MUSLIMS ARE THE GODLESS
CULT OF MURDER, RAPE AND HATE
November 21, 2018
When
Muslims Rape European White Women, Whose Fault Is It?
European
women are to blame for being raped by Muslim men. Such is the latest
position – the latest apologia – being offered by those dedicated to
exonerating undesirable Muslim behavior, particularly in the context of
accepting more Muslim migrants into the West.
On
October 14, seven Muslim migrants raped a
teenage German girl in a park, after drugging her at a disco in
Freiburg. (At least she survived; in a similar case that occurred a
week earlier in Italy, the drugged rape victim was left
murdered .) Bernhard Rotzinger, the police chief of Freiburg,
responded bysaying ,
"We cannot offer citizens an all-risk insurance [against crime], but I can
advise this: Don't make yourself vulnerable by using alcohol or drugs."
Similarly,
after mobs of Muslim migrants sexually assaulted as many as one
thousand women on New Year's Eve 2016 in Cologne, Germany, the city's
mayor, Henriette Reker, called on
the women, the victims – not their male rapists – to make changes: "The
women and young girls have to be more protected in the future so these things
don't happen again. This means they should go out and have fun, but
they need to be better prepared, especially with the Cologne carnival coming
up. For this, we will publish online guidelines that these young
women can read through to prepare themselves."
Such
advice against alcohol, drugs, and reckless behavior would be more respectable
had it not been made under duress. As it is, it is a
cop-out. Or, as a November 8 report discussing
the aforementioned rape in Freiburg puts it, "[t]he focus on prevention is
a good thing, but also shows how German authorities and media barely hold the
migrant crisis responsible for the disaster that is unfolding in
Germany. Political correctness has caused officials to put the blame
for the criminal acts on the women instead of Merkel's guests."
These
are hardly the first times officials "put the blame for the criminal acts
[of Muslim men] on the women." Nor is this phenomenon limited
to Germany. For instance, after a 20-year-old Austrian woman waiting
at a bus stop in Vienna was attacked,
beaten, and robbed by four Muslim men – including one who
"started [by] putting his hands through my hair and made it clear that in
his cultural background there were hardly any blonde women" – police
responded by telling the victim to dye her hair:
At
first I was scared, but now I'm more angry than anything. After the
attack they told me that women shouldn't be alone on the streets
after 8pm. And they also gave me other advice, telling me I
should dye my hair dark and also not dress in such a provocative
way. Indirectly that means I was partly to blame for what happened
to me. That is a massive insult.
Likewise,
Unni Wikan, a female professor of social anthropology at the University of Oslo
in Norway, insists that
"'Norwegian women must take their share of responsibility for these
rapes,' because Muslim men found their manner of dress
provocative. The professor's conclusion was not that Muslim men
living in the West needed to adjust to Western norms, but the exact opposite:
'Norwegian women must realize that we live in a Multicultural society and adapt
themselves to it.'"
So
much for the feminist claim that women are free to dress and behave as
promiscuously and provocatively as they want – and woe to any man who dares
cite this as justifying his sexual aggression. Apparently, this
feminist refrain does not apply to Muslim men.
But
perhaps the greater irony of all these excuses is that, from the very start of
Islam 14 centuries ago, European women – even chaste nuns – have always been
portrayed by Muslims as sexually promiscuous by nature.
As
one Western academic of Muslim origin (rather euphemistically) explains:
The
Byzantines as a people were considered fine examples of physical beauty, and
youthful slaves and slave-girls of Byzantine origins were highly valued. ...
The Arabs' appreciation of the Byzantine female has a long history
indeed. For the Islamic period, the earliest literary evidence we
have is a hadith (saying of the Prophet). Muhammad is said to have
addressed a newly converted Arab: "Would you like the girls of Banu
al-Asfar [the yellow (haired?) or pale people]?"
Muhammad's
question was meant to entice the man to join the Tabuk campaign against the
Romans and reap its rewards – in this case, the sexual enslavement of
attractive women. In other words, as "white-complexioned blondes, with
straight hair and blue eyes," to quote another academic, Byzantine women
were not so much "appreciated" or "highly valued" as they
were lusted after. (All quotes in this article are sourced from and
documented in Sword
and Scimitar .)
Any
sense of compliment ends there. Muslims habitually portrayed
Europe's Christian women, as contemptible and corrupt infidels, beginning with
those they first encountered in neighboring Byzantium, as sexually promiscuous
by nature – perhaps simply to support the fantasy that they were eager to be
sexually enslaved. Thus, for Abu Uthman al-Jahiz (b. 776), a
prolific court scholar, the females of Constantinople were the "most
shameless women in the whole world"; "they find sex more
enjoyable" and "are prone to adultery." Abd al-Jabbar
(b. 935), another prominent scholar, claimed that "adultery is commonplace
in the cities and markets of Byzantium" – so much so that even "the
nuns from the convents went out to the fortresses to offer themselves to
monks."
For
all these reasons and more, European women, typified by neighboring Eastern
Roman women, became Islam's "beautiful femme fatale who makes men lose
their self-control," as Nadia Maria el-Cheikh, author of Byzantium Viewed by the Arabs ,
explains:
Our
[Arab-Muslim] sources show not Byzantine women but writers' images of these
women, who served as symbols of the eternal female – constantly a potential
threat, particularly due to blatant exaggerations of their sexual
promiscuity. In our texts, Byzantine women are strongly associated
with sexual immorality[.] ... While the one quality that our [Muslim] sources
never deny is the beauty of Byzantine women, the image that they create in
describing these women is anything but beautiful. Their depictions are,
occasionally, excessive, virtually caricatures, overwhelmingly negative.
Such
fevered fantasies – which "are clearly far from Byzantine reality" –
existed only in the minds of Muslim men and "must be recognized for what
they are: attempts to denigrate and defame a rival culture. ... In fact, in
Byzantium, women were expected to be retiring, shy, modest, and devoted to
their families and religious observances. ... The behavior of most women in
Byzantium was a far cry from the depictions that appear in Arabic
sources."
Clearly,
little has changed some 1,400 years after the founding of Islam: European women
continue to be seen as naturally promiscuous and thus provoking Muslim men into
raping them.
Thus,
in the United Kingdom, a Muslim man explained to a British woman why he was
raping her: "you
white women are good at it ." Another Muslim man called a
13-year-old virgin "a
little white slag " – British slang for "loose, promiscuous
woman" – before raping her.
In
Germany, a group of Muslim "refugees" stalked a 25-year-old woman,
hurled "filthy" insults at her, and taunted her for
sex. They too explained their logic to her – "German
girls are just there for sex " – before reaching into her blouse and
groping her. A Muslim man who almost killed his 25-year-old German
victim while raping her – and shouting "Allah!" – asked afterward if
she enjoyed it .
In
Austria, an "Arabic-looking man" approached a 27-year-old woman at a
bus stop, pulled
down his pants , and "all he could say was sex, sex, sex,"
prompting the woman to scream and flee.
In
short, the ancient Islamic motif concerning the alleged promiscuity of European
women is alive and well – irrespective of the latter's behavior – and continues
justifying the Muslim rape of Western women.
Yet,
even in this, Islam can turn to those "progressive," godless elements
that dominate Western society for cover. For, just as "the
Left" has worked long and hard to portray Islamic intolerance, violence,
and terrorism as the West's fault – because of the crusades, because of
colonialism, because of cartoons, because of Israel, because of freedom of
speech – it now adds "because of Western promiscuity" to the list of
reasons that "provoke" Muslims to behave like Muslims.
(For many more examples of Muslims sexually objectifying Western
women throughout history, see the author's new book, Sword
and Scimitar .)
Reports: Saudi
Authorities Tortured and Sexually Abused Human Rights Activists
Human rights organizations including
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch accused authorities in Saudi
Arabia on Tuesday of torturing and sexually abusing some of the country’s most
high-profile dissidents and human rights activists.
According to detailed testimony published
by Amnesty International, “activists were repeatedly tortured by electrocution
and flogging, leaving some unable to walk or stand properly,” leading to one of
the victims repeatedly trying to take her own life:
In one reported instance, one of the
activists was made to hang from the ceiling, and according to another
testimony, one of the detained women was reportedly subjected to sexual
harassment, by interrogators wearing face masks.
According to the testimonies
obtained, the human rights defenders were unable to walk or stand properly, had
uncontrolled shaking of the hands, and marks on the body. One of the activists
reportedly attempted to take her own life repeatedly inside the prison. Prison
authorities in Dhahban Prison have also reportedly warned detained activists
against disclosing any accounts of torture or prison procedures to family
members.
This testimony was also corroborated by
“informed sources” who spoke with Human Rights Watch, who reported on similar
cases of torture and sexual abuse:
The reports allege that torture by
Saudi
authorities included administering electric
shocks, whipping the women on
their thighs,
and forcible hugging and kissing, Human
Rights Watch said today.
The sources were
concerned that they and the activists would
suffer reprisals
if the women were identified
publicly.
The sources say that masked Saudi
interrogators tortured the women during the initial stages of interrogation,
but it was unclear whether they were seeking to force the women to sign
confessions or merely to punish them for their peaceful advocacy. Following the
interrogations, sources said, the women showed physical signs of torture,
including difficulty walking, uncontrolled shaking of the hands, and red marks
and scratches on their faces and necks. At least one of the women attempted to
commit suicide multiple times, the sources said.
The Saudi government has held the
activists in the Dhahban prison on the western Red Sea coast since May,
following a crackdown on women’s rights campaigners charged
with trying to “destabilize” the Kingdom and supposed links with
“suspicious” entities working outside the country.
The women were principally
campaigning for the establishment of equal women’s rights in the face of Crown
Prince Mohammed Bin Salman’s reforms to various aspects of Saudi’s religious
law, which include allowing women to drive cars.
On Wednesday, the Saudi government
strongly denied all
allegations of torture, claiming the activists were subject to the “standard
judiciary process.”
“The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s
judiciary system does not condone, promote, or allow the use of torture.
Anyone, whether male or female, being investigated is going through the
standard judiciary process led by the public prosecution while being held for
questioning, which does not in any way rely on torture either physical, sexual,
or psychological,” a Saudi official said.
The Islamic kingdom has come under
growing international condemnation in recent weeks following the murder of
Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the country’s embassy in
Istanbul last month. Principal suspects in the case include members of
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s inner circle, although he has denied
any connection to the killing.
On Tuesday, President Donald Trump confirmed that the U.S. would not pursue the
allegations against the country involving Khashoggi further for fear of
jeopardizing business and security relationship, despite growing criticism of
the country’s appalling human rights record.
“It’s a very simple equation for me.
I’m about making America great again and I’m about America first,” Trump said
in his statement. “We may never know all of the facts surrounding the murder of
Mr. Jamal Khashoggi. In any case, our relationship is with the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia. They have been a great ally in our very important fight against Iran.”
Follow Ben Kew on Facebook , Twitter at @ben_kew , or email him at
bkew@breitbart.com .
“QURAN SAYS KILL PEOPLE LIKE YOU. WE WILL KILL
YOU.”
Not much attention is
paid to the rising Islamic influence in Scotland. Aside from the Glasgow
Airport attack, there hasn't been much in the way of terrorism. And so it's
flown under the radar.
The likes of Osama Saeed and Hamza Yousaf are the
SNP's new defenders of Scottish values. Osama Saeed was also a Scottish
National Party candidate and an adviser to Prime Minister Salmond.
Osama Saeed, named one of Scotland's Top 100 thinkers and
opinion formers, wrote an article for The Guardian championing the
return of the Caliphate. "A restored caliphate," Osama explained,
"is entirely compatible with democratically accountable
institutions." It would be just like the EU, except its leader would be
called a Caliph, its law would be Sharia and if the US and Britain are really
sincere about helping Muslims, they should support the restoration of the Caliphate.
In an astoundingly short time, the Scottish National Party has
gone from collaborating with Nazis, to collaborating with Islamists. Its talk
of Scottish values has become a farce. SNP candidate Humza Yousaf took his oath
of allegiance in the Scottish Parliament in Urdu. Jahangir Hanif became
known as the Kalashnikov Councilor over a video of him firing an
AK-47 in an armed camp in Pakistan. And the SNP has funneled hundreds of
thousands of pounds to the Scottish Islamic Foundation
Paigham Mustafa and his family have been offered protection
by police after several fundamentalists branded him a
"Kafir", which means disbeliever, and issued death threats.
Mustafa claims to be living under a fatwa issued in 2001 by 15
imams in Glasgow after he published a series of articles questioning
mosque teachings. The married father of three later published his book The
Quran: God's Message to Mankind, his interpretation of the central religious
text of Islam.
Last week, a letter written by Mustafa questioning the practice
of fasting during Ramadan was published and subsequently posted on Facebook.
In a series of threatening messages under the post, one critic
said: “Shut up or else you will get your head chopped off … shut up or else you
will be beheaded … shut up you Kafir dog … you will get beheaded … we will kill
you kafir.”
A separate message sent privately by another critic said: “Quran
says kill people like you. You deserve to be killed. We will kill you.”
Another post by a third critic warned: “Don’t talk about Islam
you Kafir. Remove this post Kafir. Or else you will get killed like Rashad
Khalifa.”
Mustafa fears he will be targeted by fundamentalists in the UK
and compared himself to Asad Shah, who was stabbed to death in a
religiously-motivated murder in Glasgow in 2016. Shah’s killer, Tanveer Ahmed,
said Shah had “disrespected the messenger of Islam, the Prophet Muhammad”.
No place is safe. No
place is immune. Not when the doors to migration are open.
Democrat Corruption is a Clear and Present Danger to America
On November 6, it seemed the Republicans might hold their majority in the Senate and in the House. Sadly, they lost their majority in the House. The mystery is why so many Democrat candidates who are so obviously ethically challenged won in races that should not have even been close.
How and why do Democrats continue to vote for unqualified, dishonest candidates? Elizabeth Warren is a proven liar, a cheat who claimed Native American heritage in order to get a job at Harvard. Her baby, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, was her plan to wield control over all bank and non-bank institutions without Congressional interference. In short, she is a hard-left socialist who means to control how Americans earn, spend and borrow money, how they use their savings. Warren is a blight on the Constitution and the guaranteed freedoms of US citizens. She is an advance operative for the socialist America the left envisions.
Andrew Gillum, the left's choice to be Governor of Florida, is the failed mayor of Tallahassee. He remains under FBI investigation for corruption. Given the information about that investigation that has been released, he appears yet another greedy and corrupt Democrat pol in the Hillary Clinton mold. The stability of Tallahassee declined catastrophically under his leadership; crime and murder rose drastically .
Gillum sold out his city for money, and cries racism when confronted with his crimes. He should never have been the candidate for the Governor of Florida but the left cares only about race and power, not ethics or honor. For progressives, race trumps everything else, even character. If Gillum wins after the cheating Broward County is infamous for, Florida will suffer the slings and arrows that are inevitable under politicians like Gillum. Why was this race even close? Have half the nation's voters scuttled any semblance of traditional values in order to win? Yes.
Then there is Robert Menendez, the credibly accused pedophile senator of New Jersey. He should be in prison but was saved by one juror in his corruption trial with whom he partied after his win on November 6. Who votes for a man like this? There is plenty of proof that he took bribes from a wealthy client for numerous favors, trips to the Dominican Republic for sex with underage girls being one of them. But New Jersey just re-elected this man. They too have lost all sense of right vs. wrong.
Stacey Abrams, the still grasping gubernatorial contender in Georgia, is a hard-left, anti-capitalist, anti-Second Amendment candidate. She owes about $200K in credit card debt and wants to run Georgia? She too is corrupt and incompetent. She is also willing to cheat to win. Are Georgians ignorant of her many, many negatives? If they are, they voted for her anyway. Again, skin color trumps everything.
The left ignores fine men like John James , who ran for the House in Michigan against Debbie Stabenow. The left ignored Eddie Edwards who ran in New Hampshire. Both men are conservative African Americans. The American left today pretends such candidates do not exist. They have ignored fine people like James and Edwards as they have always ignored brilliant men like Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, Walter Williams, Jason Riley, and Larry Elder. They revile the brilliant Clarence Thomas. They don't like to be reminded of men like Frederick Douglass or Booker T. Washington . Neither of them, like Sowell, Steele, Williams and Elder ever promoted the idea that African Americans were or would be perennial victims. Each of them advocated for quite the opposite, for self-reliance and independence.
This notion of personal responsibility is anathema to today's left; they need and promote subservience and dependency among their flock of reliable but uninformed voters. This is why they encourage the immigration of so many millions of illegal migrants. They assume they will be able to win for them the right to vote. Judging by the number of them who likely voted in the midterms, their plan is succeeding.
This is how they will destroy America from within. The leftist billionaires who orchestrate these plans are extravagantly wealthy. Those tasked with representing us in Congress will never be exposed to the downside of the invasion of millions of migrants, the crime or the financial burden. They have nothing but contempt for those of us who must endure the consequences of our communities being intruded upon by gang members, drug dealers and human traffickers. These people have no intention of becoming Americans; like the Democrats who welcome them, they have contempt for us.
Then there is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the thoroughly-ignorant-of-everything candidate who won her district by 80%! This young woman knows nothing about how any government works, let alone ours. She is hopelessly uniformed; she knows even less about US history or the Constitution. She is clueless about the economy. When asked how she would pay for all the give-away programs she touts, she replied that that was a "puzzling question"! "You just pay for it" she answers. She has no idea; no idea about anything. She thinks she will be "inaugurated" to the House! Most fourth graders know more than she does about US history. And yet she is already thinking about running for President! This is a wholesale indictment of our politicized, dumbed-down system of education. Many of her constituents are immigrants; we are obviously not educating them at all. They voted for all the free stuff -- college, medical care, basic income, housing, that Ocasio-Cortez has promised to deliver. This is what socialist Democrats dream about: perpetual power over a populace too ignorant to rebel. American as founded is at grave risk.
In addition to ODasio-Cortez, Gillum, Ilhan
likely cheated to take the Arizona Senate
seat, there is Linda Sanchez . Kirsten Gillibrand is a Hillary clone; she only cares about her own political power. She speaks like a small child but is also considering a run for the presidency. She was best pals with Bill Clinton and Harvey Weinstein until they were politically inconvenient. Amy Klobuchar, who embraced the vicious and obviously false allegations against Judge Kavanagh, was re-elected! Like every other Democrat member of the judiciary committee, she knew those accusations were false, without a shred of corroboration, but her constituents re-elected her! Who are these voters? How do they reconcile voting for people willing to destroy a fine man for political purposes? She is exactly who every Democrat member of that committee is, who every member of the Democrat Party is: nothing more than power-hungry political operatives out to ruin any and all opponents by any means necessary. They are a clear and present danger to American as founded.
Young people are no longer taught the truth of American history. They are not taught the truth of the Holocaust. Anti-Semitism is acceptable, even promoted, by the Democrats. They embrace Linda Sarsour and Louis Farrakhan without shame. Young people don't know that communism killed over a hundred million people in the twentieth century. Their calculated-by-leftists ignorance is destroying our country. They try to sell the idea that gender is not a factor of biology! They attempt to convince young people that climate change is man-made (a travesty) and that global warming causes wild fires (a lie). Having control over academia, they have willfully brainwashed students for nearly two generations. Unless your children are a strong-willed, independent thinkers, do not send them to college!
How and why the American left has devolved into the kind of party one finds in a banana republic is a mystery. That our media is so anxious to promote their corrupt candidates and the low-brow tactics they employ is a tragedy. Do they do it because they can no longer win by promulgating their Orwellian vision of a socialist state, mandated equality of outcome? Perhaps. They will never sell socialism to enough sentient Americans to win. They need millions of uninformed voters to succeed.
We must not let them cheat their way to power over the rest of us. Their ongoing vote fraud must be stopped and the Democrats need to take a look at themselves and at what they have become. It's not a pretty picture. What they have become threatens to destroy the greatest nation on the planet and they are doing it on purpose. They have nothing but contempt for the US as founded and for those of us who love this country.
No comments:
Post a Comment