jeudi 11 janvier 2018

Alain-Jean Mairet mars 2006

Des millions de femmes «manquantes»
 March 29th, 2006 by  ajmch

Women go ‘missing’ by the millions
by Ayaan Hirsi Ali

As I was preparing for this article, I asked a friend who is Jewish if it was appropriate to use the term “holocaust” to portray the worldwide violence against women. He was startled. But when I read him the figures in a 2004 policy paper published by the Geneva Center for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, he said yes, without hesitation.


Read the rest of this entry »


Wafa Sultan et la lumière de la raison
 March 17th, 2006 by  ajmch



Voir aussi la version francisée de l’intervention quasiment historique de Wafa Sultan sur al-Jazeera.
http://www.dailymotion.com/Tazda/video/65587

Ces Musulmans paisibles qui tournent terroristes
 March 14th, 2006 by  ajmch

Le syndrome du djihad subit
par Daniel Pipes
New York Sun, 14 mars 2006

«Certains islamistes peuvent se montrer respectueux des lois et raisonnables, mais ils font partie d’un mouvement totalitariste et, à ce titre, doivent être considérés comme des meurtriers potentiels.» J’ai rédigé cette phrase quelques jours après le 11 septembre 2001 et j’ai été constamment critiqué pour cela depuis lors. Mais un incident survenu le 3 mars à l’université de Caroline du Nord (UNC), à Chapel Hill, indique plutôt que je n’étais pas allé assez loin.


«Une mère musulmane doit élever ses enfants pour le djhad»
 March 11th, 2006 by  ajmch
Une élue palestinienne interviewée sur une chaîne de télévision saoudienne (cliquer sur l’image):


Shahid dans l’âme ou récupérée par des terroristes?
 March 9th, 2006 by  ajmch
Deux vidéos sous-titrées en français par Pistache à observer attentivement:

Le commentaire de Pistache:

Témoignages de trois anciens islamistes
 March 6th, 2006 by  ajmch

Et pour télécharger le fichier, cliquez ici


Des millions de femmes «manquantes»

 March 29th, 2006 by  ajmch

Women go ‘missing’ by the millions
by Ayaan Hirsi Ali
As I was preparing for this article, I asked a friend who is Jewish if it was appropriate to use the term “holocaust” to portray the worldwide violence against women. He was startled. But when I read him the figures in a 2004 policy paper published by the Geneva Center for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, he said yes, without hesitation.
One United Nations estimate says from 113 million to 200 million women around the world are demographically “missing.” Every year, from 1.5 million to 3 million women and girls lose their lives as a result of gender-based violence or neglect.

How could this possibly be true? Here are some of the factors:
In countries where the birth of a boy is considered a gift and the birth of a girl a curse from the gods, selective abortion and infanticide eliminate female babies.
Young girls die disproportionately from neglect because food and medical attention is given first to brothers, fathers, husbands and sons.
In countries where women are considered the property of men, their fathers and brothers can murder them for choosing their own sexual partners. These are called “honor” killings, though honor has nothing to do with it.
Young brides are killed if their fathers do not pay sufficient money to the men who have married them. These are called “dowry deaths,” although they are not just deaths, they are murders.
The brutal international sex trade in young girls kills uncounted numbers of them.
Domestic violence is a major cause of death of women in every country.
So little value is placed on women’s health that every year roughly 600,000 women die giving birth.
Six thousand girls undergo genital mutilation every day, according to the World Health Organization. Many die; others live the rest of their lives in crippling pain.
According to the WHO, one woman out of every five worldwide is likely to be a victim of rape or attempted rape in her lifetime.
What is happening to women and girls in many places across the globe is genocide. All the victims scream their suffering. It is not so much that the world doesn’t hear them; it is that fellow human beings choose not to pay attention.
It is much more comfortable for us to ignore these issues. And by “us,” I also mean women. Too often, we are the first to look away. We may even participate, by favoring our sons and neglecting the care of our daughters. All these figures are estimates; registering precise numbers for violence against women is not a priority in most countries.
Going forward, there are three challenges:
Women are not organized or united. Those of us in rich countries, who have attained equality under the law, need to mobilize to assist our fellows. Only our outrage and our political pressure can lead to change.
The Islamists are engaged in reviving and spreading a brutal and retrograde body of laws. Wherever the Islamists implement Shariah, or Islamic law, women are hounded from the public arena, denied education and forced into a life of domestic slavery.
Cultural and moral relativists sap our sense of moral outrage by claiming that human rights are a Western invention. Men who abuse women rarely fail to use the vocabulary the relativists have provided them. They claim the right to adhere to an alternative set of values – an “Asian,” “African” or “Islamic” approach to human rights.
This mind-set needs to be broken. A culture that carves the genitals of young girls, hobbles their minds and justifies their physical oppression is not equal to a culture that believes women have the same rights as men.
Three initial steps could be taken by world leaders to begin eradicating the mass murder of women:
A tribunal such as the court of justice in The Hague should look for the 113 million to 200 million women and girls who are missing.
A serious international effort must urgently be made to precisely register violence against girls and women, country by country.
We need a worldwide campaign to reform cultures that permit this kind of crime. Let’s start to name them and shame them.
In the past two centuries, those in the West have gradually changed the way they treat women. As a result, the West enjoys greater peace and progress. It is my hope that the third world will embark on this effort. Just as we put an end to slavery, we must end the gendercide.
(Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali-born Dutch legislator, lives under 24-hour protection because of death threats against her by Islamic radicals since the murder of Theo van Gogh, with whom she made the film “Submission” about women and Islam. This Global Viewpoint article was distributed by Tribune Media Services.)
AMSTERDAM
As I was preparing for this article, I asked a friend who is Jewish if it was appropriate to use the term “holocaust” to portray the worldwide violence against women. He was startled. But when I read him the figures in a 2004 policy paper published by the Geneva Center for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, he said yes, without hesitation.
One United Nations estimate says from 113 million to 200 million women around the world are demographically “missing.” Every year, from 1.5 million to 3 million women and girls lose their lives as a result of gender-based violence or neglect.
How could this possibly be true? Here are some of the factors:
In countries where the birth of a boy is considered a gift and the birth of a girl a curse from the gods, selective abortion and infanticide eliminate female babies.
Young girls die disproportionately from neglect because food and medical attention is given first to brothers, fathers, husbands and sons.
In countries where women are considered the property of men, their fathers and brothers can murder them for choosing their own sexual partners. These are called “honor” killings, though honor has nothing to do with it.
Young brides are killed if their fathers do not pay sufficient money to the men who have married them. These are called “dowry deaths,” although they are not just deaths, they are murders.
The brutal international sex trade in young girls kills uncounted numbers of them.
Domestic violence is a major cause of death of women in every country.
So little value is placed on women’s health that every year roughly 600,000 women die giving birth.
Six thousand girls undergo genital mutilation every day, according to the World Health Organization. Many die; others live the rest of their lives in crippling pain.
According to the WHO, one woman out of every five worldwide is likely to be a victim of rape or attempted rape in her lifetime.
What is happening to women and girls in many places across the globe is genocide. All the victims scream their suffering. It is not so much that the world doesn’t hear them; it is that fellow human beings choose not to pay attention.
It is much more comfortable for us to ignore these issues. And by “us,” I also mean women. Too often, we are the first to look away. We may even participate, by favoring our sons and neglecting the care of our daughters. All these figures are estimates; registering precise numbers for violence against women is not a priority in most countries.
Going forward, there are three challenges:
Women are not organized or united. Those of us in rich countries, who have attained equality under the law, need to mobilize to assist our fellows. Only our outrage and our political pressure can lead to change.
The Islamists are engaged in reviving and spreading a brutal and retrograde body of laws. Wherever the Islamists implement Shariah, or Islamic law, women are hounded from the public arena, denied education and forced into a life of domestic slavery.
Cultural and moral relativists sap our sense of moral outrage by claiming that human rights are a Western invention. Men who abuse women rarely fail to use the vocabulary the relativists have provided them. They claim the right to adhere to an alternative set of values – an “Asian,” “African” or “Islamic” approach to human rights.
This mind-set needs to be broken. A culture that carves the genitals of young girls, hobbles their minds and justifies their physical oppression is not equal to a culture that believes women have the same rights as men.
Three initial steps could be taken by world leaders to begin eradicating the mass murder of women:
A tribunal such as the court of justice in The Hague should look for the 113 million to 200 million women and girls who are missing.
A serious international effort must urgently be made to precisely register violence against girls and women, country by country.
We need a worldwide campaign to reform cultures that permit this kind of crime. Let’s start to name them and shame them.
In the past two centuries, those in the West have gradually changed the way they treat women. As a result, the West enjoys greater peace and progress. It is my hope that the third world will embark on this effort. Just as we put an end to slavery, we must end the gendercide.
(Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali-born Dutch legislator, lives under 24-hour protection because of death threats against her by Islamic radicals since the murder of Theo van Gogh, with whom she made the film “Submission” about women and Islam. This Global Viewpoint article was distributed by Tribune Media Services.)
AMSTERDAM
As I was preparing for this article, I asked a friend who is Jewish if it was appropriate to use the term “holocaust” to portray the worldwide violence against women. He was startled. But when I read him the figures in a 2004 policy paper published by the Geneva Center for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, he said yes, without hesitation.
One United Nations estimate says from 113 million to 200 million women around the world are demographically “missing.” Every year, from 1.5 million to 3 million women and girls lose their lives as a result of gender-based violence or neglect.
How could this possibly be true? Here are some of the factors:
In countries where the birth of a boy is considered a gift and the birth of a girl a curse from the gods, selective abortion and infanticide eliminate female babies.
Young girls die disproportionately from neglect because food and medical attention is given first to brothers, fathers, husbands and sons.
In countries where women are considered the property of men, their fathers and brothers can murder them for choosing their own sexual partners. These are called “honor” killings, though honor has nothing to do with it.
Young brides are killed if their fathers do not pay sufficient money to the men who have married them. These are called “dowry deaths,” although they are not just deaths, they are murders.
The brutal international sex trade in young girls kills uncounted numbers of them.
Domestic violence is a major cause of death of women in every country.
So little value is placed on women’s health that every year roughly 600,000 women die giving birth.
Six thousand girls undergo genital mutilation every day, according to the World Health Organization. Many die; others live the rest of their lives in crippling pain.
According to the WHO, one woman out of every five worldwide is likely to be a victim of rape or attempted rape in her lifetime.
What is happening to women and girls in many places across the globe is genocide. All the victims scream their suffering. It is not so much that the world doesn’t hear them; it is that fellow human beings choose not to pay attention.
It is much more comfortable for us to ignore these issues. And by “us,” I also mean women. Too often, we are the first to look away. We may even participate, by favoring our sons and neglecting the care of our daughters. All these figures are estimates; registering precise numbers for violence against women is not a priority in most countries.
Going forward, there are three challenges:
Women are not organized or united. Those of us in rich countries, who have attained equality under the law, need to mobilize to assist our fellows. Only our outrage and our political pressure can lead to change.
The Islamists are engaged in reviving and spreading a brutal and retrograde body of laws. Wherever the Islamists implement Shariah, or Islamic law, women are hounded from the public arena, denied education and forced into a life of domestic slavery.
Cultural and moral relativists sap our sense of moral outrage by claiming that human rights are a Western invention. Men who abuse women rarely fail to use the vocabulary the relativists have provided them. They claim the right to adhere to an alternative set of values – an “Asian,” “African” or “Islamic” approach to human rights.
This mind-set needs to be broken. A culture that carves the genitals of young girls, hobbles their minds and justifies their physical oppression is not equal to a culture that believes women have the same rights as men.
Three initial steps could be taken by world leaders to begin eradicating the mass murder of women:
A tribunal such as the court of justice in The Hague should look for the 113 million to 200 million women and girls who are missing.
A serious international effort must urgently be made to precisely register violence against girls and women, country by country.
We need a worldwide campaign to reform cultures that permit this kind of crime. Let’s start to name them and shame them.
In the past two centuries, those in the West have gradually changed the way they treat women. As a result, the West enjoys greater peace and progress. It is my hope that the third world will embark on this effort. Just as we put an end to slavery, we must end the gendercide.
(Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali-born Dutch legislator, lives under 24-hour protection because of death threats against her by Islamic radicals since the murder of Theo van Gogh, with whom she made the film “Submission” about women and Islam. This Global Viewpoint article was distributed by Tribune Media Services.)


Shahid dans l’âme ou récupérée par des terroristes?

 March 9th, 2006 by  ajmch
Deux vidéos sous-titrées en français par Pistache à observer attentivement:Le commentaire de Pistache:

Je suppose qu’en ayant visionné les deux, d’autres que moi se seront fait certaines réflexions similaires aux miennes. En gros, manipulation médiatique, et attitude différente de la mère de Wafa selon l’interlocuteur…
Il y a une troisième vidéo sur laquelle je voudrai mettre la main, une vidéo dont on voit des images dans le reportage américain : c’est celle de l’interview de Wafa au lendemain de son attentat. Je ne l’ai pas encore retrouvée sur le web, mais on peut lire une partie des propos qu’elle y a tenu dans un article du Daily Telegraph ou encore ici.
Lors de cette interview, Wafa affirme que son acte n’a rien à voir avec ses cicatrices (réfutant ainsi l’hypothèse avancée dans le reportage américain par Latifa, à savoir qu’elle aurait agi parce que se trouvant défigurée…), mais, comme le dit sa mère dans l’interview palestinienne, parce que son rêve (depuis l’enfance) était de devenir martyr en tuant « 20, 50 juifs… »; elle précise aussi qu’elle se serait peut-être plutôt faite exploser dans un autre hôpital que celui qui l’avait traitée [1] – pas par reconnaissance, non, mais parce que beaucoup d’arabes y sont soignés – et confirme que, si elle en avait eu l’occasion, elle aurait tué « même des enfants et des bébés » – « les juifs le font bien, vous vous souvenez de Mohammed al-Dura ? [2] » Et enfin, l’interview se termina effectivement sur la crise de larme montrée par NBC : « … je n’ai tué personne… auront-ils pitié de moi ? …» Snif Snif.
Quant à la mère de Wafa… on a le choix. Mère éplorée face aux caméras occidentales, sa fille a « été utilisée » alors qu’elle était « malade », ou mère affirmant calmement à la télé palestinienne que c’était le souhait de sa fille depuis toute petite que de se faire sauter et devenir ainsi « shahid », martyr d’Allah. Et qui désapprouve son acte non parce qu’il s’agissait de tuer des innocents, mais parce que ce n’est pas le rôle d’une fille (le rôle d’une fille étant sans doute de pondre des bombes humaines masculines).
Au finish, je crois que je trouve le reportage américain plus insupportable que le palestinien : pathos, sentimentalisme boursouflé, quasi-mépris des victimes que Wafa aurait pu faire ; la victime, « qui pleure et dont les parents pleurent et qui va terminer sa vie en prison », c’est l’apprentie terroriste ! En sélectionnant les extraits de l’interview de Wafa, NBC a clairement et délibérément choisi les images confortant l’idée d’une fille paumée. Que ne ferait-on pour prouver l’ampleur du fameux « désespoir » palestinien ?!
——————————————————————————–
[1] Et par la suite encore, elle a déclaré qu’elle ne visait pas un hôpital, mais n’importe quel endroit où se serait trouvé beaucoup de monde…
[2] Mohammed al-Dura… effectivement, et je crois que les petits films sur « Pallywood » devraient figurer en bonne place dans mes projets de traduction !



Ces Musulmans paisibles qui tournent terroristes

 March 14th, 2006 by  ajmch

Le syndrome du djihad subit
par Daniel Pipes
New York Sun, 14 mars 2006

«Certains islamistes peuvent se montrer respectueux des lois et raisonnables, mais ils font partie d’un mouvement totalitariste et, à ce titre, doivent être considérés comme des meurtriers potentiels.» J’ai rédigé cette phrase quelques jours après le 11 septembre 2001 et j’ai été constamment critiqué pour cela depuis lors. Mais un incident survenu le 3 mars à l’université de Caroline du Nord (UNC), à Chapel Hill, indique plutôt que je n’étais pas allé assez loin.
Alors, un étudiant fraîchement diplômé nommé Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, 22 ans, immigrant iranien, dirigea un lourd SUV sur une zone piétonne fortement fréquentée. Il heurta neuf personnes, fort heureusement sans en blesser gravement aucune.
Jusqu’à cette tentative de tuerie, Taheri-azar, dont les branches principales étaient la philosophie et la psychologie, semblait mener une existence normale et se diriger vers un avenir prometteur. Il présida le conseil des étudiants de son lycée et était un membre de la National Honor Society. Plusieurs étudiants de l’UNC le décrivirent au Los Angeles Times comme «un étudiant sérieux, timide mais aimable». Un étudiant proche de lui, Brian Copeland, «était impressionné par ses connaissances de la pensée occidentale classique», et ajouta: «Il était amical et gentil, pas agressif ni violent.» Le président de l’université, James Moeser, le qualifia de bon étudiant, quoique «tout à fait solitaire, introverti, tourné sur lui-même».
En fait, aucune de ses connaissances n’eut le moindre mot critique à son endroit, ce qui est important, car cela signale qu’il n’était pas un membre d’une pègre, ni un maniaque à tendance meurtrière, ni un psychotique, mais un étudiant consciencieux et aimable. Ce qui appelle une question évidente: pourquoi une personne parfaitement normale tenterait-elle de tuer des étudiants au hasard? Les déclarations que Taheriazar fit après son arrestation nous donnent quelques éclaircissements.
  • Il dit au standard de police-secours qu’il voulait «punir le gouvernement des États-Unis pour ce qu’il fait dans le monde».
  • Il expliqua à un enquêteur que «les gens partout le monde se font tués dans des guerres et maintenant, c’est le tour des gens des États-Unis de se faire tuer».
  • Il déclara avoir agi pour «venger la mort des Musulmans dans le monde».
  • Il décrivit ses actes comme une application de la règle «œil pour œil».
  • Une déclaration sous serment de la police relève que «Taheri-azar dit à plusieurs reprises que le gouvernement des États-Unis avait tué les membres de son peuple outremer et qu’il avait décidé d’attaquer».
  • Il déclara à un juge: «Je suis heureux que vous soyez là pour me faire ce procès et ainsi en apprendre davantage sur la volonté d’Allah.»
Bref, Taheri-azar est le cauchemar islamiste absolu: un Musulman apparemment bien intégré dont la religion lui inspire, comme un éclair dans un ciel bleu, d’assassiner des non-Musulmans. Taheriazar reconnut avoir préparé son djihad pendant plus de deux ans, soit pendant son séjour à l’université. Il est aisé d’imaginer comment ses idées ont évolué, vu la cohérence de l’idéologie islamiste, son immense portée (jusqu’à une association d’étudiants musulmans à l’UNC) et son impact parmi de nombreux Musulmans.
Si Taheri-azar faisait exception dans son adoption silencieuse de l’Islam radical, son cas pourrait être ignoré, mais il s’inscrit dans une large tendance de Musulmans à vivre paisiblement avant de devenir des terroristes. Leurs rangs comprennent ainsi les pirates de l’air qui commirent les attentats du 11 septembre, les poseurs de bombe londoniens et l’ingénieur d’Intel arrêté avant qu’il ne puisse rejoindre les talibans en Afghanistan, Maher Hawash.
Mohammed Ali Alayed, un Saoudien vivant à Houston, correspond également à ce schéma, car il poignarda et tua un Juif, Ariel Sellouk, qui fut son ami. Il faut inclure aussi certains convertis à l’Islam: qui aurait suspecté Muriel Degauque, une Belge de 38 ans, de se préparer à commettre un attentat-suicide en Irak, contre une base militaire américaine?
C’est pourquoi je pense utile de parler d’un «syndrome du djihad subit», dans lequel des Musulmans d’apparence normale deviennent subitement violents. Cela a pour conséquence, affreuse mais légitime, de jeter la suspicion sur tous les Musulmans. Qui sait d’où surgira le prochain djihadiste? Comment être sûr qu’un Musulman respectueux des lois ne va pas soudain exploser de rage meurtrière? Oui, bien sûr, leur nombre est très restreint, mais il est extrêmement plus élevé que parmi les non-Musulmans.
Ce syndrome permet de mieux expliquer la crainte de l’Islam et la méfiance envers les Musulmans dont les sondages révèlent l’augmentation depuis le 11 septembre 2001.
La réplique des Musulmans qui consiste à dénoncer ces attitudes comme autant de préjugés, comme le «nouvel antisémitisme» ou encore comme une «islamophobie» est aussi mal fondée que d’accuser les antinazis de «germanophobie» ou les anticommunistes de «russophobie». Au lieu de se présenter comme des victimes, les Musulmans feraient mieux de contrer ces craintes en développant une version modérée, moderne et fraternelle de l’Islam qui rejetterait l’Islam radical, le djihad et l’assujettissement des «infidèles».

Acte I Police

Ma Vérité Politique ♦️MVP ✔ Voici l'appel à manifester des policiers pour le #20décembre ! #LREM vers l'implosion ? #Gilets...