UK Senior Judge: Nothing "Honorable" About Muslims Abusing And Killing Their Own Families

How many times have we read stories about "honor killings" or forced marriages or abuse of Muslim children? Far too many times.

I used to think that most (if not all Europeans) were simply too scared to speak out in the face of a Muslim culture that is coming to dominate them. Well, over in the United Kingdom, at least one sane, rational voice is speaking out. That voice belongs to Lord Justice Wall, a senior judge in the U.K. judicial system.

According to the Daily Mail Online:

Lord Justice Wall, giving a ruling on a case involving three Muslim children put in the care of white foster parents, said the time had come to 're-think the phrase honour killing'. He had heard that a mother had set fire to one of her three children and tried to burn down the house where they lived in an attempt to incriminate her sister-in-law. The sister-in-law 'presented a problem to the family' and had fled the home after being beaten and her first child murdered by her husband, the mother's brother. The judge said: 'The message from this case, which must be sent out loud and clear, is that this court applies a tolerant and human rights based rule of law: one which... regards parents as equals and the welfare of the child as paramount. 'That is the law of England, and that is the law which applies in this case. Arson, domestic violence and potential revenge likely to result in abduction or death are criminal acts which will be treated as such.' He said the activities brought to light by the case had 'nothing to do with any concept of honour known to English law'. 'They are acts of simply sordid, criminal behaviour and a refusal to acknowledge them as such.'

Wow! Those are some strong words and they are exactly the words that needed to be said. Two things to note:

1. Abuse and killing of family members has "nothing to do with any concept of honour known to English law."

2. The acts are "of simply sordid criminal behaviour."

That is stripping the issue down to the bare-bones essentials. Islamics who abuse and kill their own family members have no place in the civilized society of the West. That much is clear from point Number 1.

Point Number 2 serves as a reminder that moral relativism has no place in the application of laws and that all laws must be applied equally to all people across the board. As such, Muslims who abuse and kill their own family members should not be considered as adherents to a different set of beliefs, but merely common criminals who need to be held accountable and punished for their crimes.

How bad can it get? Read on:

The mother of the children - a girl aged 11 and boys of nine and five - is 32 and serving a five-year jail sentence for arson. One of her brothers had contracted a second marriage to a woman in Pakistan who came to England in 2003 pregnant with her first child. That child was taken to hospital aged 27 months suffering from multiple injuries and died. It was not known the motivation for the killing but among the injuries on the child were signs of chronic sexual abuse.

A 27-month-old child. That's not even three years. What motivates a person to physically harm a defenseless little human being like that?

I went to school here in the West and we were never taught to do anything like that. In fact, we were taught that such behavior is simply evil and that those who engage in such actions should be severely punished.

But, in certain Muslim cultures, such behavior is acceptable and encouraged and when it happens, is justified under Sharia law.

Now, I know some Muslims out there will complain that these people do not represent mainstream Islam. But my response to this complaint is that instead of berating people like me, they should go after these abusers and murderers and tell them to stop claiming to be acting in the name of Islam.

The people of Europe would do very well to listen to the admonitions of Lord Justice Wall. Maybe it's not too late yet.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Senior Judge Condemns Use Of The Word 'Honour' To Describe Abuse And Murder Within Muslim Families
Daily Mail Reporter
March 16, 2009

The Ice Age Cometh, Muslims Want McCain To Be PC And Rick Santorum Supports McCain

Whew! It's been a week since I last posted? Well, that will happen sometimes. As I have mentioned many times before, I do have a real life outside of blogging and that life takes a higher priority than trying to keep up with and make sense of current event issues.

So, what do I have today? A little more debunking of the Human Induced Global Warming Theory, some PC madness from the Muslims and a strong case for supporting John McCain for President.

Let's start with Global Warming. Our first item comes from Down Under. Why is that significant? Because the author, Phil Chapman, was the first Aussie to become an astronaut for NASA. Pretty solid credentials there. He has a few things to say about the objective scientific view of what is really going on with our climate and why.

From his column:

The scariest photo I have seen on the internet is www.spaceweather.com, where you will find a real-time image of the sun from the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory, located in deep space at the equilibrium point between solar and terrestrial gravity. What is scary about the picture is that there is only one tiny sunspot.

Note that. Sunspots. They are very important in determining the climate of the Earth.

Disconcerting as it may be to true believers in global warming, the average temperature on Earth has remained steady or slowly declined during the past decade, despite the continued increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide, and now the global temperature is falling precipitously. All four agencies that track Earth's temperature (the Hadley Climate Research Unit in Britain, the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, the Christy group at the University of Alabama, and Remote Sensing Systems Inc in California) report that it cooled by about 0.7C in 2007. This is the fastest temperature change in the instrumental record and it puts us back where we were in 1930. If the temperature does not soon recover, we will have to conclude that global warming is over.

The crux of the column is that Global Warming Theory maintains that an increase in atmospheric CO₂ will lead to increased temperatures. But that is not what has been happening over the past ten years. In fact, the exact opposite has been occuring. This is a set of facts and circumstances that people like Al Gore refuse to allow debate on.

But let's read more about sunspots:

The sunspot number follows a cycle of somewhat variable length, averaging 11 years. The most recent minimum was in March last year. The new cycle, No.24, was supposed to start soon after that, with a gradual build-up in sunspot numbers. It didn't happen. The first sunspot appeared in January this year and lasted only two days. A tiny spot appeared last Monday but vanished within 24 hours. Another little spot appeared this Monday. Pray that there will be many more, and soon. The reason this matters is that there is a close correlation between variations in the sunspot cycle and Earth's climate. The previous time a cycle was delayed like this was in the Dalton Minimum, an especially cold period that lasted several decades from 1790. Northern winters became ferocious: in particular, the rout of Napoleon's Grand Army during the retreat from Moscow in 1812 was at least partly due to the lack of sunspots.

Who says that science can't help us understand history? In fact, you can relate the sinking of the Titanic to the sunspot cycle. (Artic pack ice flows further south at certain times of the cycle than at other times. Captain Smith was unfortunate enough to sail Titanic through one of those flows.)

So what does all of this mean for us today?

It is time to put aside the global warming dogma, at least to begin contingency planning about what to do if we are moving into another little ice age, similar to the one that lasted from 1100 to 1850. There is no doubt that the next little ice age would be much worse than the previous one and much more harmful than anything warming may do. There are many more people now and we have become dependent on a few temperate agricultural areas, especially in the US and Canada. Global warming would increase agricultural output, but global cooling will decrease it.

Sorry, Al Gore. But your incovenient truth is becoming an incovenient fantasy.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Sorry To Ruin The Fun, But An Ice Age Cometh
Phil Chapman
The Australian
April 23, 2008

---

Fox News is reporting this about Muslim groups here in the United States:

A coalition of American Muslim groups is demanding that presumptive Republican nominee John McCain stop using the word "Islamic" to describe terrorists. The Washington Times reports Islamic Society of North America's secretary general wants McCain to use something he calls "more acceptable to the Muslim community." "You want to call them terrorist criminals, fine. But adding the word 'Muslim' or 'Islamic' certainly doesn't help our cause as Americans... It paints an entire community of believers, 1.2 billion in total, in a very negative way." But McCain strategist Steve Schmidt says there will be no changes. "The reality is, the hateful ideology which underpins bin Ladenism is properly described as radical Islamic extremism. Senator McCain refers to it that way because that is what it is."

They are demanding. Not asking but demanding that John McCain stop using the words "Islamic" and "terrorist" in the same sentence. As if they have some special sort of status which precludes them from the scrutiny of the general public.

The Islamic ideology of Wahabbism is probably the main engine for exporting Islamic extremism and terrorism throughout the world. Why don't these so-called peace loving Muslim groups speak out against that?

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Muslim Groups Take Issue With McCain's Vocabulary
Brit Hume
FoxNews.com
April 21, 2008

---

And fianlly, Rick Santorum (R-PA) gives us more good reasons why Conservatives should support John McCain for President:

Of all the issues confronting the United States today, none is more important than our nation's security. Although these issues don't dominate our news as they once did, we cannot forget that without a safe and secure country, all other issues don't matter. McCain is clearly the candidate with the capacity, judgment, experience and will to confront America's enemies. He's served our country honorably - heroically - in war. I served eight years with him on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and I can assure you he knows our military. Importantly, he also knows our enemies. He understands their capabilities and their aims. He will not sugarcoat the human or financial commitment and cost needed to defeat this enemy. The most important social issue is life. Yes, I often wished McCain would have joined me on the Senate floor in debating Barbara Boxer on issues like the partial-birth-abortion ban. In the end, with the exception of embryonic stem-cell funding, he always voted for life and stood for the culture of life. In short, he's been a reliable vote on life issues, which are critical to conservatives. Many conservatives have given McCain poor marks for his involvement in the Gang of 14. I was in leadership pushing hard for a showdown with the Democrats on using the "Constitutional Option" to end their filibuster of judicial nominations. The Gang of 14 broke the impasse, and it probably was for the best. I was the one counting votes on that issue, and I was much less certain of success than others. In the end, the Gang deal resulted in numerous confirmations of qualified conservative jurists. On judges, McCain has repeatedly made clear that he will, as his Web site states, "only nominate judges who understand that their role is to faithfully apply the law as written, not impose their opinions through judicial fiat." Sounds good to me. Yes, I disagreed with McCain's opposition to President Bush's tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. But I give him credit that he now thinks we must make those tax cuts permanent to boost our now-struggling economy. And, yes, McCain has been a thorn in the side of many of us who supported important appropriations earmarks for our states. But he's always objected with principled consistency. This is but one example of McCain's character - the kind of character I want in the person who answers 3 a.m. phone calls at the White House.

Of course, I shouldn't have to mention what the two possible alternatives to John McCain are.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

The Elephant In The Room: Why Conservatives Should Support McCain
Rick Santorum
The Philadelphia Enquirer
April 21, 2008