Alberta Islamic Welfare Association hosted on Family Day (February 5, 2016) Syrian refugees and their families for a social gathering with members of the local Muslim community in Edmonton and the Imam Shaban Sherif Mady.
Sheikh Shaban Sherif Mady (شعبان شريف ماضي), was a scholar at al-Azhar theological school in Egypt and served at the Ministry of Endowment and Ministry of Education of the Egyptian government. Today, he is the Imam of a Muslim congregation in Edmonton, Alberta which holds its Friday prayers at Glengarry Hall in Edmonton.
In his speech to the Syria refugees, Shaban Sherif Mady greeted them, emphasized the merits of the people of Greater Syria in the eyes of Allah for defeating the Crusaders and the Tatars and ended with a supplication to Allah. The following is an excerpt of the supplication (originally in Arabic):
“O Allah! Strengthen the mujahideen [jihad fighters in the path of Allah] everywhere, make their hearts firm and strong, let them hit their targets, give them victory over their enemies.
“O Allah! Destroy the oppressors.
“O Allah! Destroy your enemies, the enemies of religion (Islam).
“O Allah! Whoever wishes good for Islam and the Muslims bestow all goodness upon him.
“O Allah! Whoever wishes ill for us and wishes ill for Islam and the Muslims, make his plot (tied) around his neck and make him preoccupied with himself, and make his plan cause his own destruction.”
To watch the entire video click here.
Shaban Sherif Mady dedicated his Friday sermon on December 18, 2015 to Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, whom he sees as the greatest ally of the Muslims. Trudeau was likened to “the Najashi”, the Christian King of Abyssinia in the 7th century AD, who is honoured in the Islamic history for the support and protection he provided to the Muslim emigrants who fled pagan Mecca and his persistent refusal to expel them while fending off the pressure and lure offered by Muhammad’s Meccan rival leadership. Later, according to the Islamic tradition, the Najashi King accepted Muhammad’s invitation to embrace Islam and became a Muslim.
The following is an excerpt of Shaban Sherif Mady’s sermon (originally in Arabic):
“Justin Trudeau – I call him today the Najashi of the current era. He hosted Muslims,honoured them, visited their mosques, greeted them for their holidays, and removed the suspicion that terrorism is related to Islam, honoured the Muslims, hosted the refugees.
“He is the Najashi of the current era. This is the title of my sermon that will appear on YouTube – Justin Trudeau Najashi of the current era…
“In Islam there are men, in the world there are men who helped the world with their wisdom, such as [Recep Tayyip] Erdoğan [President of Turkey] and Justin Trudeau.
“Salute to Justin Trudeau, O the Najashi of the current era. Thank you… This man is affable. This amiable man we call him the Najashi of the current era.
“Thank you for hosting our Muslims on behalf of this Canadian country which you run in the same way the Najashi ruled in ancient era our Muslims, who were oppressed and tortured [in Mecca].
“Thank you. Thanks you, O the Najashi of the current era… The world is happy to see people like Erdoğan and Trudeau. With people such as those the compassion is spread, the friendship is spread, the love is spread…”
In his Friday sermons in Edmonton during the years 2013-14, Shaban Sherif Mady said the following:
“O the courageous Palestinian people! Al-Quds (Jerusalem) will become the capital of the Islamic State, not of Palestine… Had it not been betrayal, all the territory of Europe was almost conquered from Andalus (Spain). This is the promise of the Prophet Mohammad. The victory will come… Then the Rightly-Guided Caliphate (Islamic State) will be established and it will follow the path of the Prophet (Mohammad). We will welcome it.”
“Why (the Muslim Brotherhood movement was designated as) a terrorist organization? Because it calls for the return of the Caliphate (Islamic State). If so, I’m an operative of the Muslim Brotherhood, I’m a terrorist… (O Allah) to those who want to harm Islam and the Muslims, make their animosity annihilate themselves, make them kill themselves, destroy them completely, annihilate them all, like you did to the peoples of A’d and Thamoud… O Allah, support all mujahideen in any place around the globe.”
“O Allah, support any mujaheed (jihadist) who raises the flag of Islam.”
“The secularism is always in a war against Islam and this conflict between the two still exists.”
“The [unmarried] adulterer and the [unmarried] adulteress will be flogged 100 times and their testimony will never be accepted by court.”
People who support Trump or believe the Earth is flat r equally stupid. Ideally, they should be forcibly medicated & kept from voting (1)…
(2)…short of that, they should be shunned, ridiculed and driven from public life. There comes a point where facts matter…
Terms of the settlement in John Doe v. Washington and Lee Universityare confidential, as is customary, but given the self-congratulatory tone of the university’s statement — which the plaintiff’s attorneys must have approved — my hunch is this: The university agreed to expunge this charge from John Doe’s record, pay his attorney’s fees, and give him a relatively small sum (say, $10,000) in exchange for avoiding a trial that could have exposed the university to devastating negative publicity. Among the more than 100 lawsuits filed against universities by male students who say they were falsely accused of sexual misconduct and denied due process in the campus kangaroo court system, the Washington and Lee case was one that most blatantly demonstrated the kind of anti-male prejudice now rampant in higher education:
Doe’s lawsuit asserted that the odds were stacked against him during a hearing before the Student Faculty Hearing Board — a process that he argued was slanted to favor female accusers over male defendants.
For one thing, he claimed, a university administrator who handled the investigation in November 2014 recently had given a talk on campus about “regret equals rape,” or the argument that what first passes for a consensual sexual experience later can be called a rape by a woman who has second thoughts.
Doe’s alleged victim heard those comments, the lawsuit alleged, and was influenced by them in her decision to bring charges seven months after their sexual encounter.
And in alleging a rush to judgment by the disciplinary board, Doe pointed out that the decision to expel him was made one day after the publication of a Rolling Stone story — since discredited — about an alleged gang rape at a University of Virginia fraternity house. The article prompted a national outcry against what it portrayed as UVa’s culture of indifference to rape victims.
“The negative impact of the Rolling Stone article on UVa influenced W&L’s decision to find the plaintiff responsible for sexual assault so as to avoid a similar fate,” the lawsuit alleged. . . .
(To interrupt: This highlights a problem that feminists refuse to recognize. Whenever concerns are raised about false accusations, feminists will instantly cite statistics to the effect that only a tiny percentage of rape accusations are false. However, those statistics refer to criminal prosecutions, rather than the kind of campus disciplinary procedures involved in these cases. Furthermore, feminists have recently taken to shrieking “rape culture” constantly, inciting a climate of hysteria where false accusations become more likely, and in which students accused of sexual assault have none of the due-process rights accorded to common criminals in a court of law. It is almost certain that among the 100-plus lawsuits filed by students who say they were falsely accused are charges that never would have been made, had it not been for the recent feminist fear-mongering crusade.)
Doe has maintained that he and the student had sex that not only was consensual, but was initiated by her after they met at a party and wound up back in his room. His lawsuit states that she never complained about the sexual encounter, or a second one a month later, until after he began dating another woman later in the school year.
Bingo! Here is the answer to the question of motive. This is something else that feminists expect us to ignore in cases like this. Feminists become outraged by any suggestion that a woman would ever lie about sexual assault. Even in the UVA rape hoax, where Jackie Coakley obviously fabricated the whole thing, including the non-existent “Haven Monahan,”feminists like Jessica Valenti, Amanda Marcotte and Jaclyn Friedman won’t denounce the false accuser as a liar, and even refuse to use Coakley’s full name. Holding the false accuser accountable isn’t part of the feminist agenda, because to tell the whole truth about such matters might give a clue to why women sometimes do lie about rape.
Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
If you read John Doe’s complaint against Washington and Lee, you can surmise that the accuser was interested in a serious romantic relationship with John Doe, but he seemed to treat their two hookups as merely casual sex. When he later got serious with another girl, we may further surmise, his accuser regretted her previous liaisons with John Doe — she felt used, a “pump-and-dump” — and it was this sense of regret, and a desire for revenge against the boy who had treated her badly, that inspired her to accuse him of sexual assault.
Let me intrude here a thought that has crossed my mind in studying this general phenomenon. Despite the prevalence of shameless promiscuity among college girls nowadays, they are still very concerned about status and reputation. And the girl who feels she had been used and discarded may become self-conscious about the reputational damage she has suffered because — news flash — girls talk. Girls gossip and whisper and form cliques, and the girl who feels she has been snubbed by a friend or excluded from the “in crowd” will often become paranoid at her perceived loss of status. Did she hook up with the wrong guy? Did she go too far, too fast? Did he tell his buddies about their hookup? Has the gossip gotten around to her friends? Are the other girls talking about her behind her back?
This kind of concern — the shadow of shame — is a psychological undertow that is seldom mentioned in regard to the apparently cheerful hedonism of sexual “empowerment” that feminist celebrate. Robert Tracinski made a very astute observation about this:
Dubious claims about “rape culture” are an attempt to create an all-purpose scapegoat for the emotional dark side of promiscuity.
College campuses have long since been taken over by a culture in which casual sex with acquaintances is considered normal and where slightly outré sexual experimentation is strongly encouraged, all of it spurred on by alcohol, which figures prominently in most of these cases. But it’s clear that some young women are not psychologically prepared for this. They have casual relationships and hookups, but then feel regret and emotional trauma when the experience ends up being emotionally unsatisfying or disturbing. Then they are encouraged, by the feminists and “rape culture” activists, to reinterpret the experience as all the fault of an evil man who must have coerced them.
Furthermore, I believe, modern communications — smartphones, email, texting, dating apps, and especially social media like Facebook — have exacerbated many of the problems surrounding casual sex. On the one hand, good-looking young people can advertise themselves online via OKCupid, Tinder, etc., and easily find potential partners. This is what “selfie culture” is really about. The girl posing provocatively in selfies she posts online is seeking attention, and while she may only be fishing for compliments to boost her ego, I can guarantee the single girl will check the profiles of anyone who responds to her selfies by actively flirting with her. The phenomenon of “long-distance relationships” that begin with online flirtation is one aspect of how the Internet has affected romantic activity, especially among the young.
On the other hand, social media can make it difficult for sexual hedonists to play the runaround game without anyone catching on. Back in the day before cell phones, it was easy to explain way a missed phone call, but now it is assumed that everyone is constantly accessible by phone, and young people consider it rude not to reply to a text message. Meanwhile, people list their relationship statuses on their Facebook profiles and a girl who goes on a date with a guy is likely to post Instagram photos of their evening together. How could a guy possibly hope to get away with cheating on his girlfriend under these conditions?
And am I the only one who sees how all this factors into the phony “campus rape epidemic” scare? In an age when young people’s romantic lives are commonly so visible online, with sites like Facebook effectively creating a continuously updated permanent record, the stakes are very high for the college girl concerned about her reputation. This in turn has consequences for the college guys who are seeking casual short-term companionship — the quick hookup after a party, or a non-monogamous “friends with benefits” arrangement. When you hear stories about guys and girls “stalking” their exes via Facebook or sending them harassing emails or text messages, you realize how a single episode of carelessness can have enormous ramifications in the New Media Age.
OK, now factor in the Law of Large Numbers. If you have many millions of college kids out there engaging in episodes of carelessness on a regular basis, you will inevitably have a certain number of genuine sexual assaults. However, you will also have an even larger number of unhappy college girls with hurt feelings and remorse. Among those broken-hearted and lonely girls — and there must be many thousands of them on campuses all across the country — there will be a certain number who decide to turn disappointment into revenge.
We may not agree on what the overall picture is, in terms of percentages and statistics, and in many cases it is quite nearly impossible to tell whether an accusation of sexual assault is true or false, but John Doe v. Washington and Lee shows how feminists who foment a climate of sexual fear help create the conditions in which men are falsely accused and denied their due-process rights.
Are you ready for the real kick in the head? Washington and Lee, whosehistory stretches back to its founding before the American Revolution, was for more than 200 years an all-male school, and did not admit its first female undergraduate student until 1985. Scarcely 30 years after that, half the university’s enrollment is female, and any male student who enrolls there knows he will be immediately expelled if his ex-girlfriend decides “regret equals rape.” This is why parents pay for their sons to attend Washington and Lee (annual tuition $46,417), a school where “equality” means that male students have no rights at all.
At a school whose namesakes were honorable men, there is now not a shred of honor or decency left. The modern worship of “equality” has destroyed everything honorable about Washington and Lee, where corrupt administrators supervise dishonest faculty in the miseducation of their perverted students. Parents thinking of sending their children there should check out the Washington and Lee University Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Questioning (LGBTQ) Resource Center. Maybe your child will want to enroll in the Women’s and Gender Studies (WGS) program at Washington and Lee University.
Is this hideous parody of “higher education” worth $46,417 a year?