Aw crap…. I incorrectly spelled “Muslim” in the headline.

Ofcom upheld two complaints from listeners about Leeds based Radio Asian Fever after presenter Rubina Nasir hit out at homosexuality and mixed faith marriages.

She said that homosexuals should be ‘beaten up’ and that a Muslim marrying a non-Mulslim was on ‘the straight path to hellfire’.

The presenter, known as ‘Sister Ruby’, said: “What should be done if they do it? [practise homosexuality].

“If there are two such persons among you, that do this evil, the shameful act, what do you have to do? Torture them; punish them; beat them and give them mental torture.”"Allah states, ‘If they do such a deed [i.e. homosexuality], punish them, both physically and mentally.

It’s unfortunate that Advocate Magazine is too busy printing hatred of fellow Americans instead of focusing on systematic anti-gay actions by Islamic regimes in Egypt and Iran that prefer their gays on the end of ropes.

-Bruce (@GayPatriot)

VIA BUZZFEED:

According to Gay Star News (GSN), the militia captured the men during a private party in Ain Zara, a suburb of Tripoli, on Thursday, November 22. Since then, the “special deterrence unit” has posted pictures to its Facebook page referring to the men as the “third sex,” an Arabic term to describe homosexuals, and they are threatening to harm (and kill) the men. The pictures have been filled with comments, such as “flog them hard!”

Human Rights Watch Libya posted a comment to the militia’s Facebook page asking that the group not harm the men and “to hand [them] to the civil authorities.”

The militia group, which claims to be a legal part of the Libyan Ministry of Interior, has not responded. The human rights group has since identified them as the Al-Nawasi militia — a group of extreme Salafists.

Aw, it’s okay… they will only murder the gays in Libya if they find out they watched that nasty anti-Islam video that Barack Obama and Susan Rice spoke about.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

In his review of Wanted Women, “a new joint biography of two Muslim women [which] refuses to distinguish between an al-Qaida terrorist and a feminist intellectual“, historian Andrew Roberts provides one example of the author’s twisted sense of moral equivalence:

Writing of a speech that [Somali-born campaigner for Muslim women’s rights, Ayaan] Hirsi Ali was set to give, [author Deborah] Scroggins alleges that “some of the anti-gay Islamic attitudes she planned to criticize weren’t very different from those of some conservative Republicans.” Really? Show me a bill in which conservative Republicans have attempted to change the law so that homosexuals are hanged, as happened to three gay men in Iran this past September. Those innocents were only the most recent victims of that country’s blood lust against homosexuals.

Via Instapundit.  Sometimes it seems that some on the left harbor more animus against conservative Republicans than they do against radical Islamicists.

Religion of Peace Alert! (via @BillyHallowell)

A disturbing trial came to a close this week in London, England, after three men were convicted of distributing pamphlets that called for gays and lesbians to be murdered. The hateful fliers were disturbing at best. One of them, titled, “Death Penalty?,” showed a mannequin that was hanging from a noose and said that gays should be sent to hell.

“The death sentence is the only way this immoral crime can be erased from corrupting society and act as a deterrent for any other ill person who is remotely inclined in this bent way.”

The leaflet continues: “The only dispute amongst the classical authorities was the method employed in carrying out the penal code.”

It goes on to offer burning, being flung from a high point such as a mountain or building, or being stoned to death as suitable methods.

It’s okay, the real threat to gays (according to American gay leftist/progressive types) is Rick Santorum. 

Move along, nothing to see here.  Except the truth.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Liberals, Susan Fleetwood writes,

. . .  seem to have an overwhelming tendency to downplay Islamic abuses towards women (as well as towards gays) under the guise of multiculturalism. Don’t believe me? Well, then I suggest that you read the column by liberal Boston Globecolumnist Susan Jacoby where she asks the question, “Why are liberals excusing religious abuses on grounds of cultural relativism?”

Fleetwood goes on to compare how one conservative blogger and another left-of-center blogger bold certain passages in a section from Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s writings in her New York Times column about the Egyptian revolution.  The liberal “found Ms. Ali’s supposed ‘intolerance’ to be the most bothersome part of that passage, whereas the rest of us find the whole stoning of women and beating of gays to the most troublesome part.”

Read the whole thing.

Once again, we see that conservatives seem more aware of and concerned about the abuses gay people suffer in oppressive, Islamacist regimes.

Via Instapundit.

Uber progressive blogger and Islamic terror apologist Glenn Greenwald is whining about how PFC Bradley Manning (alleged Wikileaks source, and anti-DADT activist) is being treated.  It is cute how in the beginning of his piece, Greenwald goes to great lengths to distance Manning from the Wikileaks story; but by the end is lauding Manning’s treasonous behavior and labeling him a “hero” (cue Berkeley City Council).

Bradley Manning, the 22-year-old U.S. Army Private accused of leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks, has never been convicted of that crime, nor of any other crime.  Despite that, he has been detained at the U.S. Marine brig in Quantico, Virginia for five months — and for two months before that in a military jail in Kuwait — under conditions that constitute cruel and inhumane treatment and, by the standards of many nations, even torture.  Interviews with several people directly familiar with the conditions of Manning’s detention, ultimately including a Quantico brig official (Lt. Brian Villiard) who confirmed much of what they conveyed, establishes that the accused leaker is subjected to detention conditions likely to create long-term psychological injuries.

Since his arrest in May, Manning has been a model detainee, without any episodes of violence or disciplinary problems.  He nonetheless was declared from the start to be a “Maximum Custody Detainee,” the highest and most repressive level of military detention, which then became the basis for the series of inhumane measures imposed on him.

Oh boo freaking hoo.  Glenn and I had a minor dustup on the topic via Twitter yesterday:

ME:  GayPatriot: RT @GregMitch: Glenn Greenwald on Bradley Manning held under “inhumane condiitons” possibly constituting “torture.” // Aww, cry me a river.

GG response:   @ggreenwald: You’d be crying a river – and doing much more – if you were held under inhumane conditions without being convicted of anything

My response: GayPatriot: I wouldn’t have committed treason against my country while wearing the uniform cuz my boyfriend dumped me. He’s a pissy bitch.

“Lexington Concord” at RedState has the right idea as to what to do with Manning (and any other Wikileaks sources, I might add).  It is priceless…

Glenn Greenwald is constantly telling us that the reason the terrorists want to kill us is not because they are regressive degenerates who hate Western values like freedom and tolerance, but rather because they just don’t like our military policies and how we’re all meddling in their business.

Well, I am not a man without a heart, so I am willing to propose a solution to Greenwald’s problem which I am confident the Army would be amenable to. As an added bonus, it will serve as an opportunity to validate Glenn Greenwald’s views on the causes of Islamic terrorism. We will give Bradley Manning his pillow and blankie back, and remove him from solitary confinement. In fact, we’ll let him be around lots of people. We’ll call an emissary with the Taliban or Al Qaeda, and tell them that we have a political prisoner to release to them, no strings attached. We will tell them that we are going to release to them an American who thoroughly rejects our interventionist policies and our military meddling – he rejects them so strongly, in fact, that he did everything in his power to see that American soldiers were killed and that Islamic terrorists were given access to our operational details. Therefore, we have decided to let him go to be with the Taliban so that he can self-actualize and join the fight against America with them.

I’m sure that like John Walker Lindh, the Taliban will be happy to have an American like this on board. So we’ll drive Manning out there to meet them at some safe remote location in Afghanistan somewhere, and we’ll release Manning and let him rush to join his new Taliban brethren.

Then we’ll tell them he’s gay.

Sign me up to help complete this diplomatic arrangement!  I think Manning would prefer my solution anyway:  firing squad.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Wondering which gay media will pick up on this story: Gay Palestinian seeks residency in Israel on humanitarian grounds:

Media attention has recently focused on the effort to obtain residency rights for children of foreign workers. But Majed Koka is not a foreign worker. He is a gay Palestinian man from the West Bank who came to Israel at age 14 because in his hometown of Nablus, he never could have lived openly as a gay man.

“If I returned to Nablus, it would be like throwing paper into a fire,” said Koka, 26, who has been living in Tel Aviv for the last 12 years. “If I returned I’d be in big trouble, one long nightmare.”

While the United Nations Human Rights Council can’t let up in its criticisms of the Jewish State, that very state becomes the refuge of choice for gay Palestinians.

Do wonder why said council doesn’t spend much time criticizing the Palestinian Authority for making it a nightmare for gays to live openly.  Guess they’re just not concerned with the rights of our fellows.

It is pretty self-explanatory.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Another one in the can!  Hopefully someday I’ll completely master uploading songs.  It was a great two hours and I’m so excited to have had two awesome guests.

Libertarian blogger and Tea Party activist Andrew Ian Dodge was my guest for Hour #1.  Check out Andrew’s work HERE.

And GOProud Executive Director Jimmy LaSalvia was my guest in Hour #2.  Please support Jimmy’s work & GOProud HERE.

Finally, I promised I would post this great video with music from the song “Crying Freedom” written by Andrew.  A great way to celebrate the awakening America — Cry Freedom!

I cannot go any longer without posting on Greg Gutfeld’s inspired idea.  This has been a HOT topic on Twitter this week among the conservative set.  Liberals are cricketly-silent (*chirp, chirp*) about this idea of full tolerance.  Greg was on Glenn Beck last night to fully discuss his business proposal.

“If New York is to accept the mosque, the mosque has to accept the gay bar.” – Greg Gutfeld

For what it’s worth… here were some of my ideas on Twitter Monday night for names of the gay bar next to the 9/11 Mosque:

• Charlie Crist’s Chocolate Factory
• Ali’s Aqua Queer Bar (say it fast!)
• The Noose and Stone
• Af-MAN-istan’s
• Fatwa Follies (a piano bar)
• Shock & Raw
• Mecca-lecka Hi Mecca Heiney Hoes

NorthDallasThirty had one I enjoyed: Crotch Bomber. 

And my favorite that I cannot take credit for thinking of:  Sodom Hussein

My great Twitter comrade-in-arms, Kurt Schlichter, has some more great names!

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

While my friend Jamie Kirchick may have won the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association Journalist of the Year Award in 2007, he has not yet gained the fame of his contemporary Ezra Klein.  (Klein was born in 1984, Kirchick in ’83)  Perhaps it has something to do with sexuality (Ezra is straight, Jamie is gay) or maybe it’s politics (Ezra is a leftie loyalist, Jamie leans right, but, unlike his contemporary, does not toe the party line).

And this notion of the younger man’s celebrity came to mind this morning as I was continuing the process of cleaning out my e-mail boxes.  I read a Wall Street Journal piece Jamie had sent his friends earlier this month on the decision of a Spanish gay organization to exclude a float from the municipality of Tel Aviv in Madrid’s gay pride parade:

By joining the international campaign to delegitimize Israel, Spain’s leading gay organization undermined its purported mission: the furtherance of gay rights. Israel is the only Middle Eastern country that even has gay pride parades, never mind respects the dignity of homosexuals. Saudi Arabia beheads gays. Syria arrests them in sting operations. Iran hangs them from cranes in public squares. (Speaking at Columbia University in 2007, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad claimed that there are no homosexuals in his country, an absurd assertion nonetheless portentous for its murderous aspirations). As for Gaza, one of Hamas’s leaders has referred to gays as “a minority of perverts and the mentally and morally sick.”

Like so many other democratic values, when it comes to gay rights Israel is an oasis in a sea of state-sanctioned repression, a “little patch,” to use Mr. Poveda’s words, that he and his comrades ought to defend. Gays serve openly in the Israeli military. While gay marriages can’t be legally performed in Israel, the government grants gay couples many of the same rights as heterosexual ones and recognizes same-sex unions performed abroad. Many Palestinian gays seek asylum in Israel. (more…)

The more I learn about the antics of gay leaders (and other organizers of gay events) in this country and abroad, the more convinced I become that their primary concern is not promoting greater social acceptance of gay people, but in becoming the gay auxiliaries of various left-wing (and often anti-Western) movements.  

The latest evidence we have comes from Madrid where the organizers of the Gay Pride parade disinvited Israeli participants:

. . . in the wake of the Gaza flotilla incident, the organizers of the Madrid parade folded quickly to pressure to get rid of the Israeli participants.

Before the invitation was officially withdrawn, it was reportedly “hinted” to the Israelis that their participation in the event would be an “embarrassment” and would mean the additional expense of increased security. When the Israelis failed to take the hint and voluntarily stay home, the axe fell on them.

No matter that Israel is, of nations in the Mideast, the most tolerant of gay people.  No matter that the flotilla was sponsored in large part by terrorist organizations which advocate the execution of gay people.  No matter that gay people face persecution in the terrorist-run enclave of Gaza.

It will be interesting to see what (if any) gay organizations condemn this exclusion and commend Israel for its policies protecting gay people and allowing our fellows in the Jewish State to live openly and celebrate publicly.

As Allison Kaplan Sommer put it in the post linked above, “Those who are truly interested in lesbian and gay rights should welcome Israel with open arms as a model of tolerance in an intolerant region.”

Yet, to all too many gay organizations, that tolerance matters less than belonging to the “Grand Coalition of those Oppressed by Western Civilization.”

Over at Big Government, Danielle Avel is taking feminists to task for their silence in the wake of Evangelical Rev. Franklin Graham’s disinvitation from the National Day of Prayer event at the Pentagon “because of his remarks about Islam which included, ‘When you look at what the religion [Islam] does to women and women alone, it is just horrid’“:

Feminists certainly could have come out in support of Franklin Graham’s truthful remarks and brought attention to some simple facts, like how women who live under Shariah Law are virtual prisoners and are not allowed to leave their home unless accompanied by an appropriate male guardian.  Or perhaps, start a discussion on the fact that over 90% of married women in supposedly “moderate Islamic” countries like Pakistan report being “kicked, slapped, beaten, or sexually abused” for crimes like failing to cook or clean to their husbands’ approval or for giving birth to a girl instead of a boy.  Maybe it would have been a good time to mention that now even here in the United States, fathers, brothers, and sons sometimes feel they have the right to viciously attack and murder their own female relatives in order to preserve their so-called “honor.”  At the very least, it would have been an appropriate moment for some feminist group to denounce the heinous practice of female genital mutilation or the stoning to death of women who are raped.  What about the Islamic tradition of forcing children to “marry” adult men who then take complete control over their little bodies — control enough to rape little girls to death as we saw in Yemen just weeks ago.

Even though feminists generally remain silent about this issue, the treatment of women in Islam can be, as Franklin Graham stated, “horrid.”

Guess the feminist groups fear that if they dare condemn the violence against women in Islamic cultures, they might forfeit their membership in the “Coalition of the Oppressed.”  Seems these feminist groups have a lot in common with European gay groups — and indeed gay groups in the United States.

In contrast to modern American conservatism which is a movement based on an idea, modern liberalism appears more a coalition based on a series of grievances.  We on the right strive to promote policies which promote freedom at home and abroad.  Those on the left seek to promote policies which punish (or otherwise constrain) the “oppressors,” be they corporations, Western militaries or white men in general, particularly those of the heterosexual Christian sort.

The dilemma for the left comes when elements of their coalition of the oppressed come into conflict.  In the British publication, the Standpoint, Peter Whittle offers a hypothetical about a gay man teaching “in a state school in an area with a large Muslim population“:

It throws into sharp relief the dilemma which has petrified the Left and its fellow-travellers within the social, educational and cultural establishment. When two parts of your worldview collide, when your traditional support for gay rights conflicts with your staunch and uncritical support of ethnic minority cultures, what do you do? Relativism has tied your hands. You conjure the possible intellectual somersaults you could perform to justify your reasoning. And then you stay silent.

This silence, Whittle writes,

. . .ignores the widespread intolerance of homosexuality throughout the Muslim communities, which in Britain are growing up to ten times the rate of the rest. This community can only increase in power and predominance, especially when faced with a weak, vacillating establishment which will do anything to avoid making a scene, let along stand up for Western liberal values.

And it seems that for many gays on the left, those “liberal values” only kick in when the oppressor is not an approved “victim” group as, to many, Muslim groups have become:

Gays are pretty sensitive when it comes to detecting possible future persecution, which makes the relative silence about Islam — whether from denial or simple ignorance — all the more worrying. I’ve certainly found, when bringing up the subject on my travels around gay London, that one is usually met with the response: “Ah, well: it’s those Christian fundamentalists that worry me.” (more…)

Michael C. Moynihan has picked up on a story which, for some reason, I don’t think will get much attention on non-conservative gay blogs. Norway’s Ministry of Children, Equality, and Social Inclusion (yes, I agree the name is Orwellian) has named Mahdi Hassan the “Role Model of the Year”.

The only problem, though, is that Hassan the Role Model has a wee problem with the gays; typically something that disqualifies one from being publicly celebrated in Scandinavia. According to [Norwegian journalist Rita] Karlsen, “Hassan told the newspaper Arbeidets Rett that he wants a ban on homosexuality, based on the Koran.” Does he support the death penalty for gays? That’s “up to each individual country to decide.” Wouldn’t want to judge the wonderful diversity of Koranic interpretation, now would we?

Defending the choice, Stein Petter Løkken, leader of the Socialist Left Party in Hassan’s home kommune of Tynset opined:

There is freedom of speech in Norway and in the Tynset Socialist Left Party we consider it unproblematic that Mahdi is opposed in principle to homosexuality. It is in accordance with his religion.

For some reason, I don’t think Mr. Løkken would be saying if Mr. Hassan’s religion were Christian.  But, then again, being a follower of that faith would likely disqualify him from any honors were he to have done exactly the same things he had been doing–and not harbor any animus against homosexuals.

(H/t Instapundit)

My second post is up at Big Journalism!  I’ll give you a preview, but you have to go there to read the whole thing.

Imagine, if you will, that the BB gun attackers [in San Fran] had been white. Or from Utah. Or from Texas.  Or Laramie, Wyoming. What kind of wild adjectives would have been applied? We can only surmise. Editorializing against mainstream Americans who are now out-of-favor by the media (whites, Catholics, evangelicals, Mormons, conservatives) happens everyday on America’s front pages and network news programs. But when it comes to Arab/Muslim attackers — all silence is golden for the American media.

<…>

It is also important to note that the fundamental philosophies of a majority of the American gay activist community have been rooted with elements of anti-capitalism, anti-democracy, anti-war, and anti-Israeli sentiment for the past three decades. You could not have attended an anti-Iraq war rally in 2003-2007 without seeing many rainbow flags (the unofficial symbol of gays and lesbians) mixed in with pro-communist, anti-capitalist, anti-Bush and anti-American signs, symbols and chants.

In order to be gay and part of “the community” in America, you must first renounce “the mainstream,” your individualism, liberty, capitalism, the Constitution, the basic right to vote and your patriotism. All those checked? Join the club!

Read the whole thing.  And please let me know your thoughts.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

In writing about a story in the San Francisco Chronicle about three Muslim men charged with “firing a BB rifle at the face of a man they believed was gay,” our reader Jenny asks, “when will gay activist groups actually start being activist in aid of saving lives by ending the mass immigration of anti-everyone Muslims?”

Now, I certainly wouldn’t go as far as her, but she raises an interesting issue:  will gay groups cover this with the same degree of frenzied fervor they would if the three men were evangelical Christians?

But, then again, while some evangelical Christians say some pretty hateful things about homosexuals, they don’t go around videotaping themselves firing BB guns at gay men.

On my pile of things to blog about has long sat a pamphlet by Robert Spencer, The Islamic Jihad Against Gays:  Why isn’t the Muslim Students Association speaking out? Published by the conservative David Horowitz Freedom Center, the pamphlet addresses an issue which most (but fortunately not all) liberal groups and gay organizations care to consider, the plight of our fellows in Islamofascist nations like Iran.

Now, another one of David’s media enterprises is addressing anti-gay attitudes among Islamic scholars, an issue to which many gay organizations seem blind.  On yesterday’s Front Page Magazine, straight blogger Eric Golub reported on a “lecture last week at the UCLA Center for Near Eastern Studies (CNES)” where Joseph Massad, associate professor of modern Arab politics and intellectual history at Columbia University, offered some theories which, if offered by a conservative would raise the hackles of gay organizations from coast to coast.

Golub calls the talk “anti-gay,” but from his report, it sounded just plain bizarre to me:

Massad . . . explained that “Queer is about resistance to Islam.” Similarly, he said that “There is no Arabic transliteration of queer. It is a judgmental notice of deviance.” In a particularly striking claim, Massad insisted that, for Muslims, concepts like “hate and sexuality are only translatable to English-speaking people.” Muslim honor killings, presumably, are only a figment of non-Muslims imagination.

Massad also used the occasion to present a novel – and decidedly homophobic – conspiracy theory. “Queer is an imperialist term,” he announced. “It is part of the Anglo-American gay agenda.” Indeed, according to Massad, “queer is an example of cultural imperialism.”

Now, I’m not particularly partial to the term “queer,” but wouldn’t even consider calling it an “imperialist” term.

It’s good to see mainstream conservative organizations addressing the plight of gays in Iran and confronting the prejudiced attitude certain Islamic scholars have toward people like us.  It would be nice if our home-grown gay organizations also took note of these prejudices.

Obama signed the stupid piece of legislation this week.  Figured I should mention it.  To underscore how inane and childish this legislation is — it is named the Matthew Shepard/James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Law.

Would Byrd’s name be attached if George W. Bush hadn’t been the Governor of Texas?  Would this new law have punished Byrd’s murderers any more than they were?  No — two were sentenced to death, the other will spend the rest of his life in jail.

Stupid, childish, petty Democrats run our nation.  Meanwhile, Congressional Democrats and Obama oppose things like free-market healthcare reform, free-market social security reforms,  and tax reforms that would actually do something for gay families.  And the Islamist Pogrom of Gays?   Democrats are silent.

Never forget that, folks.  But when you murder someone this weekend, just make sure you don’t yell nasty things at them first.

*sheesh*

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

While some gay left-wing bloggers are ever eager to criticize the Jewish State and some Jewish students, reluctant to lose favor with their left-of-center peers, don’t want to advertise that they’re pro-Israel, that Middle Eastern democracy remains one of the few (if not the only) nation in the region where gay people can live openly.

Even some Orthodox (Israel’s equivalent of American social conservatives) are more tolerant of gay people than is the Palestinian Authority.

This story, via Commentary Contentions via Ynet which illustrates that point.  When T, a Palestinian man partnered with an Israeli, heard his father who lives in a West Bank village was ill, he went to visit him.  Since “going to the village is life-threatening for him because residents there are not willing to accept his sexual orientation,” they had to meet near the checkpoint (border crossing with Israel).  Denied re-entriy into Israel because of a paperwork snafu and “for security considerations,” he feared going to his family’s village.

A few years earlier, he had been arrested and tortured by Palestinian security services.  

Left with no other choice, he turned to the only person he knew in the area who could help him – a religious settler who has known him for some years. The man decided to give asylum to T. even though he knew it would not be looked upon favorably in the settlement. (more…)