Audax- Suggestions for your homework.

Site moved to http://audaxnews.wordpress.com/

Friday, October 10, 2008

August 9, 2008- Freddy Villanueva, 18, was shot dead by police during a late-night confrontation with police in a Montreal North parking lot. The death of Villanueva sparked a riot in the borough.
Dany Villanueva, 22, Freddy Villanueva’s brother, already had a serious criminal record. On the night of the killing, he was playing dice for money knowing that this is illegal. Freddy Villanueva was with him and he began to shout when the police followed the procedure required to immobilize Dany Villanueva.
On his blog, Richard Dupuis challenges the readers with the idea that Dany Villanueva is responsible for the death of his brother, Freddy. Read his blog for more details. (http://richard3.wordpress.com/2008/08/12/mort-de-freddy-villanueva-son-frere-dany-est-il-responsable/).

“Villanueva, burn in hell!”
While on a bus, I saw this image. The person who wrote down these words might know something no one else knows about this case as there is no place for forgiveness in his/her heart.
What made this person feel like this?
It is, obviously, fierce hatred against the riots following the death, hatred against the mentality that leads individuals to such behavior. It is hatred against what some call their constitutional right to question and condemn every single step made by the police.
It is hatred against gang life, gang members and insecurity that dominate Montreal-Nord. It is hatred against the habitual practice of victimizing the criminals and criminalizing the victims.
What happens if every single time a teen, especially non-white, is killed by the police? Should the community start rioting, looting and destroying private and public property?

People have always been superstitious about mentioning the name of a dead person. It was the fear that the dead might come back. Such a belief is traceable all over the world. By wishing for a soul to "rest in peace," people hoped that the spirit would stay “peacefully” within the dead body.
Today, "May his soul rest in peace" is used more as a sign of respect for the dead person rather than the maintenance of a superstition. Even so, cursing the dead remains a strong taboo in our contemporary world.
The fear of speaking ill about the dead can be traced back to Roman times. The Romans strongly believed that doing so the dead were to return as ghosts and haunt the living.
Reading “Villanueva, burn in hell!” was unexpected. I believe that the person who wrote this must find his/her own peace and let it go.
After all, hell might be already here.

Friday, October 10, 2008

The elections are knocking at the door. Some doors are open, others stay closed. Many are tired of “trick or treat”.
Canadians will vote on Tuesday, October the 14th. After the debates (in French and in English), Stephen Harper is leading and not only thanks to his linguistic abilities.
French speakers Gilles Duceppe or Stephan Dion, when it comes to English, are visibly struggling to be coherent. During the English debate, uncomfortable because of the language, their performance was less vivid than during the French debate.
As they were arguing, the candidates did not bring anything new. It was the same, old rhetoric, aiming mainly to discredit the adversary.
Who are the candidates in the 2008 Canadian elections? In addition to Dion and Duceppe, Elizabeth May, a newcomer.
Besides not knowing when to listen and when to speak, the Green Party’s candidate, Elizabeth May, can not represent Canada as a PM as she is politically not mature enough and I did not notice the gram of political talent during the two performances. As her French is simply deplorable (during the French debate she made elementary errors like: « Vous ne comprends pas », « Une question intéressée »,
« Vous avez peut-être souviens », « Les nations premières c’est très importante ». Imagine her having a conversation with Nicholas Sarkozy…) May has no chance in Quebec, as Dion and Duceppe have no chance in the non-French speaking provinces. On the other hand, May doesn’t have the social skills a PM requires in order to conduct or be part of an elegant debate.
She behaved more like a chicken in distress on the shore of the lake, hysterical that her chicks would drown, not knowing that “her chicks” are ducklings…
Dion and Duceppe cannot become Canada’s next PM as their English is simply ludicrous and more ridiculous would be for the Canadian PM to use an interpreter. Representing an English speaking country, the PM is expected to be perfectly fluent in English.
What would you think if the British or Australian PM would be struggling when speaking English?
Who else is on the list of the candidates?
Jack Layton and the actual PM, Stephen Harper. Both anglophones, they were capable of learning French, reaching a good command of it and they are the only two candidates who are truly bilingual.
Personally, I say no to Layton. Why? I smell too many fundamentalist Muslims financially back his campaign. The sweet and sour soup à la Layton doesn’t look appetizing.
In conclusion, the only one remaining on my list is Harper.

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

This Saudi cleric (a "doctor in religion” perhaps?), came with this juvenile idea: veiled women should not be given the slit for two eyes anymore, but a niqab with a hole for only… one eye. Is his intention to create a new sect, the sect of the cyclops? No, of course not. The reason behind this silly story is very simple. We’ll get there a bit later.
Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world where women are not allowed to drive. As activist Wajeha Huwaider is now publicly campaigning for a change to the law, we might witness a truly weird reality: one-eyed women driving cars.
Besides totally disregarding these women’s freedom, Muhammad al-Habadan is also eager to endanger their health, as using one eye may lead to serious sight malfunctions. Moreover, who knows, maybe one eye might grow bigger than the other one and through evolution, move eventually slightly to the centre of the face, while what once was a second eye might lose its function and simply vanish. It sounds like a cheap, sci-fi scenario, but who cares, as we will not see this?
What a pity that the sheikh himself will not survive to see, with … both his eyes, the world of the one-eyed women.
The sheikh is sly. The truth lies in Futurama. He seems to be fixated on Leela, the one-eyed captain of the Planet Express Ship from Futurama, the American sitcom created by Matt Groening. Thus, under the pretext of the irritating makeup, the sheikh desperately wants to see… a cyclop. He wants this today and now, not in the distant future, to ease and conceal his surreptitious adoration of Leela.
Questions:
1. If women will be given a niqab with a hole for only one eye, where should the hole be situated: on the left or on the right side? As an “eye job” for a middle option is not possible at the moment.
2. What makes this cleric believe that if women are allowed to look at the world with only one eye, they won’t use kohl and mascara anymore?
3. Why not just put a barrel around their heads and give women a periscope? Thus, no one will see them.
4. If the periscope is excruciatingly too advanced technology for the oil owners, women could simply be put in a sack, like those used for rice, flour or potatoes. Thus, a new profession could be created in Saudi Arabia, opening the market to foreign workers: wheel barrel pusher. Women could be moved around in this environmentally friendly means of transport.
5. If this scenario is also too complicated, there is another thing left: the old basket. I intentionally use “old”, as, who knows, a new basket might turn on some perverts and make them rape the women wearing new, shiny baskets on their heads. Here, a little technical problem could get in the way: how tight the basket should be woven to let the woman see, but not be seen? I am sure that the Koran could give them the answer.
6. WHY NOT JUST BAN THE SALE AND USE OF THE BLOODY EYE MAKEUP?!
(This could be a divine revelation for Muhammad al-Habadan.)

Image source for Leela: http://www.fox.com/futurama/bios/leela.htm

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Covered women are not something out of the ordinary anymore in the western world. You can see them everywhere, sometimes in the least expected places, like cosmetics departments looking for hair dye, make up or simply in a women’s garments department, admiring some not quite orthodox lingerie.
You can see them on the beach, at festivals, you name it, perhaps on a mission given by their imam.

I might say that these covered women want to prove us, maybe a bit too hard, that they feel integrated in this society. Plus, I might deduce that our world pleases them more than their world. Here, covered or not, a woman can walk hand in hand with her partner, a serious misconduct punishable in an Islamic country, governed by Sharia. They can sit at the same table at a restaurant and enjoy their meal together, as a couple.
The debate over the wearing of the hijab, niqab or burka or other drapes in our world has not ended and it is not likely to end too soon.
Opinions are divided between those who defend the drapes, considering that they do not interfere with the values of a secular society and those who are against these garments as they are perceived as segregationist and insulting to western women and their history of fight for equal rights with men.
Those who wear a hijab in Canada also defend the headdress as they declare that wearing it is their free decision.
Other emancipated Muslim women, especially Iranian, cannot conceive wearing any of these garments, as they are seen reminders of a constrictive society they have willingly left behind the day they have decided to emigrate.
As the debate goes on, so do we and I would like to discuss the use of high heels by more and more Muslim women who wear hijab. High heels tend to replace the traditional, flat, man like hideous slippers.
High heels and hijab? It is, indeed, contradictory. As Muslim scholars say that the true Muslim woman is modest in clothing as she is in all other respects, trying to be as invisible as possible (by the way, how is this goal reached in our world where covered women are anything but “invisible’, as they do not blend in the context, as they do in a Muslim country?).
Make up, sometimes as heavy as the eyelids and eyelashes can carry, high heels, tight jeans… what is next? Perhaps, hijabbed women… smoking? Modesty and invisibility with heavy loads of mascara and high heels is a difficult to achieve goal.
As they defend the hijab as a fundamental element of their spirituality, I am thinking that they should also respect the rest of the requirements of their religion, thus, they shouldn’t hold hands with their partners for instance.
As I see it, those who wear the hijab here make a statement of provocation and not one of conviction.
You want to wear the hijab? Very well, then respect the rest of the interdictions.
So, you who cover your “precious” hair (by the way, your hair should be aerated for hygiene purposes) and expose the rest of your shapes, don’t you dare to consider yourself more virtuous than western women.
Don’t you dare to talk about modesty and don’t you or your husband dare to criticize western women.
You wear a hijab, high heels and make up?
N.B.
In our world, prostitutes assume what they do and never try to hide what they are. They deserve my respect more than a hypocrite hijab on high heels.

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Pirates have been around forever. Their tales of looting the seas, pillaging villages and sailing across the globe survived long after the golden age of piracy. Cilician, Viking, Arab, Slavic or Chinese pirates all took to the sea, some as late as the last century.
Others ended their pirate “careers” as far back as medieval times.
Surprisingly, a few are still practicing this antiquated means of subsistence. Among them, the Somalis.
While other nations develop new technologies used in medicine to cure incurable diseases, or explore the universe and oceans for new forms of life, today’s pirates are incapable to relate to modern times, remaining in the rear of our epoch.
I just read that three Somali pirates have died during a gun fight among themselves on the Ukrainian-operated cargo ship they hijacked off Somalia's coast.
The episode is tragically funny. Besides, it presents an accurate depiction of the geographical area populated mainly by rival clans. What are the chances for these clans to put their egos aside, work for the benefit of their country and stop relying on foreign help?
There are voices trying to victimize the pirates, suggesting an explanation of the piracy consequential to extreme poverty and lack of opportunities.
What the rest of the world should know is that Somalia is not exclusively famine and fly-ridden children.
Some claim that Somali piracy is triggered by hunger as they seem to target ships delivering UN food aid, however crew members have been kidnapped for ransom. The French luxury yacht seized on 4 April, 2008 or the Hong Kong chemical tanker seized on 15 September, 2008 are only two examples that defy the hunger theory.
Pirates are almost exclusively based in Puntland, a rich coastal region of Somalia abundant in fish and other resources, exporting large quantities of seafood, dried fish, tuna, frankincense, gum Arabic and sea salt.
Recently, the pirates have hijacked ships carrying Russian tanks to Nigeria (“nice” job, Russia!) and 30,000 tonnes of petrochemicals (a Malaysian tanker).
All nations affected must act immediately. Ignoring the escalation of violence at sea gives Somalis a green light on piracy. A country without a national legal system, Somalia lacks the juridical apparatus to crush sea piracy. Some clans might even be against criminalization, just as they opposed the abolition of slavery in the past.
Reading about piracy today, when advanced societies travel in space and discover new planets, is like reading a book about cave men.
They should be sentenced to community service for at least 10 years.

Photos:Wikipedia

17 October 2007


Streets talk louder than politicians. Streets speak the truth, without make-up. Streets reflect what we are.

Women’s emancipation, free elections, sexual revolution, fatherless children, teenage parents, breast implants, fat feminism, large cleavage, exotic children adoption, universal vote, tattoos, piercings, same sex marriage, unisex toilets, social marijuana smoking, artificial insemination, multiculturalism and legalized swinging and the list could continue; these are only a few realities defining our proclaimed egalitarian society, where often individual rights on religious grounds weight more than secular established laws. This reality creates what we proudly call the best of all societies, the pearl of all democracies. We give definitions of freedoms and liberties within a blink of an eye and we proclaim them the sole measures of judgment for the whole world. When it comes to others, our criticism is fierce: we proclaim with arrogance that Afghani and Iranian women are not free because they wear a burka or a chador. Thus, we have invaded or intend to invade their countries to liberate them. But wearing the same traditional piece of clothing, by the same women immigrating to our world, is automatically considered “freedom” by our western broad-mind. If we allow these women to live with covered faces here, why do we make such a colossal freedom statement of this reality translated to their countries of origin? Why does it bother us there and doesn’t bother us here?
Streets tell us not only stories, but they also present us a quite accurate image of a society, mirroring its system of values, human interactions, grade of personal liberty and public freedom. When you see a teen age pregnant girl, smoking marijuana in a park, you have already received information about the society that girl lives in. When you see someone’s bra strap, underwear and buttock, well, that’s once more a very true mirror of our society and of our system of values.
Buttock cleavage is exposure of the buttocks and the cleft between them, often because of low-slung trousers. It is so frequent and popular that almost nobody notices it anymore. Nevertheless, nobody seems to be bothered. Still, when half of a buttock is exposed, it is hard to be ignored.

Ban them
I am not the only one or among the few ones to observe and criticize the liberty some women take (men also) in showing their lingerie, under the slogan “I am free to wear what I want”. I am not that sure. The underwear is indeed an important piece of clothing, dating back to the times of the loincloth, probably the first of what we call today lingerie. But do we have to make a visual statement of it?
In the 90s, hip hop world would popularize a style known as the Sag, which allowed blue jeans or shorts to droop low, exposing the stomach and the underwear, in a desperate ultimate sexual statement. At a closer look, bagging and sagging are another way to hide insecurity over their own bodies. Skinny legs are not a matter of pride for many young boys, so, these trousers are considered to project the image of muscular tough guys upon them. In reality, what they want to hide is only enhanced. Rebels? Tough guys? I am not quite sure, since they have to waddle like penguins so that they don’t fall off completely. When women wearing thong underwear expose themselves in this way, it is called a “whale tail”. The term was coined by Gavin Hamilton in 2003 when he launched a site using the description. If aesthetically this fashion is obscene and a visual catastrophe, it has also moral implications since flirting with indecent exposure is not exactly a probe of maturity and courage. Baggy pants that show boxer shorts or thongs are becoming a major concern throughout the United States. In many school districts across the United States, sagging is prohibited. Canada doesn’t subscribe to anything like this for now, since Canada is doing everything in her power to differentiate from the USA at the point of even accepting immigration rejects from our southern neighbor. In Atlanta public hearings are planned in order to take a decision that might be considered, how else than racial, since sagging originated from black youth. Many pitiful organizations defending our freedoms consider that such a law infringes upon these young people’s individual freedoms. Only that these organizations are not as vocal when it comes to defend our freedoms, of those who are not thrilled to see people using their underwear as a declaration of independency. If someone would like to parade Adam’s leaf and proclaim his freedom, well, what modern society would accept that?
What about nudity? If someone chooses to go to a concert, shopping or go to work nude what should our open-minded society do, so that individual freedom is not overlooked? What these organizations do not seem to realize is that freedom without rules and limits becomes chaos. Thus, the value of our freedoms is given by the universality of those who benefit from our rules and regulations. The Virginia General Assembly tried but failed to approve a law making the sagging style illegal in February 2005. In June 2007, the Town council of Delcambre, Louisiana passed an indecent exposure ordinance, prohibiting people wearing trousers which show their underwear. A fine of up to $500 or six months in jail for exposing underwear in public makes sure that the ordinance is enforced. Legislator Derrick Shepherd of the state of Louisiana in the USA made an attempt in 2004 to outlaw the fashion of low-rise jeans, particularly to bring a halt to the display of underwear under the pants, claiming it to be disrespectful and obscene. People spotted with their whale tail or boxers showing would be fined. The bill, HB 1703, was rejected by the Louisiana House. A similar bill was attempted in Hampton Roads, Virginia, USA, charging a fine for anyone deliberately showing their underwear. The bill was rejected in February 2005, in the name of human rights. School dress codes sometimes also banned pants of too low a rise, or visible underwear. Is it an infringement upon these pupils’ freedom? Yes, would bark some. If the cleft and the underwear are not enough to proclaim our freedoms, we have another one: the nauseating image of the muffin-top. The slang term depicts a person, usually female, whose flabby midsection spills over the waistline of his or her pants in a manner that resembles the top of a muffin spilling over its casing. Muffin-top originated as Australian slang in mid-2003, but has since become popular in other English-speaking countries. It may have been first popularized by the Australian television show Kath & Kim.
As about sitting down with legs spread wide, so that anyone can see their underwear, is quite symptomatic to many Asian women. Underwear exhibitionism found its way even to China, where the traditional mandarin gracefulness is way left behind in history. In west, women became brashly unrestrained, showing as much as possible. Mothers expose their buttocks, proud that their children can label them “cool” because they are sagging. Sagging parents? Hm, probably they are having sex in front of their own children.
In a society where everything must be sexy to have a value, exposing your body or your underclothing is consequently seen as normal. Some women are wondering what is wrong in showing a bra strap. Others simply do not understand why exposing your undergarments is considered indecent. TV shows are imposing the idea that looking like a mother is simply repulsive and a shame, suggesting all kind of revealing outfits, everything in the name of be /look sexy. Women in their late 50s-60s, desperately trying to conceal their age, humiliate themselves wearing girlish clothes. Where is the limit? Feminists have fought not to be considered toys and sex-machines; today, women are proud to show even what is less flattering, splashing a tattoo on an ankle or shoulder or piercing the last vestige of their virginity.

Ladies and gentlemen, must we demonstrate our freedoms with the cleft between our buttocks?

The Ignorance of International Adoptions
Saturday, September 6, 2008

Adoptions are not a novelty. Jesus was adopted by Joseph, Mohammad himself was fed by an adoptive mother during the first two years of his life.

Hokusai's first few years are a mystery, but he was born near Tokyo, and when he was four or five he was adopted by a mirror-polisher named Nakajima Ise.
Aristotle was the son of Nicomachus, physician to King Amyntas II. His parents died when he was still a very young boy and he was brought up by a guardian, Proxenus, who sent him to Plato's academy in Athens about 367.
At the age of six Capote's parents abandoned him to the care of four elderly, unmarried maternal cousins, three sisters and a brother, living together.
Poe's actor parents died before he was three years old (his father had disappeared before he was born and his mother died in 1811) and he was fostered (never formally adopted) by a merchant named John Allan and his wife, Frances, who had been a friend of his mother. His older brother was raised by their grandfather and his younger sister was adopted by a different family, the Mackenzies, but he remained in contact with them.
Rousseau's mother died a few days after he was born (in Switzerland) and he was then raised by an aunt and uncle.
Langston Hughes was also fostered for two years by James and Mary Reed. Ella Fitzgerald, known as “Lady Ella", was also fostered by different people. The list could easily continue.

A domestic adoption is the placement of a child for adoption within the country in which he or she was born and normally resides.
International adoption is the placing of a child for adoption outside that child’s country of birth. The laws of different countries vary in their willingness to allow international adoptions. Some countries, such as China and Vietnam, have relatively well-established rules and procedures for foreign adopters to follow, while others, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for example, expressly forbid it. Some countries, notably many African nations, have extended residency requirements that in effect rule out most international adoptions. And some countries such as Romania are closed to international adoption altogether, with the exception of adoptions by close relatives (such as grandparents) or the case when the child can not find a family within Romania.
What are the reasons for these rich people to adopt from this part of the world? Media coverage? Lack of common sense? Extreme ego? Stupidity? Probably all of them.
Can a “star” be a good parent, responsible, capable to offer a child true motherly affection, a happy childhood and beautiful memories between shootings and travel?
Many children born to extremely rich and famous parents have complaint not once during their lifetime that they felt neglected, abandoned, because “My father was always gone, doing business”…
Can we assume that these actors and actresses from Hollywood can offer their child happiness and a true family?
How many of the actors and actresses coming from a Hollywoodian background can say that they had loving, caring parents, that they spent unforgettable holidays with their grandparents, that they remember decorating Christmas trees, going out for skating with their parents?
Almost all they remember is their parents divorcing and having sisters and brothers of different mothers and father.
And now, they are not only satisfied with their own born children, but they even adopt. From poor countries. To show the world their deep care.
As actors and actresses, do they have time to experience what parenthood is?
Can they offer love, besides expensive toys, clothing and trips? can they offer true affection? Or exotic maids are hired for that?
Do these children have grandparents? Is there a place in their adult memories for the image of grandparents?
What is hidden beyond these adoptions? Are these “stars” true Samaritans?
Usually, traditionally, people adopt orphans from their own culture and race, for various obvious reasons.
This offers the chance to give that child a home, a world without conflicts, visible truths and visible differences.

It is well known that the relation between Jolie and her father, actor Jon Voigh, is not to be envied.
In 2002, he was talking abut her “mental illness”, without giving details, probably thinking of her teenage habit of cutting herself. (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/08/03/1028157858647.html).

In 2006, Jolie was finally able to have a child of her own and she gave birth to a daughter named Shiloh Nouvel Jolie-Pitt, at night at the Cottage Medi-Clinic Hospital in Swakopmund, Namibia. People paid more than $4.1 million for the North American rights, while British magazine Hello! obtained the international rights for roughly $3.5 million; the total rights sale earned up to $10 million worldwide – the most expensive celebrity image of all time. All profits were donated to an undisclosed charity by Jolie and Pitt. Why undisclosed? On July 26, 2006 Madame Tussauds in New York unveiled a wax figure of two-month-old Shiloh; it was the first infant re-created in wax by Madame Tussauds.
Having already three children, Jolie can not stop from adopting and she put her eye on a little boy from Vietnam: Pham Quang Sang, who became… Pax Thien.
Hollywood has not only created a fashion in adopting exotic faces, but in inventing ridiculous names as well, “names” parents are happy to put on these children’s shoulders.

Meg Ryan couldn’t resist this trend either, so she joined the club in 2006 adopting a girl from, of course, China and, of course, renaming the girl as Daisy.

Michelle Pfeiffer (Catwoman in Batman Returns) has adopted a daughter, Claudia Rose, who was then adopted by Kelley following their marriage. The adopted baby was the daughter of an African-American nurse living in New York, who already had four children. At the time of the adoption, there were rumours that money was exchanged for the baby, but Michelle has vigorously denied these claims stating that the adoption was private (no money involved?!).
But Mia Farrow is definitely the champion with her 14 bunch of kids, 6 adopted and 4 of her own.

Cross cultural adoptions might be that popular because of the low cost, compared to indigenous ones and probably there is another factor: the spectrum of the living natural parents within your country is hard to deal with, especially that some natural parents might turn to extortions.
With children from the third world, people feel more comfortable.
But are those children happy?
Having an adopted child with dark skin or flat nose is an accessory for these women who believe that adopted parents develop deeper relationships with their children than natural parents, as actress Sharon Stone has declared.
Well, from the little puddle, dressed in pink and carried in expensive bags, buying an exotic child is all what these questionable people were able to think of.
If your image was a bit damaged or is in shadow, join the UN, adopt a baby, start fighting for Africa. Tibet is no longer on the celebrities’ list. Why not?
Because if they start messing around with the Chinese authorities, there are no more babies from China…


It is not known yet what is the future mental, emotional and ideological development of children coming form Africa or Asia, adopted by western “stars”.
Are they happy? Do they really feel that they have parents? Are they happy to grow up in a completely foreign environment, sometimes with natural born children to their “parents “as siblings, dispossessed even of their original names?
One day, they might feel the difference: my brother is the natural son, but I am adopted and I am from Africa. They go to school, but they know that their siblings are the natural children, while they are only the adoptees.
What is the future like for a child from Cambodia named”Maddox”? Or that one of an Ethiopian with a Swahili name?
What if these children would one day go back to their place of birth? And live among those people?
What drives these rich people to adopt from this part of the world? Fashion? Media coverage? Lack of common sense? Extreme ego? Stupidity?
Can a “star” be a good parent, responsible, capable to offer a child true motherly affection, a happy childhood and beautiful memories? Probably there are examples. But the overwhelming cases prove the opposite. Children of actors are not happy themselves, experiencing a troubled youth, blaming the separation of their parents for everything … Well, it is Hollywood, even if very far from anything connected with “holiness”.
How many of the actors and actresses coming from a hollywoodian background can say that they had loving, caring parents, that they spent unforgettable holidays with their grandparents, that they remember decorating Christmas trees, going out for skating with their parents?
Almost everything they can remember is their parents’ divorce and having sisters and brothers of different mothers and fathers…
And now, they are not only satisfied with their own born children, but they even adopt. From poor countries. To expose the world their profound “care”.
As actors and actresses, do they have time to experience what parenthood is?
Can they offer, beyond expensive toys, clothing and trips, love? Affection?
Or the exotic maids are made and hired for that?
Do these children have grandparents? Is there a place in their adult memories for the image of grandparents?

It is well known that the relation between Jolie and her father, actor Jon Voigh, is not to be envied.
In 2002, he was talking abut her “mental illness”, without giving details. He was probably referring to Jolie’s habit of cutting herself when he was as young as 12 at 14 she was already living with a boy. Her personal life is punctuated by bisexual love stories, written in her own blood on the back of some t-shirt, stories that ended in less than 3 years. Her tatooos also come and go, according to her benefit. Among those which had to go is the name of her former husband Billy Bob.
(http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/08/03/1028157858647.html).
Beyond their adoptions resides a colossal hunger for publicity. Selling the image of their born daughter for 10 mil dollars advocates it.
Pitt comes from a normal family, where his parents did not divorce and he has two siblings, Doug and Julie. He is one of the lucky actors who had a real family, with real siblings. After his marriage with Jennifer Aniston, he became trapped in Joliemania, adopting her style and “her” children as well.
Changing the names of their adopted children is not only the sign of their bottomless ignorance and lack of cultural sensitivity, but also the inability to foreseen the destiny of these unfortunate souls. Or should we call them instruments to gain public affection?
Adopting children from exotic areas gives them a phony sense of accomplishment, in truth no more than blatant selfishness and ignorance.
Changing their adoptees ‘names into some hybrid ones, is also the proof of their disrespect of the cultural background of these children.
Pham Quang Sang had an identity. (Quang: clear, brilliant; good reputation Sa'ng: bright)
What is… Pax Thien? Beyond the brilliant explanation given by Jolie?
Rath Vibol, who became… Maddox Chivan, might ask, one day: why did you change my name?
Tena Adam, adopted from Ethiopia, became…. Zahara Marley Jolie-Pitt! Tena means health. Zahara is a Swahili name, Swahili not being even among the languages spoken in Ethiopia.
… and… why Marley and not simply… Bob? When it comes to inheritance… well, that’s going to be another juicy story for the media.
Until then… maybe, in a few years, Brad Pitt marries… Marley.
Woody Allen had no problems in making Soon-Yi Previn his legal wife.

What is hidden beyond these adoptions? Are these “stars” true Samaritans?
What lies beyond these adoptions made outside your own culture and race? A sense of safety? That that child will love you more than one adopted from your own social area? That that child will never want to find his/her natural parents?
One day, they might feel the difference: my brother is the natural son, but I am adopted and I am from Africa. Or China.”I am Chinese, but I don’t speak Chinese”, they might say one day.
A Canadian documentary about the life of a Korean adopted by a Canadian couple gave a bitter glimpse in the pink painted world of international adoptions. That young boy felt alienated in “his family” in Canada and he never felt he had “parents”. He eventually went to find his natural parents. But his father had another life and this adopted teen had no place there, even if they tried to integrate him.
He committed suicide.
He was less than 20 years old.
Where is the place for such children? How much loneliness is hidden in their eyes?

Recently, Jolie and Pitt showed the world their own twins, a boy named Knox Léon Jolie-Pitt, and a girl, Vivienne Marcheline Jolie-Pitt (notice the French names as the babies were born in France; Marcheline was Jolie's mother name, an actress of French-Canadian descent on her father's side). They again sold the first photos of their newly born kids for… 14 million and this time there was no secrecy to where the money went: the Jolie-Pitt foundation.
Lucky Shiloh! Now the forces are equal in the Jolie-Pitt international team: three natural and three adopted, three blond and three other than blond.
Not long ago I was looking at a “family” photo with this little blond girl, Shiloh, surrounded by her “siblings” and I felt sorry for her. I saw her lonely.
I must admit that Jolie-Pitt’s decision to have more natural offspring was a brilliant choice, probably triggered by the idea that the little blond girl was in a … visibly minority position.
Three more and you have got yourselves a baseball team!

OBAMA, A STOOGE?
Friday, September 5, 2008


”Go into any inner-city neighborhood, and folks will tell you that government alone can’t teach kids to learn. They know that parents have to parent, that children can’t achieve unless we raise their expectations and turn off the television sets and eradicate the slander that says a black youth with a book is acting white.”
Barack Obama, Keynote Address, Democratic National Convention, 2004

First of all, we should say that his white mother from Kansas had a constant fascination with interracial Muslim maleness. What has this to do with the presidential elections? It has, since Obama, half white and Christian, half black and Muslim might be one of the biggest political cons in the American history.
Obama is not a simple candidate, Obama is a case.
Kenyan citizens are already dreaming about Osama helping them by pouring money into the country simply because Obama’s father was a Kenyan. Obama, the half black, half white, young and ambitious, is projecting the image of a New Order. The question is whose order?
Should we ignore his race? Not at all. Does Obama have a crushing black support, as expected?
Well, since Obama is not a full blooded black, but a biracial, his opinions are not expected to side any side 100%.
For some, he is not a black, for others, he is not a white. It depends on which side you are.
His ancestors were not slaves in the USA, so he can’t impress the audience with heartbreaking stories about some distant relative who was lynched or had to run, maybe to Canada. Obama’s original given name is Baraka Hussein and it comes out of the Koran and Arabic, not Africa.
For those who imagine that being black in the USA is simple, since "all black are black", things are not that easy. It is not only white people who talk about the rights and the legitimacy of the first arriving, but blacks too. There is a tendency in the American black community of making differences: You were not born here, you don’t have ancestors who were killed, persecuted, who suffered and fought for what we have achieved today. Thus, you are not a true-born Afro-American.

Is Obama black enough for them?
Is Obama truly the first Afro-American candidate in the American history? It depends. Both sides are entitled to embrace him as their “first”: black people and biracial.
I don’t see the black community giving him the overwhelming support he wants. At this point, I believe that his voters are mostly white. If elected, he must play a hazardous game, to please both sides and to get what he wants from them, not stepping over his electoral promises.
More than others, black and Muslim (black or non-black) voters see Obama as their flange.
During his rallies, cameras are always taking their time to show some black people, smiling and almost in ecstasy, as if they were watching a minister on the Sunday preaches.
Maybe for the whites, Democratic presidential candidate Obama is what Saddam Hussein was thought to be for the Americans: an easy to control puppet. Once the puppet broke the strings, the puppet had to go.


Is Obama a little communist himself?
With a communist activist wife, in an ex-communist country Obama would get only a few votes from nostalgic of the named regime. As for today’s American electorate, communism is not a scarecrow anymore. Today, a sympathizer to the cause is not a break in the social advancement of an American.
Is Obama a sympathizer? Well, he married Michelle Obama and she might become the first communist first lady. He can not oppose her ideas that strongly. It is as if one would be married to a Nazi and pretend that the Nazi ideology is somewhere in the neighbour’s yard.
So, how many of his wife's marxist ideas have been embraced by Obama, the presidential candidate?

Is he “acting too white”?
Some say reading is “acting white”
Barack Obama is openly critiquing the African American community saying that many of his generation are disenfranchising themselves because they don't vote, taking rappers to task for their language, and decrying "anti-intellectualism" in the black community, including black children telling peers who get good grades that they are "acting white."
Can we draw the conclusion that according to some black people blacks should be poor, uneducated, singing rap, barking hip-hop, wearing gilded jewelry and sagging?
I don’t think that the question is whether America is ready to have a black president, but whether the black community is mature enough for this.
Studying has become an insulting act and the studious student is slandered and excluded by the rest. It is a trend to be “popular” and stupid, and this can be traced back to American teen-age movies.
Obama has a burden no other candidate has: he must be what some call “a true black”.
While Obama is just a man, who doesn’t seem to think too much of his own racial specificity.
But others do. And there is nothing wrong about it.
When Obama took a bold step in criticizing the core of “blackness”, he might have done an electoral mistake.
If Obama wants to be a leader, he knows that he must deliver the speech, even if it might offend someone. Is critiquing the core of “blackness” situating him in the “acting white” label too much?
If such a criticism were posted by a white, that candidate would have been forced to abandon his dreams of becoming a president. Since, still, Obama is “black” he can criticize and point out the faults of the black community without being labeled a racist. And this is an immense gain.
Could Obama be called a racist, suggesting that the criticism comes from his white blood streams?
On the other hand, he was never explicit on his madrasa years he spent in Indonesia. He was enrolled in this type of Muslim school for two years.
Was it a wahhabist school? (Wahhabi is a member of a strictly orthodox Sunni Muslim sect from Saudi Arabia; he strives to purify Islamic beliefs and rejects any innovation occurring after the 3rd century of Islam.)
His studies at Occidental College in Los Angeles are mentioned in every single biographical note, as well as his Columbia University years in New York. He graduated with a degree in political science in 1983, and in 1991 graduated from Harvard Law School.
Baraka (Barakah) Hussein Obama is silent and not willing to clarify his views on his Muslim heritage. Obama is not being upfront about it and it makes me wonder why. Is there anything to hide, is he ashamed of this heritage?
Obama's parents -- Barack Sr. and mother -- separated when he was two. His father, his grandmothers and most of his family members in Kenya are Muslims. His father, Barrack Hussein Obama Senior, was member of the Luo tribe and a Muslim (he converted from African Christianity).

Obama and Odinga
When Obama visited Kenya in 2006, he was hosted by Raila Odinga and Obama showed his full support to him.
Raila Odinga is the one responsible for the actual crisis in Kenya since his ego didn’t let him keep his pants on and leave Mwai Kibaki do his work as elected president. Raila Odinga was upset that Kibaki (from Kikuyu, the opposite tribe) didn’t offer him the expected positions in the government, so Odinga formed an opposition party (ODM-Orange Democratic Movement, orange the symbol color of opposition).
In December 2007, Odinga lost the presidential election to Kibaki and he claimed the vote was manipulated. His fans began thus their vicious, murderous riots; on New Year’s Day, at least 37 people were burned to death in a church deliberately set on fire. African fight for personal power, using tribal vindication, is the locomotive of African political unrest and economic handicap.
Odinga’s father was a communist, supported by the Soviets.
Raila Odinga made a deal with fundamentalist Muslims as he signed a Memorandum with Sheik Abdullah Abdi, chairman of the National Muslim Leaders Forum of Kenya.
The Evangelical Alliance of Kenya has posted on its website a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding, dated and signed on August 29, 2007.
This Forum wants to implement the Sharia law in Kenya. In return to the Muslim support, Odinga Jr. agrees to 14 humiliating actions.
Raila Odinga claims to be a practicing Anglican. Kenya on the whole is Christian, with 80% of Kenyans either Protestant or Roman Catholic, while only 10% are Muslim. Though, read the requirements of those 10%. They simply want to control the Coast (with a population of 2,487,264) and the North Eastern regions (with a population of 962,143). Thus, the Kenyan Indian Ocean shoreline with the three islands would be under their administration and the Sharia law.
The prominent ethnic group in the North Eastern regions is Somali people. Bordering Somalia (the Somalis are almost entirely Sunni Muslims) and Ethiopia, the Kenyan Muslim state would control more than Odinga ignorantly agreed to sign.
Raila Odinga has, in his own words, a "close personal friendship" with Barrack/Baraka Hussein Obama Junior.
When Obama went to Kenya, he spoke in praise of Odinga at rallies in Nairobi. Obama's bias for Odinga was so obvious that a Kenya government spokesman called him Raila's "stooge."
In the end, whose stooge is Obama?

Wind of change from east?
On August 22, 2008, Barack Obama announced that Biden would be his running mate.
Biden officially accepted the nomination on August 27, 2008 at the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver, Colorado.
Joe Biden serves as chairman in the Committee on Foreign Relations.
This CFR has been the subject of many controversies, partially due to the number of high-ranking government officials in its membership, its secrecy clauses, and the numerous aspects of American foreign policy that its members have been involved with.
The CFR wants to create “one world” and David Rockefeller admitted it proudly. The CFR would like to secure the borders on the entire North America, asking for full mobility of labor among the three countries within five years. In their internationalist fervor, they try to impose a new concept of sovereignty, cataloging the actual one as “outdated”.
During Biden’s speech, the audience would chant slogans, in a very old fashioned communist style. I also saw a few stars on a red background as part of an image on his platform.
I quickly put these elements together: CFR internationalism, Michelle Obama, staged chants and stars on a red background and I came up with one word: communism.
Is the United States slowly taking the curve eastwards?
Is this the change Obama keeps talking about?

Funny fact:
Obama- change a letter and we have Osama.
Biden-add three and we have Binladen.
What a coincidence!

February 18, 2008

The world is divided and it’s time for everyone to admit it. It was never “one world” and it can’t be.

I’ll never enjoy sharing a table with a Chinese or Korean who engulfs pieces of dog in front of my eyes. It is their table, not mine.

On February the 15th, Muslims from Denmark are re-enacting the riots of the Muslims from France in 2005. The 2005 civil unrest in France of October and November was a series of riots and violent clashes, involving mainly the burning of cars and public buildings at night starting on October 27th, 2005 in Clichy-sous-Bois. A state of emergency was declared on November 8, 2005, extended for three months a few days later. The riots were triggered by the accidental death of two teenagers, Zyed Benna and Bouna Traore, in Clichy-sous-Bois, who were chased by the police as the two refused to stop. The two later ran into a power substation where they died, electrocuted. And the police was held responsible.

February 16, 2008 - Gangs of Muslims in Denmark set fire to cars and garbage trucks in northern Copenhagen, the sixth night of rioting and vandalism, angry at the reprinting of the cartoon of Mohammad in 15 Danish newspapers. Five youths (called “Danes” by the media) were arrested in the capital on Friday after 28 cars and 35 garbage trucks were burned. Cars and several schools have been vandalized or burned in the past week. Soft weather, schools closed, what else can the “Danes” do than burning or vandalizing schools? Anyway, they don’t need them.

I thought that their parents have left their archaic homes for Denmark to “give my children a better education”.
Several hundred Muslims (or “Danes”?) gathered in central Copenhagen on Friday to protest against re-publication of the cartoon.

“I AM NOT POLITICALLY CORRECT”

October 18, 2007

CECILIA AND NICHOLAS SARKOZY: DIVORCE IN FRENCH STYLE
This is what Cecilia Sarkozy said. And we know that a non PC declaration coming from a first lady could cost a president’s destiny. She didn’t take any risks. Cecilia Sarkozy simply couldn’t accept the standard expected behaviour of a first lady. Accompanying her husband to all sorts of events was not for her. She is the woman who can’t submit her life to anything she doesn’t believe in. Politics is not her passion. In fact, it is a boring matter she found herself whirlpooled into.

She is the type of woman to lounge on a golden beach, sipping from a refreshing fruit cocktail, decorated with a pink miniature umbrella. She was a model and she keeps behaving like a model. And she made the rules from the very beginning, showing that she doesn’t want to dance according to the tune.

She left for a holiday in Florida directly before the Election Day, and also left Sarkozy alone at the G8 dinner table, heading for Paris. How else can someone display in a more direct manner a message? Today, she and her husband, President Sarkozy, separate by mutual consent. How is this going to affect the President’s political decisions, consequently France’s internal and external politics? We shall see. Nicholas Sarkozy , elected president this year, must face immense publicity and media scrutiny. Who is the next wife, if any? Is Anne Fulda, the Le Figaro journalist, who was Sarkozy’s girlfriend during his brief separation from his wife, Cecilia, in 2005? Maybe not.

On the other hand, Cecilia Sarkozy, born to a Romanian father and a Spanish mother, also had an affair in 2005 in New York with Richard Attias, a Moroccan-born French. Is there a reunion floating in the air?

Her mission to Libya and her chatting with Muammar Gadaffi left room for endless comments, suggesting that Sarkozy used her as a weapon of seduction. Hopefully, we won’t witness a Cecilia converted to Islam, advocating the “religion of peace”.

However, you never know.

November 8, 2007

One of these days, while looking for Toronto Hindu community websites, I found one where “our successesful campaigns”(sic!) are reason for community pride. These campaigns deal with a list of issues which bothered the Hindu community in 2003. The incriminated apologized so the community became at ease. Among the offenders, there was a Seattle based toilet seat manufacturer; this came up with a design depicting Lord Ganesh and Goddess Kali on the toilet inside cover.

February 2001: FoxNews Withdraws India map without Jammu and Kashmir http://www.ivarta.com/Cause/C1_Fox_Map.htm

31 January, 2003: Maxim Magazine Apology for Gandhi Bashing http://www.ivarta.com/Cause/C17_Maxim_Gandhi.htm

27 April, 2003: American Eagle Apologize for Lord Ganesha flip-flops http://www.ivarta.com/cause/C18_AE_Ganesha.htm

11 July, 2003: ‘OM’ Socks, Apology from the President, Gold Medal Hosiery http://www.ivarta.com/Cause/C21_OM_Socks.htm

9 October, 2003: Apology by Toronto Star for Insulting Durga Image http://www.ivarta.com/Cause/C23_TheStar_Durga.htm Toilet Seats with Ganesha & Kali Pictures withdrawn http://www.ivarta.com/Cause/C2_Sittin_Pretty.htm

I understand that, for a Hindu, it is an offensive gesture. Imagine the illustration of Jesus, Virgin Mary or, if you are an atheist, the image of a cherished writer, composer or painter in such a posture.

Not that our reaction would be similar to that of some Muslims.

Not that the Hindus reacted like the Muslims did when the Danish newspaper published the “offensive “caricatures.

The Hindus didn’t rush out in the streets, in strident crowds, burning flags, shouting “peaceful” slogans (see the Muslims’ slogans during their rallies), offering rewards for killing those incriminated or attacking churches and priests. Hindus proved to know better than the Muslims themselves a Muslim saying:”The ink of the scholar is closer to god/ more valuable than the blood of the martyr”.

After Sweden has taken a bold step in publishing Lars Vilks drawings, rewards were offered by two Islamic leaders for killing the artist and the newspaper editor. Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, leader of the self-styled Islamic State in Iraq, has offered 50,000 in an audiotape posted on an Islamist Web site to anyone who killed the editor of the newspaper that published the drawing .

Driven by the religion of peace, he even suggests an increased reward if the body is … slaughtered.

The head of an al Qaeda-led group in Iraq has offered a 100,000 reward for killing the Swedish cartoonist whose sin of drawing Islam’s prophet Mohammad triggers fueled reactions. He even threatened to attack major Swedish companies.

What we should acknowledge is that Islam and Mohammad are given unmerited absolute attention. This interest made Muslims believe that their presence in our societies is without equal, extremely important or even… vital.

They should be remembered that they are only one of the numerous religious communities in the western societies and that we do not owe them anything. On the contrary, they owe us a lot.

They should be remembered that their presence in our world bears nothing exceptional, with one notable exception: the terrorist fear instilled in the mainstream society. They are not more hardworking, educated or intelligent than other cultural or religious communities.

They should not be the exception to create the rule.

Weak voices say that not all Muslims are terrorists and that these fundamentalists are only an undersized group and they do not represent Muslims.

Very well, this is obvious, only that since a fundamentalist imam represents Muslims and the imam declares war on west, I believe that the Muslim community, if disagrees with such a position, must amend him. Instead, “moderate” Muslims (what exactly is the meaning of “moderate” when applied to them?) come in front and try to tell us that Islam is peace.

What about those imams who deliver daily speeches of hatred? Whom are they representing?

It has become a question of ultimate courage and symbol of “expression of our freedoms” to caricature/draw, with or without any aesthetic value, their prophet. I believe that it is an immature method to state and prove western values, our freedoms. There are by far much more imperative issues to deal with, to open and discuss, topics like teacher’s lack of authority, global warming, GMO, human-animal embryos, lenient laws in rape, pedophilia, first degree murder and the list could go on.

Our society must reconsider certain “values”, examples of “emancipation” like teenage pregnancy and parenting or encouraged trendy interracial adoptions. Instead, the western mind is obsessed with drawing Mohammad.

Be more serious, gentlemen.

November 30, 2007

WHY NOT AN ABORIGINAL, JEWISH, SOUTH AMERICAN OR EUROPEAN HISTORY MONTH TOO?

Canada did it. Canada opened a practice nobody ever thought about: to celebrate the Islamic presence in Canada under the form of the world’s first Islamic History Month (why not called Muslim History Month?). Why such a gift, you might ask? To me it doesn’t seem to be anything but a gift of fear. Our government knows very well what is happening in Europe and is hoping that Muslims in Canada might be bought with such gestures.


Such a gesture is simply questioning its timing, as it comes in the context of “offended”� Muslims by the reasonable accommodation hearings held in Quebec. I see a connection. The raising of Islam in Europe is not a distant theory or a page taken out of the history books. Such a reality, with all aspects included, can not remain unknown to our government and politicians.

Silently, with an Islamic History Month, Canada is hoping to keep the Muslims in a range of comfort given by such official events.

As some began to question the Quebec hearings, as they might trigger similar hearings in the rest of the country, this gift comes as a high level of assurance coming from the government that no matter what those people say in Quebec, Muslims are loved, wanted and their presence highly valued.

Now, a logical question comes: Is there a similar month for other religions or ethnic communities? Not quite. Official recognition of each ethic, cultural, religious or linguistic community’s contribution to Canada is undoubtedly a nice gesture. In this respect, Canada, besides the already well-established Black History Month (celebrated in February in Canada and the USA and October in the UK), has also a South Asian Heritage Month in Canada, celebrated in May. And this comes as, according to the 2001 Census, almost 10 % of Canadians are of Asian descent.

Significant Muslim population begins to move to Canada in the 1970s through emigration. The first census year in which Muslims in Canada were specially included was 1981 and they then numbered 100,000. By 1991 the number had grown to more than 250,000; in 2001, there were almost 600,000.

The Muslim community in Canada has its foundation in the West, where Al-Rashid, the first mosque in North America, was built in Edmonton, Alberta, in 1938. The Canadian Muslims come from all over the Muslim world. Many held or still hold key positions in the Canadian media.

Mohammed Azhar Ali Khan is a former Ottawa Citizen editorial writer. He retired recently after 10 years as a member of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, deciding refugee asylum cases including dozens from Somalia.

Tarek Fatah (born November 20th, 1949) is a secular Muslim Canadian political activist, writer and TV host. Founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress. Fatah’s advocacy for a separation of religion and state, opposition to Sharia law, and what he calls a “progressive” form of Islam has met with considerable controversy from other Canadian Muslim groups, such as the Canadian Islamic Congress.

Haroon Siddiqui, newspaper journalist, columnist and editorial page editor for Toronto Star, considered by many a Third World apologist. Referring to a Siddiqui column that appeared in March 2001, Robert Fulford wrote, “He found a way to look with a degree of tolerance even on the Taliban’s destruction of ancient Buddhist sculptures in Afghanistan.” Haroon Siddiqui also greets Turkey’s returning to an Islamic country.

So, if some speak about a Zionist media conspiracy, others might be entitled to speak of a Muslim one.

On the Canadian Islamic Congress site, in an article praising Ottawa’s decision to install the Islamic History Month in Canada, Mohamed Elmasry, president of the Canadian Islamic Congress, says: “ Muslim identity in Canada has been influenced in two major ways; first, there is the country itself — a nation with a comparatively young history (140 years in 2007), occupying a huge and ruggedly diverse land-mass — and secondly, by the self-perceptions of its Muslim immigrants.”
140 years only?! According to this person’s broad knowledge, Canada came into being in 1867! Yes, indeed, Canada became a self-governing country on July 1st, 1867. But this doesn’t mean that Canada’s history as a nation began 140 years ago! According to his judgment, the history of a nation begins with its independence. Thus, Iran’s history as a nation began 1979 (the day the country became a theocratic Islamic Republic state), Norway’s in 1814, and Egypt’s, to end the examples, in 1922, when the country was declared independent from the British rule and it acquired full sovereignty following World War II. So, according to Mr. Elmasry, Canada is older than his native Egypt by 55 years!

Mr. Elmasry, French explorer Samuel de Champlain arrived in 1603 and established the first permanent European settlements at Port Royal in 1605 and QuebecCity in 1608. The Act of Union merged The Canadas into a United Province of Canada in 1840. Do the math. This doesn’t seem to exist in the history books Elmasry has read.

The same Dr. Mohamed Elmasry of the Canadian Islamic Council has declared in a televised interview in 2004 that Israelis over age 18 are a legitimate target for suicide bombers because adult Israelis are required to do military service, thus everyone is a soldier. “They are part of the Israeli army, even if they have civilian clothes,” Elmasry said on The Michael Coren Show. (See http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2004/10/25/muslimleaders_041025.html )

Elmasry apologized for his remarks as he considered being “misunderstood”, and kept his post as council president, as his letter of resignation was rejected by the board of directors. This was a very clear message of backing up his remarks from the part of the board. What was so multifaceted in his statement to lead to “misunderstandings”?

Certain Muslims believe that their sentences are so sophisticated that they make room to “misunderstandings”, especially when it comes to “non-believers”.

Now, back to 2007, when Ottawa officially proclaimed October to be Islamic History Month in Canada. Since the Muslim community has only a few decades presence in Canada, I was wondering if other older cultural/religious communities have anything similar: for instance, a European History Month in Canada would be a sign of recognition of the centuries old contributions made by European immigrants to the development of this country, culturally, socially and economically.

I am also thinking of the First Nations. After contacting The Assembly of First Nations, I was informed that there is no such thing as First Nations History Month in Canada. Tracy Lavallee, a First Nations woman stated, ”There is no month dedicated to the First Nations in Canada - we do have “National Aboriginal Day”, June 21st, that has been proclaimed by government. It would be nice if Canada would declare some month First Nations history month - this might prompt the various provincial governments to look seriously at having “proper” history taught which ought to include First Nations’ history, contributions, etc.”

What Canada gave the aboriginal people is one day, June 21st, as recognition of their historical presence and contribution to our society. Is it, perhaps, enough?

I have also contacted the Jewish community, and I received a prompt answer from Enza E. Martuccelli, Director of Community Relations for Canadian Jewish Congress, Quebec Region , who stated: ”We have had Yom Hashoah recognized by Parliament and from October through November the Montreal Holocaust Memorial Centre runs a series of programs on the holocaust. The Sephardic community also runs a month long cultural program focusing on their community in Quebec and elsewhere. However no proclamations of the kind that are found on the Muslim History Month website exist for the Jewish community.”

There has been a Jewish population in Canada since the 1700s. The 2001 census lists 370,505 Jews in Canada. In the USA, May was proclaimed in 2006 as Jewish American Heritage Month. Another significant community in Canada is the Christian Orthodox community which numbers 479,620 (2001), counting as 1.6% of the population (the Muslim community 579,640, counting2.0%).

I believe that the Orthodox community is also entitled to be honoured with a History Month. The first Orthodox Church in Canada was erected in 1898, 40 years earlier than the first mosque.

What about the Hispanic community in Canada?

During the Islamic Month, of 31 days, 10 days were without events. As for the events, they were basically a handful, shuffled during 21 days: - Free Public Performances on Qanoun By Dr. George Sawa “- Film: Damascus and the Umayyads, people of the 9th and 10th centuries “- Film: Istanbul, capital of the Ottomans in the 15th and 16th centuries “- Film: Glories of Islamic Art, Part 2; Cairo, the cockpit of the early Islamic struggles between Sunni and Shiia faiths “- Islamic History Month Canada (IHMC): Its Goals, Its Methods, Its Themes “- Cairo, traces of the 12th and 14th centuries “- Eid-ul-Fitr- Canadian Muslims celebrate Eid-ul-Fitr across Canada, ending the Islamic month of Ramadan “- Expo Islamia- Displays from around the Muslim World, books, CDs, DVDs, films on Islamic History, Arts, Architecture, Heritage, Games and Prizes “- The Ottawa Muslim Women’s Organization- Multicultural Show, Dinner & Entertainment “- A Mystical Journey - Sufi Music and other Expression of Devoton from the Muslim World- “- Islamic Civilization - A Very Short History- A presentation by Dr. Jamal Badawi, delivered by Dr. Safaa Fouda “- The Canadian Muslim Artist Ibrahim Shalaby in a Special Solo Show: Longing for the divine - an artistic tapestry “- Islamic Architecture, Science, Art and Spirituality: A Lecture in Celebration of Islamic History Month Canada- By Prof. Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Professor of Islamic Studies, George Washington University, Washington DC in his first Canadian Lecture Tour “- Friday October 26th- “National Pink Hijab Day”- to raise funds for breast cancer research “- The Canadian Islamic Congress Annual Ottawa Gala Dinner- with the speech: “Creativity in the Medical Sciences during Medieval Islamic Times”�- by Dr. Ingrid Hehmeyer, MSc, PhD.

Even cancer is opportunity for Dawah
As about the “National Pink Hijab Day”, this is not only an initiative to raise funds for breast cancer, but also a method of advertizing the religion itself. The organizers of this specific are hoping to also raise awareness about Islam and hijab. They have used it as an opportunity for Dawah, considered to be an obligation on Muslims to invite others to Islam. Dawah is often referred to as the act of “preaching Islam”.

It is, undoubtedly, an activity of proselytizing. In some cases, Dawah can also be seen as preaching to non-Muslims to convert to Islam. (The Encyclopeadia of Islam, BRILL)

The Canadian Islamic Congress has announced it was giving away pink hijabs to 200 Canadian women across the country who would volunteer to wear them on October 26th, to raise funds for breast cancer research. To request a free pink hijab, those interested were supposed to send a message to an e-mail address before October 22nd and include name, phone number, postal address and “a short personal biographical statement”. Why this ”biographical statement”?

And this is how the Muslims have decided to enlighten us about their history.

Call for a Canadian year

If the Canadian government decides to offer one month to every single ethnic, religious, linguistic group, there is only one tiny problem: the length of the year. Since there are only 12 months and more than 20 large ethnic groups and over 100 of “smaller” groups, I suggest the creation of the Canadian year, so that every single community gets a celebration! The Canadian week would become 3, 04 days long. Thus, the 120 ethnic groups could each get an equitable representation in the Canadian calendar of official events.

February 10, 2008

As anyone can read on the "apartheidweek website", Israeli Apartheid Week (IAW) is an international series of events held in cities and campuses across the globe. “It has become imperative for people around the world to isolate the Israeli apartheid regime, especially in the face of governments’ failure to ensure respect for human rights and to hold Israel accountable before international law and countless U.N. resolutions” said Ahmad Shokr, an organizer of IAW in New York City. Shokr adds that “by supporting the boycott, divestment, and sanctions campaign the international community can bring an end to Israeli apartheid and work toward a future of justice, equality and peace.” When I ran into a shabby person in downtown Montreal holding a sign saying “Boycott Israeli Apartheid”, I took the required photos and then I asked about the rights of Christians in Islamic countries. The man, looking very much homeless, holding a pathetic sign, mumbled something like: “It’s your opinion”. As for “my opinion”, it is the brutal reality avoided by spineless mainstream media. It is a subject the bribed media is not willing to discuss. It is the scare-crow subject, “hate speech” type and the rest of PC bla-bla-bla.


Christians in Islamic countries
Christians from Palestine, Nigeria and Somalia to Indonesia, Iraq, Algeria, Jordan are under open attack from the Muslims. Respect for other religions is not what Islamic countries are prominent for. They are far from being a model of reverence and tolerance, the two values so much used when it comes to Muslims’ demand for special rights (and no responsibilities) in non-Muslim countries. Christians are usually persecuted for “preaching Christianity in a Muslim country”.

This is a tricky offence, since “preaching” means even a private religious discussion between a Christian and a Muslim. Very few western Christian preachers would street-preach, as allegedly some did, knowing the dangers and consequences of such a gesture in an Islamic country. Paradoxically, Muslims who move to western countries erect numberless mosques with tall minaretes and are granted all their demands. Even so, Muslims find place to blatantly criticize our society for not being “tolerant”, giving themselves as examples of “tolerance”.
In 2001, in Indonesia “Holy War Warriors” with help from the government went on a campaign to eradicate Christians from the town of Tentena. A group called Laskar Jihad (responsible for hard to describe atrocities) has burnt 600 homes and six churches during the November 26-29 attacks. Laskar Jihad’s leader, Ja’far Umar Thalib, wants to make Indonesia an Islamic state.

In neighboring Maluku province, at least 9,000 people have been killed since 1999.

The criminal group aims to exterminate Christians from the Moluccas and Sulawesi Island. Its mission is “to defend” Muslims against Christians. It is ridiculous, knowing that Christians (Protestant 5.7%, Roman Catholic 3%) in Indonesia are a tiny minority while 86.1% of the population is Muslim (according to CIA based on 2000 census).

In 2005, three Christian school girls in Central Sulawesi were beheaded by masked attackers of the religion of “peace”. Police in the region commented that one head was placed by the attackers in front of a new Christian church, and the other two placed outside the police station. Let’s take a look at only a few news about Christians living in Muslim countries in 2008.
Iraq-Iraqi Christians are leaving the country or moving to Kurdistan for safety reasons. About 1 mil. Christians live in Iraq, with 50 churches in Baghdad.
Jordan- foreign long-term Christians living in the kingdom are being expelled, showing the direction of the kingdom towards a radical Islam.
Palestine- Christians live in constant fear. Recently, gunmen have blown up the YMCA library in Gaza Strip. 8000 books were destroyed. Christians in West Bank and Gaza Strip have been reduced to less than 2%. Their exodus is continuous. Bethlehem, once preponderant Christian, is today Muslim.
Pakistan- after a Christian man had requested a raise, his family (wife and children) was beaten, tortured humiliated and physically abused by his Muslim employer and his stooges.

The list is lengthy and it is just the beginning of 2008.

As some pockets might be jam-packed with a few golden dinars, probably IAW is blind and deaf at such news. Looking at the international situation, with the minority Orthodox population expecting violence in Kosovo and with Turkey lifting the ban on head scarves , it is easy to deduce following religious disputes and shameful compromises made by the western world to accommodate those who would fire in the skies, celebrating the joy of our extinction.

February 16, 2008


TFL (Transport for London) officials have come under fire for banning a poster showing a poster of a classic nude painting of Venus on the Underground train system because it might offend travelers. What type of travelers, you might ask?

The incriminated poster was part of an advertising campaign for the Royal Academy for a forthcoming show on the 16th century German painter and printmaker, Lucas Cranach the Elder. But TFL said the classic painting breached guidelines against advertising which “depict men, women or children in a sexual manner, or display nude or semi-nude figures in an overtly sexual context.”
The importance of this exhibition was highlighted in the press release from the Royal Academy.
“In March 2008 the Royal Academy of Arts will present the first major exhibition in Britain devoted to Lucas Cranach the Elder (c. 1472-1553). Collaboration between the Staedel Museum, Frankfurt am Main and the Royal Academy, the exhibition will bring together some 70 works chosen to represent the quality and range of this important master of the German Renaissance. The Staedel has generously made available to the Academy major works from its collection of paintings, drawings and prints by Cranach; foremost among them is The Altarpiece of the Holy Kinship, dated 1509.”
The exhibition was open to public and there was no age limit.
Children under seven years old could visit the exhibition free. Now what do we do? There are two options: either cover the “overly sexual” images (Water Nymph resting is another painting in the exhibition) or simply rate the exhibition as improper for visitors under a certain age.

What about the plentiful fashion, cosmetics and perfume-related ads displaying if not as much
flesh as a Venus, definitely a more provocative, sensual and sexual content? They seem to be more acceptable than a 500 year old nude.
Would a prostitute be considered more virtuous than a naked model, posing for an art class, only because one is clothed and the other one naked?
For some minds, exposed body is automatically “inviting”, “asking to be raped” , while covered women are models of virtue, even if their exposed eyes are fully loaded with mascara and kohl, in a desperate attempt to emphasize this part of their anatomy and bring attention upon it. Few ask why a “virtuous covered woman” use make up if she is indeed that “modest”.
If you go on a beach with nudists, that nudity is not more provocative than a pair of underwear on the cloth line.
Nudity can be elegant and refined or cheap and vulgar. A fully dressed woman can be as provocative or earthy as a naked one if this is her intention or she was just simply born with no taste at all. Cranach’s intention was obviously far from our modern concept of sexuality. Five hundred years ago, Venus was simply Venus: an important Roman goddess principally associated with love, beauty and fertility.
Is Cranach’s Venus “overtly sexual”?
The TFL officials behave and think like a bunch of men who see sexual promises and provocations in anyone who has exposed more than her nose. Some seem incapable of noticing that modern men have conquered the battle against their senses and they can control their desires even if they see more than an ankle, a wrist, an ear lob, or a nostril. No matter how “sexy” they are!

Public nudity
In many countries public nudity is forbidden, e.g. in many states of the USA and may be fined as indecent exposure. In Scandinavia, Spain and Germany, public nudity per se is not forbidden, but when other people feel harassed by public nudity, it may be fined. In Barcelona public nudity is a civil right. In the Netherlands public nudity is allowed on sites that have been assigned by the local authorities and other suitable places. In 2004, a Japanese restaurant which serves sushi on the body of nearly naked women caused a storm of controversy in the conservative southwest Chinese city of Kunming. The practice of nyotai mori - eating sushi and sashimi off the body of a naked woman “dates back to the times of the ancient Japanese courts. In 2007, a piece of news was making the headlines for many newspapers: a tall, naked tattooed woman, wearing nothing but golden stilettos, stopped by the petrol station in the town of Doemitz (Germany) to buy cigarettes.

Back in business
In the early 1800’s, Goya’s Nude Maja was declared “obscene”. After outrage in Spanish society he painted “La maja vestida”, The Clothed Maja. But the Inquisition found both paintings unacceptable and thus they were confiscated in 1813, demonstrating that “obscenity” is not strictly related to nakedness. Why didn’t the Inquisition simply burn them? We’ll never know. In 2008, in the UK, the poster of a 500 year old painting is banned from the public sight.
The Inquisition is back.

February 23, 2008

February 23, 2008 -The horrific news doesn’t seem to be run by any newspaper in the UK. I found it on Hindustan Times, DNA and NRI World. IN.
Major Singh was living illegally in the UK since 1994. He was charged with sexually assaulting a 9-year old girl. Singh was sentenced to 6-years in prison by the Leicester Crown Court for assaulting the girl on September 24, 2007, and will hopefully be deported immediately after ending his jail sentence. After his arrest, Singh admitted that while drunk, he forced the child to sexual act against her wish. During this dishonorable act he was caught by local youths who took the matter in their hands and beat him. Singh was able to flee from the crime scene only to be arrested by the police shortly after. No details about the girl’s ethnicity were revealed.
BBC news is dead silent about Singh’s crime, but it’s running the story of John Ruth (”safe” name) who has admitted raping a girl aged 10 in a house in Shettleston November 18, 2007.

What I found about Major Singh is simply outrageous: according to the JUDICIAL REVIEW OF A DECISION OF A SPECIAL ADJUDICATOR AND A CHAIRMAN OF THE IMMIGRATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL, and the OPINION OF LORD NIMMO SMITH in the petition of MAJOR SINGH, Petitioner dated 7 March 2000, Singh entered the United Kingdom illegally in October 1994. On November10, 1994 he applied for political asylum, claiming to be a supporter of the Khalistan Liberation Front and a member of the Sikh Student Federation. In the above mentioned review we can read: ”The appellant was born on 21 March 1965 and is of Indian nationality. According to the appellant, he left India in August 1994 and travelled by air via the United Arab Emirates to the Czech Republic where he remained for approximately 9 weeks. From there he entered the United Kingdom clandestinely by lorry in October 1994. He made an application for asylum on 10 November 1994. This application was refused by the Secretary of State in a letter of June 1996. On 16 August 1996 the appellant was served with directions for his removal from the United Kingdom to India.”

At interview the appellant said he joined the latter organisation in 1989 but the documents at annex E of the main Home Office bundle said that he joined in 1990. The letter of 23 March 1996 at Annex E was written in English, although the appellant claimed to have needed an interpreter for the purposes of his appeal. If the appellant was part of any organisation it was at a very low level. He said at interview that he had not attended rallies or demonstrations but just put up posters and gave food to members of the party. He claimed to have been detained once for four hours on suspicion of hiding guns and sheltering terrorists but he said he was not ill-treated and said he was never tried or sentenced. His family were not harassed or detained. AISSF was not a banned organisation but a mainstream political party. It did contain the Bittu Faction which was banned because of involvement in terrorism. If the appellant was part of this faction the police might want to question him in their role of maintaining law and order. The appellant did not leave India until nearly a year after he claimed to have been detained. It was unlikely that the police had any interest in him, if they did he would have a fair trial. His passport was issued in 1993 and he said he had waited one year for his passport to be issued which suggested that he had applied for it in July 1992. This suggested that he intended to leave India before his alleged difficulty started. At interview he said he had no trouble leaving India. This was despite the evidence of the US State Department report which said that the government of India might deny a passport or prevent travel by those advocating Sikh Independence. The appellant claimed to have spent 10 weeks in the Czech Republic but had made no application for asylum there. His actions were not consistent with someone fleeing for his life as in Manga Singh (11175). If he was concerned that he could not remain in Punjab he could move elsewhere in India, as in Mohan Singh (9151) and Dupovac (11846).”

This is the man who raped a 9 year old girl, destroying her innocence.
This is the man protected by media and an irresponsible PC policy.
This is the man who was not supposed to be in the UK.
Someone should get the balance right.

February 27, 2008

Muslim students, mainly from Saudi Arabia, want lectures to be rescheduled to fit in with prayer timetables and separate male and female eating and recreational areas established on Australian campuses. What is wrong in this picture? Obviously, it’s the country.The “students” who made their choice to study there should keep their prayers quiet and private and if living in a non-Islamic country is that demanding, there is always a solution: learn in one of their universities. They could choose one in Saudi Arabia where men and women study in separate buildings and have prayer breaks to cool off from intense studying.

When you start appeasing 7th century Muslims, it will never end.
Or it will end with us living under Sharia law.
How long will it take for the fundamentalist or less fundamentalist, moderate or semi-moderate Muslims to require their host-countries to change flags, national anthems, history books, national holidays, dress code and ask for women and men to work and study in separate buildings? Why not create a sector for females and one for males in every city where there is a mosque? Would such a decision make these backward fundamentalists finally declare their contentment? I never understood why isn’t Saudi Arabia building more schools in Islamic countries, instead of sending money overseas and open Wahhabist schools?
Why do Muslims choose to humiliate themselves, recognizing the superiority of the “infidels” educational system and schools? If they have decided to come here, than face the music!
Under the concept of Al-Takeyya if under the threat of force, it is justifiable for Muslims to lie and act contrary to their faith. The following actions are tolerable: Drink wine, abandon prayers, and skip fasting during Ramadan. Renounce belief in Allah. Kneel in homage to a deity other than Allah. Utter insincere oaths.
When dealing with Muslims, what they say is not the issue. The real issue is what they actually mean in their hearts. Lying is also acceptable amongst spouses, to keep “peace” in the family.
Governments and all kind of “integration” organisms and associations chant a slogan: cultural exchange, better understanding of other cultures etc. It seems clear to me that this is a one way policy: we must learn about them, we must introduce new curricula in our schools to meet their needs, we must be “open” and make compromises and we must “create the proper environment for a dialogue”. This intention is very polite and noble.
But what do they do? All they desire is to live according to their religious necessities and ideas. They are not willing to learn from us or “experience other cultures”. They despise our culture, considering it rotten and vicious. They are not here to eat and taste our food, listen to our music, watch our movies, visit our museums or read our literature.
While they keep ignoring that it is them who have applied for a visa, refugee status or political asylum, leaving “their countries”, we keep forgetting that this is our world we have created and we have managed to craft it so eye-catching that the whole planet would like to relocate here.
We are suggested to educate ourselves and our children to “embrace, appreciate and accept” their culture, while they teach their children to reject what is labeled “infidel” and remain “Muslims”.
Where on Earth is the cultural exchange when it comes to Muslims and non-Muslims?
I have recently seen a sad scene, in a public eating space. It was this numerous Muslim family (4 generations) sitting and chatting. All men were crowded around one table, while the single woman in the group was sitting lonely with the toddler at a table across the aisle. There is some backbone left here and there like La Trobe University International College , the institution that has rejected such abusive accommodations. Director Martin Van Run said that those Saudi students were fully aware that the university is secular before coming to study there. Here we are. Someone has finally the courage to say it. Is it “hate speech”?

Muslims in Australia
In 2006, Australia rolled out a pilot program in 16 schools in Muslim areas of western Sydney on the compatibility of Islamic and Australian values and the wearing of religious attire, including headscarves. The federally 1 million funded three-year program was looking “to improve understanding of other faiths and cultures.”
What about those “other cultures” to improve their respect and knowledge of our cultures?
Australia is under their heel. In 2007, Islamic Friendship Association of Australia president Keysar Trad admitted hearing young Muslims asking their cleric for advice on going to fight jihad overseas. These young Muslims are predominantly university students. Willing to become perhaps “doctors” and save our lives?

In 2007, an “Australian”, Ahmed Ali, died fighting alongside Islamists in Somalia, his country of birth. Ali (who married what else than an Australian convert!) migrated to Australia with his parents in the late 1990s. He went to Somalia with his wife and children, to expose them to an integration lesson. With the jihadist funds and the Australian social welfare, his wife will be living off the fat of the land. Even if under the Crimes Act 1978 (Foreign Incursion and Recruitment) Australian citizens who engaged in hostile activity in a foreign country face up to 20 years in jail, there is nothing stipulated on family members who were aware of the respective activities.

Australia should add this: “and their dependants who knew about their activities get no social welfare”
Keysar Trad is the one who said on the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia website about Sharia: “Sharia refers to the system of guidance in Islam. There are penal provisions within Sharia, these are referred to as Hudood. The Hudood are a very small part of Sharia. The following is a reasonable summation: 95% of Sharia protects the life, safety and freedom of individuals and of society, especially women, 5% are provisions to deter those who would threaten the freedom of society.Keysar Trad”

Unsatisfied Muslims in west had fallen on their sword, making the west fed up to the back teeth. Under false colours, fundamentalist Muslims work and live among us, waiting for the right moment to harm us. The case of the so-called “doctors” in Glasgow and the school bus driver in the Toronto case are only two examples of their chameleonic behaviour. They greet you, they are your neighbours, they mow the lawn, water the plants, complain about the weather. They are “friendly” and “normal”. Until the day they decide to act against the “infidels”.

We are fiddling while Rome burns.

KATOUCHA NIANE DEAD: ACCIDENT OR MURDER?

February 28, 2008

Some tradition-minded families have their daughters undergo FGC whilst on vacation in their home countries.
Some women take the hard road and speak out against the abuse and humiliation dictated by what some call “tradition”. Katoucha Niane was one of them. Born in Guinea, she was one of the world’s first models to have come from Africa. In the 1980s she modeled for Thierry Mugler, Paco Rabanne and Christian Lacroix and was described as Yves Saint Laurent’s “muse.”

Even if she was born to educated parents (Djibril Tamsir Niane, her father, is an author, playwright and historian, specialized in the history of the Mali Empire. In spite of his studies made in France, he has remained deeply anchored in the primitivism of the rituals dictated by his religion and agreed on his daughter to undergo the repellant procedure)at the age of nine, she had to experience one of the most barbaric rituals still practiced on Earth: female genital mutilation or cutting.

As Western governments become more aware of FGC, legislation has come into effect in many countries to make the practice of FGC a criminal offense. In the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, it is practiced mainly among foreign workers from East Africa and the Nile Valley.

In Indonesia, the practice is fairly common among the country’s Muslim women. Due to immigration, the practice has also spread to Europe, Australia and the United States. Some tradition-minded families have their daughters undergo FGC whilst on vacation in their home countries.

In 2006, Ethiopian Khalid Adem became the first man in the United States to be prosecuted for mutilating his daughter. He had personally excised his 2-year-old daughter’s clitoris with a pair of scissors, in order to preserve “her virginity”. Katoucha Niane stopped modeling in 1994 to focus on activism and has become an outspoken activist against female circumcision, a rite constantly performed in Mali, Senegal, Somalia, Ethiopia, Sudan, Egypt, Tanzania and some groups in the Arabian Peninsula.

In the Arabian peninsula, Sunna circumcision is usually performed, especially among Arabs (ethnic groups of African descent are more likely to prefer infibulation). The practice occurs particularly in northern Saudi Arabia, southern Jordan, and Iraq. Egypt recently passed a law banning FGC. She created the organization KPLCE - Katoucha pour la lutte contre l’excision (Katoucha for the battle against female circumcision).

In 2007 she published a book about her mutilation experience,”Dans ma chair,” in France. On February 1st, 2008, she returned to her houseboat from a party. This was the last time she was reportedly seen alive. Police believed that she was likely intoxicated and fell into the Seine. Her body was found in the Seine on February 28th, 2008.

While some customs and traditions must be protected and preserved, others are only remains of obsolete social realities or simply symbols of ignorance. Foot binding was a custom practiced on young girls or females for approximately one thousand years in China. In Chinese foot binding, young girls’ feet, usually at age 6 but often earlier, were wrapped in tight bandages so that they could not grow and develop normally; they would, instead, break and become highly deformed, not growing past 4-6 inches (10-15 cm). As the girl reached adulthood, her feet would remain small and dysfunctional, subject to infection, paralysis, and muscular atrophy. This mutilation requested by social status ended in the early 20th century.

FGC is the next on the list.
http://www.afrol.com/Categories/Women/FGM/netscapeindex.htm