MUSLIM WOMEN HAVE THEIR CLITS CUT OUT OF THEM
WHEN THEY ARE LITTLE GIRLS
Caught on Video: Rashida Tlaib Admits She Only Wears Mask for Cameras
'I'm just wearing it because I've got a Republican tracker here'
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D., Mich.) thinks masks only need to be worn if someone is there to catch you without one, according to remarks caught on video during a Detroit community event.
The "Squad" member told attendees at the event that she only wore a mask because a "Republican tracker" was filming her. After doing an event with Housing and Urban Development (HUD) secretary Marcia Fudge on Monday, Tlaib conversed with a maskless attendee who mistakenly thought the Democrat scolded him for being "the one unmasked guy" in the area. Tlaib responded by insisting she only wore a mask because a "Republican tracker" was recording the exchange.
"Oh, no, oh, not you!" Tlaib said as she pulled her mask away from her face. "No, no, no—I'm just wearing it because I've got a Republican tracker here."
Just weeks before the event, the "Squad" member faced criticism when she danced maskless at a crowded, indoor wedding in Dearborn, Mich. The video surfaced on the same day Tlaib slammed Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.) for urging his followers to "resist" Centers for Disease Control and Prevention masking guidelines. Tlaib attended the wedding days after the CDC recommended wearing masks indoors regardless of vaccination status in local areas with "high" community transmission—a categorization that applied to Dearborn at the time.
Tlaib, who did not return a request for comment, is far from the only Democrat to ignore her own rhetoric on masks. Fellow "Squad" member Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) masked up for an August photo with liberal activists but Quickly Removed her face covering after the picture was taken. One month prior, Virginia gubernatorial nominee Terry McAuliffe (D.) violated federal regulations when he refused to wear a mask on an Amtrak train. McAuliffe has pledged to maintain the state's mask mandate in schools and told voters in September to "follow the CDC guidelines."
President Joe Biden in July told "all Americans who live in the areas covered by the CDC guidance" to wear a mask—a sentiment that Fudge herself has Echoed. HUD's website Notes that public housing inspectors "follow safety protocols informed by the CDC, which includes wearing proper protection and following other related safety measures."
HUD did not respond to a request for comment.
Fudge is not featured in the video, but she would not be the first Biden administration official who has condoned violations of mask requirements. U.S. Agency for International Development head Samantha Power rode an Amtrak train maskless in September. Climate envoy John Kerry, meanwhile, was caught removing his mask during an American Airlines flight in March and again at Boston Logan International Airport in July.
Tlaib's congressional allies have also skirted mask orders and recommendations in recent months. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) partied indoors without a mask at interior secretary Deb Haaland's wedding in August. Days before the ceremony, New Mexico governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (D.) issued a statewide order that reimposed an indoor mask mandate. Nevada Democrats Jacky Rosen and Susie Lee violated their own state's mandate during a costume party held on the 20th anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks.
Bringing in Afghan Refugees with All of Their ‘Luggage’
What's not being talked about.
Afghanistan has fallen to the Taliban and American forces are withdrawing. As with such ventures, this has resulted in tens, if not hundreds of thousands of Afghan refugees fleeing their own country. And as night follows day, this has also resulted in calls by many American individuals and organizations to bring in as many of those refugees as possible, because we “owe” it to the Afghans.
To hear such claims, one would think that these many thousands of refugees will immediately become part of America, sharing our values and ideas, and contributing to our communities.
What is not being talked about are the values, ideas, and culture those refugees are bringing with them.
In order to better understand the people many are calling to be brought in by the tens of thousands, let’s look at some considerations about the society from which these refugees are coming.
National Security
There are two national security issues that must be acknowledged.
First, a 2019 study found that 13% of Afghans had a lot of (4%) or a little (9%) sympathy for the Taliban.[1] This means that for every 100,000 Afghan refugees brought into the United States, we could expect about 13,000 of them to have varying degrees of sympathy for the Taliban.
Then we need to take into consideration that 39% of Afghans think that “suicide bombing” in defense of Islam is often or sometimes justified.[2] If we use the 4% number for those with a lot of sympathy for the Taliban, this means that out of every 100,000 Afghans we could have up to about 1,560 Afghans believing that “suicide bombing” could often be justified.[3]
Combining these two issues means we could be bringing in a potentially significant base of support for a jihadist group; and that base of support could include a large number willing to engage in jihadist attacks in the United States using explosives.
History of Violence
Then there is Afghanistan’s violent history. What is the impact of this history on many of those refugees we are bringing in? Consider this 2018 article:
…Afghanistan is home to nearly two generations that have grown up knowing only conflict and war. As a result, violent and aggressive behavior—particularly from young men—has become an accepted norm of Afghan society…a significant number of Afghan youth have become involved in organized crime or other illegal—and often violent—activities to fulfill their perceived obligations and duties to family…In many parts of Afghanistan, displays of aggression and intimidation represent a rite of passage for adolescent boys and a symbol of manhood for men. The social acceptance of such behavior, however, heightens the risk that intolerance of diversity and interpersonal violence, including violence against women and children, become an everyday fact of life. A 2009 report…described violence as “an everyday occurrence in the lives of a huge proportion of Afghan women.”…a majority of Afghans are exposed to violence beginning at an early age, including physical abuse at home by parents and relatives as well as the liberal use of corporal punishment at mosques, madrassas, and schools. Children witness their mothers and sisters being violently abused at the hands of family members, which comes to be accepted as a social and cultural norm, resulting in the acceptance of violence as a first—and sometimes only—option for resolving conflicts.[4]
We are importing from a culture of violence.
Rights of Women
What is the attitude many of these refugees have toward women? Here are two assessments:
Women and girls in Afghanistan continue to face widespread discrimination and human rights abuses. The country ranks among the least favourable on the Gender Inequality Index and the literacy rate for women is among the lowest in the world. Violence against women and girls is rife and the majority don’t go to school.[5]
And,
About two-thirds of men thought women in Afghanistan had too many rights and that women were too emotional to become leaders, compared to less than a third of women. And while nearly three quarters of women said a married woman should have equal rights with their partner to work outside the home, only 15 percent of men agreed. More than half of men also agreed with the statement that “more rights for women mean that men lose out”.[6]
Wife-beating is largely acceptable in Afghanistan:
Overall, 92 percent of women in Afghanistan feel that a husband is justified in hitting or beating his wife for at least one of these reasons: going out without telling the husband, neglecting the children, arguing with the husband, refusing sex, and burning the food. Seventy-eight percent of women believe that going out without telling the husband is justification for beating, while 31 percent think the same about burning the food…The Afghanistan survey added an additional question to reflect local attitudes—wearing inappropriate clothes. Sixty-three percent of Afghan women feel a husband is justified in hitting or beating his wife if she wears inappropriate clothing.[7]
94% of Afghans completely or mostly agree that a wife must always obey her husband,[8] and two-thirds of Afghan men agree or strongly agree with the statement, “Women in Afghanistan have too many rights.”[9]
Considering the information in this and the previous section, it is not surprising to hear this warning from Pierre-Marie Seve, the director and spokesman of the French think tank Institute for Justice. He noted that migrants are over-represented in nearly all categories of crime [in France] and stated that Afghans, in particular, commit more crimes than asylum seekers from other countries.[10]
Prepubescent Marriage
Prepubescent marriage is acceptable in Afghanistan. In 2016, the Pew Research Center released a report titled “Many countries allow child marriage.”[11] An appendix to that report titled “Marriage Laws around the World” provided this interesting information about approaches to child marriage in Afghanistan:[12]
Despite a law setting the legal minimum age for marriage at 16 (15 with the consent of a parent or guardian and the court) for girls and 18 for boys, international and local observers continued to report widespread early marriage… By law a marriage contract requires verification that the bride is 16 years of age, but only a small fraction of the population had birth certificates…some girls as young as six or seven were promised in marriage, with the understanding the actual marriage would be delayed until the child reached puberty. Reports indicated, however, that this delay was rarely observed and young girls were sexually violated by the groom or by older men in the family, particularly if the groom was also a child.
Will instances of prepubescent marriage soon be coming to your community or to a community nearby?
Sharia as the official Law of the Land
Afghans almost uniformly agree (99%) that Sharia should be the official law of the land.[13] And among those Afghans who say Sharia should be the law of the land, 61% say it should apply to all citizens.[14]
81% of the Afghans who support Sharia as the official law of the land favor corporal punishments for theft; 85% favor stoning as the punishment for adultery, and 79% favor the death penalty for apostasy.[15]
In terms of honor killings for pre- or extra-marital sex, 60% of Afghans believed honor killings of women were often or sometimes justified; 59% believed the same about killing men in those circumstances.[16]
These are majority views among Afghans that are incompatible with American values and laws.
Integrating into American society
The Afghan values and beliefs mentioned above are major hurdles to the idea of Afghans integrating as a group into American society. In addition, only 5% of Afghans speak English,[17] and the adult literacy rate is only about 43% (although the numbers vary). 66% of Afghans believe Western popular culture harms morality in their country,[18] and 96% believe that trying to convert others to Islam is a religious duty.[19]
These are not harbingers of widespread social/cultural integration by these refugees into American society.
Conclusion
Those on the side of bringing tens of thousands of Afghan refugees into the United States have been able to rely on noble sounding rhetoric and emotional arguments to confront those who are not as enthusiastic about that venture.
However, the facts presented in this article show that in reality these refugees are coming from a culture and a land whose values and history are completely different from, and largely incompatible with, those of the United States.
What is being generally overlooked is that there are more socially/culturally compatible countries for these refugees that actually border Afghanistan. Perhaps what we might “owe” these refugees is assistance in finding refuge in those neighboring countries.
Dr. Stephen M. Kirby is the author of six books about Islam. His latest book is Islamic Doctrine versus the U.S. Constitution: The Dilemma for Muslim Public Officials.
[1] “A Survey of the Afghan People, Afghanistan in 2019,” The Asia Foundation, p. 315, https://asiafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2019_Afghan_Survey_Full-Report_.pdf.
[2] “The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society,” Pew Research Center, April 30, 2013, pp. 29 and 70, https://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview/.
[3] For why it is not accurate to use the term “suicide bomber” in these circumstances, see my article “Suicide or Paradise?” Arutz Sheva 7 – Israel National News, June 7, 2017, https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/20604.
[4] Belquis Ahmadi and Rafiullah Stanikzai, “Redefining Masculinity in Afghanistan,” United States Institute of Peace, February 15, 2018, https://www.usip.org/publications/2018/02/redefining-masculinity-afghanistan.
[5] Gender Focus, UNICEF, accessed on August 27, 2021, https://www.unicef.org/afghanistan/gender-focus.
[6] Sonia Elks, “Afghan men oppose more women’s rights; elders less hardline,” Reuters, January 29, 2019, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-afghanistan-women-equality/afghan-men-oppose-more-womens-rights-elders-less-hardline-idUSKCN1PN0TZ.
[7] Donna Clifton, “Most Women in Afghanistan Justify Domestic Violence,” PRB, September 13, 2012, https://www.prb.org/resources/most-women-in-afghanistan-justify-domestic-violence/.
[8] “The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society,” Pew Research Center, April 30, 2013, p. 93, https://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview/.
[9] “Afghanistan Flash Surveys on Perceptions of Peace, Covid-19, and the Economy: Wave 1 Findings,” The Asia Foundation, 2020, p. 43, https://asiafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Afghanistan-Flash-Survey-Wave-1_fullreport_.pdf.
[10] Chris Tomlinson, “French Think Tank Warns Afghan Migrant Increase Means Increased Crime,” Breitbart, August 28, 2021, https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2021/08/28/french-think-tank-warns-afghan-migrant-increase-means-increased-crime/.
[11] Aleksandra Sandstrom and Angelina E. Theodorou, “Many countries allow child marriage,” Pew Research Center, September 12, 2016, https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/09/12/many-countries-allow-child-marriage/.
[12] “Marriage Laws around the World,” Pew Research Center, https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2016/09/FT_Marriage_Age_Appendix_2016_09_08.pdf.
[13] “The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society,” p. 15.
[14] Ibid., p. 48.
[15] Ibid., pp. 52, 54 and 55.
[16] Ibid., p. 89.
[17] “A Survey of the Afghan People, Afghanistan in 2019,” p. 336.
[18] “The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society,” p. 136.
[19] Ibid., p. 112.
Migration Groups Want $8 Billion for Afghan Migrants
Handout/Bundeswehr via Getty Images
2 Sep 20210
4:49
Pro-migration groups want at least $8 billion in Americans’ money — and a new citizenship law — to help fast-track at least 50,000 mostly unvetted Afghan migrants, according to the Washington Post.
“The number we’ve been floating around, just on the back of the napkin, is $5 billion for [the Department of Health and Human Services], $2 billion for [the Department of] State, and $1 billion for [the Department of Homeland Security], at a minimum,” said Mark Hetfield, president of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society.
The advocates also told the Washington Post that they want the incoming Afghans to jump the line in the nation’s asylum courts. The line is several years long because Democrats have allowed at least two million Central American migrants into the United States since 2009 under the claim that they need asylum from crime and poverty. The Post reported:
Congress could create a mechanism to allow them to “adjust” to legal permanent residency, aid groups say, along the lines of the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966 or more recent programs to aid Iraqis.
The [Afghan] parolees could apply for asylum, stating a fear of persecution if returned to Afghanistan, but the U.S. asylum system is badly overloaded by applicants from the Mexico border.
A survey by Rasmussen Reports shows that the public does not approve of the Democrats’ rush to naturalize tens of thousands of Afghans. A majority of Americans oppose the resettlement of more than 50,000 Afghans in the United States, according to an August 18-19 survey of 1,000 likely voters by Rasmussen.
Refugees walk through the departure terminal to a bus at Dulles International Airport after being evacuated from Kabul following the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan on August 31, 2021, in Dulles, Virginia. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
Many of the migrants could impose more chaotic diversity to Americans’ society, in part, because many are fundamentalist Muslims who lack passports.
Many pro-migration lobby groups are lavishly funded by wealthy pro-migration donors, including Mark Zuckerberg, George Soros, Brad Smith, the president of Microsoft, and others who hide their identity.
But the groups say they cannot get access to usual spigots of taxpayer cash because many Afghan migrants are being sneaked into the United States via small a side door in U.S. immigration law.
For example, only a few of the Afghans fought alongside the U.S. military, so only a few can get “Special Immigrant Visas” (SIV) created by Congress.
Also, only a few of the migrants were legally approved as refugees amid the rush by thousands of Afghans into American aircraft.
Afghan citizens pack inside a U.S. Air Force C-17 Globemaster III, as they are transported from Hamid Karzai International Airport in Afghanistan, August 15, 2021. The Taliban on Sunday swept into Kabul, the Afghan capital, after capturing most of Afghanistan. (Capt. Chris Herbert/U.S. Air Force via AP)
So most of the roughly 20,000 migrants now in the United States were allowed into the United States via the little-used “parole” side door in U.S. immigration law. The parole side door was intended for a few charitable cases such as sick passengers on an international flight, “on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit,” according to federal law.
President Joe Biden’s border chief, Alejandro Mayorkas, may try to admit 50,000 Afghans via the parole door, Hetfield told the Washington Post.
The requested $8 billion in cash “would give [Afghan] parolees the same amount of assistance as refugees or SIVs would get,” Hetfield said.
The changed citizenship laws would allow the paroled Afghans to quickly win green cards and citizenship, many of whom lack vital identification documents or even endorsements by U.S. soldiers. That fast-track process could deliver tens of thousands from Afghanistan to the polling booths by 2028.
Afghan refugees arrive at Dulles International Airport in Northern Virginia while en route to military facilities in the U.S. (Jack Gruber-USA TODAY)
Meanwhile, many millions of Americans are unemployed, earn little money, and have difficulty paying their rents. Much of that economic distress is caused by the federal government’s policy of encouraging migration into the United States.
Overall, Biden’s government is expected to import 1.6 million migrants in 2021, or roughly one migrant for every two American births in the year. This policy extracts many new workers, consumers, and renters from poor countries for the benefit of U.S. employers, investors, and government agencies — and also to eventually deliver many potential voters to the Democratic party.
This policy of extraction migration damages ordinary Americans’ career opportunities, cuts their wages, and raises their housing costs.
More migration also means that coastal investors can hire cheap foreign labor on the coasts instead of investing in heartland jobs or deploying wage-boosting robots. Immigration also shrinks Americans’ political clout and wrecks their open-minded, equality-promoting civic culture.
Refugee resettlement costs American taxpayers nearly $9 billion every five years, according to research, and each refugee costs taxpayers about $133,000 over the course of their lifetime. Within five years, an estimated 16 percent of all refugees admitted will need housing assistance paid for by taxpayers.
Study: Over Half of Migrants Are on American Taxpayer-Funded Welfare
Brandon Bell/Getty Images
2 Sep 20210
3:09
More than half of the nation’s non-citizen population — including legal immigrants, foreign visa workers, and illegal aliens — use American taxpayer-funded welfare after arriving in the United States, a new analysis reveals.
Research by Center for Immigration Studies Director of Research Steven Camarota finds that about 55 percent of non-citizen households in the U.S. use at least one form of welfare compared to just 32 percent of households headed by native-born Americans.
Camarota’s research analyzes the U.S. Census Bureau’s Survey of Income and Program Participation data from 2018, showing that 49 percent of households headed by foreign-born residents, including naturalized American citizens, use at least one welfare program.
In 2017, economist George Borjas called the U.S. immigration system “the largest anti-poverty program in the world” at the expense of America’s working and middle class.
(Center for Immigration Studies)
Specifically, foreign-born residents used vastly more Medicaid compared to native-born Americans and food stamps. For example, while 33 percent of foreign-born residents use Medicaid, just 20 percent of native-born Americans do so.
Likewise, while 31 percent of foreign-born residents are on food stamps, only 19 percent of native-born Americans use the program.
Camarota’s research reveals that even after years and years of residing in the U.S., foreign-born resident households continue to use high levels of welfare.
About 44 percent of foreign-born residents who resided in the U.S. for 10 years or less use at least one form of welfare. Roughly 50 percent of those who resided in the U.S. for more than 10 years are on welfare.
When naturalized Americans are excluded from that count, the level of welfare use rises significantly for those who have resided in the U.S. for a while. For example, among non-citizen households who resided in the U.S. for 10 years or less, 40 percent use welfare. For those in the U.S. for more than 10 years, about 62 percent are on welfare.
The latest data comes after similar numbers were released in March 2019 that showed that, in 2014, non-citizen households used nearly twice as much welfare as native-born Americans.
Currently, there is an estimated record high of 44.5 million foreign-born residents living in the U.S. This is nearly quadruple the immigrant population in 2000. The vast majority of those arriving in the country every year — more than 1.5 million annually — are low-skilled foreign nationals who go on to compete for jobs against working class Americans.
At current legal immigration levels, the Census Bureau projects that about 1-in-6 U.S. residents will be foreign-born by 2060 with the foreign-born population hitting a record 69 million.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here.
Report: Afghans Arriving at U.S. Military Bases to Get $1,250 Payments
Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
2 Sep 20210
2:30
Afghans arriving in the United States and being temporarily resettled at U.S. military bases will receive one-time payments from the State Department, funded by American taxpayers.
As Breitbart News reported, President Joe Biden’s administration is looking to turn various military bases in Texas, Wisconsin, New Jersey, Virginia, New Mexico, and Indiana into refugee camps that can accommodate about 50,000 Afghans.
Most of all Afghans headed to military bases for temporary resettlement are arriving on “humanitarian parole,” which does not expire for at least two years. These Afghans are not eligible for Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs), P-2 visas, or refugee status.
According to the Washington Post, Afghans arriving at military bases will secure a $1,250 one-time payment provided to them through the State Department and funded by American taxpayers.
Among the Afghans arriving in the U.S. — from Dulles International Airport in Virginia and Philadelphia International Airport in Pennsylvania — are those who have little-to-no ties to America and many who do not have the most basic paperwork to prove their identities. The Biden administration, the Post notes, has yet to disclose what they are doing with Afghans who fail the vetting process.
Last week, Bloomberg reported that Afghans flagged with “ongoing security concerns” may still be resettled across the U.S. with some monitoring by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). This week, top Biden officials confirmed that Afghans “flagged for concerns” have sought entry to the U.S.
Over the last 20 years, nearly a million refugees have been resettled in the nation — more than double that of residents living in Miami, Florida, and it would be the equivalent of annually adding the population of Pensacola, Florida.
Refugee resettlement costs American taxpayers nearly $9 billion every five years, according to research, and each refugee costs taxpayers about $133,000 over the course of their lifetime. Within five years, an estimated 16 percent of all refugees admitted will need housing assistance paid for by taxpayers.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here.
At Fort Bliss and Fort McCoy, Afghan Refugees Are Acting Like Afghans
What did anyone expect?
Mon Sep 27, 2021
They didn’t leave Afghanistan very long ago, and so it is understandable that some of the newly arrived Afghan evacuees would be acting as if they were still there. But some recent incidents once again spotlight the fact that to bring in large numbers of people with a radically different culture and sharply divergent standards of behavior is unwise, and is only going to mean strife in America’s future.
El Paso’s KFOX14 reported Friday that “officials with Fort Bliss said a female soldier was assaulted by a group of Afghan refugees who are being housed at the Doña Ana Complex in New Mexico.” Officials at Fort Bliss issued a statement saying the usual blather: “We can confirm a female service member supporting Operation Allies Welcome reported being assaulted on Sept. 19 by a small group of male evacuees at the Doña Ana Complex in New Mexico. We take the allegation seriously and appropriately referred the matter to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The safety and well-being of our service members, as well as all of those on our installations, is paramount. We immediately provided appropriate care, counseling and support to the service member. Task Force-Bliss is also implementing additional security measures to include increased health and safety patrols, additional lighting, and enforcement of the buddy system at the Dona Ana Complex. We will cooperate fully with the FBI and will continue to ensure the service member reporting this assault is fully supported.”
Great. But health and safety patrols might not be all that is necessary. What may be needed is a thoroughgoing evaluation of the values, attitudes, and assumptions of the Afghan refugees. That is clear from another recent incident in Fort McCoy, Wisconsin, involving two other Afghans, Bahrullah Noori and Mohammad Haroon Imaad.
The Justice Department announced Wednesday that a federal grand jury in Wisconsin charged Noori with “attempting to engage in a sexual act with a minor using force against that person, and with three counts of engaging in a sexual act with a minor, with one count alleging the use of force.” Imaad was charged with “assaulting his spouse by strangling and suffocating her.”
The Justice Department said nothing about how both men, as well as the fellow at Fort Bliss, were just following religious and cultural norms that other Afghan refugees are likely to follow as well, or about the implications of that fact for the entire Afghan refugee resettlement project.
Noori’s victims, according to the indictment, “had not attained the age of 16 years and were at least four years younger than the defendant,” who is 20. No one in the establishment media will dare to talk about it, but the fact is that in the culture in which Noori was raised, an unmarried girl who is 16 is getting a bit long in the tooth.
And it’s not just Afghanistan: child marriage has abundant attestation in Islamic tradition and law. Turkey’s directorate of religious affairs (Diyanet) said in January 2018 that under Islamic law, girls as young as nine can marry. Ishaq Akintola, professor of Islamic Eschatology and Director of Muslim Rights Concern, Nigeria, said in 2016: “Islam has no age barrier in marriage and Muslims have no apology for those who refuse to accept this.” Dr. Abd Al-Hamid Al-‘Ubeidi, Iraqi expert on Islamic law, said in 2008: “There is no minimum marriage age for either men or women in Islamic law. The law in many countries permits girls to marry only from the age of 18. This is arbitrary legislation, not Islamic law.”
Dr. Salih bin Fawzan, prominent cleric and member of Saudi Arabia’s highest religious council, declared in 2014 that there is no minimum age for marriage in Islamic law at all, and that girls can be married “even if they are in the cradle.” Pakistan’s Council of Islamic Ideology has ruled that “Islam does not forbid marriage of young children.”
These authorities say these things because hadiths that Muslims consider authentic record that Muhammad’s favorite wife, Aisha, was six when Muhammad wedded her and nine when he consummated the marriage: “The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death)” (Bukhari 7.62.88).
Marrying young girls was not all that unusual for its time, but because in Islam Muhammad is the supreme example of conduct (cf. Qur’an 33:21), he is considered exemplary in this unto today.
And regarding spousal abuse, the Qur’an teaches that men are superior to women and should beat those from whom they “fear disobedience”: “Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them.” (4:34)
Muhammad’s child bride, Aisha, says in a hadith that Muhammad “struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: ‘Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?’” (Sahih Muslim 2127) Another hadith states: “Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating). It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah’s Messenger came, Aisha said, ‘I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!’” (Sahih Bukhari 7.77.5825)
In light of all this, no one should be surprised that these three evacuees, fresh from Afghanistan’s deeply Islamic culture, should be caught in America behaving like Afghans. The larger question is whether it is wise to endanger women and girls by bringing into the country large numbers of people among whom is an unknowable number who think the same way that Bahrullah Noori, Mohammad Haroon Imaad, and their countryman at Fort Bliss do. But that question will, of course, not be asked. To ask it would be “Islamophobic.”
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of 23 books including many bestsellers, such as The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), The Truth About Muhammad and The History of Jihad. His latest book is The Critical Qur’an. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.
Masked Mass Murder
Five years since Islamic terrorists Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik murdered 14 innocents in San Bernardino, California.
Thu Dec 3, 2020
On December 2, 2015, employees at the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California, were gathering for a holiday party when they heard multiple popping sounds outside. Some thought it might be fireworks but the center was under fire from Islamic terrorists Syed Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik. The black-clad pair gunned down two victims then headed inside. A National Police Foundation report provides a chilling account.
“Suddenly, a door swung open and a person clad in all black, with a mask shielding his or her face, stepped inside, wielding what appeared to be an automatic rifle. Without saying a word, the person, now believed to be Farook, opened fire.” Then Tashfeen Malik followed. “She also wore all black and entered the room shooting. Together, the shooters fired more than 100 rounds.” The shooters then “hastily departed, heading out to a black SUV they had parked just outside, leaving behind a chaotic scene of noise, fear, and pain.”
In the ensuing chase, Farook fired at least 81 rounds at the police, wounding one officer. Police took down the terrorists with little collateral damage and inside the SUV they found a trigger apparatus to detonate bombs the Muslims had planted at the Regional Center, where they had already taken 14 lives: Robert Adams, Isaac Amianos, Bennetta Betbadal, Harry Bowman, Sierra Clayborn, Juan Espinoza, Aurora Godoy, Shannon Johnson, Larry Daniel Kaufman, Damien Meins, Tin Ngyen, Nicholas Thalasinos, Yvette Velasco, and Michael Wetzel.
Isaac Amanios, 60, immigrated from Eritrea to California in 2000 to escape violence and repression. Bennetta Betbadal, 46, fled to America with her family to “escape Islamic extremism and the persecution of Christians that followed Iranian Revolution.”
On December 2, in his first response from the White House, President Obama said it was still an active situation and “we don’t yet know what the motives of the shooters are.” In a December 6 statement, the president failed to mention a single victim and did not name the shooters, both Muslims.
Farook was American and Pakistani-born Malik held a green card but “we have no evidence that the killers were directed by a terrorist organization overseas,” or part of “a broader conspiracy here at home.” In closing, the president said, “Muslim Americans are our friends and our neighbors, our co-workers, our sports heroes,” as well as “our men and women in uniform.”
California attorney general Kamala Harris, in a December 17 statement, said “we must seek justice for those who lost their lives in the recent attacks in Paris and San Bernardino.” The attorney general failed to name any of the victims and her priorities seemed to lie elsewhere.
“Ultimately,” Harris said, “not only is it immoral and contrary to our values to stoke fear and cast aspersions against an entire faith and the millions of law-abiding American Muslims, but it is also strategically unwise. This very community is a critical ally in the short and long term fight combatting terrorism and radicalization here at home and across the world.”
Harris was joined by officials from the Muslim Public Affairs Council and CAIR, whose Los Angeles director Hussam Ayloush said “Islamophobic and xenophobic rhetoric by certain public figures has made Muslim communities an easy target for hate crimes.” Attorney general Harris, Ayloush added, “exemplified leadership” by addressing “the spike in hate crimes against American Muslims and other minorities.”
In a statement one year later, Harris recalled “those who lost their lives and the loved ones they left behind,” but named not a single victim or any of the “brave first responders.” Those were the San Bernardino police, but the word “police” does not appear. In similar style, Farook and Malik were not named, and Harris does not mention their possible motive for “the tragedy that took place.” Like the president, Harris hailed the Muslim community as an ally against terrorism. In this case, it wasn’t.
Muslim convert Enrique Marquez procured weapons for Farook and Malik, and in February of 2017, Marquez pleaded guilty to federal terrorism charges. Rafia Farook, mother of Syed, claimed she knew nothing of his deadly plans, but she shredded a map her son had made for the attack. As the U.S. Attorney announced on March 3, 2020, Rafia Farook, agreed to plead guilty to a one-count of “alteration, destruction, and mutilation of records.”
Nothing has emerged about members of the Muslim community attempting to stop the attack. Likewise, the FBI only came into play after the jihadists had murdered 14 people. The mass murder could well foreshadow what conditions would be like under a Biden-Harris administration or the reverse. The FBI would look the other way at Islamic jihadists and politicians would pass off terrorist mass murders as “tragedies” that simply “took place,” with no connection to Islam.
Conditions would be the same as under the “composite character” president David Garrow exposed in the 2017 Rising Star: The Making of Barack Obama. He’s the president who called Nidal Hasan’s mass murder at Fort Hood “workplace violence,” and said “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
The newly released A Promised Land hints that the composite character expects to keep leading from behind and calling the shots. What goes around comes around.
Sanctuary California: Three-Time Deported Illegal Alien Charged with Double Murder in Stabbing Spree
https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2020/11/you-really-want-joe-biden-and-la-raza.html
DO A SEARCH FOR HOW MANY AMERICAN (legals) MURDERED BY MEXICANS.
Raymond Ibrahim Video: Texas Judge Defers to Sharia Court
Sends a Muslim woman’s divorce to a Sharia tribunal.
Tue Jul 27, 2021
CBN News’ Gary Lane recently interviewed Raymond Ibrahim, a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, for a segment on how a Texas judge ordered a Muslim woman seeking a divorce to appear before a sharia court. The video follows; below it is the Global Lane’s summary of the story.
Islamic Law Analyst Says Texas Judge’s Ruling Sending Muslim Woman’s Divorce to Sharia Tribunal Sets ‘Shocking Precedent’
Is Islamic Sharia law coming to the USA? It’s already here in the Lone Star State.
A judge in Texas has ordered a Muslim woman seeking a divorce from her husband to appear in a tribunal governed by Sharia law.
Collin County District Judge Andrea Thompson ruled in March that Mariam Ayad must forego the justice system’s legal paths for divorce and instead submit to mediation under a Fiqh panel governed by a Muslim group based in Saudi Arabia, according to the Washington Examiner.
The judge based her decision on the fact that Ayad signed a prenuptial agreement with her husband, Ayad Hashim Latif, stating she would permit her marriage — if necessary — to be arbitrated by Sharia.
Ayad claims she was misled into signing a pre-nuptial agreement that mandated Sharia mediation.
She’s appealing the ruling saying it violates her constitutional rights as a U.S. citizen.
On this week’s episode of the Global Lane, Islamic historian and analyst Raymond Ibrahim suggests Judge Thompson’s ruling sets a shocking precedent for America.
BERNARD FRIEDMAN = SICK FUCKER!
THEY WILL LET THE MUSLIMS TAKE OVER THIS COUNTRY LIKE THEY HAVE THE MEXICANS. JUST WATCH WHAT THE MUSLIMS HAVE DONE TO EUROPE!
And make sure to watch The Glazov Gang’s 6-Part Series on Islamic Female Genital Mutilation and the Left’s Complicity, below:
Part I: U.S. Judge Condones Female Genital Mutilation — how our horrific surrender to Sharia is accelerating.
Part 2: Islamic Female Genital Mutilation and Denial — The monstrosity that lies behind the “others do it too” mantra.
Part 3: Elizabeth Yore Fights to EndFGMToday.com — 513,000 girls and women are at risk in the U.S. alone.
Part 4: Female Genital Mutilators Flown Into UK — Where is #MeToo? Where are all the leftist feminists?
Part 5: Malaysia: 93% of Muslim Women are Victims of FGM — When will we start protecting Muslim girls?
Part 6: Amazon Supports Female Genital Mutilation? — America’s electronic commerce company descends into the moral sewer.
Subscribe to Jamie Glazov Productions and follow us on Twitter: @JamieGlazov.
Michigan: Judge Throws Out Female Genital Mutilation Case Against Muslim Physicians
Freedom of religion apparently includes freedom to abuse children, as long as it’s done under religious auspices.
Another effect of multiculturalism was revealed Tuesday in Detroit, where a physician, Jumana Nagarwala, was charged with performing female genital mutilation (FGM) on young girls in the United States. The Detroit Free Press reported that U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman “threw out the nation’s first female genital mutilation case, delivering a major blow to the prosecution and survivors who had hoped the Detroit case would help end a practice that is still performed on millions of girls worldwide.” Celebrate diversity!
Friedman declared: “The court concludes that the prosecution in this matter is vindictive. The government obtained the fourth superseding indictment, which asserts new and additional charges, in retaliation for defendants’ past success in having other charges dismissed. Such vindictive or retaliatory prosecution is a due process violation of the most basic sort.”
The defendants had previous charges dismissed on religious freedom grounds. But is the freedom of religion really a license to abuse children? “The lead defendant,” the Free Press noted, was Dr. Jumana Nagarwala, “whom prosecutors allege cut the genitals of nine minor girls during after-hours procedures at a Livonia clinic that belonged to her doctor friend, who also was charged in the case. Nagarwala has long denied engaging in genital mutilation, saying the procedure she performed on minor girls was a benign, religious practice that involved only scraping or ‘shaving’ of the genitalia, not cutting.
Nagarwala’s attorney, Shannon Smith, was bitter in victory: “Yes, they’ve won, but they’ve never been vindicated in court. Those things never happened. The things the government alleged never happened. Our clients have lost so much of their lives. The impact on their lives has been unspeakable. It’s hard. They’ve gone through half a decade of being charged and living under these charges.”
Yes, Ms. Smith, and so have your clients’ victims. But now it appears that female genital mutilation can be practiced in America with impunity. The Free Press noted details that vividly demonstrated the horrific nature of the case: Nagarwala was accused of performing FGM on “nine girls, ages 7 to 12, from Michigan, Illinois and Minnesota, including some who cried, screamed and bled during the procedure and one who was given Valium ground in liquid Tylenol to keep her calm….Among the accused were three mothers, including two Minnesota women whom prosecutors said tricked their 7-year-old daughters into thinking they were coming to metro Detroit for a girls’ weekend, but instead had their genitals cut at the Livonia clinic as part of a religious procedure.”
In the course of their prosecution, federal prosecutors for the first time acknowledged that there was nothing singular about Dr. Nagarwala: they revealed that she was, according to the Detroit Free Press, “part of a secret network of physicians in a tight-knit Indian community who were cutting 7-year-old girls across the country for years as part of a religious obligation and cultural tradition that had mothers and daughters traveling all over for the procedure.”
Jumana Nagarwala is a member of a small Muslim sect originating in India, the Dawoodi Bohras. The feds said Thursday that other female doctors in California and Illinoiswho belonged to the sect were also performing FGM on preteen girls, and that Nagarwala herself had at one point gone to Washington D.C. to subject five underage girls to the barbaric and grisly procedure. These doctors, according to Justice Department attorney Amy Markopoulos, “were in demand. This was not a discrete, one-time occasion. ... It was not arbitrary…travel is often necessary to perform the procedure.”This is apparently true because the number of doctors willing to perform FGM is far outstripped by the number of parents who want it for their daughters.
All this has been enabled by the Left’s embrace of cultural relativism, and by something else as well: the Left’s general unwillingness to challenge any aspect of the Islamic faith. We are constantly told the opposite by propagandists in the West, but the reality is that FGM is justified in Islamic law. It is practiced by some non-Muslims, but only in majority-Muslim areas where the influence of Islamic culture, mores and law is all-pervasive.
“It is a religious thing. Do you want to change religion?” said one Egyptian in response to a campaign to eradicate female genital mutilation. “You only listen to what the West is saying.”
One Islamic legal manual explains “Circumcision is obligatory (for every male and female) (by cutting off the piece of skin on the glans of the penis of the male, but circumcision of the female is by cutting out the bazr ‘clitoris’ [this is called khufaadh‘ female circumcision’]).” (Umdat al-Salik e4.3, translated by Mark Durie, The Third Choice, p. 64)
Why is it obligatory? Because Muhammad is held to have said so. One Islamic tradition quotes him as saying: “Circumcision is a law for men and a preservation of honor for women.’” (Ahmad Ibn Hanbal 5:75) Another quotes Muhammad’s child bride Aisha: “When the circumcised meets the circumcised, then indeed Ghusl [ritual purification] is required. Myself and Allah’s Messenger did that, so we performed Ghusl.’” (Jami` at-Tirmidhi 108) If Muhammad had the genitals of his favorite wife, Aisha, mutilated, that is a strong endorsement of the practice from the man who is an “excellent example” (Qur’an 33:21) for Muslims.
Why does it matter whether or not FGM is Islamic? Because the practice will never be eradicated if its root causes are not confronted. As long as those Muslims continue to believe that Allah and Muhammad want it done, for some that will override all other considerations, in the United States and everywhere else. If this secret network isn’t dismantled now, it will only grow, and more young girls will suffer. But does Biden’s America have the cultural confidence necessary to confront and eradicate this practice?
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of 23 books including many bestsellers, such as The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), The Truth About Muhammad and The History of Jihad. His latest book is The Critical Qur’an. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.
Pakistan: Armed Muslims Abduct, Forcibly Convert, Rape Hindu Girl for Three Months
Why did this horror story not make headlines across the world?
Fri Sep 24, 2021
A story of horror that should have made headlines on news portals across the world has been masterfully swept under the rug. Is this how media outlets deal from Islamic barbarity?
The incident has been reported from Pakistan’s Sindh province. A young Hindu girl named Tamana Meghwad was allegedly abducted by a group of armed Muslims in the province and was gang-raped for over three months. They also forced Tamana to convert to Islam. There are no records of Pakistan’s administration making any arrangement to rescue this girl or extend any kind of assistance to her family to locate her. After months of assault and molestation, the girl somehow managed to escape and return to her parents.
While the shocking incident was astutely kept quiet by Pakistan’s domestic media, Rahat Austin shared a video of Tamana Meghwad on Twitter and presented her story to the world at large. Austin, a Christian born in Pakistan, is a human rights activist who had to flee his home country and has been staying in South Korea with his family.
In the video, Tamana seems to be naming her perpetrators as Ghulam Rasool, Allah Baig, and Rasool Baig. She accuses them of kidnapping her, forcing themselves on her, and holding her captive for over three months. Now that she has escaped the captivity, they continue to intimidate her.
Returning home doesn’t guarantee safety for Tamana, as now “she is a Muslim” and she must live like one, and with her kind. Muslims are constantly threatening Tamana and her family.
Apostasy from Islam is not permissible, as per the Sharia law. Islamic law prescribes the death penalty for the crime of apostasy. Though Pakistan claims to be a republic, faith in the supremacy of the Sharia wields an enormous influence on the country’s judicial system. Hence, the toothless administration that showed itself incapable of rescuing an abducted girl continues to demonstrate its powerlessness and stands as a silent spectator while the Muslim hoodlums torment the beleaguered family from the minority community.
Tamana was captured from the Kunri area, which is located in the Umerkot district of the Sindh province. More than 90% of Pakistan’s total Hindu demography, comprising 2-4% of Pakistan’s total population, lives in Sindh. They are mostly scattered across border districts including Umerkot, Mirpurkhas, Tharparkar, Sanghar, and, Ghotki.
Thousands of Hindu girls have been abducted from these regions; these girls either end up as sex slaves or are pushed into forced marriages after religious conversions. Hindu families in this region are economically backward, and hail from the marginalized Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. It is easy to exploit them, and that is exactly what Pakistan is doing as a country. Bonded labor is still a thing in Pakistan, and in most cases, it is the subjugated Hindus from Sindh who are taken in as bonded laborers by feudal landlords. Shamefully, its government has not introduced any reforms to protect these families. The administration has essentially thrown them to the mercy of feudal landlords and hardline Muslims.
Sex-Slavery: An Islamic Sacrament?
ISIS may have popularized it, but concubinage is integral to Islam.
February 20, 2020
Raymond Ibrahim
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
Is the sexual enslavement of non-Muslim women an Islamic State idea or merely an Islamic idea?
First, lest there is any doubt that ISIS members were not only convinced that it was their Islamic right to sexually enslave “infidels,” but that doing so was pious, consider this account from 2015: “In the moments before he raped the 12-year-old [non-Muslim] girl, the Islamic State fighter took the time to explain that what he was about to do was not a sin. Because the preteen girl practiced a religion other than Islam, the Quran not only gave him the right to rape her — it condoned and encouraged it, he insisted.” “He said that by raping me,” recalled the 12-year-old, “he is drawing closer to God.”
“Every time that he came to rape me, he would pray,” explained another girl, aged 15. “He said that raping me is his prayer to God. I said to him, ‘What you’re doing to me is wrong, and it will not bring you closer to God.’ And he said, ‘No, it’s allowed. It’s halal.’”
Such claims are of course consistent with a Q&A pamphlet on the topic published by the Islamic State in 2015:
Question 1: What is al-sabi?
Al-Sabi is a woman from among ahl al-harb [the “people of war,” meaning un-subjugated non-Muslims] who has been captured by Muslims.
Question 2: What makes al-sabi permissible?
What makes al-sabi permissible [i.e., what makes it permissible to take such a woman captive] is [her] unbelief. Unbelieving [women] who were captured and brought into the abode of Islam are permissible to us, after the imam distributes them [among us].
Question 3: Can all unbelieving women be taken captive?
There is no dispute among the scholars that it is permissible to capture unbelieving women [who are characterized by] original unbelief [kufr asli], such as the kitabiyat [women from among the People of the Book, i.e., Jews and Christians] and polytheists. However, [the scholars] are disputed over [the issue of] capturing apostate women. The consensus leans toward forbidding it, though some people of knowledge think it permissible. We [ISIS] lean toward accepting the consensus….
Question 4: Is it permissible to have intercourse with a female captive?
It is permissible to have sexual intercourse with the female captive. Allah the almighty said: “[Successful are the believers] who guard their chastity, except from their wives or (the captives and slaves) that their right hands possess, for then they are free from blame [Koran 23:5–6].”…
Question 5: Is it permissible to have intercourse with a female captive immediately after taking possession [of her]?
If she is a virgin, he [her master] can have intercourse with her immediately after taking possession of her. However, if she isn’t, her uterus must be purified [first]….
An important question arises at this juncture: Are these beliefs based on ISIS’s own interpretation of Islam—as we are repeatedly told by the “experts”—or are they based on standard Islamic teachings?
Evidence clearly indicates the latter. Most recently, for instance, on February 2, 2020, Reuters reported that “The man shot dead by police after wounding two people in a stabbing spree on a busy London street… described Yazidi women as slaves and said the Koran made it permissible to rape them.” A few weeks earlier, in late December, African migrants in Paris “repeatedly cited Allah, the Koran, and Mecca,” while raping a minor girl in Paris (original). One can go on and on; consider just the following quotes limited to the ongoing sex grooming scandals in the UK:
· “Muslim abusers quoted Qur’an as they beat me,” said one of countless rape victims.
· “The men who did this to me have no remorse,” said another victim of her Muslim rapists. “They would tell me that what they were doing was OK in their culture.”
· A Muslim convicted of rape confessed that sharing non-Muslim girls for sex was “a religious requirement.”
None of these men were ISIS members; they were just Muslims. If they shared the same outlook concerning the sexual bondage of non-Muslim women, that is because Islam—not the Islamic State, a byproduct—promotes it.
Here, for example, is how the late American professor Majid Khadduri (1909-2007), “internationally recognized as one of the world’s leading authorities on Islamic law and jurisprudence,” politely touched on the topic—and only in the past tense, as if to say this is how Muslims once behaved but no longer. From his War and Peace in the Law of Islam:
The term spoil (ghanima) is applied specifically to property acquired by force from non-Muslims. It includes, however, not only property (movable and immovable) but also persons, whether in the capacity of asra (prisoners of war) or sabi (women and children). … If the slave were a woman, the master was permitted to have sexual connection with her as a concubine.
“Spoils of war” is certainly correct. As one human rights activist said while discussing a Muslim man’s rape of a 9-year-old Christian girl in Pakistan: “Such incidents occur frequently. Christian girls are considered goods to be damaged at leisure. Abusing them is a right. According to the community’s mentality it is not even a crime. Muslims regard them as spoils of war.”
Moreover, seeing and treating non-Muslim women as “spoils of war” is not just limited to the words of old religious texts or “extremist” groups. It was a primary feature of—and often motivation for—over a millennium of war on the non-Muslim world (15 million Europeans alone were enslaved, many—including men and boys—for sexual purposes).
All this is also a reminder that ISIS should not be instantly rejected—as it always is by the Western establishment—as an authority on Islamic topics. Indeed, and as the rest of its Q&A pamphlet on sex slavery makes clear, ISIS so meticulously follows the arcane minutia of sharia as to maintain an odd veneer of “morality”—there are a number of restrictions—and even goes so far as to indicate that freeing slaves is a virtuous act (Q&A 27).
The real difference between ISIS and other Muslims is that the former is, refreshingly, very forthright concerning the teachings of Islam (as when they made clear that their hate for the Western world is based on sharia, not grievances, even though the latter paradigm has long worked as a cover for Islamic terror groups, as al-Qaeda well knew).
I am reminded of an old Arabic language program, where the hostess asked two prominent Muslim clerics: “According to sharia, is slave-sex still applicable?” The two ulema refused to give a clear answer — dissembling here, going off on tangents there. When she pressed the issue, one of the clerics stormed off the set. He eventually returned, and the hostess politely explained her incessant questioning: “Ninety percent of Muslims, including myself, do not understand the issue of sex slavery in Islam and are having a hard time swallowing it,” she implored, to which the sheikh closed the matter by replying, “You don’t need to understand!”
At any rate, from here it becomes clear why so many Muslim men—above and beyond ISIS card-carrying members—see and treat “infidel” women in Europe and elsewhere as “pieces of meat”. As the all-important answer to the third question in the ISIS pamphlet correctly states: “There is no dispute among the scholars that it is permissible to capture unbelieving women [who are characterized by] original unbelief [kufr asli, meaning they were born as non-Muslims], such as the kitabiyat [women from among the People of the Book, i.e., Jews and Christians] and polytheists.”
Such is the impact of the Islamic “sacrament” captured in Koran (4:3; 23: 5-6, etc.): all non-Muslim women—be they atheists, Christians, Jews, polytheists, wiccans et al—are free game for abducting and enslaving. They exist, quite simply, for the “pleasure of Muslim men,” as a would-be rapist once told a reluctant Christian girl before murdering her.
Female Genital Mutilation and Islamic Social Norms
By Paul Sutliff
On January 30th of this year, a 12-year-old girl in Egypt died as a result of her parents having Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) performed on her. Egypt has had a law outlawing the practice since 2008. The parents have been charged. This law was written to protect females because Islamic social norms permit and encourage this practice.
According to Ian Askew, World Health Organization Director for the Department of Reproductive Health and Research:
FGM describes all procedures that involve the partial or total removal of external genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons. It has no health benefits.
More than 200 million girls and women alive today are living with FGM and many are at risk of suffering the associated negative health consequences as a result.
These include death, severe bleeding and problems urinating. Longer-term consequences range from cysts and infections to complications in childbirth and increased risk of newborn deaths.
FGM is a grave violation of the human rights of girls and women.
Another term used for FGM is female circumcision. Some countries prefer the term FGC, as it is seen as “more neutral.” (The “C” being a reference to “cutting.”) This “more neutral” term allows their medical personnel to package FGM into the “birth package.” Ebony Ridell Bamber, the head of advocacy and policy at Orchid Project, a UK-based NGO working towards ending FGM, states that. "It really contributes to legitimizing and entrenching the practice even further."
In Islam, legitimization comes when shariah, Islamic law, endorses and promotes a practice. Under shariah, female circumcision is required of Muslim females. This is documented in Reliance of the Traveller:
e4.3 Circumcision is obligatory (O: for both men and women. For men it consists of removing the prepuce from the penis, and for women, removing the prepuce (Ar. Bazr) of the clitoris (n: not the clitoris itself, as some mistakenly assert). (A: Hanbalis hold that circumcision of women is not obligatory but sunna, while Hanafis consider it a mere courtesy to the husband.)"
Islamic scholars have been found using this piece to declare to non-Muslims that shariah does not agree with FGM, going so far as to claim it is unIslamic if carried out to the extreme and totally removing the clitoris:
Female circumcision, known pejoratively in its extreme form as female genital mutilation or cutting, is not prescribed in the Quran and there are no authentic prophetic traditions recommending the practice. The basis in Islamic law is that it is not permissible to cause bodily harm and any such practice of female circumcision proven to be harmful would be unlawful.
This is very deceptive. Let’s look at what the abbreviations mean in the above section of shariah:
A: ... comment by Sheikh 'Abd al-Wakil Durubi
Ar. Arabic
n: ... remark by the translator
O: ... excerpt from the commentary of Sheikh 'Umar Barakat
Taking the commentary of the translator out, the passage now reads:
e4. 3 Circumcision is obligatory (O: for both men and women. For men it consists of removing the prepuce from the penis, and for women, removing the prepuce (Ar. Bazr) of the clitoris.
Many other hadiths also back up the obligation for FGM under Shariah. For example:
· Jami` at-Tirmidhi Vol. 1 Book 1 #109
Aishah narrated that: the Prophet said: "When the circumcised meets the circumcised then Ghusl [full-body ritual purification] is required."
· Muwatta Malik Book 2, Hadith 73
Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Said ibn al- Musayyab that Umar ibn al-Khattab and Uthman ibn Affan and A'isha, the wife of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, used to say, "When the circumcised part touches the circumcised part, ghusl is obligatory."
· Sahih al-Bukhari 6599, 6600
Abu Huraira: Allah's Messenger said, "No child is born but has the Islamic Faith, but its parents turn it into a Jew or a Christian. It is as you help the animals give birth. Do you find among their offspring a mutilated one before you mutilate them yourself.”
To
say that FGM only happens in third-world countries ignores the sad and sorry truth that several countries have passed laws forbidding this cruelty to their children. Egypt passed a law against FGM in 2008 and was amended in 2016. But by 2015, a “government survey discovered that 87% of Egyptian women and girls aged between 15 and 49 have been mutilated, or as the Egyptian government put it, “circumcised.”
February 6th was the International Day of Zero Tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation. This annual day of awareness was commenmorated this year by the German news source DW.com’s article, “Female genital mutilation feels 'like living in a dead body' by Shadia Abdelmoneim, which describes how a midwife performed FGM on her without her consent after the birth of her third child in Sudan:
It led to a lengthy period of shock thereafter where she found it difficult to trust anybody, but Shadia also vividly recalls the moment she realized what had happened.
"I wanted to go to the toilet, but something wasn't right. I couldn't walk and was in considerable pain. When I saw what she had done, I was shocked. She'd cut everything open and then sewn it closed. I had no idea what to do.”
Shadia, already fighting against female genital mutilation and for women's rights as an activist in Sudan, was in her mid 30s at the time. She started living in a constant state of fear for her three daughters; she could barely let them out of her sight.
"How could women do something like that to one another, how?" she asks, her eyes welling up with tears. "Being circumcised is like living in a dead body.”
Dr. Cornelia Strunz, who works at the Desert Flower Center, met Shadia when she came to the center for help, said Shadia needed surgery to help her live with this mutilation. According to Dr. Strunz, there are many possible problems that result from FGM.
Many women have problems emptying their bladder after FGM. Menstrual blood can't drain properly. For some, sex becomes practically impossible. Women can also develop fistulas -- connections between two body parts which should not exist at all in normal circumstances. One example would be a link between the vagina and rectum, leading to them passing stools through the vagina. Obviously, that's not very easy to live with.
Social norms that allow for FGM conflict with several social norms of Western civilization. It denies a women’s rights to have control over her own body, as it is a requirement under shariah. It destroys a woman’s ability to enjoy partaking in sexual activity when the woman marries. This makes the act a duty and not a pleasure. The act itself violates the Hippocratic Oath “to do no harm.” In countries where FGM is banned, parents/guardians who have this done to their own daughters are denying the validity of laws made by men.
Paul Sutliff is a federally recognized expert on Civilization Jihad. His blog can be found at http://paulsutliff.blogspot.com. You can request him as a speaker at http://paulsutliff.com. Paul’s books are on Amazon.
Exclusive: 'A Piece of Meat' - How Muslim Men See White Women
Past and present, little has changed.
December 20, 2019
Raymond Ibrahim
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
A British girl was “passed around like a piece of meat” between Muslim men who abused and raped her between the ages of 12 and 14, a court heard earlier this month. Her problems began after she befriended a young Muslim man who, before long, was “forcing her to perform sex acts on other [and older] men,” and receiving money for it. When she resisted, he threatened her and her family with death and destruction. Speaking now as an adult, the woman explained how she eventually “lost count of how many men I was forced to have sex with” during two years of “hell” when she often considered suicide. Among other anecdotes, the court heard how the young “girl was raped on a dirty mattress above a takeaway and forced to perform [oral] sex acts in a churchyard,” and how one of her abusers “urinated on her in an act of humiliation” afterwards.
Although her experiences are akin to those of many British girls, that she was “passed around like a piece of meat” is a reminder of the experiences of another British woman known by the pseudonym of Kate Elysia. The Muslim men she encountered “made me believe I was nothing more than a slut, a white whore,” she said. “They treated me like a leper, apart from when they wanted sex. I was less than human to them, I was rubbish.”
What explains this ongoing exploitation of European women by Muslim men—which exists well beyond the UK and has become epidemic in Germany Sweden, and elsewhere? The answer begins by understanding that, although these sordid accounts are routinely dismissed as the activities of “criminals,” they are in fact reflective of nearly fourteen centuries of Muslim views on and treatment of European women.
For starters, Muslim men have long had an obsessive attraction for fair women of the European variety. This, as all things Islamic, traces back to their prophet, Muhammad. In order to entice his men to war on the Byzantines—who, as the Arabs’ nearest European neighbors represented “white” people—the prophet told them that they would be able to sexually enslave the “yellow” women (an apparent reference to their fair hair).
For over a millennium after Muhammad, jihadi leaders—Arabs, Berbers, Turks, Tatars et al—also coaxed their men to jihad on Europe by citing (and later sexually enslaving) its women. As one example, prior to their invasion into Spain, Tarek bin Ziyad, a jihadi hero, enticed the Muslims by saying, “You must have heard numerous accounts of this island, you must know how the Grecian maidens, as beautiful as houris … are awaiting your arrival, reclining on soft couches in the sumptuous palaces of crowned lords and princes.”
That the sexual enslavement of fair women was an aspect that always fueled the jihad is evident in other ways. Thus, for M.A. Khan, an author and former Muslim, it is “impossible to disconnect Islam from the Viking slave-trade, because the supply was absolutely meant for meeting [the] Islamic world’s unceasing demand for the prized white slaves” and for “white sex-slaves.”
Just as Muslim rapists see British and other European women as “pieces of meat,” “nothing more than sluts,” and “white whores,” so did Muslim luminaries always describe the nearest European women of Byzantium. 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 … [T]hey 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.”
But as the 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 [Arab/Muslim], Byzantine women are strongly associated with sexual immorality . . . .While the one quality that our 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…The behavior of most women in Byzantium was a far cry from the depictions that appear in Arabic sources.
The continuity in Muslim “dealings” with European women is evident even in the otherwise arcane details. For example, the aforementioned Kate “was trafficked to the North African country of Morocco where she was prostituted and repeatedly raped.” She was kept in an apartment in Marrakesh, where another girl no more than 15 was also kept for sexual purposes. “I can’t remember how many times I’m raped that [first] night, or by who,” Kate recounts.
This mirrors history. By 1541, the Muslim Barbary State of “Algiers teemed with Christian captives,” from Europe that “it became a common saying that a Christian slave was scarce a fair barter for an onion.”
According to the conservative estimate of American professor Robert Davis, “between 1530 and 1780 [alone] there were almost certainly a million and quite possibly as many as a million and a quarter white, European Christians enslaved by the Muslims of the Barbary Coast,” of which Morocco—where Kate was abducted to in the modern era—was one. Women slaves—and not a few men and boys—were always sexually abused. With countless European women selling for the price of an onion, little wonder by the late 1700s, European observers noted how “the inhabitants of Algiers have a rather white complexion.”
It was the same elsewhere. (The number of Europeans enslaved by Muslims throughout history is closer to 15 million.) The slave markets of the Ottoman sultanate were for centuries so inundated with European flesh that children sold for pennies, “a very beautiful slave woman was exchanged for a pair of boots, and four Serbian slaves were traded for a horse.” In Crimea—where some three million Slavs were enslaved by the Muslim Tatars—an eyewitness described how Christian men were castrated and savagely tortured (including by gouging their eyes out), whereas “The youngest women are kept for wanton pleasures.”
Such a long and unwavering history of sexually enslaving European women on the claim that, they are all “pieces of meat,” “nothing more than sluts,” and “white whores,” should place the ongoing sexual abuse of Western women in context—and offer a dim prognosis for the future.
(Note: All historical quotes and facts in this article are sourced from the author’s book, Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West.)
Why Yasmine Mohammed's 'Unveiled' Is a Must-Read
Buy a copy for yourself -- and one for your leftist Islam-apologist friend.
December 20, 2019
Danusha V. Goska
"My whole body was suffocating. My head throbbed, and my skin oozed sweat from every pore … dressing like the kuffar was evil. I would go to hell if I dressed that way … when the Caliphate rises, if you're not wearing hijab, how will you be distinguished from the nonbelievers? If you look like them, you'll be killed like them … wearing a niqab [face veil] you feel like you're in a portable sensory deprivation chamber. It impedes your ability to see, hear, touch, smell. I felt like I was slowly dying inside … I didn't even know who I was anymore – if I even was somebody at all."
Yasmine Mohammed is a spitfire, a term once applied both to World-War-II-era combat aircraft and to superstars like Jane Russell who played hotblooded women who didn't let anyone push them around. Yasmine is a forty-something Canadian ex-Muslim, atheist, educator, and activist. (I'm going against convention here and referring to the author by her first name. She shares a last name with Islam's prophet and founder, and I want to avoid confusion.)
Yasmine was raised by a strict Muslim mother who was the second wife of an equally strict stepfather. She was in an arranged marriage to an Al-Qaeda member. She left Islam and she is now married to a non-Muslim. Unveiled: How Western Liberals Empower Radical Islam is her first book. And what a first book it is. Unveiled is a can't-put-it-down instant classic. Authors Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Nonie Darwish, Wafa Sultan, Kate McCord, Jean Sasson, Nawal el-Saadawi, and Phyllis Chesler, move over. There is a new star in your literary firmament.
The subtitle of Unveiled, How Western Liberals Empower Radical Islam, is a bit misleading. Yes, Yasmine takes on actor Ben Affleck's October, 2014 appearance on Bill Maher's Real Time HBO show. On that broadcast Maher and Sam Harris, both atheists and critics of Christianity, bemoaned their fellow liberals' attacking them for also criticizing Islam. Ben Affleck exploded – no pun intended. Affleck, a normally cool and ironic actor, devoted a freakish amount of zealotry to shielding from analysis clitoridectomy, throwing gay men off roofs, and suicide bombings. Affleck yelled, waved his arms, furrowed his brow and interrupted. Any criticism of Islamic doctrine is "gross, racist, ugly." Affleck offered zero facts. Facts are not necessary. Become apoplectic, smear any critic of jihad or gender apartheid as racist, pose and preen and signal your own superior, culturally relative virtue, and the good liberal is done. We've all met versions of this Islamapologist, though most are not as good looking as Affleck.
Affleck's Islamapologism outraged Yasmine Mohammed. She notes that Affleck made a film, Dogma, that mocks Christianity. She insists that liberals like Affleck do great harm to real, live human beings. "It was unforgiveable for Ben Affleck to deflect criticism of this ideology that has caused so much suffering in the world … no one in the West cares if Muslim women were being imprisoned or killed … for not covering their hair … that bloggers in Bangladesh were being hacked to death … because they dared write about humanism … this seemingly well-meaning, white-guilt ridden man was standing in the way!" Affleck's immorality, cowardice, narcissism and ignorance, so paradigmatic of Islamapologists, prompted Yasmine to write her book. Unveiled, she says, "is for anyone who feels a duty to defend Islam from scrutiny and criticism … you are deflecting the light from shining on millions of people imprisoned in darkness."
"At times Western corporations actively support the very things brave women fight against. The 2019 Sports Illustrated featured a burkini." Nike put a swoosh on "religiously prescribed modesty clothing … How can we fight Western patriarchy while simultaneously supporting Islamic patriarchy?" Yasmine asks.
Liberal Islamapologists' constant shielding of Islam from critique is not merely a debate question for Yasmine Mohammed. Decades ago, young Yasmine told her teacher, Rick Fabbro, that she was being abused. She showed Fabbro bruises on her arms, caused by her stepfather's beatings with a belt. Her stepfather wasn't punishing Yasmine for any wrong-doing; he was merely taking out his own personal frustrations on her body. Fabbro reported the abuse. A Canadian judge ruled that Islamic culture allowed severe "corporal punishment." "I never felt so betrayed in my life … how disgusting to allow a child to be beaten because her abuser happens to come from another country!" Children are being abused, Yasmine reports, "because their government is hell-bent on cultural and moral relativism."
Yasmine is not alone. In 2010, a New Jersey judge refused a restraining order to a teenage Muslima who was raped and tortured by her arranged husband. The husband told the wife, "this is according to our religion. You are my wife, I can do anything to you. The woman, she should submit and do anything I ask her to do." The judge agreed, asserting that spousal abuse is sanctioned in Islam. The Islamapologism of useful idiots like Ben Affleck causes real harm to real victims.
Though Yasmine opens and closes with mentions of Ben Affleck, The bulk of the book is not about liberals empowering radical Islam. Rather, it is a riveting memoir of child abuse and recovery. Yasmine's mother is one of the most vile characters I have ever read about, and I've read a fair number of books about Nazism. "Mama" quite literally tortures her daughter, all in the name of making her a good Muslima.
Islamapologists will no doubt hit upon this aspect of the book. "Yasmine Mohammed's critique of Islamic gender apartheid and jihad can't be taken at face value. She was raised by an abusive mother and molested by her mother's male companions. Child abuse is her problem, not Islam," they'll say. Further, some will accuse Yasmine of stoking the flames of xenophobic hatred. "By speaking in such detail about your abuse, you make all Muslims look like monsters!" they'll say.
No, Yasmine does not stoke the flames of xenophobic hatred. In fact, Yasmine dedicates her book in part "to those of you who feel compelled to demonize all Muslims. I hope you will see that we are all just human beings and we battle our own demons." She rejects racist terms like "sandn----r" and insists that no one should misconstrue her "personal journey out of faith as an invitation to be hateful to those still in it." After reading this book, I felt great compassion and fellow feeling for Yasmine Mohammed, a woman who lived most of her life as a devout Muslim. Yasmine will, no doubt, arouse that same compassion and fellow feeling in many readers.
It's also very true that horrific child abuse occurs in non-Muslim societies as well as Muslim ones. There are several features, though, that distinguish Muslim child abuse and non-Muslim child abuse.
In her book Wholly Different, Nonie Darwish discusses the Islamic emphasis on hiding sin. Darwish contrasts this emphasis with the Judeo-Christian tradition of confession of sin and subsequent redemption. Darwish heard an Egyptian sheikh say on TV that if a follower of a sheikh witnesses the sheikh committing a sin, the follower should say, "it is my eyes that committed the sin" for having witnessed a power figure do wrong. The holy man is "masoom," infallible or free from sin. The Islamic view of public exposure of sin feeds a culture based on pride and shame. The Koran is replete with references to "shame," "disgrace," "humiliation," and "losers." These concepts contribute to thwarting attempts at rescuing abused children. If you can't see, or talk about child abuse, you can't address it.
Another cultural factor: submission to an overwhelming sense that everything "is written." "Any effort to try to create your own destiny is meaningless … your whole life is written before you take your first breath," Yasmine writes.
Yasmine describes Islam as a pyramid-shaped power structure, with unquestioning obedience required at all levels. Men submit to Allah, women submit to men, and children submit to adults. Yasmine cites a hadith that describes power descending from the ruler, to the man, to the woman, and then to the servant. There are ethnic pyramids of worth as well. Rich Gulf Arabs are superior to poor Muslims from Pakistan and India.
In such a system, "women rarely support one another. Each woman is too concerned with saving her own skin … We hold down our screaming five-year-old daughters and allow a woman to take a razor to their genitals because a man will prefer her that way." Girls are close to the bottom of the pyramid of power. Yasmine mentions the 2017 Norwegian film What Will People Say. In the film, the main character, a child of Pakistani parents growing up in Norway, abuses a cat. Why? Because she's on the bottom. She's been taught that you deal with frustration by abusing the person, or animal, beneath you on the pyramid of power. The cat is the innocent and defenseless target.
The Allah who is the pinnacle of the Islamic pyramidal power structure is a sadist whose graphic torments are detailed in the Koran. Don Richardson, in Secrets of the Koran, writes that one in every eight Koran verses is a threat of damnation. Hell is graphically described as a place with vivid tortures. By contrast, according to Richardson, the Old Testament mentions Hell once in every 774 verses, and it is never described so graphically.
In the Koran, Allah burns off the skin of the damned. They grow new skin, and that skin, in turn, is burned off, for all eternity. Young Yasmine dared ask her mother, "Won't I eventually get used to it?"
No, her mother replied. "Allah will make sure that every single time it hurts as much as the first time."
The hadiths, as well as the Koran, contain graphic tortures of Hell. In one hadith, Mohammed reports that he saw women hanging by their hair, with their brains boiling. Their crime? They refused to wear hijab.
Total, unquestioning obedience under pain of eternal damnation is pounded into Muslims several times a day, with the daily prayers. Islamic prayer indoctrinates Muslims in mindless obedience and group, not individual, behavior. Yasmine details the robotic movements that must accompany each syllable. These syllables, she says, are meaningless to most Muslims, who don't understand classical Arabic. They must merely memorize syllables and repeat them over and over to the point where the mind is numbed. When praying in a group, they must stand touching other Muslims. This physical contact provides an extra layer of surveillance. If a Muslim shirks a given, required movement, other Muslims will not only see it, they will feel it. Too, Muslims are assured that their prophet is watching them pray, "Make your rows straight for I can see you behind my back." Any deviation from prescribed activity is automatically a ticket to Hell. If you don't touch another Muslim while praying, you leave room for Satan, and you will be punished. "Do not leave any gaps for the Shaytaan. Whoever complete [sic] a row, Allaah will reward him, and whoever breaks a row, Allaah will forsake him."
"The prayers are mind-numbingly repetitive. There is no room for the slightest variation. Every ceremonial motion and every word is specific and methodic, stripping … Muslims … of any individuality. Get in line. Follow the herd. No distractions … The meaning [of prayer] was never discussed … Questioning only lead to anger and admonishment," Yasmine writes. Islam is so thorough in outlining how Muslims are to live that there is a specific ritualistic way to cut fingernails and dispose of clippings.
When Yasmine finally does learn the meaning of the words she's been repeating, she realizes she's been indoctrinated. "Nearly twenty times a day, I was referring to non-Muslims as the enemies of Allah. I was chanting that Muslims who became friends with non-Muslims were doomed to Hell, that non-Muslims were the vilest of animals, only fit to be used as fuel for the fires of Hell, that Jewish people were sub-human … I remember one of my aunts lamenting that the cucumbers were smaller this year because the Jews were putting cancer in the vegetables … At least five times a day over a billion people are droning on, calling for the death of all non-Muslims."
Yasmine describes her younger self being bound, whipped, caned, and locked up. Mama tells little Yasmine that she has no value whatsoever. Indeed, Yasmine is told again and again that she is a slut, prostitute, and whore, even though she is a chaste virgin, and, later, a dutiful wife in an arranged marriage. Don't worry that reading a book about graphic child abuse will be too upsetting. Yasmine's descriptions are searing, but brief. The reader never forgets that the author of these nightmarish accounts is an adult powerhouse who managed to break free both of her tormentors and the Islam that her tormentors cited as justification.
After each incident is described, Yasmine offers a corresponding quote from Islamic sacred texts that is used to justify such tortures. Young Yasmine must kneel at her mother's feet and kiss them. This is because Islam teaches that "Paradise is under the feet of mothers." Mama determines whether Yasmine will go to Heaven or Hell. Yasmine is bound and hung upside down from a hook used to hang the lamb sacrificed for the Eid holiday. A woman, a sacrificial animal, little difference. "Hang your whip where members of your household (your wife, children, and slaves) can see it, for that will discipline them," says one hadith. Another, "Teach your children to pray when they are seven years old, and smack them if they do not do so when they are ten."
Yasmine does not cite Koran 18:65-81. In this passage, Musa, meant to be the Biblical Moses, is depicted as following and learning from Khidr, a "slave of Allah." Khidr murders an innocent child. Musa objects. Khidr reprimands Moses for objecting. Khidr explains that the boy's parents were Muslims and "we feared lest he should make disobedience and ingratitude to come upon them." In the place of the child Khidr murdered, Allah "might give them in his place one better than him." The Koran itself offers a passage often interpreted to mean that Muslim parents have the right to life and death over their own children.
When discussing honor killing, Robert Spencer reminds his readers that, "A manual of Islamic law certified as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy by Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, says that 'retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right.' However, 'not subject to retaliation' is 'a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring's offspring.' ('Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2). In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law."
I admire Yasmine for being so frank as to recount how long she stayed loyal to her abusive mother, and to religious observance that she felt to be destroying her very sense of self. Again and again the door swings open and Yasmine walks past that open door and back into the sick, twisted prison of her mother's oppressive hold. Again and again, Yasmine sees utterly plainly how destructive her mother is, and yet Yasmine continues to live with her and crave her love, a love this poisonous viper would never bestow on her precious daughter.
Yasmine marries the man her mother tells her to marry, though she does not love him. This man, Essam Marzouk, beats Yasmine so badly she miscarries their second child. Eventually, slowly but surely, Yasmine breaks her conditioning, leaves her family, abandons her veil, and marries a non-Muslim man. The reader rejoices for her.
This reader has one problem with Unveiled and other media produced by some Ex-Muslims, including the Ex-Muslims of North America. These ex-Muslims decide, "I discovered that Islam is oppressive, therefore, all religion is oppressive nonsense." Their dismissals are based not only on scanty knowledge of the scripture and dogma of other faiths, but also ignorance of how other faiths have influenced society.
Yasmine says, again and again, that her encounters with non-Muslims were like encounters, as she herself puts it, with "angels." There's a reason that the non-Muslims Yasmine encountered treated her with concern and decency. That reason is their training, very different from her own. They were raised in a Judeo-Christian society, that upholds Judeo-Christian values.
In the Old Testament, God orders Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. God stops the sacrifice. For hundreds of years, Jews and Christians have understood this story as separating God's chosen people from the surrounding Canaanite society, where child sacrifice to Moloch was practiced. Archaeology confirms Biblical accounts. Various Phoenician societies around the Mediterranean, including the Canaanites and Carthaginians, left evidence of child sacrifice. Child sacrifice was also practiced by several Native American cultures, including Chimu, Inca, Maya, Aztec, Mississippian and Pawnee; it possibly occurred in Ancient Greece, and child sacrifice occurs today among Hindus in India.
Contemporary scholars debate whether or not the Isaac story was originally understood as a stand against child sacrifice, but Christians and Jews themselves understand it that way, and that interpretation was explicitly advanced by a Jewish scholar eight hundred years ago. In any case, Biblical verse after verse condemns parents killing their own children.
The New Testament could not be more dramatic in emphasizing the value of children. God, the omnipotent creator of the universe, enters time in the body of a helpless infant born of a lowly peasant girl, among stock animals in a stable. Jesus famously says, "Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as little child shall in no wise enter therein."
Pregnant with Jesus, Mary recites the Magnificat, "He hath put down the mighty from their seat: and hath exalted the humble and meek." Jesus says, "The last shall be first, and the first, last," and "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth." Again and again, the Bible overturns the pyramid of power.
Early Christian critic Celsus, a Greek Pagan, dismissed Christianity as a religion that attracted those on the bottom. Christianity, Celsus sneered, is a religion of women, of children, and of slaves. The Pagan Roman legal code attributed to Romulus allowed for the murder of female children, and female infanticide was common in the ancient, Pagan world. A Greek comedy from the third century BC records, "Everyone, even a poor man, raises a son; everyone, even a wealthy man, exposes a daughter." Rodney Stark theorizes that Christianity's remarkable success can be attributed partially to Christianity's remarkable respect for the personhood of women and children, even female infants. "Thou shalt not murder a child by abortion nor kill them when born," said the Didache, "a first century manual of Church teachings." Early Christianity's valuing of young, female human beings is unforgettably depicted in The Acts of Paul and Thecla, about a Pagan girl who converts to Christianity and boldly asserts her own full worth in the face of murderous Pagan opposition. Finally, of course, Christianity mandates confession and repentance, rather than the hiding of sin.
Non-believers have only a partial picture when they refuse to consider how Judeo-Christian teaching and Christian faith have fostered the features they value in Western Civilization. Yes, child abuse occurs in Christian families and institutions as well as in Muslim ones. But there is a difference between, say, Jordan, a relatively modern Muslim-majority country, and the United States. In Jordan, honor killing is a perpetual problem. Families practice it; authorities look the other way. The ancient Koran story of Khidr, a revered Muslim character who killed a child because the child might someday embarrass his devout Muslim parents, is carried out daily in Muslim countries. In countries with a Judeo-Christian heritage, killing your child because the child might embarrass you is not supported by the wider society. Some cultures provide guardrails and tools that can be used to dismantle human dysfunction. Other cultures provide scriptures that uphold hate and abuse.
Not just honor killing oppresses Muslim women and girls. Clitoredectomy, child and forced marriage, and polygamy are all part of day-to-day life. Sharia dictates that women inherit half of what men inherit, and the testimony of two women equals the testimony of one man. Women cannot pray when they are menstruating. In a hadith, Mohammed himself cited the ban on women praying during their menstruation as proof that women are "deficient in religion" and make up the majority of the damned in Hell. A woman, Mohammed insisted, must satisfy their husband's demand for sex, even while riding on a camel's back. One could go on. Denigration of the value of the lives of girls and women is deeply embedded in the Koran and hadiths.
Rodney Stark ended his book The Victory of Reason with a quote he attributes to a Chinese scholar. "One of the things we were asked to look into was what accounted for the success, in fact, the pre-eminence of the West all over the world. We studied everything we could from the historical, political, economic, and cultural perspective. At first, we thought it was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next we focused on your economic system. But in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity. That is why the West is so powerful. The Christian moral foundation of social and cultural life was what made possible the emergence of capitalism and then the successful transition to democratic politics. We don't have any doubt about this."
I hope (and pray) that the aversion that immersion in Islam taught ex-Muslims to feel for all religion does not blind them to the impact of the Judeo-Christian tradition on what they value in kuffar society – including the right to self-identify as an atheist, and not be killed for doing so.
Yasmine Mohammed's book is receiving terrific reviews on Amazon. Yasmine deserves more. Krista Tippett hosts On Being on National Public Radio. Tippett markets a soft-focus, touchy-feely Islam. Terry Gross frequently features memoir authors on Fresh Air. Tippett, Gross, the New York Times, all should provide Yasmine Mohammed with a platform. Truth and courage demand it.
Danusha Goska is the author of God through Binoculars: A Hitchhiker at a Monastery
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
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/08/new-novel-blasphemes-fornicating-dog.html
Koran 2:191 "s lay 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".
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
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
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.
Home Office Bureaucrats Accused of Burying Report on Ethnicity of Grooming Gang Rapists
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2020/02/07/home-office-bureaucrats-accused-burying-report-on-ethnicity-grooming-gang-rapists/
West Yorkshire Police
7 Feb 20201,211
4:03
Home Office bureaucrats have been accused of burying a report on the ethnic background of grooming gang rapists announced in 2018.
The report was commissioned by Sajid Javid — then Home Secretary, now Chancellor of the Exchequer — in 2018, with the Pakistani-heritage Muslim MP saying it made him “feel angry” that such a disproportionate number of grooming gang rapists came from his community, and that they had “disgraced our heritage”.
The Home Office later said the review would remain internal, however, supposedly due to operational sensitivity, and Javid was accused of having essentially shelved it.
Now his successor as Home Secretary, Priti Patel, is reportedly being met with “obfuscation” and “given the run around” by departmental bureaucrats as she attempts to find out what has become of their investigation.
Breitbart London@BreitbartLondon
Police Knew About Rotherham ‘Asian’ Rape Gangs But Ignored Them over Fears of ‘Racial Tensions’: Report https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2020/01/19/police-knew-about-rotherham-asian-rape-gangs-but-ignored-them/ …
Rotherham Police Ignored 'Asian' Rape Gangs Fearing 'Racial Tensions'
Rotherham Police ignored decades of abuse carried out by 'Asian' grooming gangs against young girls for fear of sparking "racial tensions".
breitbart.com
157
164 people are talking about this
“I have no idea why, but it has consistently felt like Home Office officials deliberately avoid ministers clear instructions for research when it comes to grooming gangs,” commented Sarah Champion, a Labour MP who has pressed the issue of grooming gangs for some time, and was sacked from Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s shadow government for daring to say that “Britain has a problem with British Pakistani men raping and exploiting white girls.”
“The Home Office ministers and the former Home Secretary [Javid] have all stated to me that the department will carry out research into perpetrators of gang-related child sexual exploitation,” Champion said of the current impasse.
“Still we have nothing. It appears civil servants in the Home Office believe if they ignore requests into grooming gang data for long enough, ministers will just move on to a different topic.
“I think they might be shocked by the persistence of Priti Patel on this issue.”
Sources told the Huffington Post that Patel was “not best pleased” with officials in her department, who are seen as “not being completely upfront” about the issue. She is said to be insistent on seeing the results of the report for herself, even if they are not revealed to the public.
Independent research by think tank Quilliam has previously indicated that some 84 per cent of groomers are South Asian origin men.
Breitbart London@BreitbartLondon
A report by think tank Quilliam has found that more than eight out of ten men convicted of grooming gang offences have an 'Asian' background, while victims are "almost exclusively white girls". http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/12/10/84-grooming-gangs-asian-report/ …
Grooming Gangs: 84 Per Cent Convicted 'Asian', White Girls Seen As 'Fair Game'
A report by think tank Quilliam has found that more than eight out of ten men convicted of grooming gang offences have an 'Asian' background.
breitbart.com
514
640 people are talking about this
“We were promised a review of sorts by the then home secretary and then when it didn’t surface, we were told it was for internal use only,” commented Nazir Afzal, a former Crown prosecutor who led some of the early cases against grooming gang when the authorities were finally forced to act on the scandal.
“Now it seems nobody can find it, he added.
“It’s victims that constantly get let down by the failures of those in authority.”
Afzal wants the report released because, in his view, its absence is being “exploited by the far right”.
Because of his background and work on grooming gang cases, Afzal is often wheeled out by the mainstream media outlets who neglected the issue for years as an authoritative voice ont the subject — but he has previously tried to play down the religious and ethnic dimensions of the large-scale sexual exploitation of overwhelmingly non-Muslim, usually white girls by overwhelmingly Mulsim, usually Pakistani-origin men as non-existent or minimal.
In 2014 he suggested that while the ethnic profile of victims and perpetrators “is what it is”, Asian-origin men were vastly overrepresented in the offender statistics in large part because “Pakistani men, Asian men, [are] disproportionately employed in the night-time economy” — cab drivers, takeaway owners and workers, and so on — and that brings vulnerable seeking “transport” and “food” in contact with the “very small minority” of night-time economy workers inclined towards sexual abuse.
“There is no religious basis for this. These men were not religious,” Afzal insisted — but victims vehemently disagree.
The Independent
✔@Independent
'As a Rotherham grooming gang survivor, I want people to know about the religious extremism which motivated my abusers. The men who raped me weren't like paedophiles - they were like terrorists' https://ind.pn/2pnUr1K
As a Rotherham grooming gang survivor, I want people to know about t…
I’m a Rotherham grooming gang survivor. I call myself a survivor because I’m still alive. I’m part of the UK’s largest ever child sexual abuse investigation. As a teenager, I was taken to various
independent.co.uk
93
132 people are talking about this
Follow Jack Montgomery on Twitter: @JackBMontgomery
Follow Breitbart London on Facebook: Breitbart London
Video: Activists Say Protecting Girls from Mutilation is Anti-Transgender
https://cms.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/03/video-activists-say-protecting-girls-mutilation-frontpagemagcom
The Left’s vicious war on Muslim girls escalates.
March 16, 2020
Frontpagemag.com
Subscribe to the Glazov Gang‘s YouTube Channel and follow us on Twitter: @JamieGlazov.
In this new Jamie Glazov Moment, Jamie focuses on Activists Say Protecting Girls from Mutilation is Anti-Transgender, unveiling how the Left’s vicious war on Muslim girls is escalating.
Don’t miss it!
And make sure to watch The Glazov Gang’s 6-Part Series on Islamic Female Genital Mutilation and the Left’s Complicity, below:
Part I: U.S. Judge Condones Female Genital Mutilation — how our horrific surrender to Sharia is accelerating.
Part 2: Islamic Female Genital Mutilation and Denial — The monstrosity that lies behind the “others do it too” mantra.
Part 3: Elizabeth Yore Fights to EndFGMToday.com — 513,000 girls and women are at risk in the U.S. alone.
Part 4: Female Genital Mutilators Flown Into UK — Where is #MeToo? Where are all the leftist feminists?
Part 5: Malaysia: 93% of Muslim Women are Victims of FGM — When will we start protecting Muslim girls?
Part 6: Amazon Supports Female Genital Mutilation? — America’s electronic commerce company descends into the moral sewer.
Subscribe to Jamie Glazov Productions and follow us on Twitter: @JamieGlazov.
Raymond Ibrahim Interview: Afghanistan, Jihad, and Christian Persecution
In the wake of 9/11's 20th anniversary, a look at other 9/11s in history.
1 comment
Raymond Ibrahim, a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, was recently interviewed on The Catholic Current podcast about Afghanistan, Jihad, the persecution of Christians, and more topics. Check out the 52-minute-long interview, which can be listened to by clicking here.
BLOG BEST READS
THE INSPIRING EPIC STORY
She conquered herself and then conquered her times to become one of America's greatest Daughters!
CLICK ON EBOOK IMAGE BELOW WHICH WILL
DELVIER YOU TO AMAZON
THERE CLICK ON THE EBOOK IMAGE TO READ PAGES
No comments:
Post a Comment