Sunday, October 22, 2006

What She Needs is a Good Stoning

I Could Scream: Examining the plight of women under Islam
The Baron found a forum link in the referrals on our site meter and followed it over to discover the following story. It was published by a newspaper in Lyon, France-Echos, dateline October 7th (translation by the Baron):

A schoolgirl was stoned Wednesday in a playground for non-observance of Ramadan.

"According to information sent by Michele Vianès, of the organization Regards de Femmes

The information given by me on Thursday at the time of our Regards de Femmes café is in today’s Le Progrès [the October 6th edition].

'A schoolgirl at the Jean Mermoz college [secondary school] in the eighth district of Lyon was pelted with a hail of stones on Wednesday morning in a playground where she was eating a snack. The theory that the act was related to the non-observance of Ramadan has been confirmed by the prosecutor in Lyon on the strength of the earliest results of the investigation.

Azzedine Gaci, the president of the CRCM [Conseil Régional du Culte Musulman — Regional Council for the Muslim Religion] declared that if “the facts prove to be true, they are unacceptable”. He deplores the ignorance of the pupils, to whom it would be necessary to teach the Koran at school, and who are unaware that during Ramadan the “women who are indisposed are exempt from compliance'.

Without further comment for now, I will keep you informed."

According to Western Resistance, “indisposed” is “probably is a euphemism for her ‘time of the month’.

That was several weeks ago and though I searched for follow-ups to the story there don’t seem to be any. She probably went home, washed her wounds, and went back to school the next day, careful to eat in the lavatory next time.

The forum said the girl was Christian, but the newspaper story seems to imply that she was Muslim and had raised the ire of her persecutors by appearing to be breaking the dietary laws re Ramadan. Perhaps she could wear some sign which would allow others to know that she is menstruating so they wouldn't stone her. No shame in that for an adolescent girl, right?

- - - - - - - - - -
But at least they might leave her alone. Here’s an idea: Muslim women could pin red stars on their burqas if they’re menstruating or pregnant during Ramadan. Thus, they could indicate that not only are they exempt from the Ramadan strictures because of their condition, but that they’re also unclean. Then when anyone menaces them, the women could retaliate by threatening to actually touch their tormentors and thus contaminate the little buggers. It would take lots of ritual washing to get clean from that ordeal. Retaliation that severe could get her mortally stoned, however, so maybe not.

Still, the red star would save a whole lot of hassle.

This is a stony religion. Hard and unforgiving. A child not being permitted to eat all day is a travesty of anything remotely spiritual. In most Western countries, back when they were normal, finding examples of children not eating all day would be investigated as child neglect. No kid can function in school on an empty stomach.

I do not doubt that there are warm, human and witty adherents of Islam. I know one or two myself. And in the blogosphere, just to pick one example there is The Religious Policeman. But he hung up his blogger’s hat and is writing a book instead. However, here is what this sane Muslim (safely out of Saudi Arabia) thinks about the fundamentalists in his native country who have spread their poisonous message world wide:

[It is] the full spectrum of institutionalized insanity that the House of Saud and their friends with long beards have created.

That “full spectrum” includes stoning a kid for eating. Jesus would’ve suggested that before they pick up a rock they examine their own souls to see if they were without sin…an admonition that probably doesn’t make sense in a tribal, warrior culture burdened with shame. Come to think of it, Christians as well could use that admonition to look inward first (someone can remind me of this the next time I feel like stoning Nancy Pelosi. Or Dean Howard. Or Jimmah from the Ummah).

The Good Old Days Really WereJuxtapose this story with our p.c.-zero-tolerance-zero-IQ-rules about school recess. Our kids are allowed to eat - in fact, some of the food they’re given is a downright sin - but for several years now they are being restricted at recess. Hard to believe, but our children are not permitted to play dodge ball. Or tag. Nor are they permitted to push one another on the swings. No physical contact, you know. Remember — G-d forbid — cops and robbers? Of course, if our kids were still allowed to play these normal childhood games, the good guys/bad guys routine would have morphed by now into “soldiers and terrorists.” And the educational bureaucrats would be in cardiac arrest.

Heh.


Hat tip: Gold Is Money and Western Resistance.

9 comments:

JeepThang said...

They better thank allah that she wasn't my daughter.

Mom of Three said...

Today I heard about the Muslim seperatists in the UK. Europe is in for some awful times, I suspect, brought to you by the people they allowed in as guests.

Archonix said...

Why do people start seperatist movements?

I know it sounds like the start of a joke but it's a serious question, and I've come to the conclusion that there are two reasons, that are really both aspects of each other. The first is that they can't get representation. The American war of independence was a seperatist war started for that reason. The second is similar, but goes further: if the people decide that they can't get their way. Merely having representation isn't enough for some, who demand nothing less than absolute control.

The formation of seperatist movements in the UK and other countries is significant. It means that at least some muslims groups have decided that their current tactics aren't working anymore; they can't get much more power without either taking over or cleaving away. Taking over completely must seem to be out of their reach, perhaps because of increasingly visible opposition amongst the people and at least lip-service to that opposition from the political classes. In that situation, to gain absolute control requires seperation and independence from the governing authority. If a seperatist movement starts to gain traction it means that they reckon they feel are no longer in a position to gain control of the entire country. It also makes them that much more visible as "seperate" and "apart" from us, and makes them an easier target. It's something of a losing strategy and, frankly, it smacks of a little bit of desperation because the idea that they can nibble aay chunks of the country until they own it is flawed, because the host country will very quickly reject these suddenly foreign bodies.

And you're right, it will be messy. But it's a sign that they aren't able to go on as they were before.

Yorkshireminer said...

I was browsing a couple of days ago through the Civil Contigences Bill, passed by Her Majesties Government a couple of years ago. Not many people have heard of it and on a cursory reading seems fairly innocuous, and seems to describe the problems of civil disasters like Hurricane Katrina and oil spills etc. and the structure that has to be put into place and how to deal with it. It was only when I got to the end of the bill that my eyes began to pop. It seems that when the emergency powers under this bill are enacted 32 other acts or parts of act do not apply for the duration of the emergency, The Criminal Justice Act 1982, The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and the The Civil Protection in Peacetime Act 1986 to mention just three. The act has to be renewed every 30 days but that is only a formality and it can be renewed indefinitely. It can also be brought in, if the cabinet, not parliament, thinks it necessary, that there is a likelihood of an emergency. They seem to have control of the Army, terrorism does get mentioned in passing. It seems to me that the British Government is well aware that the chance of civil disturbances are likely to be the rule and not the exception in the near future. These are draconian methods which frighten me. I have got to go and read the parts of the other acts before I can really access what freedoms that the British people will lose if this act in implemented , but one thing is deffinately certain Archonix and other readers of this Blogg is that the followers of the religion of Peace are in for a very nasty surprise if they start to get too stroppy.

chuck said...

These are draconian methods which frighten me.

My own opinion is that Britain has changed for the worse under Blair. While many applaud him for his support of the US, I think he has been a disaster for Britain, er, Oceania. And the Tories don't look to offer an alternative. The problems in Britain go beyond unassimilated Muslims. The working class and countryside have also been damaged.

Gormless Norman said...

Implicit in Gaci's comments is that, had the girl not been menstruating, it would have been acceptable, or at least not quite so bad, to throw stones at her. Lovely.

TonyGuitar said...

Chickens have a cold blooded instinct of pecking a misformed or visually injured chick to death.

I saw this on a little farm near Souris PEI. One chick had a little of its scalp skinned.
The other chicks pecked his head relentlessly.

The chickens cannot be judged as instinct is not pre-meditation.

Stoning a child is pre-meditated evil, unless a chicken does it that is.

Then there was a case where Syrian religious police barred schoolgirls from leaving a burning school because their faces were not covered. The girls died of smoke inhalation.

On the UK blogsite of a respected UK Muslim. I could find it if pressed. = TG

Papa Bear said...

Archonix,

In any guerrilla movement, you need a sanctuary -- someplace you can go after operations to rest, recover, train, and plan the next operation. Transforming certain areas into "no-go" zones is part of the process for transforming them into guerrilla sanctuaries.

Once you have credible capability to do damage, the game then becomes "How do I expand my power and influence without making the other side decide they have no choice but to commit all their resources to taking out my sanctuary?"

Once they have sanctuary, and the ability to cause trouble, they start making deals with politicians. "You don't want us to riot and bring the country to a standstill? Then keep the welfare money flowing, and allow further immigration of our brethren from overseas". The politicians can see where this will ultimately lead, but will be tempted to give in, in order to maintain power.

The insurgents can even make a deal with one faction: "We will make the other side look bad by making the country ungovernable when they are in power, as long as you give us what we want when YOU are in power"

You might even get some people in the ruling elite thinking that, if they allow the insurgents to make conditions bad enough, then the people may become so scared and dissatisfied with the democratic process, that they will be relieved when a Strong Man offers to take power and deal with the situation.

The pattern has happened before -- look at Germany in the years immediately after WWI. The Germans had seen an attempted Communist revolution in Germany in 1919 by the Spartacists, had seen a successful revolution in Russia resulting in wholesale liquidation of the middle class, and saw Hungary go through a bloody Communist revolution under Bela Kun. With Communists engaged in street fighting with the authorities, the German people became ready to accept Adolph's running things, as long as he looked like he would make them safe from the Communists

Dymphna said...

Tony Guitar--

That respected UK Muslim who told the story of the girls forced back into the burning building can be found at the link in my post: The Religious Policeman." He's closed shop now...

I sure do miss his sense of humor. Especially in his descriptions of his wife, who sounded very much like "She Who Must Be Obeyed."

________

Papa Bear: excellent theory about why criminals create "no go" areas. I'd never thought of that. In this country, it's what the drug thugs did with the subsidized concrete housing complexes. Even the small ones are scary.