SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : How Quickly Can Obama Totally Destroy the US? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck who wrote (6522)12/20/2013 10:52:28 AM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Anatomy of an ‘honour’ killing: Why a Palestinian community demanded a father murder his divorced daughter
.................................................................................................................................
Diana Atallah, The Media Line | December 19, 2013

Thamar Zeidan was murdered by her father when he choked her to death as she took an afternoon nap in their small West Bank village.

“Honour crimes” are rarely talked about in Palestinian society, but Ms. Zeidan’s mother and sister have gone public to highlight the case and reveal the immense pressure her father came under to commit the crime.



The Media LineExtended members of the Thamar Zeidan's family accused her of "disgraceful and outrageous acts" in a petition that was widely circulated in her village of Deir Al Ghusun, near the West Bank town of Tulkarem. Reacting to demands to restore the family's honour, Munther killed his daughter.

Extended members of the woman’s family accused her of “disgraceful and outrageous acts” in a petition that was widely circulated in her village of Deir Al Ghusun, near the West Bank town of Tulkarem.

The petition demanded Ms. Zeidan’s father, Munther, “reinstate the cultural and religious morals in his family.”

It was posted in five local mosques during Friday prayer and signed by more than 50 relatives, including Abed Al-Rahman Zeidan, a Palestinian lawmaker.

“My husband was under tremendous pressure,” said Ms. Zeidan’s mother, Laila. “The family wanted to banish us from the West Bank and people started rumours that my husband wasn??’t mentally stable.”

Reacting to demands to restore the family’s honour, Munther killed his daughter, Laila Zeidan said.

“My husband is a peaceful man and this is completely out of character, but the pressure was too intense.”

There have been 27 “honour crimes” in Palestinian areas this year, compared with 13 last year, according to organizations who keep track of such murders.

My husband is a peaceful man and this is completely out of character, but the pressure was too intense

“It’s not clear that honour killing is on the rise, but we can say that documenting such cases has improved and police and media are more aware of them,“ said Surayda Hassan, the general director of the Women Affairs Technical Committee.

Ms. Zeidan, 32, was killed in September, but her family are only now speaking out to highlight the tragedy and bring public attention to “honour killings,” which are a sensitive subject in Palestinian society.

Ms. Zeidan divorced her husband four years ago and moved back in with her parents. However, to gain her freedom she had to give up custody of her three children.

Problems began when she became friendly with Iyad Na’lweh, a labourer who worked in Israel. He was married, but promised to make Ms. Zeidan his second wife, which is legal in Islamic law.


Related
  • Pakistan teen sisters murdered in ‘honour killing’ over video of them dancing in the rain
  • B.C. project to fight ‘honour’ crimes gets 200K from federal Conservatives
  • Canadian justice system has the tools deal with ‘honour killings’: study

  • Although she wanted to marry him, her family objected, saying he had a drinking problem.

    On the night of Sept. 17, Mr. Na’lweh was seen outside Ms. Zeidan’s house. Rumours, many of them false, began to spread.

    “People said they had been together in her room for the past three days, but that’s impossible,” Laila Zeidan said. “In fact I had been in the hospital and she spent the past three days in my room there.”

    Men from the neighbourhood attacked Mr. Na’lweh and he ran into the house. The police were called and the attackers, who believed they were defending her honour, were arrested.

    The men were later released and Ms. Zeidan was taken to Ramallah by her sister and brother-in-law so matters could calm down. But then the petition began circulating.

    He told us she will be safe and he won’t surrender to the family’s pressure

    Its aim was to protect the honour of the Zeidan family, which is conservative and has its own customs and traditions, Abed Al-Rahman Zeidan, the lawmaker who signed it, told Maan, a Palestinian news agency. However, he denounced “honour killings” as a violation of Islamic teaching.

    Ms. Zeidan’s mother said she hoped she could appease relatives by disciplining her daughter.

    “I wanted my husband to discipline her. We took away her phone and limited her movement,” she said.





    NP GraphicsClick to Enlarge

    Munther Zeidan later drove to Ramallah to bring his daughter home.

    “He told us she will be safe and he won’t surrender to the family’s pressure,” said her sister, Suad.

    However, the father then killed his daughter.

    “My father doesn’t understand that he will go straight to hell now,” said Suad Zeidan.

    After the killing, Munther Zeidan went to the local police station and turned himself in.

    Later, the family found a letter he had written, outlining his plan to kill his daughter. It stated he held those who circulated the petition against the family to be responsible.

    “Don’t hold any kind of funeral for my daughter, and don’t let those who signed the petition into my house,” the letter said.

    Ms. Zeidan’s brother-in-law, Zaher Mohammed, said the family was outraged at the people behind the petition.

    “Thamar’s sisters kicked relatives who came to pay their respects out of their house. They were angry because they believe these were the same people who helped spread gossip that led to killing Thamar,” he said.

    For some of the relatives, the death was a cause for celebration. Ms. Zeidan’s aunt held a feast celebrating that the family’s honour had been restored.

    Ms. Zeidan’s mother said she visits her husband weekly in jail, where he is awaiting trial for murder.

    Suad Seidan said the family does not discuss the case when they see him.

    “We avoid talking about it as he is suffering physically,” she said. “He only recently stopped crying.”

    credit monkeyman



    To: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck who wrote (6522)1/3/2014 8:53:16 AM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Terrorist abetting attorney released from prison thanks to Obama administration

    ..............................................................................
    Powerline ^ | 1-3-14 | Paul Mirengoff

    Lynne Stewart, who was convicted of smuggling messages from Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman (“the Blind Sheikh” who masterminded the bombing of the World Trade Center) to his terrorist followers in Egypt, has been released early from prison thanks to the Obama administration. She was released on grounds of “compassion” because she is terminally ill.

    District Judge John Koeltl ordered the release based on a request from the director of the Bureau of Prisons through the office of U.S. Attorney. Judge Koeltl previously had denied Stewart’s request for release because it was not supported by the Bureau of Prisons. In other words, Stewart’s release is the handiwork of the Obama administration.

    The Bureau of Prisons claims broad discretion in deciding whether to file requests for compassionate release, and it exercises that discretion to reject such release in all but a few cases. According to this analysis, the BOP, which is responsible for more than 218,000 prisoners, filed only 30 motions for early release in 2011. Since 1992, the annual average number of prisoners who received compassionate release has been less than two dozen.

    Lynne Stewart has received extraordinarily favorable treatment.

    Lynne Stewart is also a terrorist. Not because, as a lawyer, she represented a notorious terrorist, but because she enabled that terrorist to communicate with his terrorist operatives.

    By enabling the extraordinary release of Stewart out of sympathy for her medical condition, did those in the administration responsible for this outcome — among whom, presumably, are Attorney General Holder and President Obama — show themselves to be terrorist sympathizers? That conclusion seems too sweeping. But I think it’s fair to say that they sympathized with this particular terrorist.

    What was the source of the special sympathy that enabled Lynne Stewart to receive an enormous benefit that the government very rarely grants? Was it her longtime service to the cause of anti-American radicalism? I suspect so.

    When it upheld Stewart’s ten-year sentence (which now turns out to be four years), the Second Circuit Court of Appeals found that she exhibited a “stark inability to understand the seriousness of her crimes.”

    Free now from incarceration and bathed in the adoration of her fellow radical leftists, there is no chance that she ever will.






    To: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck who wrote (6522)1/7/2014 8:12:07 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Pro-Iran Shadow Lobby Launches Bid to Kill Iran Sanctions
    ...................................................................................................




    AP



    BY: Adam Kredo January 7, 2014
    freebeacon.com

    A network of pro-Iran advocates are uniting behind a new campaign aimed at killing bipartisan legislation meant to increase sanctions on Tehran should it cheat on a recently inked nuclear accord.

    The latest bid to kill sanctions in Congress is being led by the Iran Project, a little known group that is deeply tied to, and funded by, some of Tehran’s top U.S. advocates.

    The Iran Project went live on Monday with an anti-sanctions letter signed by a who’s who of liberal former U.S. officials, many of whom have long advocated to roll back sanctions on Iran and increase diplomacy with the rogue regime.

    The letter, which quickly gained traction in some foreign policy circles, urged Sen. Bob Menendez (D., N.J.)—one of the chief architects of the new Iran sanctions bill—to back off his bid and let the bill die.

    Liberal outlets such as the Huffington Post and others have also gone after Menendez in a bid to force him to abandon the bill, which is hotly opposed by the White House but supported by 48 senators.

    The Iran Project claims that the new sanctions bill would “move the U.S. closer to war” with Iran.

    The missive is signed by former ambassadors Thomas Pickering and Ryan Crocker as well as by former National Intelligence Officer Paul Pillar and several other foreign policy experts known for taking a soft line on Iran.

    Pickering and Crocker in particular have been outspoken opponents of sanctions, while Pillar has accused pro-Israel groups of “sustaining” Iran’s nuclear program.

    “We urge you to take a second look at this legislation, accept that you have achieved your objective of putting down a marker for Iran, but not press this bill to a vote,” the letter states. “You do not sacrifice any of your options by doing so. Negotiators now need a chance to continue to their work.”

    The Iran Project, which bills itself as “dedicated to improving the relationship between the U.S. and Iranian governments,” is part of a large network of pro-Iran groups pushing to kill new sanctions and increase diplomacy with Tehran.

    The Iran Project, which has a history of opposing sanctions, has received funding from the Ploughshares Fund, one of the top advocacy groups opposing sanctions.

    Ploughshares has encouraged its allies and funding partners to work against sanctions measures like the one currently up for debate in the Senate.

    Ploughshares partnered with the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) late last year in a lobbying bid meant to stop new sanctions.

    Pickering, who is also one of the Iran Project’s founding members, serves on NIAC’s advisory board.

    Ploughshares has touted the Iran Project’s work on multiple occasions, referring to it “as a group of highly respected national security experts and former U.S. government officials.”

    “The reports released by the Iran Project are very influential among decision makers in Washington,” NIAC wrote of the group in April.

    Iranian state media organs such as Press TV have celebrated The Iran Project’s work in the past.

    Foreign policy observers have pointed out that this tightly organized group of Iran advocates has launched similar anti-sanctions campaigns in the past.

    “These are many of the same foreign policy experts who opposed the toughest Iran sanctions that got us to this point,” Mark Dubowitz, executive director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) tweeted on Monday.

    Others cautioned against taking seriously this latest anti-sanctions lobbying bid.

    “This is a group run by people who support Iran, are celebrated by the Iranian media, and are deeply embedded in a network of organizations that have consistently sought to weaken the U.S.’s leverage in attempting to denuclearize Iran,” said one senior official at a Washington-based pro-Israel group.



    To: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck who wrote (6522)1/7/2014 8:17:09 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Fmr. Defense Secretary Gates Criticizes Obama on National Security Matters
    .....................................................................................................................
    BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
    January 7, 2014
    freebeacon.com

    Former Defense Secretary Bob Gates accuses White House officials of “aggressive, suspicious, and sometimes condescending and insulting questioning of our military leaders” in his new book and compares the Obama administration’s tight control of national security matters to that of Richard Nixon’s.

    Gates, previously known for his even-keeled manner, does not mince words in his book Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War, Bob Woodward writes in the Washington Post. Thomas Donilon, initially Obama’s deputy national security adviser, and former White House coordinator for wars Lt. Gen. Douglas E. Lute were singled out in particular, as well as the president himself and Vice President Joe Biden.

    “All too early in the [Obama] administration,” Gates writes, “suspicion and distrust of senior military officers by senior White House officials—including the president and vice president—became a big problem for me as I tried to manage the relationship between the commander-in-chief and his military leaders.”

    Gates recounts one meeting between Obama and his national security staff after Gen. David H. Petraeus publicly said he was uncomfortable with setting a fixed date for withdrawing troops from Afghanistan:

    At a March 3, 2011, National Security Council meeting, Gates writes, the president opened with a “blast.” Obama criticized the military for “popping off in the press” and said he would push back hard against any delay in beginning the withdrawal.

    According to Gates, Obama concluded, “?‘If I believe I am being gamed . . .’ and left the sentence hanging there with the clear implication the consequences would be dire.”

    Gates continues: “I was pretty upset myself. I thought implicitly accusing” Petraeus, and perhaps Mullen and Gates himself, “of gaming him in front of thirty people in the Situation Room was inappropriate, not to mention highly disrespectful of Petraeus. As I sat there, I thought: the president doesn’t trust his commander, can’t stand [Afghanistan President Hamid] Karzai, doesn’t believe in his own strategy, and doesn’t consider the war to be his. For him, it’s all about getting out.”

    Gates also writes that Obama “breached faith with me” on issues such as the repeal of the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy toward gays serving in the military and defense spending.

    Gates’ book is scheduled for release on Jan. 14.