Bikini vs. Burka

Burka is a tradition in some Muslim and Arab societies. It is not a requirement of the Islamic religion, which advocates Hijab for women, a scarf that covers the head [not the face].  With this in mind, this is an interesting perspective from Dr. Henry Makow.


By Henry Makow Ph.D.


On my wall, I have a picture of a Muslim woman shrouded in a burka.

Beside it is a picture of an American beauty contestant, wearing nothing but a bikini.

One woman is totally hidden from the public; the other is totally exposed. These two extremes say a great deal about the clash of so-called “civilizations.”

The role of woman is at the heart of any culture. Apart from stealing Arab oil, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are about stripping Muslims of their religion and culture, exchanging the burka for a bikini.

I am not an expert on the condition of Muslim women and I love feminine beauty too much to advocate the burka here. But I am defending some of the values that the burka represents for me.

For me, the burka represents a woman’s consecration to her husband and family. Only they see her.It affirms the privacy, exclusivity and importance of the domestic sphere.

The Muslim woman’s focus is her home, the “nest” where her children are born and reared. She is the “home” maker, the taproot that sustains the spiritual life of the family, nurturing and training her children, providing refuge and support to her husband.

In contrast, the bikinied American beauty queen struts practically naked in front of millions on TV. A feminist, she belongs to herself. In practice, paradoxically, she is public property. She belongs to no one and everyone. She shops her body to the highest bidder. She is auctioning herself all of the time.

In America, the cultural measure of a woman’s value is her sex appeal. (As this asset depreciates quickly, she is neurotically obsessed with appearance and plagued by weight problems.)

As an adolescent, her role model is Britney Spears, a singer whose act approximates a strip tease. From Britney, she learns that she will be loved only if she gives sex. Thus, she learns to “hook up” furtively rather than to demand patient courtship, love and marriage. As a result, dozens of males know her before her husband does. She loses her innocence, which is a part of her charm. She becomes hardened and calculating. Unable to love, she is unfit to receive her husband’s seed.

The feminine personality is founded on the emotional relationship between mother and baby. It is based on nurturing and self-sacrifice. Masculine nature is founded on the relationship between hunter and prey. It is based on aggression and reason.

Feminism deceives women to believe femininity has resulted in “oppression” and they should adopt male behavior instead. The result: a confused and aggressive woman with a large chip on her shoulder, unfit to become a wife or mother.

This is the goal of the NWO social engineers: undermine sexual identity and destroy the family, create social and personal dysfunction, and reduce population. In the “brave new world,” women are not supposed to be mothers and progenitors of the race. They are meant to be neutered, autonomous sex objects.

Liberating women is often given as an excuse for the war in Afghanistan. Liberating them to what? To Britney Spears? To low-rise “see-my-thong” pants? To the mutual masturbation that passes for sexuality in America? If they really cared about women, maybe they’d end the war.

Parenthood is the pinnacle of human development. It is the stage when we finally graduate from self-indulgence and become God’s surrogates: creating and nurturing new life. The New World Order does not want us to reach this level of maturity. Pornography is the substitute for marriage. We are to remain single: stunted, sex-starved and self-obsessed.

We are not meant to have a permanent “private” life. We are meant to remain lonely and isolated, in a state of perpetual courtship, dependent on consumer products for our identity.

This is especially destructive for woman. Her sexual attraction is a function of her fertility. As fertility declines, so does her sex appeal. If a woman devotes her prime years to becoming “independent,” she is not likely to find a permanent mate.

Her long-term personal fulfillment and happiness lies in making marriage and family her first priority.

Feminism is another cruel New World Order hoax that has debauched American women and despoiled Western civilization. It has ruined millions of lives and represents a lethal threat to Islam.

I am not advocating the burka but rather some of the values that it represents, specifically a woman’s consecration to her future husband and family, and the modesty and dignity this entails.

The burka and the bikini represent two extremes. The answer lies somewhere in the middle.

from → rense.com  Couretsy PalAlert Press

CNN-BBC And India's Women

Do you know that around 50,000 females are missing from India's population at any given time because most of them are buried alive after birth?

For every 100 Indian men, there are less than 93 Indian women, and the number is going down, for the women that is.

And these are the best estimates. Chances are it is worse than what is being reported.

The world's biggest democracy, India, is also home to the world's biggest figures of child deaths, child labor, and child sex bondage. The real shocker, however, is female infanticide where it is an accepted practice in entire Indian villages in many cases to bury female newborns immediately after birth.

Again, this is not a limited phenomenon. It is an ACCEPTED PRACTICE in large swathes of India. As we speak, there is a baby girl somewhere in India, mostly outside the cities, being buried alive right now.

Don't believe me. Check UN figures. Also check this report on an Indian site IndianChild.com

Burying girls alive is not the only anti-woman crime common in India and sanctioned by customs and religion.

There is also marrying off girls as young as 13 to older men.

Again, this is not about isolated incidents. There are entire regions in India where this is a common practice. India has a law against this but it is seldom enforced. If it was, more than 10% of India's population would have been in jail now.

The latest is the story of Rekha Kalindi, a bright 13-year-old poor girl from a village just outside Kolkata, or Calcutta [read her story here]. Rekha's story came to light because she said no to her parents who were marrying her off to a guy more than double her age. She happened to attend a foreign-run school and that’s why her story reached the media. She is lucky. Most of the girls her age in her area are married off before or just at the cusp of puberty.

But you won't hear about this story on CNN or BBC. Now imagine if the same thing happened in Saudi Arabia for example, or Pakistan, or any other Muslim country. Both CNN and BBC and other outlets of the Am-Brit combine would be buzzing with coverage and spilling crocodile tears over the sad state of women in Muslim countries and so forth. Most of the time they exaggerate, since such practices are dying out even inside Saudi Arabia where they are on the extreme fringes of society and do not represent the mainstream Saudi women.

The same goes for Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Egypt and other places. But any woman-related story from these countries is instantly picked up by CNN and BBC to feed a stereotype that indirectly justifies the so-called War on Terror, which in many ways is a War on Islam by the US-UK military-intelligence complex that wants a threat to justify the hunt for world's riches.

Meanwhile, thousands of girls like Rekha go about in India being married off at 13 if they're lucky and not buried alive at birth. And yet India gets away with building nuclear bombs and reactors, now with the active help of the United States. The Indian government is even spending hundreds of millions of dollars to send an Indian to space [most probably to open an offshore call center for the Russians, Americans, and the Chinese who are already there, so goes an online joke I read on a website posted by George Fernandes].

At this point you might ask me: Why India then gets preferential treatment and gets away with all of this?

Simple. India is the new cheap, well equipped slave-soldier for American and British plans in Asia. Who cares about 13-year-old Rekha Kalindi.

Incredible India, isn't it?

Hey America: Tomahawks Or Michael Jackson?

Two things made America more influential and awe inspiring than any other nation on the face of the earth: cowboy movies and Michael Jackson.

Long before the American Tomahawks, B-52s and the rest of the American weapons used in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine, Michael Jackson entered the houses of the nations across the Middle East and Central Asia.

Some say these Muslim nations want war with America. That’s typical Langley hogwash. Long before Karen Hughes and Don Rumsfeld came up with kooky concepts of public diplomacy, and long before Pentagon and State Department established offices for outreach to Muslims, this icon of modern American culture was welcomed in a region that knew little about American culture or simply didn’t care.

America didn’t need men with twisted minds and Darth-Vader plans for global domination to open the doors for American supremacy [this is for you, Richard Perle]. It happened anyway thanks to Jackson, Stallone and Madonna.

I was ten years old, growing up in the Middle East with kids who were Iraqis, Saudis, Kuwaitis, Iranians, Palestinians, Yemenis, Egyptians, Pakistanis, Syrians, Turks, Sudanese and Afghans. And I distinctly remember how in 1982 and 1983 Michael Jackson burst on the scene, to a great and an enthusiastic welcome never accorded to an American before.

Those who knew one face of America – Reagan at the time – and vehemently hated it became crazy about another American face. I am sure they could never reconcile this contradiction deep in their hearts. But it was there, the two sides coexisting side by side.

Aside from our region, Michael’s music opened the doors of the Soviet Union and China to everything American, not to mention Africa, East Asia and the rest of the world. Before his album, Thriller, for example, only members of the elite in some of these nations knew the truth: that there is another side to America besides imperialism, a good side.

It seems so ordinary now. But, really, think about it; closed and proud societies warmly welcoming a completely new and alien culture of a country whose foreign policy was viewed suspiciously by many.

Right about the same time as Michael’s Thriller and the moonwalk, there came Sylvester Stallone with his accent, Tom Cruise with Top Gun, and then ‘USA for Africa’: forty-five American singers joining in a song for the victims of the African drought. The song, We Are The World, gave the world this amazing message about an American nation striving to help the needy. Even the best American diplomats and the best image consultants couldn’t buy the goodwill that these ordinary good Americans created for their nation.

Sure, while this was happening, CIA was secretly supporting terrorist militias in Latin America and Africa, pushing Iraq to declare war against Iran, destabilizing governments and exploiting the pure passion and the blood of the Afghans to settle an American score with the Soviets. America’s governments were doing dirty things. But it was the good side of America that the people of the world preferred, the one that was really launched by Michael Jackson and others. The Berlin Wall and the Soviet Union didn’t exactly crumble thanks only to America’s gung-ho politicians or military strategists. They crumbled because of the enduring power of the image that Jackson and Madonna and Tom Cruise and Stallone and others spread worldwide.
This is the lesson that America desperately needs to learn today. Jackson almost launched America's cultural supremacy in the digital age. CIA or the US military used it, not caused it. So who is the real asset?

Enough of US government using Hollywood celebrities to get back at China like Stephen Spielberg did when he canceled a contract for Beijing Olympics last year in a theatrical move to politicize Tibet; and enough of the US government using YouTube and Twitter as political tools in its not-so-innocent battle with Iran.

The Americans need to bring that time back when they came together for something like ‘USA for Africa’, an effort devoid of any political mileage, like the search for cheap oil in African jungles, which is what they’re doing now.

This ugly and militarized side of America has eclipsed everything else in the past decade. Let’s remember that Washington’s entire might in Iraq and Afghanistan didn’t and couldn’t generate the kind of real goodwill that America received with Jackson’s death.

Your Jacksons are far more appealing than your Tomahawks. Get it. Or beat it.