Anni Cyrus is a former child bride from Iran who suffered terribly under Sharia Law and was able to miraculously escape Islam’s totalitarian clutches. Today she is a human rights activist who tours our nation in an effort to raise awareness about Sharia; she runs her own website, LiveUpToFreedom.com, and produces this writer’s web-tv show, The Glazov Gang, which aims to tell the truth about the Leftist-Islamic Unholy Alliance.
Anni’s brave and noble fight on behalf of Muslims and non-Muslims who suffer at the hands of Jihad and Islamic Law has made her all the right enemies. The hate group, Southern Poverty Law Center, for example, is now targeting Anni, as is the Muslim-Brotherhood front-group CAIR, which is doing its best to try to silence the former child bride. Anni should take pride, of course, in these kind of attacks by these vile forces, since they confirm that she is doing something very right and humane — and effectively so.
Anni was recently invited to the Henry Monsky Lodge of B’nai B’rith in Omaha, Nebraska, to talk about Sharia Law and how she survived it. At the end of her talk, a leftist by the name of Steve, who described himself as a “lawyer,” attacked Anni with the preferred Jihad Denial slanders and accused her of preaching “hatred.” His intriguing performance was caught on video — which can be seen here. As it quickly became evident, Anni takes no prisoners when confronted with ignorance and she wiped the floor with Steve — just as she recently did with an Antifa “feminist.”
The exchange between Steve and Anni is crucial for us to highlight and examine, because the accusations and slanders that Steve hurled at Anni are the key falsehoods and smears that hate groups like CAIR and SPLC hurl at her and at other truth-tellers and freedom fighters. These malicious libels and slanders are at the core of the Jihad Denial that is now controlling our culture and its boundaries of discourse. And it is precisely this denial that clouds the threat we face in the terror war — and pushes what propels it into invisibility.
Because Jihad Denial achieves this destructive feat, it disables our civilization from making a proper threat assessment. It prevents us, therefore, from gauging clearly what is actually killing us and, therefore, from properly defending ourselves against it. The Jihad Denial practiced by the Obama administration, after all, enabled and facilitated the Jihadist attacks on our territory, such as the San Bernardino, Orlando and Boston Marathon Jihadist massacres — which could have easily been prevented if the Obama administration had allowed our intelligence agencies to make a proper threat assessment, which it did not.
Thus, what we see in this videotape exchange between Anni and Steve very much reflects the core of our battle against the Unholy Alliance, for we witness the lies and deceptions that the enemy uses to smear the heroes trying to protect our civilization and to blur the truth — so that our vision is blinded and our ability to act decapitated.
Consequently, because the tactics that Steve employs in this video are so vital for all freedom-loving people to identify, we will now narrow in on his five main contentions/accusations and unveil their erroneous and disingenuous nature. We encourage all of our readers to watch the short video before reading ahead.
We begin:
[1] Steve knows many peaceful Muslims.
Steve begins by stating that he knows many Muslims that “don’t subscribe” to anything Anni has talked about. This is the “Not All Muslims Do That!” con job. The flawed and deceptive assumption here is that because not all Muslims do something, it somehow makes the problem of Jihad and Sharia — and their victims — disappear. But it is completely inconsequential whether all Muslims do something or not. What matters is that Islamic Law exists independently of whether Muslims follow it or not. Muslims, as scholar Raymond Ibrahim points out, are not larger than Islam.
Anni makes the key point to Steve that there are many people who label themselves as “Muslim” but who do not follow Islamic Law. Their existence does not make Islamic Law wither away, nor does it erase the Muslims who follow it — or the people they hurt by doing so. There are, therefore, naturally many “good” Muslims who may be lucky enough to live free of Sharia and who, thankfully, do not follow Jihadist and other Islamic mandates. But we have to remember that they are considered “bad” Muslims by Islam.
[2] Steve finds the notion that Sharia is trying to take over “absurd.”
Steve states that he finds the notion of Islam trying to take over “absurd,” but what Islam teaches exists independently of what Steve believes. It is simply a fact that all the schools of Islamic jurisprudence teach that it is part of the responsibility of the Islamic community to struggle (wage Jihad) against unbelievers in order to extend the supremacy of Islamic law (Sharia) worldwide. And the Muslim Brotherhood has clearly stated in its own internal documents that its goal is to destroy our civilization by our own hands.
[3] In every religion there are people who have had “unfortunate experiences.”
Steve stresses that humans have suffered under every religion. Here he is tapping into the popular “Others Do It Too!” charade. This is when the Jihad-Denier hears about a crime committed by Islam and immediately brings up something that someone else has done that is allegedly similar. This tactic is severely flawed for the following two basic reasons:
First, it is based on the false and bizarre assumption that a crime committed by a person in one place should for some reason be exonerated if another person does the same thing somewhere else.
Second, as Robert Spencer documents, there is no moral equivalency between Islam and Christianity/Judaism. For instance, if a Christian commits murder or engages in sexual slavery, he is acting in an un-Christian manner because he is violating Christian teachings. But if Muslims kill unbelievers or force non-Muslim girls into sexual slavery, which the Islamic State and Boko Haram do on a daily basis, they can find justification for this behavior in Islamic texts (for killing unbelievers, see here, and for rape and sex slavery, see here.)
[4] Steve doesn’t know of any honor killings in the United States.
Steve says he is unaware of any honor killings in America, so that means, in his mind, that there must not be any. But, unfortunately, honor killings exist independently of Steve’s knowledge about them. There are, tragically, many honor killings transpiring in America. The Said sisters, Amina and Sarah, for example, were honored murdered by their father in 2008 in Texas for being too Westernized. Noor Almaleki was murdered by her father in a Phoenix suburb in 2009 for the same reason. Aasiya Hassan had her head chopped off in Buffalo, New York in 2009 by her Muslim husband — whose purported life goal was, intriguingly enough, to show America the “moderate” nature of Islam. Shaima Alawadi was murdered by her husband in California in 2012.
These honor killing victims in America represent myriad other victims. One only needs to go to Pamela Geller’s site, the Geller Report, and do a word search on honor killings in America to see this horrifying and widespread reality.
Steve also appears to believe that Israel is an Islamic country that has honor killings. But Israel is not Islamic nor do honor killings occur there; the ones that may happen in Israel are committed by Muslims in the name of Islam. It is also worth mentioning that the potential victims of honor killings in the Palestinian territories, and other Arab environments — who include women and homosexuals — flee to Israel for safe haven.
In the Islamic world, honor killing is a way of life and the police usually do not even act on them. In her memoir Burned Alive: A Victim of the Law of Men, for example, a Palestinian woman who calls herself “Souad” tells the story of her attempted “honor” killing in the West Bank. It is the first account of the practice of honor killings given by a survivor. It is a terrifying story and a must-read.
Steve also verbalizes his fantasy about Islamic authorities not approving of honor killing and honor killing being a “cultural” and pre-Islamic reality. The reality, of course, is that Islamic honor killing is rooted in Islamic misogynist texts. And there is a reason why Islamic authorities approve of honor killings and why, in Jordan, for instance, Articles 97, 98, 99, 340 of the Penal Code are designed to reduce and even erase penalties for honor killing.
Steve also says he had never heard of Reliance of the Traveler, but, again, his having never heard of something doesn’t negate its existence. A classic manual of Sharia, the Reliance of the Traveler is certified by Al-Azhar University and is the most prestigious institution in Sunni Islam. And as Anni patiently explains to Steve, it permits parents to kill their kids if they are dishonoring Islam.
[5] Steve says Anni’s message is one of “hate.”
Steve finishes his attacks by stating that Anni’s message is one of hatred. This is the typical slander that leftists and their Islamic Supremacist allies use to silence truth-tellers about Islam. The key reality to stress here is that Anni’s message is one of love, seeing that she is a child bride survivor who is trying to save not only non-Muslim women and girls, but also Muslim women and girls from the horrors of Islamic gender apartheid. Her objective is to try to protect non-Muslims and Muslims alike from the barbarity of Jihad and Sharia.
Steve is obviously trying to allege that Anni is spreading hatred against Muslims. But he is conflating Islam and Muslims — which is a common falsehood perpetrated by the Leftist-Islamic Unholy Alliance. Anni is focusing on Islam, which is an ideology, and not on the people who find themselves within its environment and/or suffer because it. She is trying to help and protect those people.
————-
All these libels that Steve casts at Anni are crucial to expose, for they are at the foundation of our enemy’s attack on our freedom and security today. Indeed, the enemy is working 24/7 to cripple our civilization — and it is doing so by libeling all the brave and noble people who are trying to stand in its way.
We must, therefore, call out the lies against heroes such as Anni Cyrus — and all truth-tellers about Islamic Law — every step of the way.
Our lives and liberty depend on it.
mortimer says
The LIBTARDED and UNINFORMED questioner uses the canard ‘I KNOW A NICE MUSLIM’. Answer: ‘NICE MUSLIMS’ do not CODIFY SHARIA LAW or practice Sharia law. They are lax Muslims. When an Islamic government is in place, Sharia law is always enforced on Muslims and non-Muslims alike. His second error is about honor killing. In fact, honor killing is in fact supported by the Islamic scholars since it is defended in Sharia.
Muslims commit 91 percent of honor killings worldwide. A manual of Islamic law certified as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy by Al-Azhar, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, says that “retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right.” However, “not subject to retaliation” is “a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring.” (‘Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2). In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law. In this case the victim was the murderer’s daughter, a victim to the culture of violence and intimidation that such laws help create.
mortimer says
The man is a naive, unread, unstudied, unaware, presumptuous Pollyanna.
He has not read the Koran or Sira or hadiths. He has not read the PRIMARY, FOUNDATIONAL TEXTS or even know the names of them.
His evidence is merely ANECDOTAL HEARSAY and not fact-based through personal study of the 1 million words of the BASIC foundational texts.
ISLAM IS HIGHLY CODIFIED and not a matter of PERSONAL OPINION as he arrogantly states. All his ASSUMPTIONS are WRONG.
Linda says
Steve is getting his talking points right out of the Leftist play book, not from Islamic writings.
Linda says
Just like Antifa calling a conservative a Nazi.
Terry Gain says
Mortimer
Who commits the remaining 9% of honor killings?
KJW says
Happens in India and Bangladesh too. Not all Hindus are up to date either such as I know in places they still adhere to all the menstruation purity rules, e.g. women can’t go into the kitchen when their menstruating, etc.
Pakistan and Afghanistan are the two biggest offenders of honor killings. In the US, even if not killing I know one case where a daughter had to get a restraining order on her father who was not happy she was planning to marry a Christian guy. He was calling them at all hours, coming by, and there was questionable murder of the groom-to-be’s friend. The FBI has no proof of his involvement, but when they went to the father’s home they discovered he had an AK-47 and was committing federal fraud such as with Social Security, etc. Thus was around 2006, I believe in a CBS article. The media has since omitted many of these things in their news.
dumbledoresarmy says
Phyllis Chesler has examined this subject in depth.
The vast majority of ‘honor’ (or, one might call them, ‘horror’) killings, are done by Muslims. Whether inside Muslim lands or inside Muslim colonies in otherwise non-Musiim lands.
There are, however similar killings that occur – though not with the same frequency – among Hindus and Sikhs. (One might reflect that both Hindu and Sikh populations lived under the Muslim yoke, and in close and unpleasant proximity to Muslims, for *centuries*, so it is possible that this evil practice ‘rubbed off’ on them. Chesler notes that outside of India the incidence of these ‘honor’ type killings *drops off dramatically* among HIndus and Sikhs, whereas among Muslims it does NOT reduce when they move to a non-Muslim land.
gravenimage says
+1
PMP says
This Steve sounds like a drunken unemployed lawyer wanna be. I do not believe for one minute that he is a bona fide lawyer. I wonder what his passing grade was. And clearly he is a leftist plant. He has never read the koran, NEVER!!! Tell this fascist douche to read the koran and then phrase a question. What an absolute moron.
Anton says
He assumes that it’s not possible to just sit and read the Qu’ran. Only special people can do it. Why? Because apparently, these special people told him so.
KJW says
His questions are such standard repeated ones he could be someone purposely making these comments in order to elicit her replies for all to see and hear the counter-arguments. Sometimes I think I’ve run into such people on YT.
Others are the Muslim Brotherhood cyber army but they can’t control themselves when they are losing arguments and smear like crazy as I was the recipient of, and they have no problem with attacking women implying they are sluts, mentally ill, hate mongering, etc. When you start pulling out Quranic verses and using the Arabic terms plus articles and videos to prove your point, you find out they’ve never read their holy books.
Then there are the innocent Muslims who really want to believe the soft version of Islam such as they teach in Malaysia, Iran, some schools in Iraq, Bosnia, etc. They insist fighting was in self-defense and can’t/won’t criticize all the verses hating non-Muslims, not being friends with them (they say that means only allies as in political allies), and the latest I’ve encountered with more than one Muslim is “that it’s fair that non-Muslims paid the jizya because the Muslims have to pay zakat, so it’s the same thing.” A lot of Muslims don’t have very good logic and reasoning abilities as they’ve been inculcated with the twisted “logic” in Islamic thinking.
One Muslim girl really thinks Islam means peace rather than submission, and another said that Allah didn’t say he dislikes non-Muslims, just “certain qualities.” Such girls do not reply when I show them verses…they really don’t know. Should they know? I think they should know how non-Muslims see it when we read the Qur’an.
Then there are the leftists or politically correct who are clueless.
gravenimage says
Wait–Iran has a “soft” version of Islam? I guess that’s why they hang gay people and stone women to death, huh?
scherado says
Well, I applaud Ms. Cyrus for preventing her head from exploding while fielding “Steve’s” commentary: Perhaps, she had a few layers of duct-tape applied to her cranium and nicely disguised.
Kay says
Excellent and helpful analysis.
These are indeed the “arguments” that leftists use to deny what is happening.
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
That old Propaganda by mithraist christian evangelists of Ex-Muslim cannot save pagan christianity from vanishing. How can one imagine a muslim who believe in one indivisible God the creator of all to believe In the stupidity of Godman and begotten son of God from paganism of mithraism ? Idiots !!
Anton says
To believe in something doesn’t mean that you do something harmful to other people. What matters is what exactly you believe in, how your belief makes you act. The left (and you are obviously there) thinks that believing in sharia laws, acting according to them is not atrocious although just believing in other religions (especially Christianity) not having anything like sharia laws somehow is disgusting. Totally unlogical.
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
Jay Boo, what about millions being killed by mithraist christians in the name of mithraist Christ , colonisation or neocolonisation and deprivations of other nations, transatlantic slave trade where more than 17million black Africans thrown into deep sea water and eatened by sharks, genocide killings by mithraist christian Nazis, churchmen having anus and vaginal sex with Kids under their care ? your satan god (holy spirit)says no one should dare to talk about It ? I Will say It. Tell your satan god ï say hé is idiot wicked for inspiring you to commit all these atrocities without blame that you are saved according that Pauline lie of law of grace. Fools !!
Ray Jarman says
Ibrahim, It seems that you never give up. First it is true that a few European nations colonized nations in the past but they did not kill and rape with impunity as the hoards of Arabian cult members slaughtered their way across Africa You also seem to have forgotten that the slave market was and still is a cult enterprise. In Mauritania and Libya, the slave trade is alive and well. Your cult believes that small boys, even cult members’ small children, may be used for sex and even says that in your sick idea of heaven little boys will be for the joy of men where as many of the pedophilic priests have been brought to trial and nowhere in the Bible (whether it be the Old or New Testament) does it say or even hint that pedophilia is permitted and I defy you to find one scripture that does. Hitler was no Christian and he signed packs with the cult leaders in places such as Baghdad where thousands were slaughtered in 1941.
gravenimage says
Ibrahim itace muhammed keeps posting this tripe–he ignores all factual refutation. But then, as a pious Muslim, he rejects reason and logic and factuall proof.
Lydia Church says
I think of this scenario:
A person (#1) stumbles upon a book, which has numerous rules about hurting people, all justified by some irrational idea. It’s okay to murder women because of rule #1. It’s okay to rape and oppress women because of rule #2. If they look at you questioningly, you can take an ax to them, according to rule #3. It’s okay to murder anyone for a long number of reasons, rape, steal, have sex with kids, take sex slaves and abuse them, invade countries, have no regard for human rights, and the list goes on.
The person sees millions of people being oppressed, persecuted, and killed as whole countries follow the rules in that book.
The person speaks out, in a self sacrificial act to protect others, from all these harms. The person themselves suffered at the hands of the same rules and wants to protect as many people as possible from these rules that harm others.
Then enters another person (#2), and accuses person #1 of spreading a message of ‘hate.’
Quiz time!
Who is the one guilty of spreading ‘hate,’ the one who warns of danger, or the one who discourages the one who warns of danger?
Hint: Under which action would more people get hurt?
Special Education Modified Version:
Suppose a child were about to fall into a ditch.
You see it and you warn the child just before they step into the ditch.
You saved the child from harm, maybe even death by warning them.
Then, from the shadows emerges a person who, for this act, accuses you of
‘spreading hate,’ and that you should not have warned them because that
act was ‘hateful,’ as it may have hurt the child’s feelings or shed a disparaging
light upon the child’s beliefs about where they thought they were headed.
But, the child would have ended up injured or dead otherwise.
Is he right?
In that case, it would be better to be ‘hateful,’ if you protect them!
But it is he who was hateful, not you, as anyone would see, unless
even the special education accommodation does not get this across
to them.
Roland Peterson says
I would have liked to see what [Steve, who described himself as a “lawyer,”] looked like. I can only imagine he looks as ugly as his talk. Anni, is refreshing to see, and should let us have a larger view of her. .We should wake up to the Islamic threat among us.
gravenimage says
Sharia, Lies and Videotape
………………….
Excellent point by point refutation of this dhimmi ignorance.