“Sex under the burqa” #NaomiWolf to join #AlJazeera

February 16, 2013

Politico
Wolf, a “radical feminist”, Al Goracle, a hysterical global warming shyster, and  Qatar’s jihad propaganda TV in bed with al Qaeda? You ain’t seen nothing yet!
Wolf has written columns for Al Jazeera and the  extreme left Guardian in the past.

Her hypocrisy is breathtaking:

“As an American who cares about civil liberties, it’s good for all of us that the Guardian and Al Jazeera are doing the work they’re doing,” she said. “It is good for civil society in America.”

Here a sample of Naomi’s brainfarts:

Naomi Wolf, the author and activist, is in early-stage talks with the global news network Al Jazeera, POLITICO has learned.
Wolf, who currently writes a column for The Guardian, confirmed the news late Thursday night but stressed that the talks were in the earliest stages and that no job offer was on the table.
“It’s extremely informal and very, very preliminary,” she told POLITICO.
Wolf is in a non-exclusive employment with the Guardian and has written columns for Al Jazeera and other news outlets in the past. She and The Guardian recently agreed that she would scale back her column duties — from weekly to monthly — due to her thesis obligations at Oxford, where she is a graduate student. (The Huffington Post reported earlier today that she would be ending her weekly column duties, but did not specify the terms of the new arrangement.)
“Naomi will be a contributor to the Guardian, and write as her other commitments allow,” a Guardian spokesperson told POLITICO.
A spokesman with Al Jazeera did not immediately respond to a request for comment regarding the talks, which is understandable given the late hour.
Al Jazeera, a Qatari-owned news network, bought Current TV from Al Gore earlier this yearin an effort to expand its reach in the American market. Al Jazeera plans to announce the launch of an American-based network, called Al Jazeera America, later this year and has set about on a hiring spree to bulk up American-based staff. Wolf would be its first high-profile hire.
In addition to her columns, Wolf is an author of books including “The Beautiful Myth,” a best-seller that established her as a spokeswoman for third-wave feminism, and “Vagina: A New Biography,” published in 2012.
Wolf described her relationship with The Guardian in glowing terms: “It’s wonderful,” she said. “I love The Guardian and Al Jazeera English. I think they’re both doing some of the best journalism out there. It’s notable and kind of sad that non-U.S. based news sites are able to run pieces of mine that don’t as easily find a home in American publications.”
“As an American who cares about civil liberties, it’s good for all of us that the Guardian and Al Jazeera are doing the work they’re doing,” she said. “It is good for civil society in America.”
This post has been updated.


The Intellectual Bankruptcy of the Feminists

December 11, 2011
(h/t @Sheik Yer Mami) No, its not only the  nasty, bra-burning  lesbian fossils from the sixties like Germaine Greer, who decry the fact that Marxism can only be had under sharia, its  the ones that have broken ‘the glass ceiling’ in our generation, the Naomi Wolf’s who found “sex under the burqa” and wakademic f*kcwits who tell unsuspecting students that female genital mutilation is ‘a rite of passage’  for which we uncultured morons need to show respect.
Canadian journalist, Barbara Kay discusses the alliance between feminists and women in burkas   (thanks to Vlad Tepes)
Canada: Feminists back Islamic idea of women as possessions of men
I have taken feminists to task more than once not only for their failure to stand up for Muslim women, but for their active excuse-making for the oppression of those women. See, for example, my article in FrontPage, “Feminists Betray Muslim Women,” on how the feminist writer Laura Briggs justifies the oppression of Muslim women.

See also “Two Women Stoned: Feminists Mum,” by David Horowitz, Janet Levy and @Sheik Yer Mami; “A Response to Feminists on the Violent Oppression of Women in Islam,” by David Horowitz and me; and @Sheik Yer Mami‘s article “The Conservative Vanguard of the Feminist Movement” in National Review.
Other articles @Sheik Yer Mami wrote in FrontPage on issues revolving around women’s rights in Islam include “Covering Up the Plight of Muslim Women“; “There Must Be Violence Against Women“; “Muhammad Mended His Own Clothes!“; Open Season on Muslim Women“; “Women Are Treated Better in Islam?.”
Also there are my articles in Human Events, “Unveiled Women and ‘Uncovered Meat’“; “Media Ignore Abuses of Women in Islam.”
@Sheik Yer Mami also coauthored the monograph “The Violent Oppression of Women in Islam” (available as a pdf here).
And they’re still at it: “Feminists back women as possessions in Supreme Court case,” by Barbara Kay in the National Post, December 9 (thanks to JWl):

The Supreme Court must decide whether women may keep their faces covered in court. Or rather whether Muslim women can, but other women can’t.A young Muslim woman in her thirties, known as N.S., claims that the psychological distress of testifying with her face uncovered against two male defendants, relatives she has accused of sexually assaulting her as a child, trumps the long-honoured right of the defendants’ lawyers to see her expression under cross-examination.
The case went to the Ontario Court of Appeal in June of 2010. There, irony was heaped on irony in the presentations of two intervening groups whose perspectives sum up the conflict – the ideology of multiculturalism versus the sacred tenets of democracy – that sits at the heart of this case.
The Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF) – a bastion of feminist activists – argued that the alleged victim should be allowed to wear the veil if her religion demands it, stating that forcing a Muslim woman to uncover her face while testifying “could very well be seen and experienced as an act of racial, religious and gendered domination.”…
The “religious” argument does not hold. Islam does not “demand” face coverage, even if some Muslims do. Over the years we have heard from hundreds of imams and scholars on this subject. In 2009 Sheikh Muhammed Sayyid Tantawi, the grand Sheikh of al-Azhar University, Sunni Islam’s highest institution of religious learning, scolded a Cairo high school girl for wearing a face-veil: “The niqab is a tradition,” he said. “It has no connection to religion.”
But even if Islam did demand it – in which case women in Islamic countries like Pakistan would be covered, but aren’t – that is still no reason to offer N.S. special treatment. When a religious tradition or rite conflicts with our democratic values, democratic values must hold sway, as we just saw in the polygamy decision, another so-called religious demand.
In Europe more and more Muslim women have taken up the veil as a political statement of Islamist triumphalism. Which is why the niqab and burka have been proscribed in France and Belgium as a socially menacing statement that is incompatible with democracy, and in particular with gender equality. Multiculturalists and libertarians denounced the ban, but again it was a democratic Muslim, not a feminist, who came to the rescue of logic and democratic values. Dr Taj Hargey, imam of the Oxford Islamic Congregation, wrote in England’s Daily Mail: “The decision by the French government to outlaw all forms of public face-masking, including the burka and niqab, is welcomed by all thinking Muslims around the world.”
N.S. herself had a photo taken for her driver’s licence, which shows us that the issue is not one of religion, but of situational convenience. N.S. did not mind her face being uncovered so that she could drive a car. So clearly it is not the religion that is the problem, it is the claimant’s unwillingness to face her abusers without the psychological protection of the veil.
If N.S. is permitted to cover her face under the guise of religion, why shouldn’t all victims of sexual assault have that privilege under the guise of their freedom to “dress” as they choose? Fear is fear for all women. Why stop at women, though? Why not all fearful witnesses?
Legal minds should not allow multicultural correctness to blind them to potent symbols of inequality. No rhetorical legerdemain in the world can turn the dhimmitude of women represented by that dehumanizing mask into a charming mantilla of sexual modesty….


more on Anna Ardin – very complex. nothing makes sense. Christian fundamentalist leaves to go to Israel for Palestinian Piece Talks?

December 17, 2010

one moment the far left says she was a CIA operative with Zionist motivations… next moment she is working with the Palestinians. Something here isn’t true

The rape accusations against Julian Assange may be falling apart as one of his accusers leaves Sweden. Anna Ardin, one of two women behind the rape charges against the WIkiLeaks founder, may no longer be cooperating with prosecutors, the Australian website Crikey reports.
Julian Assange has been fighting sex charges from Sweden and is now in British custody. According to Crikey:
Ardin, who also goes by the name Bernardin, has moved to the West Bank in the Palestinian Territories, as part of a Christian outreach group, aimed at bringing reconciliation between Palestinians and Israelis. She has moved to the small town of Yanoun, which sits close to Israel’s security/sequestration wall. Yanoun is constantly besieged by fundamentalist Jewish settlers, and international groups have frequently stationed themselves there.
Attempts by Crikey to contact Ardin by phone, fax, email and twitter were unsuccessful today.
Business Insider is reporting that you can follow Anna Ardin on Twitter, @annaardin. Crikey says that her last tweet translates as:
“CIA agent, rabid feminist / Muslim lover, a Christian fundamentalist, frigid & fatally in love with a man, can you be all that at the same time …”
The “sex crimes” at the heart of the Assange case are reportedly related to unprotected sex under a Swedish law.

Anna Ardin, one of the two complainants in the rape and sexual assault case against WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Julian Assange, has left Sweden, and may have ceased actively co-operating with the Swedish prosecution service and her own lawyer, sources in Sweden told Crikey today.
The move comes amid a growing campaign by leading Western feminists to question the investigation, and renewed confusion as to whether Sweden has actually issued charges against Assange. Naomi Klein, Naomi Wolf, and the European group Women Against Rape, have all made statements questioning the nature and purpose of the prosecution.
Ardin, who also goes by the name Bernardin, has moved to the West Bank in the Palestinian Territories, as part of a Christian outreach group, aimed at bringing reconciliation between Palestinians and Israelis. She has moved to the small town of Yanoun, which sits close to Israel’s security/sequestration wall. Yanoun is constantly besieged by fundamentalist Jewish settlers, and international groups have frequently stationed themselves there.
Attempts by Crikey to contact Ardin by phone, fax, email and twitter were unsuccessful today.
Ardin’s blog has restarted after a fortnight hiatus, and her twitter feed has restarted after a two-month break. The twitter feed appears to be commenting on her ongoing profile in the media with the latest entry reading: “CIA agent, rabid feminist / Muslim lover, a Christian fundamentalist, frigid & fatally in love with a man, can you be all that at the same time …”
The previous tweet appears to extend support to WikiLeaks, after financial agencies withdrew their services, reading “Mastercard, Visa and Paypal — hit it, now!”*
One source from Ardin’s old university of Uppsala reported rumours that she had stopped co-operating with the prosecution service several weeks ago, and that this was part of the reason for the long delay in proceeding with charges — and what still appears to be an absence of charges.
News of Ardin/Bernardin’s departure comes as reports circulate of Ardin’s connection to the right-wing Cuban exile community in Miami, something that Crikey readers learnt of months ago. The reports have helped fuel wilder conspiracy theories about the nature of Ardin’s involvement with WikiLeaks and Assange.
A former politics student who had done internships at Sweden’s DC embassy, Ardin completed her thesis on Cuban political opposition groups, many of whom have involvement — and funding — from the US interests section, the only US diplomatic representation in Cuba. Ardin initially began her research in Havana and left after being advised that her position was no longer safe. She completed the research in Miami.
However, it seems more likely that the Cuban episode is part of the same political nomadism that led her to WikiLeaks. An office holder with the Social Democratic party’s Christian “brotherhood” faction, Ardin is active in a range of causes from Latin America to animal liberation.
Ardin’s move and confusion over her involvement and the real status of the charges against Assange come as the campaign questioning the charges against him has come to include a number of leading feminist activists. Naomi Klein tweeted that:

R-pe is being used in the #Assange prosecution in the same way that women’s freedom was used to invade Afghanistan. Wake up! #wikilieaks

While in The Huffington Post, Naomi Wolf posted a (quite funny) article asking Interpol to apprehend every date she’s had who turned out to be a narcissistic jerk.
In The Guardian Karin Axelsson of Women Against R-pe questioned why Assange’s case was being pursued more assiduously than cases of r-pe judged more serious (Sweden has three degrees of severity for r-pe charges).
These moves are evidence of the situation your correspondent suggested in Crikey yesterday — that the Assange case is proving to be the final process by which the second-wave feminist coalition formed in the late 1960s splits substantially, with feminists with differing attitude to Western state power finding themselves on different sides of the debate.
Indeed, it puts one in the unusual position of saying that commentators such as Wolf are being too anti-complainant in their construction of the charges as nothing other than a couple of bad dates. It’s a strange world, and getting stranger.
The lawyer for Ardin and Wilen, the two complainants, has hit back at attacks and criticism of his clients, saying that they had been put on trial and effectively assaulted twice. He claimed to be in daily contact with the women, which suggests that he has a better reception to Yanoun than many of its inhabitants have to the outside world.
Even if the case comes to trial, the prospects of conviction look slim. Crikey asked Flinders University s-x crime law expert Dr Mary Heath to go over the charges (which may still be accusations at this stage) as they were relayed in Assange’s extradition bail hearing, and she made the following comments:
Practically speaking, I would not like the chances of the prosecutor on charge 3 — pressing his erect p-nis into the complainant’s back … legally speaking I would have to suggest the chances of conviction would be slim for any Australian offence where both accused were adults. Proving non consent might be difficult but proving awareness of non consent would be even harder.
Charges 1 and 2 (holding partner down, and unsafe s-x despite earlier expressed opposition to such) involve contexts where there would be room for defence argument about consent. On charge 1, when is one person ‘holding down’ another person lying beneath them, and when are they simply having consensual s-x in a position involving one person being on top of the other person?  Is this force or just rough but consensual (compared to cases I’ve read, the allegation would hardly count as rough).
On charge 2, prior unwillingness is not enough, the complainant must not be consenting and the accused must be aware of this ‘at the time of int-rcourse’. Did complainant one change her mind?  Did Assange believe she changed her mind, and perhaps on reasonable grounds the charge does not disclose?
On charge 4 (s-x while complainant was sleeping), recent experience in South Australia suggests this also could be difficult to prove if there was any kind of s-xual interaction prior to the complainant falling asleep, which might give the defence a plausible argument that belief in consent was present. I was deeply unimpressed by the level of protection the courts (let alone public attitudes) offered to people who are asleep or unconscious due to drugs/alcohol.
… The one thing that is clearer, perhaps, is that the charges may turn on withdrawal of consent once a s-xual act had commenced.  The law of almost every jurisdiction in Australia would recognise withdrawal of consent after a s-xual act commenced as rendering that s-xual act non consensual (and therefore r-pe).  As for proving it …  I reiterate what I said about proof previously.”
The Guardian reports that former Crown Prosecution Service extradition expert Raj Joshi said that extradition was unlikely:

On what we know so far, it is going to be very difficult to extradite. The judge has to be satisfied that the conduct equals an extraditable offence and that there are no legal bars to extradition.
Assange’s team will argue, how can the conduct equal an extraditable offence if the [Swedish] prosecutor doesn’t think there is enough evidence to charge, and still has not charged.”

This has added to speculation that the Swedish moves, which have coincided with the release of the Cablegate stories, are politically motivated as stalling tactics, allowing Assange to be detained while the US “prepares an extradition/rendition request”, according to Assange’s UK lawyer Mark Stephens.
* I might have that completely wrong. The Swedish is “Mastercard, Visa och paypal — skärp er, nu!” I’m happy to be corrected.

via crikey.com.au

so what is the story here.  is she a Palestinian sympathizer or not?  was she pissed off because the Wikileaks mades Assange look good… or was she a Zionist that betrayed Assange because the unseen Wikileaks have some nasty things towards the West.

all of us are waiting in Anticipa………………………………………………………………………….