ANOTHER REPRIEVE FOR RIFQA BARY

I've checked the news on the current hearing today of Rifqa Bary at Atlas Shrugs. And if I've got the following news correct:

4:15 Judge says rifqa stays with foster family while he communicates with ohio judge to determine jurisdiction and what kind of case this is dependency or criminal or truancy.

So there's another fortunate reprieve for her, but as one commentor says, we can't be overconfident.

Update: and all is not well. According to the following, the Lorenz children have been banned from visiting Rifqa, thanks to this disgusting lawyer Shayan Elahi, whom the parents hired. This is also because the "parents" are even filing a complaint against the Lorenz family. More about this at the Examiner.

On a related note, Hugh Fitzgerald writes about the St. Petersburg propagandist Michael Kruse, who, it turns out, is really a sports writer, and clearly not fit for his job. Plus, as told here:

And what about a systematic boycott of those papers -- the St. Petersburg Times, the Orlando Sentinel -- by their advertisers, who should be apprised of what these papers are doing, or not doing? Or, if the advertisers won't raise this issue, then why should not individuals, or groups, let those advertisers know that as long as they continue to advertise in the St. Petersburg Times, and the Orlando Sentinel, others will choose not to give them their custom?

I do agree that's time to boycott the newspaper for which people like him are working, and perhaps to avoid all businesses advertising in them as well.

Update 2: Yid With Lid raises some good questions: if the lawyer is a member of unindicted co-conspirator in terrorism CAIR, should Elahi be allowed to act as the "parents" lawyer? I do think an appeal should be made to challenge Elahi on whether he should be representing them. Here's also an article from Investor's Business Daily.

NOW THAT IS SICK

Of all the filthiest acts the MSM could commit in their demonization of Rifqa Bary, not to mention the "parents" themselves, do you know what they've done now? They've given her diaries to the Orlando Sentinel to publish. Of course, there's the question if anything extra was fabricated in their drive to demonize her.

Is this what real parents do? Is this what any decent person does, to expose someone else's private properties, which is a violation of privacy? This is most truly disgusting, and Rifqa's counsel should sue the paper over this. Come to think of it, they should sue the "parents" as well. This exposes the "parents" as the attention-hungering hatemongers they really are. Such vile characters should be shunned and ostracized by any and all sensible society.

Update: Rusty at the Jawa Report has some extra things to observe on the case, including a certain blogmaster's surprising irresponsibility in how he addressed Rifqa's defenders.

Update 2: Atlas Shrugs and Jihad Watch have a new video of Rifqa from last May that's also interesting for viewing, as well as the following statement by Bruce Bawer for the Intl. Free Press Society and Free Thinking Films about Europe's multiculturalists:

And in many cases they shamefully close their eyes to honor killings. The murders by parents and siblings, of girls and women who in some cases doing no more than looking at a boy the wrong way, have according to Islamic beliefs, soiled family honor. European authorities are so much a prisoner of multiculturalism that they could actually believe that their obligation in such matters is not to protect innocent children from brutality, but to display sensitivity to cultural difference.

Within Muslim communities, there are only a very few unimaginably bold men and women, who dare to speak out against the traditional sharia based autocracy of the Mullahs and Imams. And when they did so, they were not defended, let alone praised for it by the government, media or by professors,but were rather accused of betraying their people and rocking the boat. Take the writer Whalid Al-Kalbaisi, who came to Norway from Iraq many years ago, and has recounted a conversation he had with the Ethnic Norwegian Director at what Al-Kalbaisi described as an "international cultural center".

This cultural bureaucrat plainly thought of himself as being devoted heart and soul to the welfare of immigrants, but when Al-Kalbaisi raised the question of the freedom of Muslims to criticize or even leave their own religion, the cultural bureaucrat was displeased. "You are a Muslim Whalid", he said, "and you must not lose your identity. " "But do you believe", Whalid asked, "that I will lose my identity if I believe in the freedom of expression?" "Listen" the man replied, "this is something that you decide yourself, but your attitude causes a lot of problems. We want to create a multicultural society and we don't want to dissolve these foreign cultures, your attitude alters all our plans, it creates conflicts between immigrants.

I think that's telling of what Norway for one has in mind for its own country.

ANDREW BOSTOM GIVES MICHAEL KRUSE SOME EDUCATION

Over on Jihad Watch, they present a discussion Andrew Bostom had with the propagandistic pro-Islam journalist Michael Kruse, who doesn't like Rifqa Bary, and doesn't like Bostom or Pamela Geller of Newsmax/Atlas Shrugs either. From what I can tell, Kruse refused to answer on whether he ever interviewed any of Rifqa's friends in Ohio, and did not want to provid any intelligent answers on anything else in the case either. Honestly, I think Mr. Kruse does stand discredited.

In more news on the subject, Geller has interviewed Jamal Jivangee, another apostate, pastor, and one of the people in Ohio who helped work on her conversion to Christianity. He takes on the mendacity displayed by Newsweek, long one of the most loathsome newsmagazines on the stands. And here's another interview with another of Rifqa's friends, Brian Williams.

BOSTOM ON RIFQA BARY'S CASE

Andrew Bostom writes an article on the American Thinker (via Jihad Watch) about how the MSM has been almost consistently hostile to Fathima Rifqa Bary, including, sadly enough, FOX News.