Victory! Raymond Ibrahim to Speak at U.S. Army War College Next Week
Victory! Raymond Ibrahim to Speak at U.S. Army War College Next Week
Truth gets last laugh in battle with CAIR.
Raymond Ibrahim, a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, will be speaking about his book, Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West, at the U.S. Army War College in Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania, next week.
This is significant: the War College first invited Mr. Ibrahim to speak last year; however, one week before his scheduled appearance in June, 2019, a number of politically active Islamists—including CAIR, Linda Sarsour, etc.—protested wildly, including by presenting Mr. Ibrahim as a “white supremacist” who if allowed to speak would incite an “already racist and nationalist” American army to start randomly killing Muslims in the street (for background, click here). Due to the hysteria created by CAIR and allies, the event was subsequently canceled/postponed.
It is, therefore, a very welcome development to see Mr. Ibrahim re-invited to lecture about the long but suppressed history of conflict between Islam and the West before what will no doubt be an even larger military audience—thanks to the previous controversy created by CAIR.
The description and flyer of the event, as they appear on the U.S. Army Heritage & Education Center, a branch of the War College, follows. FrontPage readers who live locally are encouraged to attend this free event:
Events
Wed, February 26, 2020
Sword and Scimitar
On Wednesday, February 26 at 6:30 p.m., at the U.S. Army Heritage and Education Center (USAHEC), author Raymond Ibrahim will address the historical roots of the Christian-Islamic rivalry in, "Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West." From the birth of Islam and the long forgotten battles leading to the present day conflict, Ibrahim will provide historical and religious context to understand the current relationship between Islam and the Western world. He will draw on his research of original Greek and Arabic sources used for his 2018 book. The lecture will be followed by a moderated discussion.
Raymond Ibrahim is a book author and speaker on Middle East and Islamic topics. He is currently the Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute, and Judith Friedman Rosen Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum. Ibrahim's presentation is part two of the Controversies second theme “Historical Underpinnings of Conflict between Islam and the West,” and the fourth in the "Controversies in Military History Lecture Series." This series provides an educational forum for our audience to examine provocative topics in the interest of academic growth and promoting communication. This series is designed to serve as an important step in evaluating differing perspectives, while encouraging open, professional dialogue on potentially opposing opinions. Lectures and topics do not necessarily reflect the policies or opinions of the USAHEC, the U.S. Army War College, or the U.S. Army.
THE KORAN
BIBLE OF THE
MUSLIM TERRORIST:
“The Wahhabis finance thousands of madrassahs throughout the world
where young boys are brainwashed into becoming fanatical foot-soldiers for the
petrodollar-flush Saudis and other emirs of the Persian Gulf.” AMIL IMANI
Koran 2:191
"slay the unbelievers wherever you find them"
Koran 3:21 "Muslims must not take the infidels as friends"
Koran 5:33 "Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticize Islam"
Koran 8:12 "Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Koran"
Koran 8:60 " Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the infidels"
Koran 8:65 "The unbelievers are stupid, urge all Muslims to fight them"
Koran 9:5 "When the opportunity arises, kill the infidels wherever you find them"
Koran 9:123 "Make war on the infidels living in your neighborhood"
Koran 22:19 "Punish the unbelievers with garments of fire, hooked iron rods, boiling water, melt their skin and bellies"
Koran 47:4 "Do not hanker for peace with the infidels, behead them when you catch them".
Koran 3:21 "Muslims must not take the infidels as friends"
Koran 5:33 "Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticize Islam"
Koran 8:12 "Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Koran"
Koran 8:60 " Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the infidels"
Koran 8:65 "The unbelievers are stupid, urge all Muslims to fight them"
Koran 9:5 "When the opportunity arises, kill the infidels wherever you find them"
Koran 9:123 "Make war on the infidels living in your neighborhood"
Koran 22:19 "Punish the unbelievers with garments of fire, hooked iron rods, boiling water, melt their skin and bellies"
Koran 47:4 "Do not hanker for peace with the infidels, behead them when you catch them".
“The tentacles of the Islamist hydra have deeply penetrated the
world. The Egyptian-based Muslim Brotherhood poses a clear threat in Egypt. The
Muslim Brotherhood also wages its deadly campaign through its dozens of
well-established and functioning branches all over the world.”
“The Wahhabis finance thousands of madrassahs throughout the world
where young boys are brainwashed into becoming fanatical foot-soldiers for the
petrodollar-flush Saudis and other emirs of the Persian Gulf.” AMIL IMANI
* We will take advantage of their immigration policy to
infiltrate them.
* We will use their own welfare system to provide us with
food, housing, schooling, and health care, while we out breed them and plot against
them. We will Caliphate on their dime.
* We will use political correctness as a weapon. Anyone who
criticizes us, we will take the opportunity to grandstand and curry favor from
the media and Democrats and loudly accuse our critics of being an Islamophobe.
* We will use their own discrimination laws against them
and slowly introduce Sharia Law into their culture..
Duping Americans on Sharia
A detailed look at how
Islamic apologist extraordinaire John Esposito whitewashes Islamic terror.
January 14, 2020
Raymond Ibrahim
Raymond
Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
Does Islam itself promote
hostility for and violence against non-Muslims, or are all the difficulties
between the West and Islam based on secondary factors—from “radical”
interpretations of Islam, to economics and grievances?
This is the fundamental
question.
Obviously, if “anti-infidel”
hostility is inherent to Islam itself, then the conflict becomes existential—a
true clash of civilizations, with no easy fixes and lots of ugly implications
along the horizon.
Because of this truism, those
whose job it is to whitewash Islam’s image in the West insist on the
opposite—that all difficulties are temporal and not rooted to innate Islamic
teachings.
Enter Shariah: What Everyone Needs to Know,
co-authored by John Esposito and Natana J. Delong-Bas. The authors’ goal
is to exonerate Shariah, which they portray as enshrining “the common good (maslahah), human
dignity, social justice, and the centrality of the community” from Western
criticism or fear, which they say is based solely on “myth” and
“sensationalism.”
In their introductory chapters
they define Shariah as being built upon the words of the Koran and the Sunna
(or example) of the Muslim prophet Muhammad as contained in sahih (canonical)
hadiths. They add: “Shariah and Islamic law are not the same thing.
The distinction between divine law (Shariah) and its human interpretation,
application, and development (Islamic law) is important to keep in mind throughout
this book…. Whereas Shariah is immutable and infallible, Islamic law (fiqh) is fallible and
changeable.”
Next the authors highlight how
important Shariah is to a majority of Muslims. They cite a 2013 Pew Poll
which found that 69% of Muslims in the Middle East and North Africa, 73%
in South Asia, and 55% in Central Asia believe that “Shariah is God’s [Allah’s]
divine revelation.”
Even larger numbers “favored
the establishment of Shariah as official law”: 99% in Afghanistan, 84% in South
Asia, 74% in the Middle East and North Africa, and 64% in sub-Saharan Africa.
So far so good. The
authors’ introductory claims (that Shariah is fundamental to Islam) and
statistics (that hundreds
of millions of Muslims revere and wish to see it implemented)
are correct.
But they also beg the
aforementioned question: is Shariah itself behind
the intolerance, misogyny, violence, and terrorism committed in the name of
Islam?
Here, the hitherto objective
authors shift gears and take on the mantle of apologists. Their thesis is
simple: Any and all negative activities Muslims engage in are to be pinned on
anything and everything—so long as it’s not Shariah.
In order to support this
otherwise unsupportable position, and as might be expected, the remainder of
the book consists of obfuscation, dissembling, and lots and lots of contextual
omissions and historical distortions.
A small sampling follows:
Shariah on Women
The authors quote and discuss
at length many Koran verses about women that seem positive (Koran 30:21, 3:195,
and 2:187), without alluding to counter verses that permit husbands to beat
their wives (4:34) and treat them as “fields” to be “plowed however you wish”
(2:223). Nor do they deal with Muhammad’s assertions that women are
“lacking in intelligence” and will form the bulk of hell’s denizens, as
recounted in a canonical hadith.
They partially quote Koran 4:3:
“…marry those that please you of other women, two or three or four. But if you
fear that you will not be just, then marry only one.” This suits the
authors’ purpose, which is to present the Koran as implicitly recommending only
one wife, since it acknowledges the near impossibility for a man to treat all
wives equally. Yet the authors deliberately cut
off the continuation of that verse—which permits Muslim men to copulate with an
unlimited amount of sex slaves (ma malakat aymanukum) even if they
are married.
They also dissemble about child
marriage, saying “classical Islamic law” permits it, but only when “the child
reaches a mature age.” Yet they make no mention that, based on
Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha—that is, based on his Sunna, which is immutable
and part of Shariah—nine is considered a “mature age.”
Freedom of Religion and
Non-Muslims
The authors claim that “There
are more than 100 Quranic verses that … affirm freedom of religion and
conscience.” They quote many at length and assert that “The guiding
Shariah principle … underscored by Quran 3:28, 29:46, and 60:89, is that
believers should treat unbelievers decently and equitably as long as the
unbelievers do not behave aggressively.”
Yet they fail to mention or
sideline the many contradictory verses that call for relentless war on
non-Muslims—who are further likened to dumb cattle in Koran 25:44 —until they
surrender, one way or another, to Islam (e.g., 8:39, 9:5, 9:29).
They fail to quote the verses
that form the highly divisive doctrine of al-wala’ w’al bara’ (“Loyalty
and Enmity”), including Koran 5:51, which forbids Muslims from befriending Jews
and Christians, and Koran 60:4, which commands Muslims to harbor only “hate”
for non-Muslims, until they “believe in Allah alone.”
Needless to say, they ignore
Koran 3:28, which permits Muslims to feign friendship for non-Muslims, whenever the former are under the latter’s authority (such is
the doctrine of taqiyya;
see here, here, here, here, and here for examples).
It is, incidentally, because of
all these divisive Koran verses—because
of Shariah—that the Islamic State forthrightly explained, “We hate you, first and
foremost, because you are disbelievers.”
The closest the authors get to
address these issues is in a section titled, “Can Muslims in the West be Loyal
Citizens.” They respond with a yes—but the evidence they cite are polls
(based on wishful interpretations), which of course tells the reader little
about the topic they purport to “de-mythologize”: Shariah.
Jihad
As might be expected, when the
authors reach the topic of jihad, their dissembling reaches a new level.
They repeatedly insist that jihad, as enshrined in Shariah, is simply the
Muslim counterpart of Western Just War theory, which teaches that war and
aggression are permissible, but only in defense or to recover one’s territory
from occupiers: “The lesser or outer jihad involves defending Islam and
the Muslim community.” As usual, they spend much time quoting and
elaborating on Koran verses that comport with this position, while ignoring or
sidelining the many contradictory verses. In reality, mainstream Islam
holds that the Koran’s “Sword Verses” (especially 9:5 and 9:29) have abrogated all the peaceful
ones, thereby making warfare on non-Muslims—for no less a reason than that
they are non-Muslims—obligatory.
Consider Koran 9:29:
“Fight those who do not believe in Allah nor the Last Day, nor forbid what
Allah and his Messenger have forbidden, nor embrace the religion of truth
[Islam] from the People of the Book [Jews and Christians], until they pay the
jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.”
What, exactly, is “defensive”
about this verse?
Similarly, they claim
that dar al-harb,
or “abode of war”—Islam’s designation for all those non-Muslim territories
(such as Europe) that Muslims were historically in a permanent state of war
with—“applied to other parties with whom Muslims were in conflict.” Again, they
fail to mention that the primary reason Muslims were “in conflict” with them
was because they were non-Muslim,
and that all non-Muslim territories were by default part of the “abode of war,”
except when treaties advantageous to Islam were drawn.
Instead, the authors say, “The
territories classified as the abode of war were those that refused to provide
such protection to Muslims and their clients”—thereby implying Muslims were
hostile to, say, Europe, because Europe was first hostile to Muslims.
(Reality, as chronicled in Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and
the West, was the exact opposite.)
Miscellaneous Subterfuge
One can go on and on; the
authors engage in other forms of subterfuge to exonerate Shariah. They
frequently project a Western veneer to Islamic terms and concepts, saying for example
that Shariah is ultimately about “promoting good and preventing evil”—which
sounds admirable—without pointing out that, based on the Koran and Sunna (that
is, Shariah),
conquering non-Muslim territories is about “promoting good” and keeping women under
wraps and indoors, beating them as required, is about “preventing vice.”
While admitting that Christians
and other non-Muslim minorities are currently being persecuted, not only do the
authors insist that this has nothing to do with Shariah, but they invoke
relativistic thinking: “Just as Muslims living in non-Muslim countries are
often concerned with their rights and civil liberties as minorities,” they say,
“so some consider the rights and status of non-Muslim minorities living in
Muslim countries to be a parallel issue.” In other words, because some
Americans view Muslims in their midst with suspicion, the ongoing enslavement
and slaughter of Christians—more than 6,000 in Nigeria alone since
January 2018—and ban on or destruction of churches is a sort of tit for tat, a
“parallel issue” that can only be solved when the West becomes less critical
about Islam.
Relativism is also invoked during
the authors’ brief treatment of apostasy in Islam: “Historically, apostasy was
sometimes punishable by death in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.” They
claim that apostasy is still a major issue in Islam due to “radical”
interpretations or politics—bolstering their position by again quoting the same
Koran verses that seem to support freedom of religion—without mentioning, say,
the canonical hadith (meaning part of Shariah) where Muhammad said, “Whoever
leaves his religion [Islam], kill him.”
Such is how Islam’s skilled
apologists dupe the West: they admit to some of the more controversial aspects
that many other apologists shy away from—namely that Shariah is indeed
foundational to Islam and that hundreds of millions of Muslims revere and wish
to see it implemented—but then, having established trust with the reader, they
slip back into the “game,” portraying all the intolerance, misogyny, violence,
and terrorism daily committed in the name of Islam as products of anything and
everything—fallible Muslim interpretations, self-serving clerics and
terrorists, socio-economic pressures, Western criticism or encroachments—never
Shariah itself.
Contrary to its subtitle, then,
John Esposito’s and Natana J. Delong-Bas’s Shariah is not “what everyone
needs to know”; rather, it is what non-Muslims need to believe in order to
give Shariah—which is fundamentally hostile to all persons and things
un-Islamic—a free pass.
Islamic Center of Irving’s
Mass Data Deletions
Islamic
religious leaders at a local Texas mosque allege that former leaders stole key
files and security camera footage.
According
to an announcement posted on December 31, 2019, the current leaders alleged
former Shura council members deleted key files and transferred files from
security camera footage.
On
December 31, 2019, the Islamic Center of Irving (ICI)
announced on its website that two members of ICI’s outgoing Shura Council
had “engaged in mass data deletions, downloading, copying of thousands of
documents and emails.” The announcement notes that information about lawsuits
and audio/video files of Congregants were transferred from ICI’s camera and
security systems. According to the announcement, the mosque’s attempts to have
the information returned have gone unanswered. Later the announcement was
deleted from the ICI website.
While
information regarding the two councils is not available on ICI’s
website, ICI announced the results of the 2019
election and the current Shura Council on October 22, 2019. The announcement lists
Hassan A. Hye as the current ICI president. In another
announcement from October 21, 2016, Bayinnah Institute and superstar
preacher Nouman Ali Khan presents himself as the
former president of the Islamic Center of Irving. This information is
corroborated by a photo on ICI’s Facebook page of Nouman Ali Khan at a
fundraiser in his capacity as ICI President in 2017.
Khan
first faced scrutiny in 2017 after screenshots went pubic showing him
bribing, threatening and “sexting” with different women online. Khan defended
his actions by stating in a Facebook post that he had been
divorced for two years and that both his and the women’s actions were based on
mutual consent.
Muslim
American writer and lawyer Rabia Chaudry then
reported on Facebook that “multiple people have had Facebook posts removed
and a number of people have had their Twitter accounts suspended for
criticizing Bayinnah” and also speculated that possibly Khan had threatened to
bury them in legal fees.
There
have been two criminal incidents that brought media coverage to ICI in the last
year. In May 2019, a security guard at ICI, Syed Humzah
Hashmi, was arrested for aggravated sexual assault of a child. According to the
arrest warrant, the male victim was in third grade and attended the Islamic
School of Irving. The alleged assaults allegedly included attempted sodomy and
took place at the Islamic Center of Irving from August 2016 through June 2017.
A
few months later, the former imam of Islamic Center of Irving, Zia ul-Haq
Sheikh. Imam Sheikh was ordered to pay $2.55
million to a woman identified as Jane Doe in the lawsuit alleging sexual
exploitation.
The
lawsuit states:
“Jane’s emotional dependency as a result of being
counseled by the defendant from age 13 to age 19 led Jane to be fearful of
losing the defendant’s support in her life, and therefore created a situation
where Jane was unable to refuse the defendant’s requests.”
Sheikh
allegedly requested sexually explicit photos and videos and ultimately
intercourse from Doe in exchange for his support. According to the lawsuit,
when the woman was nineteen, shortly after Sheikh and Doe had sex at a Motel 6,
Sheikh gave Doe a pregnancy test to make sure he wouldn’t lose his job and then
cut off contact with her.
The
lawsuit was filed in July 2018 and was later amended to include an allegation
of sexual assault.
Zia
Sheikh was for a time a darling of the local news media. In 2015, after former
mayor of Irving Beth Van Duyne objected to the
opening of an Islamic Tribunal in Irving, of which Sheikh was
a member,
the Dallas Observer wrote a piece called “Imam Zia Sheikh
opens minds to the real Islam.” D magazine wrote another glowing
piece about the imam called “Anti-Muslim Sentiment in Irving (and
the Imam who has to tolerate it)”.
ICI’s
Shura Council, according to an archived page from Islamic Center
of Irving’s website, as late as February 2012, included a representative for
the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). ISNA was founded as an
organization of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood in the early 1970s. According
to Brotherhood archival documents submitted during the Holy Land Foundation
Trial, it was named in a May 1991 Muslim Brotherhood document, called “An Explanatory Memorandum on the
General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America,” as an ally of the
Muslim Brotherhood. That document was entered into evidence during the Holy
Land Foundation Trial as “Elbarasse Search-3.”
The
face behind the lawsuits against Sheikh is an unlikely one. Alia Salem is the
former head of CAIR DFW as well as the founder and executive director of FACE (“Facing
Abuse in Community Environments”). According to their website, that
organization is designed to counter abuses of power within leadership in the
Islamic community. Before founding FACE, she created a stir when she advised
local Muslims not to cooperate with the FBI investigating ISIS.
ICI’s
current religious leaders seem as eager as the previous council to keep these
events out of the public eye. On January 13th, an
announcement on the ICI homepage stated that after a meeting on Sunday,
January 12, attended by two former ICI presidents, the current ICI Shura
Council, members of the ICI Shura Body, and “a group of brothers,” the various
parties completed the transition from the previous Shura Council and came
to an agreement.
Current
ICI president Hassan A. Hye asked that members of the masjid “refrain from
posting or commenting in public forums” regarding ICI or matters related to it.
Given
the legal and ethical cloud hovering over ICI’s recent leaders and staff,
there’s serious questions to be asked about the management of Irving Masjid.
The Islamist penchant for covering up scandal is sure to only exacerbate community
dissension. Irving Masjid congregants should think seriously about following
the maxim that “sunlight is the best disinfectant” and bucking leadership which
seeks to silence and protect rather than expose wrongdoing.
Anne-Christine Hoff is the Dallas
associate of the Counter Islamist Grid. You can connect with her on LinkedIn.
Cops: Muslim Sex Grooming Gangs “Didn’t Understand That It Was
Wrong"
Why Manchester cops didn’t protect young girls from Muslim sex
grooming gangs.
January 23, 2020
Daniel
Greenfield
Call it a tale of two girls. And a tale of two Englands.
One is an actress who grew up to marry a prince, lavished with luxuries, amassing a fortune, before her tantrums and antics drove her to depart her newfound royal family for a Canadian billionaire’s manor.
The other was put into foster care when she was only 8, by the age of 13 she was being raped by a Muslim sex grooming gang, and by 15, Victoria Agoglia was already dead of a heroin overdose injected by the 50-year-old Muslim pedophile who had been abusing her. Today, she would have been a woman.
Unlike Meghan Markle, Victoria never got the opportunity to marry a prince or even grow up. And while the media weeps for Markle, who is departing for Canada because of some tabloid tales, the story of Victoria, once again in the news because of the release of an independent report on the sex grooming gangs of Manchester, shows what true social injustice looks like. It’s not bad publicity for a celebrity.
It’s a girl who was abandoned to the worst imaginable abuses because intervening would have been politically incorrect.
The report chronicles how Operation Augusta was launched and then scuttled after her death in 2003, despite identifying 97 suspects and 57 victims. The victims were, “mostly white girls aged between 12 and 16”, and the perpetrators were, “mostly men of ‘Asian heritage’”. By ‘Asian’, the report means “predominantly Pakistani men” though at least one of the perpetrators was apparently Tunisian.
Constable B, the anonymous cop responsible for some of the most revealing quotes in the report, said, “What had a massive input was the offending target group were predominantly Asian males and we were told to try and get other ethnicities.”
Mohammed Yaqoob, the pedophile who had forcibly injected Victoria with heroin and was cleared of manslaughter charges, was not the sort of pedophile the Manchester cops were supposed to find.
A meeting at Greater Manchester Police headquarters “acknowledged that the enquiry was sensitive due to the involvement of Asian men” and worried over “the incitement of racial hatred.” There were concerns about “the damaged relations following Operation Zoological.” Those were the police raids targeting Iraqi refugees involved in an alleged Al Qaeda plot to bomb a soccer stadium in Manchester.
Some in the GMP didn’t see the point to stopping the rape of young girls because of cultural differences.
“There was an educational issue. Asian males didn’t understand that it was wrong, and the girls were not quite there. They were difficult groups to deal with. We can’t enforce our way out of the problem,” Constable B said.
And so they didn’t.
More young girls and women were raped. Some of the perpetrators were later arrested. The full scope of the abuse and the cover-up will never be known. The independent report tells us a little of the horror.
The Muslim sex grooming gangs in South Manchester targeted girls from broken families who were taken to care homes. This was not accident or chance. As the report notes, the “offenders understood that a specific children’s home in Manchester was used as an emergency placement unit for children entering the care system and this maintained a steady supply of victims.” And the Muslim sex groomers made sure to be on hand and ready so that the “children were befriended as soon as they arrived.”
These were some of the same tactics used by Muslim sex grooming gangs in Rotherham, Bradford, Huddersfield, Rochdale, Aylesbury, Oxford, Newcastle, Bristol, and Telford, suggesting some level of coordination between grooming gangs from various cities. Possibly over the internet. It’s an angle that the authorities have shown no interest in following up because of its potentially explosive nature.
Some previous Muslim sex grooming gangs were set up among taxi drivers. This gang, according to the report, was based out of the “Asian restaurant and takeaway trade.” Again, by Asian, they mean Indian, Afghan and Pakistani cuisine, kabobs and curry, not Egg Foo Yung and General Tso’s Chicken. These traditionally Muslim businesses served as coordinating networks for the rape and abuse of children.
The migrant populations that destroyed the English working class, displacing them and taking their jobs, leaving men without purposeful work, wives without husbands, and children with broken homes, then completed the hat trick by drugging, raping, and killing the daughters of the working class. And the authorities shrugged because the girls were the worthless leavings of broken homes and a declining populace, the Mohicans and Incas, the Bushmen and the Picts, ragged remnants of defeated tribes brokenly making way for a new conquest, their daughters subjugated by the arrogant colonizers.
There are brief snapshots of the horror of this New Britain: notes from a lost investigation into lost lives.
“Carers reported to police that a child had provided information stating that she was being pursued/threatened/coerced into having sex by two men who were Asian,” a brief summary mentions. “A child begged her carers to get her away from Manchester as she was too involved with Asian men. She disclosed that an Asian man known by his nickname ‘made her do things she didn't want to do’”.
While girls have been the focus of many of the stories, some of the predators also went after boys.
“Child 14 was a male looked after child who regularly went missing,” the report also notes. There were “references from other young people that he was being prostituted by Asian and gay men.”
Despite its thorough documentation, the report ends in a bureaucratic sea of missing information.
In 2005, senior officers of the Greater Manchester Police and Manchester City Council members attended a meeting at Manchester Town Hall and announced the shutdown of the investigation. The report mentions that, "The review team has requested a copy of the minutes for that meeting but neither GMP nor Manchester City Council was able to provide a copy."
It’s no doubt been logged and filed in the same place as Jeffrey Epstein’s suicide videos.
Constable B’s rough answers tell us certain truths about the cover-up. The investigation of Muslim sex grooming gangs was too likely to offend the wrong people. And the behavior of the Muslim pedophiles, who abused young girls and addicted them to drugs, was attributed to cultural differences.
The nameless Constable B tells us the true scope of the problem. Manchester cops like him know that this is habitual and that it’s taking place on a level vastly beyond the scope of Operation Augusta. It’s not 57 girls or 97 suspects. It’s thousands. “We can’t enforce our way out of the problem,” he said.
That’s what you say about vast social issues that involve entire communities and a way of life.
Muslim sex grooming gangs, like drugs or prostitution, are too widespread to be enforced out of existence because, like college students and pot, the culture doesn’t accept that they are wrong.
The police did nothing because these were not isolated crimes by criminals, but clashes of morals and values between two communities, one of which does not believe that child rape is wrong because its sacred texts tell it that Mohammed married Aisha and consummated his marriage when she was 9.
There are nearly 2 million child marriages in Pakistan. The notion that a woman’s consent to sexual relations matters is an utterly foreign concept in a culture where unaccompanied women are fair game.
The child rapists did not believe that their actions were wrong under Islamic law. And they weren’t.
The Manchester City Council and the GMP just accepted this reality as they have accepted it so often. They buried the minutes, shut down the investigation, and walked away from the screams of the girls.
They did it for multiculturalism, integration, and community relations. They did it for social justice.
We know that no real action was taken because the girls were troubled. They didn’t matter. And their bodies and lives could be sacrificed for the greater good.
The real tragedy is not that the rapists didn’t understand it was wrong. It’s that the UK no longer does.
As the media moans over Meghan Markle, sob stories rolling in of the injustice of tabloid headlines and the prejudice of the Brits, it is worth remembering those nameless girls who were sacrificed to progress.
They were not worked to death in factories. The brand of progress is no longer Dickensian. Instead it’s Markleite. It demands that we look away from the broken bodies in the chimneys of social justice, to bury away these cinderellas of the postmodern age until Blake’s angel comes with his bright key.
The princess of social justice is in. And the cinderellas who never get asked to the ball, who never grow up or meet their prince, who are taken by taxi to drug dens, shot up, abused, and then turned out, are obstacles to the brand of progress that Markle, Stormzy, and the rest of the social justice crowd of the ‘Cool New Britain’ that is quick to stomp on offensive speech and quicker to look away from the horrors of the new golden age of acid attacks, sex grooming gangs, and nail bombs at teen girl concerts, represent. There is no fairy godmother for them. Only little black coffins and filing cabinets.
Bodies are buried in coffins and the truth is buried in filing cabinets, along with the unasked questions
There is a red Mercedes linked to four of the young girls. Who was behind the wheel of the car “used in the procurement of the victims”? Where did it go? Who knows.
Ask the GMP. Ask the lost and the dead.
The notes and minutes are missing. The truth has been buried in little black coffins along with the bodies of young girls like Victoria. England might once have been theirs. Now it belongs to their abusers.
Video: Texas High School Teacher's Incoherent Responses to Questions About Sharia
Inside the twisted world of Lake Highlands High School teacher Tracey Bishkin.
On February 19, 2020, Lake Highlands High School (Dallas, Texas) teacher Tracey Bishkin gave a one hour presentation entitled "The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict." Bishkin told the audience Israel is to blame for the first and second Intifadas (1987 & 2000) and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin was a terrorist but Yassar Arafat was not.
Understanding the Threat (UTT) President John Guandolo asked Ms. Bishkin this question during the presentation: "How can we put this discussing in proper perspective without looking at Palestine's true intent as detailed in the Cairo Declaration since Palestine is a signatory as a member of the OIC?" Her answer was the Cairo Declaration is not relevant and its one of many treaties and other agreements over the years.
Understanding the Threat (UTT) President John Guandolo asked Ms. Bishkin this question during the presentation: "How can we put this discussing in proper perspective without looking at Palestine's true intent as detailed in the Cairo Declaration since Palestine is a signatory as a member of the OIC?" Her answer was the Cairo Declaration is not relevant and its one of many treaties and other agreements over the years.
After the presentation, John Guandolo spoke with Ms. Bishkin. The following video captures the conversation and interlaces facts to contradict what Ms. Bishkin shares. A real question here is: How can Texas public schools, in this case the Richardson Independent School District, employ a racist and biased teacher like Tracey Bishkin? This says a lot about how U.S. public school students are not only ignorant about real-world issues, but are intentionally trained to be anti-Israel and pro-jihadi.
No comments:
Post a Comment