JOE BIDEN SAYS WE MUST RESPECT THEIR BARBARIC 'RELIGION' EVEN IF IT KILLS US. BUT ISN'T THAT THE ISLAM CODE?
JOE BIDEN'S IMPORTED MUSLIMS:
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.
Afghanistan in 1996 witnessed a young woman’s finger being chopped off by the Taliban; she had dared to paint her nails. A woman named Bibi Aisha was forced into a nightmarish marriage as a trade-off to settle a family dispute. When she tried to escape the violent and abusive marriage, the Taliban, to shame her for her act of disobedience and to set a warning example for the other young women in the community, severed her nose and ears.
Two Afghans Brought to U.S. Charged with Child Sex Crimes, Strangling Wife While Living on WI Military Base
Two Afghan men, brought to the United States as part of President Joe Biden’s massive resettlement operation out of Afghanistan, have been charged with child sex crimes and domestic abuse while temporarily living at Fort McCoy in Wisconsin.
On Wednesday, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced federal charges against Afghans Bahrullah Noori, 20-years-old, and Mohammad Haroon Imaad, 32-years-old.
According to prosecutors, Noori is accused of trying to forcefully engage in sexual acts with a minor while temporarily living at Fort McCoy since being brought to the U.S. with tens of thousands of other Afghans. Noori has also been charged with three counts of engaging in a sexual act with a minor and one count alleging the use of force.
An indictment against Noori states that his victims were under the age of 16 and were at least four years younger than him.
In a separate incident, Imaad is accused by prosecutors of strangling and suffocating his wife while temporarily living at Fort McCoy after arriving in the U.S. from Afghanistan. The alleged assault apparently took place on September 7.
Both Noori and Imaad appeared in court in Madison, Wisconsin, on September 16 to face the charges against them and are currently being detained at the Dane County Jail. Their immigration statuses, whether they arrived as refugees, Special Immigrant Visa-holders (SIVs), P-2 visa-holders, or parolees remains unclear.
Noori is facing a mandatory minimum of 30 years in prison and a maximum sentence of life in prison. Imaad is facing a maximum of 10 years in prison.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here.
Pentagon: ‘We’re Aware’ of Reports of Afghan Refugees in U.S. Facing Food, Clothing Shortages, Harassing Women
The Pentagon on Wednesday acknowledged that there are problems with Afghan refugees at U.S. military bases where they are being held until they are screened and released.
Pentagon press secretary John Kirby said the Pentagon is “certainly aware” of reports that Afghan refugees lack enough food and clothing, and that some women are being harassed by former Afghan soldiers. Kirby said:
We’re certainly aware of these reports [and] we take it very, very seriously. There are — the — especially in a place like Fort McCoy with winter coming on, and so, NORTHCOM is very mindful of the needs of the weather and the climate and making sure that the evacuees have a safe, clean, warm living environment while they continue this processing.
But we’re mindful about this at all installations here domestically that we have a responsibility to provide that kind of an environment for these individuals and their families to be able to subsist while they continue to work through the immigration process. And again, we’re taking it seriously. I know of no specific request today to conduct an investigation, but the secretary is certainly mindful of the reports.
He added that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin is “comfortable” that Northern Command commander Air Force Gen. Glen D. VanHerck “also is mindful of these issues and will continue to work closely with our interagency partners to alleviate any concerns there might be.”
Kirby said military base commanders are responsible for the bases, including the physical environment, housing, and sustenance issues including medical care, recreation facilities, child care, and religious accommodations.
“Our job is the housing and making sure that there’s a safe environment, a safe and secure environment, for them to complete the processing,” he said.
Asked about reports of “serious problems” at Fort McCoy, Kirby responded again that the Pentagon is ‘aware’ of the reports:
Yeah, I know and I understand that. And I said we’re aware of these reports too. We’re taking them all seriously. Gen. VanHerck is very much mindful of what our responsibilities are in terms of the safe and secure environment. And we take it all seriously. I can’t speak with specificity to each and every one of these reports.
As Breitbart News reported earlier Wednesday, two Afghan men at Fort McCoy in Wisconsin were federally charged for child sex crimes and domestic abuse.
The Justice Department announced federal charges against Afghans Bahrullah Noori, 20-years-old, and Mohammad Haroon Imaad, 32-years-old.
According to prosecutors, Noori is accused of trying to forcefully engage in sexual acts with a minor while temporarily living at Fort McCoy. Noori has also been charged with three counts of engaging in a sexual act with a minor and one count alleging the use of force. An indictment against Noori states that his victims were under the age of 16 and were at least four years younger than him.
Separately, Imaad is accused by prosecutors of strangling and suffocating his wife while temporarily living at Fort McCoy. The alleged assault apparently took place on September 7.
Both Noori and Imaad appeared in court in Madison, Wisconsin, six days ago, on September 16 to face the charges against them and are currently being detained at the Dane County Jail. Their immigration statuses, whether they arrived as refugees, Special Immigrant Visa-holders (SIVs), P-2 visa-holders, or parolees remains unclear.
Noori is facing a mandatory minimum of 30 years in prison and a maximum sentence of life in prison. Imaad is facing a maximum of 10 years in prison.
According to the Minnesota Public Radio, there are about 12,500 refugees from from Afghanistan were being temporarily housed at Fort McCoy.
Kirby said Northcom has about 53,000 Afghan refugees it is temporarily housing, but that it has capacity for over 60,000.
Follow Breitbart News’s Kristina Wong on Twitter or on Facebook.
India: Another Hindu Woman Converted to Islam, Sold Off, Slaughtered by Muslim Husband
An everyday occurrence in India.
Thu Aug 26, 2021
Muslim men initiating romantic associations with Hindu women, marrying them, converting them to Islam, putting them through endless agonies and finally killing them has become an everyday occurrence in India. The horror of these stories remains constant; what changes is the intensity of violence these women are made to endure during their partnership with these men.
Yet another shocking case of this has been reported from Kota in the western state of Rajasthan, India; a 26-year-old mother of three, Rizwana, was attacked and killed by her husband Imran in the middle of the street in broad daylight, because she had been staying away from him and seeking a divorce.
The deceased was originally a Hindu girl named Antima. She was a 15-year-old minor when she met and fell in love with welding worker Imran, and did a “love marriage” with him. Shortly after the marriage, she converted to Islam and adopted the name Rizwana. This marriage was never a smooth and loving one. But Antima, the ninth of ten siblings, held on to the marriage, hoping for things would improve gradually. The couple also had three children, but the arrival of their children didn’t change things for the better, either. In fact, as children were added to his family, Imran picked up the habit of whipping the children as well.
Imran, as reported by Antima’s sister Anita, was a drunkard who would physically assault his wife regularly, in fits of rage. Anita further notes that Imran would often burn Antima with cigarettes.
The sister of the deceased also told the media that Imran had once taken Antima to the popular Indian tourist destination Goa, and sold her off to the skin trade. With a great deal of effort, Antima somehow rescued herself. She then, however, made a disastrous decision: she chose to stay with Imran and give him another chance.
Her living conditions kept deteriorating, and the beating and battering only grew more frequent. Antima finally decided to walk away from this toxic marriage, and moved in with her elder sister. But Imran would call her and threaten her with dire consequences; her mother-in-law (Imran’s mother) would also harass her every day, according to Anita.
“A couple of months ago, Imran had ferociously attacked her with a cricket bat. The wounds Antima received from that beating were so critical that she had to be given 17 stitches,” adds Anita.
Antima stayed away from Imran for two years, but Imran continued to threaten her, and one day forcefully took her to his dwelling. This time he was more ferocious in his tortures of the hapless woman.
For the previous two months, Antima had been staying with her elder sister. On Wednesday, August 18, Antima was on her way to perform her regular chores when Imran ambushed her and repeatedly struck her with a sharp knife; he then fled the scene. Antima’s niece, who was accompanying Antima on her way, also sustained knife injuries in the mayhem. Locals rushed Antima to a local hospital. She was bleeding profusely from the multiple injuries she had received; her throat was slit as well. Doctors at the local hospital referred her to the New Medical College. Unfortunately, she was pronounced dead on arrival at the medical college. Antima met the same fate as hundreds of thousands of Hindu girls who are trapped in Love Jihad in India. The three children she has left behind are now orphaned.
This is the second known case of Hindu women being killed by Muslim partners in India this week. The first one was Diksha Mishra, who was killed by her lover, also named Imran, although he was pretending to be a Hindu, Rishabh Tiwari.
Taliban’s Regulations For Women
It will send chills down your spine.
Thu Aug 26, 2021
Conventional media have put all their resources into whitewashing the brutalities of the Taliban and giving them an image makeover, so as to make them acceptable to the modern world and perhaps win these mountain savages a seat at the United Nations. They tell us that Taliban 2.0 is a whole different entity and is not comparable to the Taliban that had wreaked havoc in Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. After all, the Muslim group has promised to honor women rights and allow them to continue to work as usual. Little girls could receive education as well.
We are a little confused by the Taliban’s commitment to permitting girls to go to school, because quite recently, Taliban jihadis were going door-to-door hunting down girls as young as twelve years old, to take them as sex slaves. We have learned of a woman being lashed for wearing revealing slippers and another burka-clad woman being shot dead for not covering her face enough. And these atrocities have happened under the rule of the moderate, women’s-rights-acknowledging Taliban 2.0.
Leaders of the Muslim outfit have clarified their views on women’s rights in the country: “The rights of women will be under the Sharia law,” affirmed Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid, during their first press conference since conquering Kabul.
And what are the rights granted to women by this esteemed Islamic law? Let’s look at the “rights” Afghan women enjoyed during Taliban 1.0 from 1996 to 2001; or shall we call them impositions?
Women were not allowed to walk out of their homes without a burqa covering every inch of their skin, including their feet, hands and face. Most women during that period opted for the shuttlecock burqa that covered them from head to toe; there was a little gap for the eyes, but with a net or mesh covering the gap so that their eyes couldn’t be seen. It was mandatory for every woman to be accompanied by a male family member – a blood relative – while she was out on the street.
No man should be able to hear the footsteps of a woman, hence, high heels or any kind of footwear that produced a sound while walking were banned from use by women.
A woman’s voice must not reach the ears of a man who is not related to her. Hence she must watch the level of sound she was producing while talking. Would it be “Islamophobia” if we said that the Taliban had perfected the textbook version of silencing a woman?
Again, as women were prohibited from being viewed by men who were not related to her by blood, it was mandatory that the windows of all ground floors be painted in a dark tint, covered, or shut at all times, just in case a woman passed by and became visible to a man in the ground floor.
Also, women were barred from standing at the balconies of their houses, as that could allow men on the streets or male neighbors to catch a glimpse of them.
The word “woman” was removed from all public places or names of public places.
Women were precluded from having their pictures taken or being filmed. No images of women could be printed on the pages of books or newspapers, or kept at stores or in homes.
It goes without saying that women were not allowed to be in movies or on television, or to work at radio stations. They were forbidden from forming groups outdoors or holding public gatherings.
Women have never been allowed to work in offices under the Taliban. They cannot work as journalists, bankers, teachers, nurses, doctors or hold administrative positions, as these jobs would land them amidst male colleagues who are not related to them. Office jobs held by women were subsequently passed on to their male family members.
Little girls were banned from going to school. Numerous schools imparting education to girls have been bombed or burned down by the Taliban, not only in Afghanistan, but in several countries where they have gained the slightest foothold.
No woman under the Taliban rule in Afghanistan ever enjoyed the basic human right of speaking her mind or dressing as she liked. Women who flouted any of the above commandments were subjected to harsh, undreamed-of and ruthless punishments by the religious police. They could be stoned to death, mutilated, or given hundreds of lashes with a meter-long metal lash. Many of these women perished in the midst of receiving their penalty.
Afghanistan in 1996 witnessed a young woman’s finger being chopped off by the Taliban; she had dared to paint her nails. A woman named Bibi Aisha was forced into a nightmarish marriage as a trade-off to settle a family dispute. When she tried to escape the violent and abusive marriage, the Taliban, to shame her for her act of disobedience and to set a warning example for the other young women in the community, severed her nose and ears.
One must be an absolute ignoramus living in denial to even begin to trust that the Taliban will leave the Afghan women alone this time.
Ingraham: Biden 'flooding America' as thousands of Afghans
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGMrd8zV5_M
Hannity: Biden clearly lied
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mtLvYnIPFA
Tucker: You don't see this everyday, in fact you never see it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OmWkozn_iQ
FLEECED! How aid billions were squandered in Afghanistan: £4 million on Tuscan goats for the cashmere trade, £120 million on Dubai villas for corrupt politicians and £400 million on aircraft left to rot
On Contact: The debacle in Afghanistan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7ZQHssDTbc
How U.S. Failure in Afghanistan Validates the Koran’s Jihadist Teachings
Jihadist zeal is at an all-time high, for the Koran always “foretold” America’s failure.
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
While it should be a no-brainer that the Taliban’s victory in Afghanistan has emboldened like-minded (read: “radical”) Muslims to no end, few in the West appreciate how this episode—especially America’s disastrous retreat under Biden—is being used to validate the Koran itself, and thus reignite Muslim zeal and faith in Islam.
Since August 15, 2021, when the Taliban reconquered Afghanistan, anytime I watched an Arabic language program or sheikh speak, they cited several Koran verses as “proof” that it was only inevitable—only a matter of time—that the U.S. would be humiliated and the Taliban exalted.
Consider, as one example, the words of popular sheikh, Wagdi Ghoneim (pictured above). An Egyptian scholar of Islam and member of the Muslim Brotherhood, he is notorious for issuing violent fatwas against Israel and inciting hatred against other “infidels” (including by threatening Egypt’s indigenous Christian minority, the Copts with genocide). With such “credentials,” it should come as no surprise that he once served as the imam of the Islamic Institute of Orange County, California, and was a fundraiser for the Toledo, Ohio charity, KindHearts (a Hamas front).
On August 15, 2021, this Ghoneim offered a “victory” speech that—at least as of publication of this article—still appears on YouTube, titled (in translation), “Allahu Akbar: The Taliban’s Victory Represents the Power of Jihad in Allah’s Way.” He began his talk by quoting the Koran on the virtues of jihad, for example:
O believers! Be mindful of Allah and seek what brings you closer to him and perform jihad in his way, so you may be successful (5:35).
O believers! March forth [into battle] whether it is easy or difficult for you, and perform jihad with your wealth and your lives in the cause of Allah. That is best for you, if only you knew (9:41).
Having laid the doctrinal framework for jihad, Ghoneim moved on to its most important aspect—perseverance: “The Taliban persevered in its jihad for 20 years,” he stressed. “This isn’t a problem—what’s 20 years in the context of history? Who said [the outcome of] jihad is instantaneous? No! It requires patience and time!”
In fact, patience and perseverance in the jihad was his grand point—not to mention the grand takeaway lesson of Afghanistan for all Muslims. It is for Allah to decree when the jihad succeeds; for every day Muslims, there duty is simply and always to wage it. If they do so, Allah, according to his word, shall eventually bless them with victory.
Supporting Koran verses Ghoneim cited include,
We will certainly test you until we learn who among you are the true mujahidin [jihadists] who remain steadfast and how you conduct yourselves (47:31).
Do you think you will enter Paradise without Allah proving which of you truly performed jihad for his cause and patiently endured? (3:142).
O believers! Patiently endure, persevere, stand on guard, and be mindful of Allah, that you may be successful (3:200).
Interestingly, the phrase “stand on guard” in Koran 3:200 literally means “perform ribat,” that is, man the frontier zone, whence the infidels should be harried, including through guerilla tactics—precisely what the Taliban did.
Finally, Ghoneim moved onto Allah’s words concerning infidels, especially those who try to prevent Muslims from performing jihad and enforcing sharia; he quoted Koran 8:36: “Surely the infidels spend their wealth to prevent others from the Way of Allah [sabil allah, i.e., jihad]. They will continue to spend to the point of regret. Then they will be defeated and the infidels will be driven into hell.”
As countless other Muslim clerics and leaders have done, are doing, and will do for years to come, Ghoneim proceeded to expound how that particular Koran verse foretold America’s defeat—that is, so long as there were always Muslims willing to persevere in the jihad, namely the Taliban. At one point he descended into wild gloating: “See how much they lost by way of dead and wounded—and trillions, all lost!... So you see, trillions they have lost!”
Because Ghoneim made this video on August 15, when it was still unknown that billions of dollars’ worth of U.S. weapons had fallen into the hands of the Taliban, he did not mention it—though countless other clerics have since, citing it as proof of how Allah blesses his jihadist servants, while humiliating their infidel enemies.
At any rate, the take away lesson from Afghanistan for millions of Muslims the world over is that perseverance in jihad and patience pays off—just as the Koran says it will. Put differently, the roles of both the Taliban and the U.S. have now confirmed for Muslims the truths of the Koran, specifically, that perseverance in the jihad always leads to victory over and leaves infidels broken—even if it takes years and decades.
“Therefore, thanks be to Allah,” concluded Ghoneim, “that they [Taliban] were patient and steadfast, and Allah rewarded them with victory over the infidel nations.” He closed by supplicating Allah to let the umma, the entire Muslim world, learn from the Taliban—from “those heroes who raised all of our heads up high and cast the infidels’ heads down in shame.”
As such, expect a renewed and unwavering commitment to the jihad—in all its manifestations, violent and nonviolent—in the foreseeable future.
Aisha, Muhammad’s Child Bride
A rebuttal of author Lesley Hazleton.
July 27, 2020
Isaac Marshall
‘Quick-witted’, ‘tart tongued’, ‘daring’, ‘headstrong’ and ‘assertive’ are not five phrases I would immediately attribute to Aisha when I hear them. What springs to mind is rather ‘prepubescent child-bride’; the authority for this assertion consists of multiple Islamic sources rather than speculative, cringeworthy platitudes. This is the issue we face when dissecting one of the most popular videos from the Emir-Stein Center, ‘Who Is Aisha?’ , featuring Lesley Hazleton. In this edition of Emir-Stein’s video series whitewashing Islam, Hazleton attempts to distract the viewer with irrelevance, willfully neglecting to expand upon some of the most significant parts of Aisha’s story.
Aisha is frequently mentioned in Islamic sources, but Hazleton speculates this is because she is a daring young upstart, rather than just Muhammad’s favourite wife, which Hazleton also acknowledges. Hazleton even asserts that Aisha led an entire army, but this isn’t quite true.
When Hazleton moves to address Aisha’s age, the deflection begins. She seems unable to condemn Muhammad’s marriage, apparently to a nine-year-old girl, as wrong. She first suggests that Muhammad’s later marriages were political, which I would dispute, as Muhammad had clear attraction to these women; his marriages to them were not simply a forced, political move. Hazleton states: ‘Aisha would later claim she was only nine and while other accounts have her nine when she was betrothed and married at age twelve, few people cared to openly contradict Aisha. Besides, being married at nine would make her unique and she was proud of her uniqueness’.
There are three serious framing errors here. Not only does Hazleton insist that Aisha’s saying she was nine was simply a later claim, but she refutes herself when she says that many of the writings stating this were early. The second is that Hazleton contradicts herself again by claiming that later writers were afraid to contradict what Aisha had said. If that were true, Hazleton would have no sources for her claim that the betrothal took place when Aisha was nine and the marriage when she was twelve. The third framing error is the most disgraceful; attempting to paint a marriage between a fifty-three-year-old man and an apparently nine-year-old girl as positive in some way. Who else would defend such a marriage today by claiming the child wants to be unique?
When we look at the earliest and most trusted Islamic sources, they are unapologetically unanimous regarding the age of Aisha when she was married, as well as about the age of consummation and the details of the marriage. The fact that the consummation took place when Aisha was still so young also shows that the marriage was not solely political, but we do not need this fact to prove Muhammad’s intentions. If we look at Sahih al-Bukhari 268 and 5068, we read the following two accounts of Muhammad and his wives: ‘The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number. I asked Anas, “Had the Prophet the strength for it?” Anas replied, “We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty (men).” And Sa`id said on the authority of Qatada that Anas had told him about nine wives only (not eleven)’. ‘The Prophet used to go round (have sexual relations with) all his wives in one night, and he had nine wives’.
Muhammad married Aisha at the age of six, not nine, in multiple Islamic sources. I could be picky here and detail how the people used a lunar calendar, so she would more likely be four at the time of the marriage and six at the time of the consummation, as opposed to six at the time of the marriage and nine at the time of consummation, but we will take the trusted sources at face-value. Sahih al-Bukhari 5133, Sahih al-Bukhari 5158, Sahih Muslim 3481, Sahih Muslim 3482 and Sunan Abu Dawud 2121 all unanimously repeat that Aisha was married to Muhammad at age six or seven and that the consummation of the marriage took place when she was nine years old.
The sources also show that Aisha was prepubescent. In Sahih Muslim 3481, when she was taken to consummate the marriage, we read; ‘A’isha reported that Allah’s Apostle married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he died she was eighteen years old’. Because she was playing with dolls, which is forbidden as they are images, it confirms her prepubescence: young children are not held to observance as strict as that to which older people are held. In Sahih al-Bukhari 6130, it is said: ‘I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s Messenger used to enter they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for `Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.)’
Hazleton then asks, given Aisha’s insults to Khadija among other examples, ‘how ironic it is then for the outspoken Aisha to serve as the excuse, the rationale, for one of the most misogynistic interpretations of the Qur’an, one that would force women into silence’. This is a straw man. The misogyny that Hazleton objects to so strenuously can be found throughout the commands of the direct, perfect, uncheangable, eternal, perfectly preserved word of Allah, the Qur’an.
Surah 2:228 depicts Allah saying a man has to wait three monthly cycles before he can divorce his wife; in Surah 65:4, it gives exceptions to that rule: women who are too old, women who are too young, or women who are pregnant. This shows that child marriage was permissible. Additionally, the chapter heading of Sahih al-Bukhari 5133 is ‘Giving young children in marriage is permissible by virtue of Statement of Allah’. The chapter cites verses 65:4 as well as the words of Aisha, who repeats that Muhammad consummated their marriage when she was nine years old.
Women are property when married, as Surah 4:24 states: ‘And married women [are also forbidden], except all that your right hand possesses. This is the decree of Allah for you. And it is lawful to you, besides this, to seek out women with your money, chaste without fornication. So, whatever you enjoy by it (their sexual parts) from them, so give them their wages; it is an ordinance’. This is followed by Surah 4:34, where Allah says ‘Men are in charge of women’ and ‘of whom you fear rebellion, so preach to them and separate from them in the beds and scourge them’. Equality is not present in the sources. If a man wants to engage in an extra-marital sexual affair, it is legitimised in Sahih al-Bukhari 5075.
Surah 2:282 shows that a woman is half as intelligent as a man, as two women are required in the place of one man to judge: ‘if one of them should make an error, the other may cause her to remember’. In Sahih Muslim 7099, Muhammad says; ‘Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler’. This, yet again, does not fit in with Hazleton’s feminist Qur’an, and you cannot change the direct and perfect word of Allah, so reform in such passages is impossible.
Jannah would be a hellish place for Lesley Hazleton. Aside from disgusting sources such as page 351 of Al-Suyuti Al-Itqan fi Ulum Al-Qur’an and Sunan Ibn Majah, Zuhd 39, we find many references to Jannah in the Qur’an. Surah 78:31-34 involves ‘Surely to the fearing ones triumph, gardens and vineyards, and women of equal age with large breasts, and a cup dihāqan (filled, a non-Arabic word of Mesopotamian origin)’ while in Surah 55:56-57, Allah asks ‘In them those who restrain their eyes, whom neither human nor jinn has ever had sex with before them. So which of the bounties of your lord will you deny?’, before asking the same question in 55:70-73: ‘In them, good and beautiful maidens. So which of the bounties of your lord will you deny? Hūr confined in the khaima. So which of the bounties of your lord will you deny? No human nor jinn has ever had sex with.’ Hūr are defined as ‘the ever-virgins of the gardens with white skin, large dark eyes, and large breasts’. Khaima means tents, a word of Abyssinian origin. More details about Jannah can be seen in Surahs 41:51-55, 56:22-24 and 56:35-37.
Hazleton’s segment about Aisha’s adultery story is mostly irrelevant, aside from her last statement on it: ‘extremist scholars would twist this horrible, arguing that in the lack of four eye-witnesses, an impossibility, any woman that testified to having been raped was be default admitting to adultery and therefore to be punished accordingly. If Aisha could have foreseen this, she’d have been horrified, outraged and anything but silent’. This is all simply speculation, as the idea of four witnesses for an accusation was well established at the time of Muhammad (as well as in the Qur’an at 24:4 and 24:13). Muhammad was not an ‘extremist scholar’. If rape could not be proven, the woman would be admitting to intercourse with the man, which would be adultery. Aisha would have had ample time to stand up to this idea, but there are no recorded sources where she did so.
Lesley Hazleton ends her presentation with the following; ‘It seems to me like Aisha’s life is so full of irony precisely because she could not be pigeon-holed [or] cast in the stereotypically feminine role, so while I may not know if I’d have liked her, I do know that as a feminist I have to admire her, this fearless 7th century woman whom I suspect would be utterly at home in the 21st [Century].’ Reading these sentiments back into the sources is incredibly odd. Hazleton’s only evidence for the character of Aisha she wants to portray is the fact that she was ‘leading’ an army in a battle the Muslims comically lost and compiled many Islamic sources. These things do not make her ‘fearless.’
Women in Islam are horrifically abused, often accepting the abuse as it is morally righteous from Allah and Muhammad, and this must be remembered. In Sahih al-Bukhari 6971, we read Muhammad saying: ‘Her (a virgin girl) silence means her consent’. Add the requirement of the hijab from Surahs 24:31 and 33:59 and the result is a worrying picture of women in Islam, one that Hazleton would quickly want to erase. There are many additional Islamic sources that degrade woman to an unbelievable level, but I will conclude now with a quote from Aisha herself, the teenage girl who had to wash semen off the clothes of her elderly husband and witness her fellow Muslim women beaten until their skin turned green, from Sahih al-Bukhari 5825: ‘I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women.’
Turkey Openly Declares Commitment to Jihad on Non-Muslims
While statues of American heroes come toppling down, Turkey honors a mass-murdering, pedophilic slaver of history.
July 27, 2020
Raymond Ibrahim
Raymond Ibrahim, author most recently of Sword and Scimitar, is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
While monuments to heroic Americans of a former age—including abolitionists who died fighting slavery—get toppled and dishonored, a land-grabber, mass-slaver, terrorist, and pedophile—Ottoman sultan Muhammad II—was recently honored by the president of Turkey.
During his recent public address celebrating the July 10, 2020 decree to transform the Hagia Sophia, which for a millennium had functioned as Eastern Christendom’s greatest church, into a mosque, Turkish president Erdoğan repeatedly saluted Sultan Muhammad (1432-1481), also known as al-Fatih (“the Conqueror”), for violently transforming Christian Constantinople into Islamic Istanbul.
Of the apparently intolerable decades when Hagia Sophia served as a museum (1935 to the recent decision), Erdoğan began by quoting a Turkish poet:
Hagia Sophia, O magnificent temple, do not worry: the grandchildren of Muhammad al-Fatih will overthrow all the [Christian] idols and convert you into a mosque; they will perform their ablutions with tears and prostrate; tahlils [recitations of the Islamic credo] and takbirs [cries of “Allahu akbar”] will replenish your empty domes … Your minaret balconies will light up in honor of Allah and his Prophet Muhammad. The whole world will think that Muhammad al-Fatih has resurrected. This will be Hagia Sophia; this will be a second conquest, a new resurrection”
Erdoğan’s and much of Turkey’s adoration of and desire to emulate Muhammad al-Fatih—this, to quote Erdoğan, “happy, blessed servant of Allah,” who in fact behaved like an ISIS chieftain—should (but won’t) be cause for alarm.
Consider: Sultan Muhammad’s sole justification for conquering Constantinople was that Islam demands the subjugation of “infidels,” in this case, Christians. He had no other “grievance” than that. In fact, when he first became sultan, he “swore by the god of their false prophet, by the prophet whose name he bore,” a bitter Christian contemporary retrospectively wrote, that “he was their friend, and would remain for the whole of his life a friend and ally of Constantinople.” Although they believed him, Muhammad was taking advantage of “the basest arts of dissimulation and deceit,” wrote Edward Gibbon. “Peace was on his lips while war was in his heart.”
During the siege of Constantinople, he regularly exhorted his followers with jihadi ideology, including by unleashing throngs of preachers crying,
Children of Muhammad, be of good heart, for tomorrow we shall have so many Christians in our hands that we will sell them, two slaves for a ducat, and will have such riches that we will all be of gold, and from the beards of the Greeks we will make leads for our dogs, and their families will be our slaves. So be of good heart and be ready to die cheerfully for the love of our [past and present] Muhammad.
“Recall the promises of our Prophet concerning fallen warriors in the Koran,” the sultan himself exhorted: “the man who dies in combat shall be transported bodily to paradise and shall dine with Muhammad in the presence of women, handsome boys, and virgins.”
The mention of “handsome boys” was not just an accurate reference to the Koran’s promise; Muhammad was a notorious pedophile. His enslavement and rape of Jacob Notaras—a handsome 14-year-old noble’s son in Constantinople, whom Muhammad forced into becoming his personal catamite until he escaped—was only one the most infamous. According to Gibbon, the sultan stabbed to death another Christian boy who “preferred death to infamy.”
After his conquest and desecration of the Hagia Sophia, Muhammad had the “wretched citizens of Constantinople” dragged before his men during evening festivities and “ordered many of them to be hacked to pieces, for the sake of entertainment.” The rest of the city’s population—as many as 45,000—was hauled off in chains to be sold as slaves.
This is the man whom Turkey and its president honor—including by rededicating one of Christendom’s greatest and oldest churches as a victory mosque to him. As Erdoğan concluded his speech:
The conquest of Istanbul [Constantinople] and the conversion of the Hagia Sophia into a mosque are among the most glorious chapters of Turkish history.….The resurrection of the Hagia Sophia represents our memory full of heydays in our history, from [the battles of] Badr to Manzikert, from Nicopolis, to Gallipoli [all jihadi victories] … The resurrection of the Hagia Sophia is required by our respect and commitment to all of our ancestors, from Alp Arslan [Islamic victor of Manzikert and conqueror of Asia Minor, who massacred or enslaved tens of thousands of Christians], to Muhammad al-Fatah, to Abdulhamid [who massacred as many as 300,000 Armenians in the name of jihad between 1894-1896]. The resurrection of the Hagia Sophia … honors Muhammad al-Fatih’s spirit of conquest… Allah willing, we will continue to walk on this sacred path without pause or hesitation, until we reach our ultimate destination.
The message is clear; jihadi ideology dominates Turkey. Hating, invading, and conquering neighboring peoples—not due to any grievances but because they are non-Muslim—with all the attending atrocities, rapes, destruction, and mass slavery is apparently the ideal, to resume once the sunset of Western power is complete.
Not, of course, that any of this stops Erdoğan from playing the victim card. In the same speech, he said that transforming the Hagia Sophia into a mosque is not only supposed to “reignite” all Muslims, but “all the oppressed, all the wronged, downtrodden, and exploited”; moreover, the real issue that needs discussing is not his transformation of a site deemed sacred to millions of Orthodox Christians into a victory mosque but rather Western “Islamophobia” and “xenophobia.”
Sadly, because Americans are used to seeing statues of this nation’s heroes toppled—for no other reason than they were white and/or Christian, and therefore inherently evil—the significance of Erdoğan’s words and praise of Muhammad the Conqueror—who as an Asian Muslim is further immune from Western criticism, as that would be “racist”—will remain lost on them.
Jews, Not Muslims, Are the Primary Victims of Religion-Based Hate Crimes in the U.S.
Yet the media continues to focus on the phantom of “Islamophobia.”
As the nation observed the twentieth anniversary of the 9/11 jihad terror attacks, the establishment media’s focus was largely on how Muslims were victimized in the wake of the attacks. A wave of “Islamophobia” supposedly swept over the United States, and is still very much with us. Reality, however, is (as usual) sharply different from the establishment media narrative. Jews, not Muslims, have both before 9/11 and after been the far most common victim of hate crimes in the United States. Yet the media indefatigably focuses on “Islamophobia,” not anti-Semitism.
George W. Bush got the ball rolling on September 17, 2001. He appeared at the Islamic Center of Washington, D.C., in the company of several prominent Muslim leaders, including Nihad Awad of the The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and Abdurahman Alamoudi of the American Muslim Council, who is now in prison for funding al-Qaeda, and put the spotlight squarely on Muslims as victims:
America counts millions of Muslims amongst our citizens, and Muslims make an incredibly valuable contribution to our country. Muslims are doctors, lawyers, law professors, members of the military, entrepreneurs, shopkeepers, moms and dads. And they need to be treated with respect.
In our anger and emotion, our fellow Americans must treat each other with respect. Women who cover their heads in this country must feel comfortable going outside their homes. Moms who wear cover must be not intimidated in America. That’s not the America I know. That’s not the America I value. I’ve been told that some fear to leave; some don’t want to go shopping for their families; some don’t want to go about their ordinary daily routines because, by wearing cover, they’re afraid they’ll be intimidated. That should not and that will not stand in America.
Those who feel like they can intimidate our fellow citizens to take out their anger don’t represent the best of America, they represent the worst of humankind, and they should be ashamed of that kind of behavior.
The only problem with this was that Muslims were not being subjected to wholesale vigilante attacks in the United States, at that time or at any point subsequently. A Sikh, Balbir Singh Sodhi, was mistaken for a Muslim and murdered on September 15, 2001; the following day, a Muslim, Waqar Hasan, was murdered. On October 4, 2001, the man who murdered Hasan, Mark Anthony Stroman, killed a Hindu named Vasudev Patel, mistaking him for a Muslim.
That was all. These three murders were heinous crimes; Balbir Singh Sodhi’s killer, Frank Silva Roque, is serving life in prison, and Mark Stroman was executed in 2011. But to claim that “9/11 released a dangerous wave of white supremacy and Islamophobia that, two decades later, continues to manifest in attacks on members of a variety of belief traditions,” as AP did in noting the anniversary of Balbir Singh Sodhi’s murder Thursday, is wildly exaggerated. Muslims have not suffered widespread persecution, discrimination, and harassment in the U.S. since 9/11. FBI hate crime statistics bear this out.
In 2000, the year before the 9/11 attacks, the FBI noted 33 anti-Islamic hate crimes; in 2001, that number skyrocketed to 546. That’s 546 too many, but a bit of perspective is in order: also in 2001, there were 1,117 anti-Jewish hate crimes. These were not, mind you, all violent incidents: the FBI report explained that “A review of the total offenses (11,451) demonstrated that intimidation was the most frequently reported hate crime, accounting for 37.9 percent of the total. Destruction/damage/vandalism made up 26.4 percent; simple assault, 18.8 percent; aggravated assault, 10.8 percent. The remaining offenses accounted for 6.1 percent of the total.” Intimidation can be just saying something rude, or something perceived as rude.
In 2002, the number of anti-Muslim hate crimes fell sharply, to 170; the number of anti-Jewish hate crimes held steady at 1,039. And so it has been every year since then. In 2018, there were 225 anti-Muslim hate crimes, and 896 anti-Jewish hate crimes; in 2019, there were 219 anti-Muslim hate crimes, and 995 anti-Jewish hate crimes. In 2020, anti-Muslim hate crimes decreased by 42%.
Yet ABC News gave a Muslims-As-Victims spin to all this on September 11 when it stated: “Hate crimes against Muslims rose 1617% from 2000 to 2001, according to the FBI marking some of the highest numbers of Islamophobic hate crimes ever in the U.S. But even as the country moved further from the attacks and the Muslim American population in the country grew, discrimination against this community has not waned, Pew Research Center reports.”
This kind of “journalism” is published as Jew-hatred becomes increasingly legitimized on the Left. Around the time of the recent conflict between Hamas and Israel last spring, Palestinian Muslims and their supporters committed acts of violence against Jews and supporters of Israel all over the United States. In New York City, a Muslim mob screaming “Allahu akbar” attacked a Jewish man in midtown Manhattan. Also in Manhattan, Palestinians threatened violence and screamed anti-Semitic slurs at Jews. One threw a mini-firebomb. Pro-jihad protesters stormed a restaurant and spat on Jewish patrons; one of the thugs threw a bottle. A Muslim, Waseem Awawdeh, was arrested for viciously beating a Jew in Times Square.
In Los Angeles, Palestinian protesters asked people dining at the Sushi Fumi restaurant if they were Jewish, and proceeded to attack them with knives. Elsewhere in Los Angeles, two cars festooned with Palestinian flags chased a Jewish man down a street as he was leaving his synagogue. In Florida, a van also bearing a Palestinian flag and emblazoned with the slogan “Hitler was Right” drove past a pro-Israel demonstration. In Skokie, Illinois, a pro-jihad vandal wearing an Arab headdress smashed a synagogue window and left a Palestine flag and a pro-jihad sign inside. And in Boston, an anti-Semitic Muslim migrant named Khaled Awad approached a rabbi outside a Jewish day school and stabbed him eight times.
There will likely be much more of this, while the media continues to hunt for “Islamophobia” and demonize and stigmatize all those who stand against jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women. The facts are clear to anyone who searches for them, but most people won’t; and establishment media “journalists” will continue to do all they can to hoodwink Americans into swallowing their tendentious, inaccurate, and divisive narrative.
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.
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment