Academia Bows to Islamic Terror
Academia Bows to Islamic Terror
The price of liberty is eternal vigilance, but not everyone shares in the cost.
Even fewer comprehend that the threat to our democracy is more likely to come from the internal erosion of our civic institutions than from external forces.
The most corrupting influence on our democracy is rooted in political correctness in our education system. Whereas there once was an emphasis on civic education as a means to imbue the citizenry with the values of the Constitution, that emphasis has long been diminished.
From elementary school through college, basic requirements in American history and civics have been replaced by political trendiness.
Consequently, it is not surprising that our educational system has produced generation after generation of college administrators who suffer from an embarrassing ignorance of the fundamental political values of the republic.
These present-day Gletkins (the character who embodied the ideology of Stalinism in Arthur Koestler’s classic, Darkness at Noon) have been suckled on a steady diet of political correctness, and so it follows that they are quick to trample basic liberty when it gets in the way of political expediency.
If any institution in our society should embrace the value of the free marketplace of ideas, it should be our colleges and universities. In 1964, students at the University of California, Berkeley launched “The Free Speech Movement” to protest campus restrictions on political speech.
Today, more than half a century later, students on the same campus mobilize to enforce the heckler’s veto or resort to violent confrontation to disrupt or prevent lectures from people who hold political positions with which they disagree.
No longer places for free inquiry or the challenge of dissonant ideas, colleges are now temples of intellectual conformity unworthy of our democracy.
No matter how long you have taught a subject or how solid your credentials, the modern-day Gletkins are waiting to ensnare you for the slightest manifestation of “mechanistic thinking” that threatens the prevailing dogma.
For some twenty-three years, Professor Nicholas Damask has been teaching a course about World Politics, with a section on Islamic terrorism, at Scottsdale Community College in Arizona.
Damask holds a doctorate based on a dissertation about terrorism. He is one of the few political scientists anywhere to have done so.
Professor emeritus Abraham H. Miller was on his dissertation committee and found him to be a serious, talented, and insightful scholar.
For twenty-three years, no one complained about the course. In fact, the overwhelming majority of Professor Damask’s students said they would take a course from him again.
But this year, one student took exception to three quiz questions that related the terrorism of radical Islam to Islamic religious writings.
The grievance was not in the manner of a formal complaint but rather as a posting on social media.
As if to prove that Islam is not the religion of peace, the posting drew death threats from some Muslims against Professor Damask and his family.
The irony was lost not only on them but also on Professor Damask’s superiors who, without the professor’s permission, issued a groveling apology in his name and proclaimed that he would be appendaged to some unnamed imam for reeducation on the true relationship between Islam and violence -- as if one universal explanation really existed.
All religions, including Judaism and Christianity, produce factions that vary in their interpretation of holy texts. Similarly, radical Islam finds in Islamic texts what it wants to see.
To note such relationships is a matter of fact, not a denigration of any religion. Indeed, it appears American Muslims understood this because the threats against Professor Damask largely came from overseas.
FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education created to defend academic freedom, came to Professor Damask’s aid. “FIRE sent an urgent letter to SCC… outlining the college’s free speech and academic freedom missteps and demanding that it abandon any suggestion that it will investigate or suppress his teaching.”
Responsible heads prevailed. Dr. Steven R. Gonzales, interim chancellor of the county community college system, recognizing that Professor Damask’s First Amendment rights had been trampled in a rush to judgment, issued a public apology -- a rare and laudable event in the insular and self-righteous world of academia.
The imbroglio was, in part, unnecessary from inception. If Professor Damask’s superiors had a fundamental understanding of the First Amendment, this episode would not have occurred.
The negligence of such people makes the vigilance that preserves our liberty all the more expensive. The ensuing question is: What price should they pay?
Paul Miller is president and executive director of the Haym Salomon Center. Abraham H. Miller is an emeritus professor of political science, University of Cincinnati, and a distinguished fellow with the Haym Salomon Center.
'White Harlots, Eager for Sex': Islam’s Sadomasochistic Fantasies
The price of liberty is eternal vigilance, but not everyone shares in the cost.
Even fewer comprehend that the threat to our democracy is more likely to come from the internal erosion of our civic institutions than from external forces.
The most corrupting influence on our democracy is rooted in political correctness in our education system. Whereas there once was an emphasis on civic education as a means to imbue the citizenry with the values of the Constitution, that emphasis has long been diminished.
From elementary school through college, basic requirements in American history and civics have been replaced by political trendiness.
Consequently, it is not surprising that our educational system has produced generation after generation of college administrators who suffer from an embarrassing ignorance of the fundamental political values of the republic.
These present-day Gletkins (the character who embodied the ideology of Stalinism in Arthur Koestler’s classic, Darkness at Noon) have been suckled on a steady diet of political correctness, and so it follows that they are quick to trample basic liberty when it gets in the way of political expediency.
If any institution in our society should embrace the value of the free marketplace of ideas, it should be our colleges and universities. In 1964, students at the University of California, Berkeley launched “The Free Speech Movement” to protest campus restrictions on political speech.
Today, more than half a century later, students on the same campus mobilize to enforce the heckler’s veto or resort to violent confrontation to disrupt or prevent lectures from people who hold political positions with which they disagree.
No longer places for free inquiry or the challenge of dissonant ideas, colleges are now temples of intellectual conformity unworthy of our democracy.
No matter how long you have taught a subject or how solid your credentials, the modern-day Gletkins are waiting to ensnare you for the slightest manifestation of “mechanistic thinking” that threatens the prevailing dogma.
For some twenty-three years, Professor Nicholas Damask has been teaching a course about World Politics, with a section on Islamic terrorism, at Scottsdale Community College in Arizona.
Damask holds a doctorate based on a dissertation about terrorism. He is one of the few political scientists anywhere to have done so.
Professor emeritus Abraham H. Miller was on his dissertation committee and found him to be a serious, talented, and insightful scholar.
For twenty-three years, no one complained about the course. In fact, the overwhelming majority of Professor Damask’s students said they would take a course from him again.
But this year, one student took exception to three quiz questions that related the terrorism of radical Islam to Islamic religious writings.
The grievance was not in the manner of a formal complaint but rather as a posting on social media.
As if to prove that Islam is not the religion of peace, the posting drew death threats from some Muslims against Professor Damask and his family.
The irony was lost not only on them but also on Professor Damask’s superiors who, without the professor’s permission, issued a groveling apology in his name and proclaimed that he would be appendaged to some unnamed imam for reeducation on the true relationship between Islam and violence -- as if one universal explanation really existed.
All religions, including Judaism and Christianity, produce factions that vary in their interpretation of holy texts. Similarly, radical Islam finds in Islamic texts what it wants to see.
To note such relationships is a matter of fact, not a denigration of any religion. Indeed, it appears American Muslims understood this because the threats against Professor Damask largely came from overseas.
FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education created to defend academic freedom, came to Professor Damask’s aid. “FIRE sent an urgent letter to SCC… outlining the college’s free speech and academic freedom missteps and demanding that it abandon any suggestion that it will investigate or suppress his teaching.”
Responsible heads prevailed. Dr. Steven R. Gonzales, interim chancellor of the county community college system, recognizing that Professor Damask’s First Amendment rights had been trampled in a rush to judgment, issued a public apology -- a rare and laudable event in the insular and self-righteous world of academia.
The imbroglio was, in part, unnecessary from inception. If Professor Damask’s superiors had a fundamental understanding of the First Amendment, this episode would not have occurred.
The negligence of such people makes the vigilance that preserves our liberty all the more expensive. The ensuing question is: What price should they pay?
Paul Miller is president and executive director of the Haym Salomon Center. Abraham H. Miller is an emeritus professor of political science, University of Cincinnati, and a distinguished fellow with the Haym Salomon Center.
'White Harlots, Eager for Sex': Islam’s Sadomasochistic Fantasies
The “religious and racial” nature of Muslim sex grooming gangs.
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
Speaking under the pseudonym of “Ella,” a British woman recently revealed that her Muslim rapists called her “a white c*nt, a white wh*re, and a white b*tch,” during the more than 100 times she was raped in her youth by the mostly Pakistani grooming gang.
“We need to understand racially and religiously aggravated crime if we are going to prevent it and protect people from it and if we are going to prosecute correctly for it,” she said in her recent interview. “Prevention, protection and prosecution — all of them are being hindered because we are neglecting to properly address the religious and racist aspects of grooming gang crimes…. It’s telling them that it’s OK to hate white people.”
That there are “racial” and “religious” aspects to the epidemic of Muslims raping Western European women cannot be overstated. Put differently, the males of a particular religion tend to fantasize that the females of a particular race are nymphomaniacal masochists who are hot for being degraded and abused. Consider a few earlier examples:
- Another British girl was “passed around like a piece of meat” among Muslim men who abused and raped her between the ages of 12 and 14. Speaking now as an adult, a court heard how she “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.
- Another British woman was trafficked to Morocco where she was prostituted and repeatedly raped by dozens of Muslim men. They “made me believe I was nothing more than a slut, a white whore,” she recollects. “They treated me like a leper, apart from when they wanted sex. I was less than human to them, I was rubbish.”
- A Muslim man explained to another British woman why he was raping her: “you white women are good at it.”
- A Muslim man called a 13-year-old virgin “a little white slag”—British slang for “loose, promiscuous woman”—before raping her.
- In Germany, a group of Muslim “refugees” stalked a 25-year-old woman, hurled “filthy” insults at and taunted her for sex. They too explained their logic—“German girls are just there for sex”—before reaching into her blouse and groping her.
- Another Muslim man who almost killed his 25-year-old German victim while raping her—and shouting “Allah!”—afterwards inquired if she liked it.
- In Australia, a Muslim cabbie groped and insulted his female passengers, including by saying “All Australian women are sluts and deserve to be raped.”
- In Austria, an “Arabic-looking man” approached a 27-year-old woman at a bus stop, pulled down his pants, and “all he could say was sex, sex, sex,” prompting the woman to scream and flee.
Even Dr. Taj Hargey, a British imam, confirms that the majority of the UK’s “imams promote grooming rings.” He said Muslim men are taught that women are “second-class citizens, little more than chattels or possessions over whom they have absolute authority” and that the imams preach a doctrine “that denigrates all women, but treats whites with particular contempt.”
For those acquainted with history, such Muslim behavior towards European women should be unsurprising—stretching, as it does, all the way back to the founder of Islam: In order to prompt his men to invade Byzantine territory—where the Arabs’ nearest European neighbors lived—the prophet Muhammad enticed them with the potential of sexually enslaving the “yellow” women (an apparent reference to their fair hair). It is “impossible to disconnect Islam from the Viking slave-trade,” M.A. Khan, a former Muslim, writes of the following centuries, “because the supply was absolutely meant for meeting [the] Islamic world’s unceasing demand for the prized white slaves” and for “white sex-slaves.”
Moreover, just as Muslim rapists see Western women as “pieces of meat,” “nothing more than sluts,” and “white whores,” so did Islam’s earliest luminaries always describe European women, beginning with those nearest to them, 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.”
Several centuries later, in a written excerpt that goes to great (if not pornographic) lengths, Muhammad bin Hamed al-Isfahani (b. 1125), a celebrated Persian court scholar and poet, explained how he once saw a ship containing “three hundred lovely Frankish women, full of youth and beauty” arrive by sea. The flattery ends there and the fantasying begins:
They glowed with ardour for carnal intercourse. They were all licentious harlots, proud and scornful, who took and gave, foul-fleshed and sinful . . . making love and selling themselves for gold . . . with nasal voices and fleshy thighs, blue-eyed and grey-eyed. . . . They dedicated as a holy offering what they kept between their thighs. . . . They maintained that they could make themselves acceptable to God by no better sacrifice than this. . . . They made themselves targets for men’s darts.
After Saladin conquered Jerusalem from the Franks in 1187, this same Muhammad bin Hamed, who was present and aged 62, launched into yet another sadomasochistic tirade extolling the sexual debasement of European women and children—approximately eight-thousand of whom were enslaved:
How many well-guarded women were profaned, how many queens were ruled, and nubile girls married, and noble women given away, and miserly women forced to yield themselves, and women who had been kept hidden [nuns] stripped of their modesty . . . and free women occupied [meaning “penetrated”], and precious ones used for hard work, and pretty things put to the test, and virgins dishonoured and proud women deflowered . . . and happy ones made to weep! How many noblemen [Muslim lords] took them as concubines, how many ardent men blazed for one of them, and celibates were satisfied by them, and thirsty men sated by them, and turbulent men able to give vent to their passion. How many lovely women were the exclusive property of one man, how many great ladies were sold at low prices . . . and lofty ones abased . . . and those accustomed to thrones dragged down!
In short, past and present, not only have Muslim men had a “penchant” for European women; they have always justified this lust by portraying their victims as wanton nymphomaniacs, eager to be sexually debased.
Accordingly, “Ella”—this British woman who like many others was repeatedly raped while being called “a white c*nt, a white wh*re, and a white b*tch” who “wants it”—is at the very least correct to point out that this ongoing epidemic will continue “because we are neglecting to properly address the religious and racist aspects of grooming gang crimes.”
Historical quotes used in this article were sourced from and referenced in Ibrahim’s book, Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West.
WE ONLY HAVE TO SEE WHAT THE MUSLIM BREEDERS IN EUROPE
HAVE DONE TO THOSE NATIONS TO KNOW HOW ACCURATE THIS IS!
In the end, all these overlooked and/or abandoned
Christian girls transformed into Muslim baby producing factories are part of
the equally overlooked procreation or demographic jihad, which will see
that one
out of every three people on earth is
Muslim by 2070.
Raping and Impregnating Infidels: “Another Form of
Jihad"
How the terrorists kill two
birds with one stone.
May 22, 2020
Raymond
Ibrahim
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman
Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
Because more numbers equate more power and influence, Muslims from
all walks of life—including Muammar Gaddafi—have made clear that the act of procreating is a form of jihad. Thus, in the U.K., “Muslim hate fanatics plan to
take over Britain by having more babies and forcing a population explosion,”
a report revealed back in 2008: “The swollen Muslim population
would be enough to conquer Britain from inside.”
A Christian Eritrean volunteer and translator who worked in
migrant centers in Germany, and was often assumed to be Muslim by the
migrants, confessed that “Muslim migrants often confide in her and tell her
about their dislike towards Christians,” and that “a number of the Muslim
migrants she has spoken to have revealed a hatred for Christians and are
determined to destroy the religion.” As to how they plan on accomplishing
this, “Some women told me, ‘We will multiply our numbers. We must have
more children than the Christians because it’s the only way we can destroy them
here.’”
There is, however, an even more sinister and largely unknown way
of prosecuting this “procreation” jihad—a way of killing two birds with one
stone: seize and seed non-Muslim women with Muslim babies. Doing so
depletes the infidels’ ranks of women and the non-Muslim babies they might have
birthed, while simultaneously increasing both for Islam.
As the aforementioned procreation jihad account from Germany might
suggest—where female Muslim migrants “revealed a hatred for Christians and are
determined to destroy the religion”—Christians are especially being targeted in
this manner.
In Nigeria, for instance, which is roughly half Muslim, half
Christian, thousands of Christian girls have been abducted, forced into Islam,
married off and transformed into incubators of future jihadis. Put
differently, the nearly three hundred Christian Chibok girls who made headlines in 2015—some of whom were brainwashed to “cut the throats of
Christians—are the tip of the
iceberg. As the Hausa Christian Foundation of Nigeria, a human rights
group, recently explained:
The case of abducting Christian Girls and their forceful
conversion to Islam as well as forcing them into marriage has become a water
shed issue in Northern Nigeria…. The moment these girls are abducted,
they are subjected to all manners of evil just to take control of their minds.
Once they took hold of their minds, these girls will only do everything they
are asked to do. While the parents fight for the release of their daughters,
these abductors continue to sexually abuse these girls, hypnotized
[subliminally influenced] their food, drinks, clothes, where they sleep,
perpetually evoke evil spirit upon them to the point that these girls
completely lost their minds and never think of going back to their home. Usually,
the moment a Christian girl is abducted they ensure that they get married to
her within one or two weeks. She will be sexually abused even before the
marriage to make the parents give up on her when she becomes pregnant.
The incessant kidnapping of the Christian girls and the forceful
conversion to Islam is another form of Jihad in the 21st Century. They have two
major aims for doing that: To inflict pain on the parents of the girl and the
Christian community; and to impregnate the girl to add to their claims that Islam
is the fasted growing religion in the world. They are doing it on purpose.
The statement went on by sarcastically “wondering” how unclean
“infidels [kidnapped Christians] can be used to advance such a holy and clean
religion like Islam…. But we know what the religion is all about.
Everything is welcome no matter how evil and inhumane, as long as it will help
Allah, especially the killings, the attacking, kidnapping, raping and enslaving
of Christians.”
The same phenomenon prevails wherever Christian minorities live
alongside Muslims. In Egypt, countless Christian girls have been abducted
for the very same reason—to bring them into the fold of Islam, diminish the
numbers of the infidels, and increase that of the Muslims. The schemes
often take elaborate and complex forms. Most recently, an unknown woman
posing as a Coptic nun, along with an unknown man posing as her monk assistant,
were exposed by the
Coptic pope as frauds that were using their religious garb to get near and win
the trust of young Christian girls.
In 2017, an ex-kidnapper, who “admits he was in a network
actively targeting Coptic girls for years before he left Islam,” explained the systematic and sophisticated process in Egypt:
A group of kidnappers meets in a mosque to discuss potential
victims. They keep a close eye on Christians’ houses and monitor everything that’s
going on. On that basis, they weave a spider’s web around [the girls]…. I
remember a Coptic Christian girl from a rich, well-known family in Minya. She
was kidnapped by five Muslim men. They held her in a house, stripped her and
filmed her naked. In the video, one of them also undressed. They threatened to
make the video public if the girl wouldn’t marry him…. The kidnappers
receive large amounts of money. Police can help them in different ways, and
when they do, they might also receive a part of the financial reward the
kidnappers are paid by the Islamisation organisations. In some cases, police
provide the kidnappers with drugs they seize. The drugs are then given to the
girls to weaken their resistance as they put them under pressure. I even know of
cases in which police offered help to beat up the girls to make them recite the
Islamic creed. And the value of the reward increases whenever the girl
has a position. For example, when she is the daughter of a priest or comes from
a well-known family…. The Salafist group I knew rented apartments in
different areas of Egypt to hide kidnapped Coptic. There, they put them
under pressure and threaten them to convert to Islam. And once they reach the
legal age, a specially arranged Islamic representative comes in to make the
conversion official, issue a certificate and accordingly they change their
ID…. If all goes to plan, the girls are also forced into marriage with a
strict Muslim. Their husbands don’t love them, they just marry her to make her
a Muslim. She will be hit and humiliated. And if she tries to escape, or
convert back to her original religion, she will be killed.
Although such networks have been around since the 1970s, they
reached their “highest levels now, in the era of President Sisi,” the former
kidnapper added.
In Pakistan—another Muslim majority nation where the kidnap, rape,
and forced conversion of Christian girls is endemic—the Asian Human Rights
Commission said this in a 2011 report:
The situation is worse with the police who always side with the
Islamic groups and treat minority groups as lowly life forms. The dark side of
the forced conversion to Islam … also involves the criminal elements who are
engaged in rape and abduction and then justify their heinous crimes by forcing
the victims to convert to Islam. The Muslim fundamentalists are happy to offer
these criminals shelter and use the excuse that they are providing a great
service to their sacred cause of increasing the population of Muslims.
Even in Indonesia—once known as the quintessential “moderate
Muslim” nation—last year a report found that “a new form of persecution is on the
rise—Christian girls are being targeted by Muslim men… Influential
leaders are literally training young men to target Christian girls to
impregnate them.” The report continues:
They target them to try and sort of diffuse the spread of
Christianity because the family of the Christian girl is so ashamed [of the
impregnation] … they’re forced into marrying that daughter into a Muslim
family…. and the Muslims who are being trained to do this, they understand
that. That’s why they’re doing that…. Once girls are married into the
Muslim families, they’re often cut off from or abandoned by their families and
they face even more difficult circumstances. In some cases, girls are the
second or third wife of their persecutor and they have few freedoms.
In the end, all these
overlooked and/or abandoned Christian girls transformed into Muslim baby
producing factories are part of the equally overlooked procreation or
demographic jihad, which will see that one out of every three
people on earth is Muslim by 2070.
No comments:
Post a Comment