This week we learned that an old problem that gained a lot of media traction during the heyday of ISIS is still plaguing us. We’re talking about Americans deciding to leave the country and head to Iraq or Syria, not to defend our allies, but to fight with the terrorists. These “American jihadists” (as they came to be known) were broadly reviled but seemed to provide some positive PR for the terrorists and assist in their recruiting efforts. Now, with ISIS having lost almost all of their caliphate and being largely on the run, what became of those American traitors?
It turns out that at least some of them are still out there. Our Kurdish allies captured two more of them recently. (Jonathan Turley)
Kurdish Democratic Forces in Syria report the arrest of two Americans allegedly fighting with or aiding the Islamic State terrorist organization in Syria. The two men are identified as Warren Christopher Clark, 34, of Texas and Zaid Abed al-Hamed, 35.
They were captured by the Kurds during a counter-terrorism raid near the Iraq border in the vicinity of one of the few remaining holds of ISIS in Syria. Prior to their capture, the two, along with a Pakistani National and a male reportedly from Ireland, were preparing an attack against civilians fleeing the battlefields.
The Kurds made the announcement last Sunday and U.S. Army Colonel Scott Rawlinson reports the incident is under investigation.
Details are a bit thin on Zaid Abed al-Hamed, but Warren Christopher Clark has been on our radar for some time. Clark sent in an application to join ISIS and assist them as an English teacher in Mosul a few years back. (Language skills are apparently prized among groups seeking to burn down the entire world.) Now both of these characters are in custody.
This story prompted me to wonder just how many more of these traitors are still out there and operating with our enemies. We were still receiving warnings from Homeland Security last February highlighting this threat. At that time, a study commissioned by George Washington University estimated that “nearly half of the 64 Americans who fought with those groups are believed to have survived the conflict.” This raised the prospect that they might still be in country fighting or, even worse, could be heading back to the United States to launch terror attacks here.
Not all of them fared very well. One of the more famous traitors was Eric Harroun, who left home to go fight with ISIS over a decade ago. He did eventually wind up returning home but died of an overdose in Arizona in 2014. (A fate that was far too good for him if you ask me.)
The bottom line is that it’s clearly possible that we still have dozens of American Jihadists out there. They deserve a lot more “justice” than the native ISIS fighters in Iraq and Syria. Remember that Dante said the fourth and deepest, frozen round in the Ninth Circle of Hell was reserved for traitors. Now we have two more in custody who should be heading for a frozen eternity of punishment. It’s just disturbing to think that we still haven’t tracked them all down.

Police in Muslim Chechnya Torture Two to Death, Arrest Dozens for ‘Homosexuality’

 

https://www.breitbart.com/asia/2019/01/14/police-muslim-chechnya-torture-two-death-arrest-dozens-homosexuality/

 


22

2:56

Police in Chechnya, a majority-Muslim region of Russia, have relaunched a campaign to arrest suspected gay and lesbian Russians, killing two and arresting over 40 others in the past month according to a report published Monday.

According to Russia’s LGBT Network, which seeks to protect LGBT people from repression and violence in Chechnya, the arrests of suspected homosexuals began last month. The group has documented at least two people killed while tortured in police custody.
“We can already say that the torture being suffered by those detained is savage, much worse than for those detained in 2017,” the LGBT Network’s programme director, Igor Kochetkov, told the Telegraph. “We know of two dead, but probably more have been killed.”
Breitbart TV

The individuals are reportedly being held at an infamous prison in the town of Argun, where they have had their documents seized to prevent them fleeing the region. Authorities have also used the threat of violence against relatives and family members should they speak out about the crackdown.
The arrests are the latest case of an anti-homosexual crackdown in the Muslim majority region, where Putin-backed strongman leader Ramzan Kadyrov has led repressive campaigns in an effort to “purify” the blood of the Chechnyan people.
The most prominent case took place in 2017 when over 100 gay men were rounded up and tortured. Some were handed over to relatives with the expectation they would carry out an “honor killing,” while others were forced to sign blank criminal charges for possible future detainment.
On Monday, a spokesperson for Kadyrov denounced the reports as “complete lies [that] don’t have an ounce of truth in them.” Kadyrov has repeatedly denied all allegations of human rights violations and widespread persecution of LGBT Russians and has previously claimed that gay people “don’t exist” in Chechnya because their own relatives would have banished them from the region.
“You cannot arrest or repress people who just don’t exist in the republic,” Kadyrov said at the time. “If such people existed in Chechnya, law enforcement would not have to worry about them since their own relatives would have sent them to where they could never return.”
In an interview with the BBC last January, Kadyrov also said the allegations were mainly from people looking to make money.
“That’s all an invention by foreign agents who are paid a few kopecks” he said. “So-called human rights activists make up all sorts of nonsense for money.”

Kadyrov’s claims have not suppressed evidence of a sustained campaign of repression in Chechnya; former U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley was among the many figures to publicly condemn the reports.
“Widespread detentions, torture, and killings of gay people have resumed in Chechnya,” Kochetkov added. “Persecution of men and women suspected of being gay never stopped. It’s only that its scale has been changing.”
Follow Ben Kew on Facebook, Twitter at @ben_kew, or email him at bkew@breitbart.com.

 



 

 

January 1, 2019

Why was a Muslim doctor who vowed to poison Jewish patients working at the famed Cleveland Clinic?

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/01/why_was_a_muslim_doctor_who_vowed_to_poison_jewish_patients_working_at_the_famed_cleveland_clinic.html

 

Is there any profession that merits the esteem that doctors have?  I don't think so.
What doctors do not only requires significant brains, but requires professionalism, because patient trust is so critical.  Without that trust, how would a doctor be able to get a patient to take his or her clothes off, bend over for an exam, or accept a medical treatment with bad side effects?  Trust is what makes the whole profession work.
This is why this story out of Cleveland is so chilling.
Medical resident at Cleveland Clinic Lara Kollab, who published antisemitic statements on Twitter regarding her Jewish patients at the hospital, was dismissed from the hospital, the Cleveland Clinic reported on Monday. 
Both Canary Mission and StopAntisemitism.org called attention to Kollab's tweet from 2012, in which she wrote "ill purposely give all the yahood the wrong meds..."
Here's a screenshot of her vile tweet (Hat tip: GatewayPundit):
Did I read that right?  A doctor who threatened to give her patients the wrong medicine, on the grounds that they were Jewish?  ("Yahood" is a word that means Jewish.)  That's an actual hate crime.
What was she doing working at the Cleveland Clinic?  She shouldn't have even been allowed to scrub toilets there.  This person is really a doctor?
This suggests something awful going on.  It's not just that the prestigious Cleveland Clinic should have vetted her before they hired her, or gotten some competent vetters who understand that a doctor who threatens to kill is not a doctor a patient will trust.  It's also sign of decline in the medical profession.  How on Earth did this person get a medical license, and why hasn't it been pulled?  Did no one check her ethics?  She has a long history of vile anti-Semitic tweets, loaded with homicidal ravings and musings, which are there for all to see on Twitter.  This wasn't someone who just whispered her anti-Semitism, she broadcast it.  This person shouldn't just be fired; she should be de-licensed, and maybe jailed for such vile threats, which not only bring great dishonor to the medical profession, but erode the trust that patients must have in doctors.
After reading a story like this, Jewish patients (and Cleveland has 80,000 Jewish residents) will now have to start wondering if they've got another one like her, and that will extend to other patients, too. 
It's sad and shocking, because doctors are such amazing people.  They not only cure the sick – sometimes, the very, very sick, through medical miracles performed daily – but they also are fanatical about their devotion to the Hippocratic Oath, which begins with "first, do no harm."  They care for all people, even unworthy people, from injured bank-robbers to people who sponge off the system, putting the saving of human life above all other considerations.  What's more, the heroism of doctors and other medical professionals was there for all to see during the Paradise fires, where we got stories such as this (Google, take note), with doctors racing through flames on all sides of them to save lives.  Doctors are absolutely amazing people, showing every day that their work is a calling, not a job. 
So it's important to get answers on this, because Democrats are angling hard to have the government take over medical care, and with their "Medicare for All" plans, it's a certainty that patients will no longer be allowed to choose their doctors.  If you were Jewish, how'd you like to get assigned someone like that?  You don't even have to be Jewish to start to worry about this one.  This person threatened to poison medical patients because they are Jewish.  What she did was poison medicine.

 

Jihad: Islam's Engine



Right from the start, violent jihad served as the engine of Islam under the command and supervision of Muhammad himself.  To understand how quickly Islam spread around the world, we must see the timeline of Islam.
After Muhammad's death in 632 A.D., his friend Abu Bakr was named caliph and ruler of the Islamic community, or Ummah.  Muhammad's followers in a short time occupied a vast geographic area; conversion to Islam was heightened by Islamic missionaries, who intermingled with local populations to promulgate the Islamic teachings.  It resulted in Islam's spread outward from Mecca toward both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and the creation of the Muslim world.
In no time at all, Islam spread like a pandemic.  Once it attacked the mind of its victims, this debilitating disease was capable of transforming them into helpless pawns that had no choice but to execute what they were directed to do.
Here is the truth, as bitter as it may be.  Islam is the culprit.  Islam is anything but a religion of peace.  Violence is at the core of Islam. Violence is institutionalized in the Muslim's holy book, the Qur'an, in many verses:
Qur'an: 9:5: "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."
Qur'an: 9:112: "The Believers fight in Allah's cause; they slay and are slain, kill and are killed."
Qur'an: 8:39: "So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world)."
Qur'an: 8:65: "O Prophet, urge the faithful to fight.  If there are twenty among you with determination they will vanquish two hundred; if there are a hundred then they will slaughter a thousand unbelievers, for the infidels are a people devoid of understanding."
Qur'an: 9:38: "Believers, what is the matter with you, that when you are asked to go forth and fight in Allah's Cause you cling to the earth?  Do you prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter?  Unless you go forth, He will afflict and punish you with a painful doom, and put others in your place."
That's what the Qur'an commands the believer repeatedly – to make jihad on even the people of the book, Jews and Christians.  Islam essentially invented the idea that Christians, Jews, and pagans are an abomination and offensive to Allah and that their very existence represents an attack upon the self-defined Islamic right to reign over the world.  Allah thus enlists Muslim believers to eradicate by force those who offend him and, by disbelieving, prevent his rule.  True Muslim believers therefore become the enforcers, hit men and mercenaries for their god, in order to establish a global caliphate for their parasitic clergy.  Their targets are artificially constructed adversaries.
Muslim believers hence are instructed to fear the "great Satan" and are told that if they do not live up to Allah's calls to jihad, they themselves are offensive to Allah and to their families.
Now, the only question that remains is the extent of a Muslim's obedience to the Qur'an and the Sunna, the life examples of Muhammad.  To be sure, a great many Muslims are not following the dictates of the Qur'an verbatim, as they should, since they consider it to be the literal immutable perfect words of Allah.
Furthermore, nowhere do I say all Muslims believe in shedding the blood of others.  Yet the commandments of the Qur'an to believers are clear and emphatic.  It is for this reason that an innumerable number of Muslims do engage in jihad and suicide volunteers vie with one another to offer their services to their handler leaders.
A true Muslim does not and cannot believe in freedom of choice.  In the religion of Islam – Submission – everything is up to Allah, as clearly and repeatedly stipulated in the Qur'an.  The raison d'être for the Muslim is to be unconditionally submissive to the will and dictates of Allah.  Everything a "good" Muslim does is contingent upon the will and decree of Allah, he is indoctrinated to believe. 
To cut to the chase, we need to eliminate some disinformation and myths about the "war on terror."  We are not fighting terrorism.  We are engaging in an ideological battle between freedom, conservatism, democracy, individual rights, capitalism, and "Christian" ethics and Islamofascism, communism-socialism, theocracy, and tyranny. 
There are also internationalist, dictatorial, globalist forces that seek to use the conflict to create an international government and the unification of all religions by the destruction of nationalism, patriotism, individual rights, and sectarianism.
It is not "fanatical," "radical," or "extreme" Islam that we are fighting, but normal, orthodox, canonical, typical, accepted, traditional Islam, straight from the mouth of Muhammad.  Islam is violent in direct proportion to its mission and scripture.  The so-called fanatics and terrorists are only upholding the truth of their principles. 
In short: We must begin to declare Islam evil, not from a sectarian perspective, but from a universal, humanist one.  Every encroachment of Islam as a religion must be rejected and discouraged by all people everywhere.  Any leftist who attempts to give aid and comfort to this religion of hate must be denounced and frustrated at every turn.  Otherwise, get used to your radioactive suit and your fallout shelter, a standard of living – and a level of freedom – one tenth of what you have today. 

 

 

 

 

The Islamist Terrorist as Psychopath



There are basic interrelated questions that any student of human history must ask. Why is human history filled with so much evil, and why do good people so often do nothing in the face of evil?
Jamie Glazov’s new book, Jihadist Psychopath: How He Is Charming, Seducing, and Devouring Us, addresses that troubling question.
The answer that he comes up with in Jihadist Psychopath is a collusion that is not born only of simple radicalism, but of the ways in which Islamic political movements play on our own emotional weaknesses.
Jihadist Psychopath is a journey into the dark heart of the Western world using the metaphor of the interplay between the psychopath and his victims. That metaphor pervades Glazov’s text, structuring his understanding of the growing terror death toll and the accompanying sympathy for the terrorists.
Glazov, who has a BA in Political Science and a PhD in History, had already made a study of Islamic terrorists. To prepare for the writing of Jihadist Psychopath, he also made a study of the most fascinating and deadliest element in the criminal life of societies: the psychopath. Human societies are bound together by empathy. Multiculturalism and diversity stretch and expand our sense of empathy to its limits. The psychopath plays on our sense of empathy despite lacking any empathy of his or her own.
That paradox makes the psychopath extremely curious and deadly. Like a cuckoo bird, the psychopath has evolved to exploit a biological loophole, empathy, meant to bind a species together around shared interests, without the biological commitment to those interests, creating a predator that is facile and adept, as Glazov’s title puts it, at “charming, seducing and devouring us”.
The uses and abuses of empathy by the psychopath and the Islamic terrorist are a major focus of Jihadist Psychopath. Islamic terrorists take advantage of the empathy bonds that multicultural societies use to bind diverse populations together into a single functional entity whose members cooperate and even sacrifice for the benefit of the group, without ever sharing in that sense of mutual responsibility.
Like psychopaths, Glazov argues, Islamic terrorists create the illusion of a mutual relationship while viciously exploiting and eventually destroying their victims by degrees. These victims can be the individuals, the women who marry Islamic terrorists only to be used by them to obtain legal status or to birth new Jihadists, but they are the microcosm of our larger society which is also being charmed, seduced, and destroyed by an ideology that turns our own values and our sense of self against us.
“Once he succeeds in lodging his hooks into his target’s body, he inflicts the key wound, convincing him that he (the victim) is the actual offender and guilty party, and that the psychopath is the actual victim,” Glazov writes.
The exchange of roles between perpetrator and victim is crucial to the predation of weaker societies on stronger societies. As predatory plants mimic the appearance of the prey of their victims, the Jihadist appears to resemble a victim of Western civilization, of colonialism, capitalism, and imperialism, turning guilt and grief into the aphrodisiac of his monstrous appetite, before entrapping his civilizational victim.
Victimhood is the protective coloration of the psychopathic predator, both in his familiar role as the demon haunting a thousand crime stories, thrillers, and action movies, and the less familiar guise of CAIR, ISNA, and countless other Muslim Brotherhood front groups who defend the predation of terrorists by reinventing them as the victims of the very people whom they are killing and destroying.
And yes, the victims are neither truly helpless nor innocent. As the con artist exploits greed, the psychopath’s swollen sense of self-regard feeds upon the narcissism of his victims.
As Glazov notes in Jihadist Psychopath, “It is crucial to emphasize that many victims in the con game possess a tremendous narcissism, since in needing to believe that they are part of the script and can actually change it, they incubate a pathological and self-destructive ego.”
The boundless narcissism of the Left, which convinces its true believers that their beverage choices and their menu options can save or destroy the planet, that even their pettiest actions and emotional states are deeply meaningful signifiers of great and terrible changes in the world, makes it absurdly easy for the Islamist psychopath, who offers the illusion of saving them and himself, to hook them on his line.
The Left hungers for victims to justify its inflated sense of self-importance and its greed for power. Islamists exploit their messianic delusions by playing the victims in need of rescuing. The Islamist psychopath validates the twisted psychology of his radical victims only to destroy his rescuers.
This same psychodrama has played out in Iran, in Egypt, in the United Kingdom, and the United States. When the alliances unravel, as they finally must, the socialist utopia instead becomes the caliphate.
Jihadist Psychopath is an invaluable resource for understanding and coming to grips with the human drama behind the headlines and the radical emotions behind the radical march of political events. It gets at the unacknowledged truth behind the political psychodramas of the Left, the narcissistic notion that even the most destructive behaviors can feel good because they make us feel good about who we are.
“Who we are” was the theme of  a number of Obama speeches. It is no coincidence that the politician who most definitively straddled the cultural divide between Islam and the Left, while uniting them politically in their mutual hatred of the United States of America, could never get enough of telling us who we are.
The core of Jihadist Psychopath lies in the conflict of identities, the slow sonorous clash of civilizations between a West that is losing its sense of self and an East that is regaining it, and between former conquerors losing their religion and renewed conquerors regaining it, between monsters and victims.
“Islamic supremacism crushes all individuality within itself. Its members cannot have their own identity or beliefs, nor can they explore or nurture their own happiness or talents,” Jamie Glazov writes.
And those same Islamic supremacists use their conviction in the inferiority of the individual to destroy the identities of their victims, temporarily adopting their borrowed identities as camouflage, mirroring their victims, gaining their confidence, abusing them, destroying their sense of self, and killing them.
Jihadist Psychopath is a compelling look at the process by which the West is losing its life and its soul.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

 ‘Justice Democrat’ Ilhan Omar Argued Against Bill on Female Genital Mutilation

 

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/11/21/justice-democrat-ilhan-omar-opposed-law-to-ban-female-genital-mutilation/

21 Nov 20186,825
2:40

Ilhan Omar, the newly-elected U.S. representative from Minnesota’s 5th congressional district, and a member of the left-wing “Justice Democrats,” argued against a 2017 bill in her state that increased penalties for female genital mutilation.

Omar is being celebrated as one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress, and a member of a new cohort of young, “progressive” and “diverse” representatives who purportedly represent the future of the Democratic Party.


welcome to the future of the democratic party

Yet Omar’s stance on female genital mutilation (FGM) is anything but “progressive.”
In 2017, she questioned a bill in the Minnesota State House against the practice, making it “a felony for parents to subject their daughters to the procedure and calls for loss of custody and prison terms from five to 20 years, depending on the extent of the injuries,” as well as “increas[ing] penalties for those who perform the procedure,” the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported.
While she agreed that the practice was “heinous,” and ultimately voted for the bill — contrary to at least one report — Omar claimed that FGM should not be singled out by a new law, and that parents should be charged under existing laws. She was quoted in local news as arguing: “I don’t want us to create laws because we want to get into the media and because we want a flashy headline.” She also reportedly opposed removing victims from their parents’ custody, according to Alpha News.
The bill later failed in the Republican-controlled Minnesota State Senate.
The issue came to the fore Tuesday after a federal judge in Michigan tossed out federal criminal charges against a group of Muslim defendants who had carried out FGM on young girls, ruling the federal ban unconstitutional. The state laws against the practice are valid, but the federal law overstepped constitutional boundaries, the judge ruled.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
Update: While she argued against the bill, Omar ultimately voted for it. The article has been updated to reflect that fact.

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.
This is easily discerned by examining medieval Muslim perceptions – and subsequent treatment – of European women, as documented throughout Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West (see American Thinker review here).  Consider Muslim views concerning neighboring Byzantine women, who came to represent all European or Christian women to Islam.
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 Australia, a Muslim cabbie groped and insulted his female passengers, including by saying, "All Australian women are sluts and deserve to be raped."
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

 21 Nov 2018203
4:12

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.
But it was the topic of one of my first Front Page Magazine articles.
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
And this now is just the sort of thing that will happen.
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.