Thursday, April 27, 2017

Sharia meets Kevorkian in Detroit

A federal grand jury in Detroit indicted two doctors and a doctor's wife on charges related to a scheme to mutilate two girls in a savage practice known as female genital mutilation. This is a case that will pit Islamic sharia law and practices against American values and the protection of women.

My money is on the federal prosecutor, Dan Lemisch. He's a pro who stepped into the acting U.S. attorney role after President Trump fired all the political appointees of Barack Obama.

As an assistant prosecutor in Oakland County, Michigan, in 1999, Lemisch got a murder conviction against Dr. Jack Kevorkian, who killed people in the name of assisted suicide.

From the National Right to Life in 1999:
The prosecution's case in the latest trial consisted almost solely of a videotape of Kevorkian injecting Youk, who had Lou Gehrig's disease, with lethal drugs on September 17, 1998. The tape was broadcast on the national television show 60 Minutes November 22, 1998.
During an interview with Mike Wallace, Kevorkian admitted he wanted prosecutors to put him on trial again. "I've got to force them to act," he said. "They must charge me. Because if they do not, that means they don't think it was a crime."
Prosecutor David Gorcyca, who was elected in 1996 based largely on his promise not to "waste taxpayers' money" on Kevorkian trials when it seemed impossible to get a conviction, could not ignore the clear videotaped evidence of a crime, according to the Detroit Free Press.
"Dr. Kevorkian has even begged and sometimes taunted me into prosecuting him," Gorcyca said after the jury's verdict was announced, the Associated Press reported. "Today a jury of his peers granted him his ultimate wish."
The seven-woman, five-man jury spent 12 1/2 hours deliberating after the trial. Assistant Oakland County Prosecutor Dan Lemisch told the Free Press that the jurors took time deciding between first- and second-degree murder. "They never thought there wasn't a crime," Lemisch said.
This was the sixth time a prosecutorial team had tried to convict Kervorkian. Only Lemisch's team succeeded.

Generally, when it comes to religion, our country is live and let live.

But we as a nation must draw the line at marrying of girls or mutilation. This is not the equivalent of male circumcision. This is a practice designed to turn women into chattel.

From ABC:
Dr. Jumana Nagarwala, Dr. Fakhruddin Attar and Attar's wife, Farida, are charged with female genital mutilation, conspiracy and other crimes.
The federal indictment alleges the trio tried to obstruct the investigation by telling other people to make false statement to authorities. The doctors are also accused of lying to investigators.
Genital mutilation, also known as cutting, has been condemned by the United Nations and outlawed in the United States. But the practice is common for girls in parts of Asia, Africa and the Middle East.
"This brutal practice is conducted on girls for one reason: to control them as women. FGM will not be tolerated in the United States," said Dan Lemisch, the acting U.S. attorney in Detroit.
Nagarwala is charged with performing genital mutilation on the two 7-year-old girls in February at a suburban Detroit clinic owned by Dr. Attar.
Seven.

They were only 7.

Looks like the Good Guys have a winning prosecutor on our side.




The original, "Trump the Press" chronicled and mocked how the media missed Trump's nomination.

It is available on Kindle, and in paperback.
Then came "Trump the Establishment," covering the election, which again the media missed.

It is available on Kindle, and in paperback.

Autographed copies of both books are available by writing me at DonSurber@GMail.com

Please follow me on Twitter.

Friend me on Facebook.

16 comments:

  1. I hope the trial is not in Dearbornstan.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The trial is in the US District Court in Detroit, not the state court in Dearborn (19th District, which only handles misdemeanors anyway).

    -Mikey NTH

    ReplyDelete
  3. Islam is barbarism. Do we really want them to live here and reproduce? The more there are the worse things will get. - Elric

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'd be interested to know whether the procedure was to have been infibulation, clitoridectomy or both.
    Considering that we are saying that it is wrong to surgically alter the anatomy of young girls without their consent, when are we going to do the same for young boys?
    When I talk about how much of the scientific medical literature is pure bunk, I include all of it, including the papers claiming the various supposed health effects of circumcision. Correlation is not cause, and drawing conclusions based on studies of disparate populations is bad science.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why do people deflect on to circumcision of males when female genital mutilation is discussed? "Surgically alter the anatomy of girls" "infibulation", "clitoridectomy". Why don't we accurate describe what happens to girls. There is no medical term. Girls have their clitorises sawn off. Then their labia cut off. Often the gland which produces moisture is dug out too. Then the skin around the area is stretched across and sewn together tightly, with usually one small hole for both weeing and menstrual blood. When she is married, the husband "deflowers" her by ripping her apart. If she gives childbirth, the child is forced through wounds and she is ripped apart again. Now have the gall to compare this with circumcision.

      Delete
    2. The gall is all yours. Try explaining an idiotic comment like yours to a guy who has grown up with his glans penis having become necrotic by having an unnecessary operation when he was three days old.
      Surgical mutilation is surgical mutilation regardless of which sex it is practiced on.

      Delete
    3. clitoridectomy removes the pleasure part of sex for woman (they also can remove the labia and close up the vulva) The vagina is opened for sex.

      infibulation is the creation of a hole for urine and menstruation.

      Male circumcision does nothing close to that and comparing them on the same moral or medical plane is ridiculous.



      Delete
    4. Nice to see that you looked up what I already knew. Now look up the most common cause of meatal stenosis in men and boys. Meatotomy in the uncircumcised is rarely necessary. Yes, in extreme cases circumcisions can contribute to diminished renal function and even failure. Not written about much. Lots of liability, you know.
      Both procedures are practiced on religious, traditional, or superstitious grounds. Both can be performed well or poorly. Both are defended by people who have had them done and otherwise. I'm not here to defend what is being done to those girls. I'm here to point out the hypocrisy of justifying unnecessary operations on children.
      Just because something has been done for a long time doesn't make it good.
      For decades sex reassignment surgery as close to birth was the norm in cases of ambiguous genitalia. Now the standard is to allow the actual patient to make that decision. The baby is the patient, whether it is a boy or a girl. I'm saying that the patient should be making the decision unless some medical necessity dictates otherwise.

      Casting about epithets is not argument.

      Delete
    5. It is well known and cited by WHO that female circumcision, while traditional and religious, is also used to control female sexual desires,

      Male circumcision does nothing of the sort and has not been demonstrated to do so.

      If calling your assertion ridiculous is offensive (which is the way epithet is normally used), then get tougher skin. Jeeez.

      Delete
    6. I must be talking to Peter Abelard. So mutilating the gentourinary system of a little boy is OK; but doing something analogous to a little girl is a sin based on intention and not outcome?
      In that case we can justify all kinds of things.
      Had to look up "epithet" too?

      Delete
    7. The 800# gorilla in the room is FGM's ties to Islam -- mustn't offend, you know. If the Catholic Church tried something like this, the Left would rise like Lazare to condemn it for what it is: barbaric.

      As to circumcision, I have three young grandsons and, yes, the standard has been raised. So let's not start allowing these people to start mutilating the genitalia of young girls.

      Delete
    8. Are you a medical doc "doc"? Just asking because a medical doctor would recognize the difference between them even if they were not biased.

      The very fact you equate the two inherently is a logical and factual fallacy.

      If you want to argue honestly about female and male circumsion, that is fine, but it is apparrent you cannot.


      Delete
  5. Man, those Leftist/Feminist crickets over in the Liberal Swamp are sure gettin loud. What's wrong, gals...ya skeered? Or is it Trump's fault again?

    ReplyDelete
  6. I've been hearing those crickets for a long time and just thought it was my tinnitus.

    ReplyDelete
  7. When this case eventually makes its way to the SCOTUS, I wonder if the notorious RBG (if she's still on the bench) will argue the Court should show deference to foreign law, including Sharia.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If her mouth were sewn shut, it wouldn't count as "mutilation" to me; more like an improvement.

      Delete