Posts Tagged ‘Phyllis Chesler’
#1 of 3: Connecticut’s SOS Business Database Now Obstructs/Defeats Status-based Search for Inactive/Defunct Corps (Such as the NHFA|New Haven Family Alliance, at least as to IRS tax-exempt status, Automatically Revoked Nov. 2015 for not filing a return since 2012)
I intend this series (like the blog) to be illuminating and empowering, and that it may encourage people who will live longer than me, and possibly build on this information, thus knowing more sooner, to continue “looking it up” and teaching others why this is AS important as following the daily mainstream media and weighing in pro or con on the issues it spits out, regularity, each season, to weigh in on– while keeping THIS information on a collective MSM blackout.
While what I find is usually disturbing information, and discredits the good intentions of substantial charities and public-interest causes, it’s still a good thing to know what is taking place in those sectors, and some of the backdrop of their operations. There has been an extreme level of computer problems since I first published this post, including saving revisions, or with my laptop working — at all. I shortened this post, removed major sections to a different one, and am hoping nearly one full week later to get Posts #2 and 3 (links below will activate when I do) published.
*Shortlink to this Post #1 of 3 .** Post #2 of 3 at this link, and *** Post#3 of 3
This post as updated 6/21/2016 has much less text, and more charts directly related to that Connecticut’s Secretary of State (“SOS”) Databased, labeled “C.O.N.C.O.R.D.” I moved major sections to a new post and published it 6/20/2016, the Monday after Father’s Day. See Shortlink to that post, which explains why I’m doing a series on Connecticut and certain organizations running marriage/fatherhood (and youth mentoring) within it. Some references from the removed material remain. The result so far is now down to just over 6,000 words (significantly shorter).
Posts #2 & #3 will be published under those links as soon as I finish split process; their contents are already basically complete. As of late Tuesday 6/21/2016, they are not yet active, however. (There was a computer-related delay last weekend).
Also see my prior, 6/8/2016, post “Courtesy PRWORA, HHS, and Public Apathy, the Good Ol’ Boys Network with help from (speaking of which) Yale University is Re-packaging the Same Old Schlock, in this example, as “Male Involvement Network” revisits Connecticut and links back to several of my Spring 2013 posts on Connecticut’sfamily courts. “Male Involvement Network,” an aside on one of those post, I since learned is a collaboration begun in 1997. One article on it was produced by at least three (actually more) key entities. As I have in some other states, while working on-line and electronically from California, in investigating family court operations, organizations, or high-profile custody cases in specific states, I am typically also networked (to a degree) and long-term, dealing with some people involved locally, active on others’ blogs or MSM blogs in comments fields. My awareness of these situations, while not local, is still in-depth in the larger context and with levels of influence within state government — simply because I look at more than one sector of influence on these courts. After all, you can see well over 600 posts on this blog, completed over six years’ time, and a lot of time spent on each one. The perspective is not just anecdotal evidence, not just a mothers’ perspective, and differs significantly from the average “take” on the situations involved.
Don’t Get Completely Distracted From “Looking It Up” by Current Events and the News.
Apart from who owns the mainstream (and other major on-line) media …. at some levels ALL news deals with government/private sector interplay, and accounting. Media is not just to inform, it’s also to please its owners (often very wealthy corporations; at a certain level of wealth, individuals or families can go BUY a sports team, or a major newspaper. By definition, most major wealth is if not obtained, at least u pouring finances into them. by stowing large parts of it into tax-exempt foundations, or p
Most days, weeks, months and years, there always will be an ongoing series of distractions from looking at how the government of the USA, and state governments taking significant federal input to their economies via the Social Security Act funds, as amended 1996 and passed a few times since with some amendments, and NO amendment, to date, having eliminated the HMRF* or Access/Visitation funds — or the expanding infrastructure, in the private sphere, they continue to not just directly support, but encourage continued expansion through public relations, evaluations, demonstrations, and social science/public health sectors of universities.
[[*HMRF stands for “Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood” and refers to a public (federal agency HHS) grants stream I have been blogging on for six years now. The “HMRF” acronym may be more recent. “HMRF” while in use by HHS is not searchable on its Database, “TAGGS.hhs.gov” of distributed grants and grantees. To find HMRF grants in any state (or all states), use CFDA 93086; recommended, under “Advanced” search options.]]
Why should we NOT make sincere and diligent efforts to comprehend what this means locally? We are being constantly fed paid-for promotions by the participants of what GOOD things it means locally, where is the counterpoint reporting, based on an overview and linked to supporting details other than more journalism based on, essentially, storytelling designed to increase readership and sell stories & programming?
Funny, and Not so Funny . . . Bad, and a BIT Better: in Bahrain, Arizona and Rhode Island
(1) Funny
(especially if you’ve experienced what they’re talking about)
Welcome to caught.net’s
BLACK IS WHITE LAW DICTIONARY
Tongue in cheek but pathetically true!
Copyright 2009 – All Rights Reserved
(2) Not Funny: Broke in Bahrain
(A)
Breezy Globalsapiens Travelogue perspective: narrative
The Peninsula above is not Bahrain, but Qatar. Bahrain is between Peninsula and mainland, as following images show:
The 25 miles between Qatar and Bahrain “Friendship Bridge,” the longest bridge IN THE WORLD,
has not yet been built (@ 2008 article).
The contract to construct the $3 billion causeway was signed on Tuesday
by Ahmad Hasan Al Hammadi, director of the legal affairs department at
Qatar’s Foreign Ministry, and Pierre Berger, chairman of Vinci Group.The
transport link between the two Gulf states will reduce the travel time
from one to the other from approximately five hours to around 30
minutes.
Location
Where is Bahrain?
Bahrain is an island
located in the Persian/Arabian Gulf.
Can you see BAHRAIN in this NASA photo of a Dust Storm over Bahrain and Qatar, posted at “redorbit.com
[Credit: Jeff Schmaltz; MODIS team; NASA, Posted on: 26 September 2007, 06:45 CDT ]”?
To the East
lies Qatar, to South Saudi Arabia and to the North, across the Gulf,
looms Iran.
Next to these Bahrain is a midget, making even tiny Qatar appear large
in size.
History:
Early History
Bahrain was not always as dry as it is now – in the last 40 years development
has dried up much of the natural springs that used to lure the Qatari
bedouin to its shores in the hot summers – and there has even been speculation
that it was once the Garden of Eden.
There is evidence that the country has been inhabited for 7000 years,
and it was also a major part of Dilmun, a Bronze Age trading empire
which lasted for 2000 years. Later on there was a strong Greek influence
and the country was renamed Tylos – itself a Greek name. Trading was
once again its main activity for 600 years.
In 629, much of Bahrain accepted an invitation from the Prophet Mohammed
to accept Islam, and Bahrain was ruled by Mohammed through a governor.
However, Bahrain was later taken over by the Qarmatians, who used Bahrain
as a base to sack many of Islam’s holiest cities, and desecrated the
Zam Zam well with the bodies of Hajj pilgrims.
The Qarmatians were in turn replaced by a series of invaders, including Genghis Khan.
Modern History
In the 16th century Bahrain was invaded by the Portuguese, who defeated and
beheaded the local king, but they were kicked out by a revolt in 1602.
The Portuguese were replaced by the Persian empire until the Persians
themselves were replaced by the Khalifa family. The Khalifas eventually
fell under the influence of the British, who flexed their muscles after
the Khalifas laid waste to Doha and Al Wakra. Bahrain remained a protectorate
of the British until 1971, when the British left the Gulf and Bahrain
declared its independence.
After oil was discovered in the 1930s Bahrain boomed,
(B)
The Nightmare Gets Worse for An American Woman and Her Child Trapped In Bahrain
by Phyllis Chesler
Fox News
August 27, 2010
On Thursday, August 26 in Bahrain, the country’s police stormed into the home where Yazmin Maribel Bautista was hiding her five-year-old daughter, Fatima, an American citizen. She was hiding her child to keep her from being handed over to her Bahraini father for weekend visitation as ordered by a local court. Yazmin, an American citizen from Arizona, was helpless to prevent this from happening.
Her lawyer, Majid Shehab, who nobly took on the case pro bono, was arrested for trying to report the police and keep them from taking the child away. The lawyer has since been bailed out. Yazmin does not know whether her daughter, Fatima, will be returned to her. She also does not know whether it is safe for her to remain in the country. Yazmin has no money, no job, no financial resources, and no powerful relatives who can help her fight for her daughter.
Fatima is terrified of her father’s family and once hid under a café table when she saw relatives approaching. She said: “I don’t want to see my father. He will take me so that I will never see you (my mother) again.”
. . .
In 2003, Yazmin met Sadiq Jaffar Al-Saffar, a college student, and in 2004 Yazmin was born. Sadiq was a deadbeat dad who seemed more interested in getting a green card than in being with his family in Arizona, spending most of his time back in Bahrain. In four years, he visited only three times.
In January of 2009, Yazmin divorced him and received custody in Arizona.
Later, however, Yazmin went to Bahrain because she got laid off from her job in Arizona and because she chose to believe Sadiq’s promises: that he would get her a good job, an apartment of her own, a car, a cell phone, and that both she and/or Fatima would be part of a loving, extended family.
Major mistake. Unemployment and compromised circumstances can tempt someone to make poor decisions. This makes me think that Yazmin’s own extended family / support system were not able to step up, or involved at this time.
He lied.
Even as I write, her advocate, Beth X, who must remain anonymous, is meeting with Senator John McCain, who represents Yazmin’s state of Arizona in Congress and who previously had written a letter to Bahrain’s Ambassador to the United States urging her to “allow Ms. Bautista and her daughter to return home peacefully.”
Arizona’s got its own issues also, about letting women divorce safely. Or mothers relocate after they have, for safety reasons.
Her ex-husband’s lawyers, Fatima Abdullah and Majd Ramadan, both women, who found Yazmin’s address where she has been hiding ever since the court ordered her to turn over her daughter every week for the Muslim weekend. Yazmin initially complied with the court order but she stopped doing so when her daughter made it increasingly clear that she did not want to be with her father, her father’s new wife, and her father’s extended family. Yazmin called the American embassy, which dispatched consul Nausher Ali, who observed what was happening but did nothing.
This behavior continues the shameful inactivity of the American embassy in this matter. In fact, it was an American consul who prevented Yazmin from escaping with Fatima in the first place. At one point the two had cleared customs before boarding a plane bound for the United States, but the consul convinced them to cross back over to Bahraini-controlled territory, telling Yazmin that this was just a formality and that they would soon be free to go, at which point the Bahraini government apprehended them and put a hold on Fatima from leaving the country.
Yazmin remains dependent on the kindness of strangers and at the mercy of the American government.
She told me: “We’ve been here over a year and I’ve gone to court hearing after court hearing, and it’s not going anywhere…
Aspects of this sound like someone stuck in the courts in the USA for years. I can’t imagine it in a foreign company.
I’m sure the embassy has done everything it can, but at the end of the day we’re still stuck in Bahrain. I was told that I’ll be getting her back on Saturday, but who’s to say that I’ll be getting her back? I feel like even though she’s an American citizen no one is looking after her rights…I feel like there’s no more hope…I’m just hoping that someone somewhere can help us…”
I wonder whether a new foreign policy in the Middle East will be able to bring these two American citizens home or whether it is another tragic tale like Betty Mahmoody’s, the American author of “Not Without My Daughter” who was similarly trapped in Iran with her young American citizen daughter.
. . .
= They’ve Got to be Kiddin’, but Aren’t . . . .
Now, in RHODE ISLAND, our SMALLEST U.S. STATE:
VERY BAD DECISION:
Judge imposes gag order on mother in R.I. custody case
01:00 AM EDT on Saturday, August 14, 2010 [don’t miss the comments submitted]
JUST A BIT BETTER
Judge lifts gag order in Torres custody battle
August 18, 2010 [don’t miss the comments submitted]
Journal Staff Writer PROVIDENCE — Faith Torres left her credit card and other valuables at home Tuesday when she went to Family Court. She didn’t know how her hearing was going to go, and she might be spending time in jail.
Torres is in a custody battle to get her children. On July 29, Family Court Judge Debra E. DiSegna had ordered her not to talk about her case with anyone, including the media, or post anything about it on the Internet. Torres feared DiSegna would find her in contempt of court because she had contacted the American Civil Liberties Union, and a story had appeared in Saturday’s Journal.
But after conferring with lawyers for about an hour Tuesday, Judge DiSegna lifted the gag order, though she forbade Torres and her lawyers from identifying her children or giving out confidential information about them in regard to the case.
“I was hoping for the best,” Torres said after she got out of court. “I was prepared for the worst.
Preparing for the worst is GOOD advice for anyone going anywhere near a family law courtroom.
I wouldn’t hang our hopes on consistent respect for the First Amendment, or any of the others, in places like this, though. The price of freedom is Vigilance (NOT “vigilante, which is a better description of where our civil rights went, and some of the DCFS groups around the country who prefer operating “behind closed doors,” like most abusers, not to mention child molesters, do).
“I thought I might have violated the order. … I was happy she kind of lifted it.”
But Steven Brown, executive director of the ACLU’s Rhode Island affiliate, said DiSegna’s new order is still too broad, and still violates the First Amendment.
THANK YOU, The Providence Journal, Steve Brown of the ACLU, and Faith Torres for persistence!
“On Tuesday, DiSegna allowed a reporter in the courtroom for Torres’ hearing, where Torres told the judge that the court visits were financially draining for both her and Fernandez.”
Ya THINK!? — read the articles!
QUESTION: Why is it a “domestic dispute” (per the agency that requested the gag order, referring to the violence between the parents) but a “custody battle” (per the headlines — referring not to her battle primarily with her ex, but with the STATE, who has retained, apparently, legal custody of 3 children that actually live with Ms. Torres. This is odd — unless one understands the implicit “Kids for Kash” concept behind being American, giving birth, not living off 100%non-taxable income, and seeking any form of help from the courts, or social services.
Formerly, the recruiting poster read:
Wikipedia informs us that the first concept of “Uncle Sam” as the U.S. comes from:
“The first use of the term in literature is seen in an 1816 allegorical book, The Adventures of Uncle Sam in Search After His Lost Honor by Frederick Augustus Fidfaddy, Esq.”
What else might one expect from a “Fidfaddy.” (Esq.)?
and that
“The female personification “Columbia” has seldom been seen since the 1920s.” The word “Columbia” supposedly combines “Columbus” (as in, Christopher) and “Britannia” (the colonizer), hence, “Columbia.” Despite the civil war and westward expansion, it still appears, at least as to national symbols, that this country was basically uninhabited except by people of this pale color.
Not suprisingly, around the 1920s women were (FINALLY) getting the vote, so I guess this wasn’t a great image to publicize. While Uncle Sam is an older, paternal figure, this one is certainly not very Maternal (or of similar age)
Not much has changed in the meantime. Ms. Torres is to be gagged, and those speaking for her, then partially ungagged, as a mother, and fork her kids over to Uncle Sam (Rhode Island) on behalf of, not the war on poverty (which was Part 1 of “welfare reform”) but the war on “Fatherlessness” (which is Part 2 of “welfare reform”).
In Bahrain, Ms. Bautista, totally stranded, had her attorney actually jailed, not just threatened with it, bailed out, and what appears to be a very uneven custody battle.
Maybe Arizona can redeem some of its tarnished image by helping out!
NOT FUNNY:
Blogger (that’s me) Just Got Jilted by Slow/Interrupted Internet time, lost my commentary on this case. But I did get a comment in on the second news site under “StillTalksBack” (cf. “StandsWithaFist” from “Dances with Wolves”)
and referred to explanatory comments here:
Afghanistan // Egypt — The Art of Suppression (2 from MidEast Forum/Pajamas Media)
My connection with this is (obviously) through the writings of Dr. Phyllis Chesler, but the relationship of suppression of women to suppression of the “wrong” religion (according to who’s in power) is universally important.
Here’s the “about” page on “meforum However my main hope in posting these two articles is that visitors to THIS blog about familycourtmatters will consider these topics.
I consider the family law system symbolically an “archipelago,” and I also see it as Sharia in the making. Most men are not really ready for women to be free from their domination throughout society. The risks that we might just :
1. Say No and stop providing services, including supporting oppressive systems, breeding more young, nubile females to satisfy infantile fantasies, and stop rebuilding what wars have destroyed, AND (as to middle aged males), after by doing this, have restored some possible equilibrium,
2. Seek mates closer to our own age, and stop standing by while our neighbor females lose their lives, and children, through a court system, because we have been socially groomed that, by paying taxes (i.e., being employees, not employERs), someone else is responsible for it.
3. In general set higher standards of behavior for interaction with us and our kids.
To be fair, though this is “MEFORUM” opening description:
The Middle East Forum, a Philadelphia-based think tank, works to define and promote American interests in the Middle East and protect the Constitutional order from Middle Eastern threats. It does this in three main ways:
- Intellectually: Through the Middle East Quarterly, staff writings, lectures and conference calls, the Forum provides context, insights, and policy recommendations.
- Operationally: The Forum exerts an active influence through its projects, including Campus Watch, Islamist Watch, the Legal Project, and the Washington Project.
- Philanthropically: The Forum distributes nearly $2 million annually through its Education Fund, helping researchers, writers, investigators, and activists around the world.
Now about 2006, and how Phyllis almost got stuck overseas, and came back more feminist than before. Many parallels exist with USA (from where I, obviously, blog)…
(1) of (3)
How Afghan Captivity Shaped My Feminism
by Phyllis Chesler
Middle East Quarterly
Winter 2006, pp. 3-10
. . .
/// My life was akin to that of an upper class Afghan woman. My experience was similar to—but hardly as constrained as—that which an increasing number of Arab and Muslim women face today.
In this first decade of the twenty-first century, women living in Islamic societies are being forced back into time, re-veiled, more closely monitored, and more savagely punished than they were in the 1960s.
That said, I had never expected my freedom and privacy to be so curtailed. In Afghanistan, a few hundred wealthy families lived by European standards. Everyone else lived in a premodern style. And that’s the way the king, his government, and the mullahs wanted it to remain. Western diplomats did not peg their foreign policies to how Afghanistan treated its women.
Even before multicultural relativism kicked in, Western diplomats did not believe in “interfering.”
My comment: This attitude prevails in the family-worshipping environment of white (and black, and other colors, from what I can tell) Protestant non-mainstream AND mainstream churches. At least that has been my consistent experience over more than a decade, both married with violence, and single supposedly without it….
I am now (of recently) re-evaluating this concept of the ramifications Monotheism (as well as Atheism) according to its practice. If you think THAT ain’t challenging … it is ….. But an honest person will do this. More in other posts.
The Afghanistan I knew was a prison, a feudal monarchy, and rank with fear, paranoia, and slavery. Individual Afghans were charming, funny, humane, tender, enchantingly courteous, and sometimes breathtakingly honest. Yet, their country was a bastion of illiteracy, poverty, and preventable disease. Women were subjected to domestic and psychological misery in the form of arranged marriages, polygamy, forced pregnancies, the chadari, domestic slavery and, of course, purdah (seclusion of women).
Women led indoor lives and socialized only with other women. If they needed to see a doctor, their husband consulted one for them in their place. Most women were barely educated. In Kabul, I met other foreign wives who loved having servants but whose own freedom had been constrained. Some European wives, who had come in the late 1940s and early 1950s had converted to Islam and wore The Thing, as we called the cloaking chadari.
Each had been warned, as had I, that whatever they did would become known, that there were eyes everywhere, and that their actions could endanger their families and themselves. Afghans mistrusted foreign wives.
I have a post, a while back, including the “Seven-lesson Schoolteacher” (from “Dumbing Us Down” by John Taylor Gatto (1990), a homeschool favorite. ONE of the lessons is, “there is no privacy.” This concept is echoed in the Decalaration of Independence of the United States, as follows:
The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription
IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
[[As contrasted to “no-fault divorce.” hmmm..]]
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
[[Again, read this with the concept of men governing women within their marriages, and society — and think about it!]]
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–
And some of them are listed in this document:
The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States…
- He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries. {{or custody dependent on the will of a capricious judge..}}
- He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
These are the court paraprofessionals I keep blogging about….
- He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
- He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
- He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation
- For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
The family courts exist in ORDER to do this; it is therapeutic jurisprudence, and mediation, evaluation, supervised visitation IN ORDER to produce a desired outcome, which I have been posting about (see also NAFCJ.net). When you have the words “required outcome” in a court case, as opposed to “required PROCESS,” you no longer have justice. Period.
Back to Phyllis’ Feminism formed, or re-inforced, in Afghanistan
Once, I saw an Afghan husband fly into a rage when his foreign wife not only wore a Western swimsuit to a swimming party—but actually plunged into the pool. The men expected to be the only ones who would swim; their wives were meant to chat and sip drinks. The concept of privacy is a Western one. When I would leave the common sitting room in order to read quietly in my own bedroom, all the women and children would follow me. They’d ask: “Are you unhappy?” No one spent any time alone. To do so was an insult to the family. The idea that a woman might be an avid reader of books and a thinker was too foreign to comprehend. Like everyone else, Ali was under permanent surveillance. His career and livelihood depended upon being an obedient Afghan son and subject. How he treated me was crucial. He had to prove that his relationship to women was every bit as Afghan as any other man’s; perhaps more so, since he had arranged his own marriage to a foreigner. ///
In Western terms, he had to prove his “masculinity.”
NOTE: I haven’t fully processed this next article but (as typically) put it out here for public consumption and digestion. I do note that in our area (which has a prospering MidEastern population from a number of countries) I recently met a (professor/doctor) man, a Christian, who said that the U.S. has strongly underestimated the danger of Islam, and spoke of how Egypt (from where he was) persecutes Christians. I remembered “Now They Call Me Infidel” for sure.
(2) of (3)
Unprecedented: Egyptian Government Suppresses Christian Doctrine
by Raymond Ibrahim
Pajamas Media
June 16, 2010
It is not enough that the Egyptian government facilitates persecution of the Copts, Egypt’s indigenous Christian minority. Now the government is interfering directly with the church’s autonomy concerning doctrine. According to the Assyrian International News Agency:
The head of the Coptic Church in Egypt has rejected a court ruling that orders the church to allow divorced Copts to remarry in the church. In a press conference held on Tuesday June 8, Pope Shenouda [III], reading from the statement issued by the Holy Synod’s 91 Bishops, including himself, said: “The Coptic Church respects the law, but does not accept rulings which are against the Bible and against its religious freedom which is guaranteed by the Constitution.” He went on to say “the recent ruling is not acceptable to our conscience, and we cannot implement it.” He also said that marriage is a holy sacrament of a purely religious nature and not merely an “administrative act.”
Though little reported in the West, this issue is rapidly boiling over. There is even talk that, if he does not submit to the court’s ruling, the pope will (once again) be imprisoned. What is behind such unprecedented governmental interference with the Coptic Church’s autonomy?
Reading Egypt’s national newspaper, Al Ahram, one gets the impression that, by trying to make divorce and remarriage easier for Copts, the Egyptian government is attempting to “liberalize” Coptic society—only to be challenged by an antiquated pope not open to “reform.” It quotes one Copt saying that the “Pope’s limiting divorce and remarriage to cases of adultery is unfair. It is against human nature.” Even the manager of the Centre for Egyptian Women’s Legal Assistance claims that his position “exposes Pope Shenouda’s desire to impose his will over the Christian community” (a curious statement, considering that some 10,000 Copts recently demonstrated in support of the pope, and that the Catholic and Orthodox churches—which guide some 1.5 billion Christians—hold similar views on divorce and remarriage).
At any rate, lest the reader truly think that the Egyptian government is becoming more “liberal,” there are a few important facts to remember:
First, according to the Second Article of the Egyptian Constitution, Sharia law—one of, if not the most draconian law codes to survive the Medieval period—is “the principal source of legislation.” This means that any number of measures contrary to basic human rights are either explicitly or implicitly supported by the Egyptian government, including polygamy, the obstruction of churches, and institutionalized discrimination against non-Muslims and females in general. Put differently, Sharia law can be liberal—but only to male Muslims, who (speaking of marriage and divorce) can have up to four wives, and divorce them by simply uttering “I divorce you” thrice (even via “text messaging“).
Moreover, the Egyptian government—again, in accordance to Sharia law—prevents Muslims from converting to Christianity. Mohammad Hegazy, for instance, tried formally to change his religion from Muslim to Christian on his I.D. card—yes, in Egypt, people are Gestapo-like categorized by their religion—only to be denied by the Egyptian court. (Many other such anecdotes abound). In other words, while the Egyptian government portrays itself as “modernizing” the church’s “archaic” position on divorce and remarriage, it—the government, not Al Azhar, nor some radical sheikhs, nor yet the Muslim mob—prevents (including by imprisonment and torture) Muslims from converting to Christianity.
As for those who accuse Pope Shenouda of behaving no better than “closed-minded” radicals, consider: he is not forcing a law on individual Copts; he is simply saying that, in accordance to the Bible (e.g., Matt 5:32), and except in certain justifiable circumstances (e.g., adultery) Copts cannot remarry in the church: “Let whoever wants to remarry to do it away from us. There are many ways and churches to marry in. Whoever wants to remain within the church has to abide by its laws.”
If this still sounds a tad “non-pluralistic,” know that at least Copts have a way out: quit the church. No such way out for Muslims: Sharia law—Egypt’s “primal source of legislation”—mandates death for Muslims who wish to quit Islam.
Nor has the inherent hypocrisy of the government’s position been missed by Egyptians: “The Pope evaded answering a question presented by a reporter in the press conference on whether the court would dare order Al Azhar [Egypt’s highest Islamic authority] to agree to a Muslim marrying a fifth wife and not only four, comparing it to the interference of the Court in the Bible teachings through its recent ruling.” A good question, indeed.
Finally, the grandest oddity of this situation is the fact that, for all its inhumane practices, Sharia law does, in fact, permit dhimmis to govern their communities according to their own creeds, a fact not missed by the pope himself, who “pointed to Islamic Law, which allows religious minorities to follow their own rules and customs.”
In short, the Egyptian government is behaving even more intolerantly than its medieval Muslim predecessors who, while openly oppressive of Christians, at least allowed the latter to govern their own, personal affairs according to Christian doctrine. As Pope Shenouda declared at the emergency Holy Synod, “the ruling must be reconsidered, otherwise this will mean that the Copts are suffering and that they are religiously oppressed.”
Indeed, when Copts are violently persecuted by Muslims, the government claims that it cannot control the actions of a minority of “extremists.” However, now that the Egyptian government is personally tampering with the church’s ability to live according to Christian doctrine, what more proof is needed that it seeks to subvert Coptic society and is therefore an enabler of Coptic persecution?
Raymond Ibrahim is associate director of the Middle East Forum, author of The Al Qaeda Reader, and guest lecturer at the National Defense Intelligence College.
Related Topics: Anti-Christianism, Egypt | Raymond Ibrahim
AND, all to common these days, a woman imprisoned, baited by her own child’s voice, til she agrees to NOT divorce him….
(3) of (3)
Man allegedly imprisoned estranged wife
Sheboygan Press staff • June 19, 2010
This is the day before father’s day. The man was a father. THe word “father” should’ve been in the headline. AND, how come SHE is a “wife” but HE is a “man.” If she’s his WIFE, he’s a “husband.” If a SWAT team had been called in, he might’ve ended up dead, as did a young man who held a cousin/baby hostage (though unharmed) in our area not long ago, after a hole was blown through a wall).
A 29-year-old rural Sheboygan Falls man allegedly lured his estranged wife into his basement with their child’s voice and locked her in a room until she promised to reconcile, according to a criminal complaint filed Friday.
Benjamin C. Riemer, of N4395 Van Treeck Trail, is charged with felony false imprisonment and misdemeanor counts of battery and disorderly conduct.He faces up to four years in prison, if convicted on all counts.
According to the complaint:
Riemer’s wife, 29, came to his house about noon Thursday to pick up their 2-year-old daughter.
{{FOLKS NOTE: they were separated, and had obviously visitation or some form of shared parenting or joint custody… I recommend a DETOX period for men when they separate. This is a DANGEROUS time for a woman, even if no prior DV was alleged, and can be for the children, too. Traumatized threatened Moms are challenged in their parenting, if this goes on too long, as it does in custody “battles.” (a male phraseology, not a female one, by the way)}}
As she looked for the child outside, Riemer came outside with a “crazy look” in his eyes and told her to get in the house.
The woman said allowed Riemer to herd her inside,
WOMEN, be forewarned. Perhaps he’d been herding her a lot during marriage; perHAPS this relates to why they were divorcing…How old was she? The baby has an age, and he does, but she doesn’t?
but she resisted when he told her to go to the basement. She relented when he told her their daughter was downstairs and she heard the girl’s voice.
When they reached the basement, she discovered the voice was coming through a baby monitor. Riemer then told her, “Oh yeah, you knew you shouldn’t have come down here.”
Riemer pushed the woman into a bedroom and locked the door, taking her phone and throwing it away.
Riemer then told his wife he had been planning this day for weeks and she was not leaving until she agreed to give him another chance. Riemer said he had a loaded gun ready to kill himself if she said no, and he also referenced shooting her.
The wife said Riemer kept her in the room for about an hour, repeatedly pushing and screaming at her as she began to panic and hyperventilate. When she tried to run out, Riemer slammed her into a desk chair and moved a sofa in front of the door.
{{Readers: Re-read that above paragraph, and the below one, and then consider whether that wasn’t a LIGHT sentence, if he is even convicted… Will his behavior be excused because he was “distraught” ?? I suspect there was probably more shoving and such behavior in the marriage BEFORE separating….}}
Riemer let the woman go when she promised not to go through with the divorce. Court records show the couple filed jointly for divorce in March.
I rest my case that we are heading towards Sharia Law in the U.S. Watch Out!
======
Regarding “Not Without My Daughters” (Beth Mamoody), Yes, there was protest about this version of events; even Wikipedia acknowledges. Here’s a link from the “Iran Times,” last August stating so:
‘Not Without My Daughter’ dad dies0 Comments | Iran Times International (Washington, DC), August 28, 2009
Bozorg Mahmoody, the medical doctor who became internationally famous, even infamous, as the man described as a wife-beater in the book and film “Not Without My Daughter,” died Saturday. He was 70 years old.
The state news agency quoted his nephew, Majid Ghodsi, as reporting Mahmoody died in a Tehran hospital of kidney problems and other complications.Ghodsi said, “He thought of his daughter until the end and passed away without seeing Mahtob.”
Mahtob, who will turn 30 next month, has said publicly that she refused to have anything to do with her father and has lived for years in an undisclosed city in North America under an assumed name so that he could not find her.
The book, written by Mahtob’s mother, Betty Mahmoody, and especially the 1991 movie adaptation, starring Sally Field as Betty and Alfred Molina as Bozorg, enflamed the Iranian-American community for depicting Iranians and Iranian culture negatively.Betty Mahmoody responded that the heroes of the story were the Iranians who went to great lengths to help Betty and Mahtob flee Iran in 1986. Bozorg had refused to allow his wife to leave the country with their daughter, hence the title of the book and film.
Bozorg Mahmoody fought back in 2003 by cooperating in a French-German film financed by Finnish television that gave his side of the story.
Bozorg Mahmoody was defiant that his ex-wife invented much of the story and in the process defamed him and prevented him and his daughter from having a normal father-child relationship. And because of her book and the Hollywood film it spawned, he said he was “a victim of international politics.”
Wife-beaters are always “victims” … Even the CONCEPT that a man might beat his wife for religious, or other reasons, is a vicious feminist lie striking at the heart of the family, which of course is with Apple Pie, what America is really about, as well as most religions . . . .
The MSM news are NOT majority feminist owned. Nor are the churches, nor is Washington. There is plenty of fatherhood & marriage funding making the rounds, still. The richest church around (Roman Catholic, Vatican) has a real love/hate relationship with females, while promoting the breeding of more church members to dedicate their lives and services (and tithes, including help settling abuse complaints) to this organization. It’s not owned by feminazis. Nor are the Mormons, nor are other major churches that consider the family more important than individual rights.
And the news I’m reading, as hard as it tries to “equalize” the situation, still reports rapes, beatings, murders, etc. by women attempting to leave men as primarily BY men. Maybe they did it for “real” good reasons, but the facts are, if the papers are not outright lying when they say what’s on the police blotter, there’s a lot of violence going around. …
I think it’s time we searched for a BALANCED set of social paradigms, and seek to limit the power of government in our lives. I do understand, from one perspective, how the feds have to step in at times and have in the past. However, the creators of the poverty and the creators of the DOMINATE mentality should not be entirely trusted to set the social standards of an entire nation. And for this — face it — until CONGRESS is more diverse, which takes independent money most of us don’t have — we are going to have to think more cooperative locally.
Someday the middle-class will figure out what’s going on at the top and at the bottom of society, and I hope that there will be a track record of some truths (I don’t say ALL truth, which is an egotisticals tatement, but SOME relevant truths) to the cause and effect of all this — well, for an analogy to BP fiasco — spillage and spouting out of what’s in the innards of the earth into the more visible and more sensitive ecology of the ocean (of humanity….). We are up to our necks in it.
Don’t blame the oil! ……
And one response to PRESSURE is PRESSING BACK. And the natural Re-action to PRESSING BACK AGAINST PRESSURE.
Adding the weight of “God” (and being His (or Her, or Their) “sole interpreter” in this is simply not really playing fair.
“Why Shariah?” (Noah Feldman, at CFR), “Islam’s Double Standard” (Arthur Frederick Ides) and {No Feminine Nouns at} the Michigan Family Forum’s home (Brian Snavely): But First, Four Women…
leave a comment »
This blog should be filed along with my ones about the Gulag Archipelago, and Bahrain Archipelago.
With respect and appreciation intended this season towards:
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Dr. Phyllis Chesler, Nonie Darwish, and Immaculee Iligibazi, who survived the Rwandan Holocaust in a cramped bathroom in a pastor’s house, although others who sometimes sought shelter in churches then, didn’t find it. In their books (I haven’t met any of these women, all activist and all authors, and all who overcame many odds and losses), and in reverse order:
Immaculée
I love what I think this country stands for. I understand we are in a period — perhaps we have always engaged in this – of a different sort of “genocide” and the “genus” we are involved in eradicating is the word Mother and Woman as a functional reality in the major institutions of life — except we comply and fit in. what we are expected to fit in with is becoming nonpersons, and religious and sectarian violence against us and our children because we spoke up against violence and weren’t aware ahead of the family law system that is designed to STOP such speaking up and leaving it. As formerly it was “not without my children,” Nowadays it has become, “OK, but ONLY without your children…”
I think that story needs to be heard, too, and how having children, then losing them to systems, transformed each of us personally, and our relationships with the rest of the world, particularly any religious segments of it. If the U.S. is the BEST for women, then we are indeed in trouble throughout the world.
Nonie:
She was too outspoken. Respectable organizations headed for the hills when
A woman, presumably Brown student, responds in the Daily Herald (newsletter) “Nathalie Alyon ’06: Nonie non grata?“:
{**a.k.a. “Brown,” give me a break with the language, eh?}
And, may I add, possibly when the speaker is also female… (and a mother at the time, I think)….
I think the answer there is self-evident….
Good. This young woman (presumably) is on the right track to feminism {a.k.a. females speaking their minds} in the real world…
By the way, isn’t Nonie Darwish (along with President Obama) a PURRRfect example of what risk any fatherless child is of teen pregnancy, runaway, drug use, etc. Look at her disgraceful track record, educationally, and as to contributions to this world. What a burden on society.
(my point being — WARS, too, help make fatherlessness; don’t blame the Mamas!)
She also got silenced at Princeton and Columbia — so mothers silenced in the courts are perhaps in good company? Granted, both quotes from known conservative ezines (exception the BrownDaily, which I don’t know about). But it kinda makes you wonder, eh?
…
She is eminently qualified to speak about this, having lived it. Her education is fine. It’s the topic which is politically incorrect even in “liberal” circles..
??Character assassination, sounds like to me… Good grief, here’s a Princeton Commentary on it:
OK, now again briefly (since I mentioned above), Ayaan Hirsi Ali:
Again, I find it a little disconcerting she is a scholar at a conservative think-tank also known to have “fatherhood” advocacy within its ranks… (AEI.org).
Ayaan Hirsi
Biography
SHARE THIS POST on...
Like this:
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
December 31, 2010 at 5:12 pm
Posted in History of Family Court
Tagged with Ayaan Hirsi Ali, censorship in liberal universities, Child Molestation, Declaration of Independence/Bill of Rights, domestic violence, fatherhood, Feminists, Imaculee Ilibagiza, Intimate partner violence, Nonie Darwish, Phyllis Chesler, Princeton Brown Columbia said NO!, sharia and family law, social commentary, Social Issues from Religious Viewpoints, women's rights