Comments in News

After repeated requests for feedback, a former longtime D.C. political operative gives this rather brief and too the point assessment of Hillary Clinton’s testimony today before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee regarding the Benghazi Massacre that led to the deaths of four Americans, including the first U.S. Ambassador to be killed in the line of duty in over 30 years.

“And they’re working it up to keep it going after ’16. A longer term shakedown. Breaking the whole country right over the wheel. Community organizing on a global scale.” -White House Insider

_______________________________
WHI: What I think about Hillary’s show this morning? All bullsh-t. Every single second of it. Want to know something the media isn’t telling you? That neither the Republicans, the White House, or Hillary’s people are telling you?
EVERY F-CKING QUESTION WAS AGREED TO BEFOREHAND. Hillary had notes for every question. Watch her look down every time a question is asked. She sucks at hiding it. That’s the tell. They negotiated the terms of the questioning weeks ago. She was prepared. There is no real investigation by the Senate. There is no real search for justice here. None. Zero. Zip. Nada. Complete bullsh-t.