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.
THE DIVISIONIST DEMOCRAT PARTY AND BLACK ANTI-SEMITICISM…. BUT BLACKS HATE EVERYONE PERIOD.
https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2022/05/black-lives-murder-most-violent_8.html
Only a minority of black people are anti-Semites, but those that are, are not lone wolves. They are not inventing the wheel. Rather, they are steeped in a significant cultural trend, a trend that persons of conscience will name, confront, analyze, and denounce.
Danusha Goska is the author of God through Binoculars: A Hitchhiker at a Monastery
Whose future, indeed? If we are to repel Black Lives Matter’s full-on assault on our values, institutions, and character, it will only be if all American patriots summon the kind of courageous, truth-telling resistance David Horowitz displays in his indispensable book I Can’t Breathe to expose and condemn the corrosive racial hoaxes perpetrated by BLM and the Democrat Party.
Black Lives Matter: Not Just Communist, But Viciously Anti-Semitic Too
Biden's EPIC Fail That Media Hid.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqgTGG3W60o
Biden's new press secretary has a problem with Jews
By Edward Davis
Karine Jean-Pierre makes history this week as the first woman "of color" and the first open lesbian to become the official spokesperson for the leader of the free world.
Unfortunately, another characteristic that sets her apart from previous White House press secretaries is her malicious radical activism, which reached its low point when she made fictitious allegations against a moderate, bipartisan pro-Israel organization.
Biden’s Nominee for Brazil Ambassador Faces Accusations of Antisemitism
Elizabeth Frawley Bagley, the Biden administration’s nominee to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Brazil, is facing accusations of antisemitism from both sides of the aisle after a 1998 interview surfaced in which she referred to the “Jewish lobby.”
Bagley’s State Department bio described her past service in Democratic administrations, and her career inside the Beltway:
Elizabeth Bagley’s considerable diplomatic experience spans over 20 years at the Department of State. This includes her earlier service as Congressional liaison for the Panama Canal Treaties, Special Assistant for the Camp David Accords and Congressional liaison to the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (Helsinki Accords) in Madrid, Spain; all positions served during the Carter Administration. In 1994, Ms. Bagley was confirmed as U.S. Ambassador to Portugal under President Bill Clinton. In 1997, following her return to Washington, she served as Senior Advisor to Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to head the office of Media Acquisition for the Balkans.
During the Obama Administration, Ms. Bagley was appointed as the first Special Representative for Global Partnerships, under Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. She continued her service at the Department of State as Senior Advisor to both Secretary Clinton and Secretary John Kerry. Before her confirmation as U.S. Ambassador to Portugal, Ms. Bagley served as Adjunct Professor at Georgetown University Law Center – her alma mater – and later as Associate Producer for ABC News in Paris, France and Washington, D.C. Ms. Bagley also served as Of Counsel to Manatt, Phelps law firm in DC, specializing in international law. Ms. Bagley is currently the owner and Board member of SBI, a cellular communications company in Show Low, AZ. Ms. Bagley’s distinguished career as a diplomat and lawyer, and her demonstrated commitment to public service make her a well-qualified candidate to serve as U.S. Ambassador to the Federative Republic of Brazil.
President Joe Biden sent Bagley’s nomination to the Senate this January. In her May confirmation hearing, she faced some questions from Democrats — not just Republicans — about her past use of language that implies Jewish control over politics.
The Washington Free Beacon reported Wednesday:
Bagley, in a 1998 interview, a full copy of which was obtained by the Free Beacon, bemoaned “the influence of the Jewish lobby because there is major money involved.” She went on to claim “the Democrats always tend to go with the Jewish constituency on Israel and say stupid things, like moving the capital to Jerusalem always comes up.” Support for these Israel-related issues are due to “the Jewish factor, it’s money.” The interview was conducted by a historian at the Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training for an oral history project.
Senate sources involved in the confirmation process said Bagley’s comments should disqualify her from the ambassador’s role and told the Free Beacon that both Democrats and Republicans on the Senate committee have privately expressed concerns about these remarks.
…
“Is it a suggestion that one group of Americans don’t have the right to engage in the political process as others do?” [New Jersey Senator Bob] Menendez asked (D). “Words, especially for those who are going to be ambassadors of the United States to other countries are incredibly important, probably more significant than maybe in our individual daily lives.”
Some Jewish groups and activists are outraged.
The Republican Jewish Coalition’s executive director, Matt Brooks, said in a statement: “Ms. Bagley’s disgraceful, antisemitic comments are absolutely disqualifying; her outrageous slurs include suggesting the ‘Jewish lobby’ influences elected officials with ‘major money’ – an age-old antisemitic stereotype.”
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee was scheduled to hold a vote Thursday on advancing Ms. Bagley’s nomination to the floor.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). He is the author of the recent e-book, Neither Free nor Fair: The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
‘The Jewish Factor, It’s Money’: Biden Ambassador Pick Under Fire for Anti-Semitic Tirade
Elizabeth Frawley Bagley decried ‘the influence of the Jewish lobby’ and its ‘major money’
The Biden administration’s nominee to serve as the U.S. ambassador to Brazil spoke at length about the influence of Jewish money in politics, claiming the "Jewish lobby" exerts undue influence over the Democratic Party with its "major money."
Elizabeth Frawley Bagley, a longtime diplomat and Democratic Party insider, is scheduled on Thursday to have her nomination advanced to the full Senate by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. But Bagley’s comments about Jewish money in politics—tropes long considered anti-Semitic in nature—are raising red flags among Democratic and Republican members of the committee, senior congressional sources told the Washington Free Beacon.
Bagley, in a 1998 interview, a full copy of which was obtained by the Free Beacon, bemoaned "the influence of the Jewish lobby because there is major money involved." She went on to claim "the Democrats always tend to go with the Jewish constituency on Israel and say stupid things, like moving the capital to Jerusalem always comes up." Support for these Israel-related issues are due to "the Jewish factor, it’s money." The interview was conducted by a historian at the Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training for an oral history project.
Senate sources involved in the confirmation process said Bagley’s comments should disqualify her from the ambassador’s role and told the Free Beacon that both Democrats and Republicans on the Senate committee have privately expressed concerns about these remarks.
"Under a normal administration this kind of vicious anti-Semitism would be disqualifying. You couldn't get hired as an intern," said one senior congressional Republican staffer, who was not authorized to speak on record about the concerns related to Bagley. "It speaks volumes that the Biden administration was confident enough to nominate Bagley and send her to the Senate for confirmation. They know that Democrats are going to fall into line."
Bagley opened up about the "Jewish lobby" and its impact on Democratic Party politics in the 1998 interview. She was asked about "the Israeli influence" on the Clinton administration, where Bagley served as the ambassador to Portugal.
"There is always the influence of the Jewish lobby because there is major money involved," Bagley said. "But, I don’t remember any major issues coming out on that, besides the usual ‘make Jerusalem the capital of Israel,’ which is always an issue in the campaign."
Democrats, she said, "always tend to go with the Jewish constituency on Israel and say stupid things, like moving the capital to Jerusalem always comes up. Things that we shouldn’t even touch."
"Jewish Democrats," she continued, "were going to give their money to Clinton anyway and Jews are mostly Democrats on social issues."
The "Jewish factor" is not about the raw number of electors who care about these issues, Bagley said, "it’s money."
When questioned about these remarks during a May 18 confirmation hearing with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Bagley claimed they were the result of a "free-flowing discussion" with the interviewer.
"The language you used in regard to the Jewish community, Israel’s influence on our election, and Jewish money have me concerned," Sen. Ben Cardin (D., Md.) said during the hearing. "The choice of words was fit into the traditional tropes of anti-Semitism."
"I regret that you would think that it was a problem," Bagley told Cardin. "I certainly didn’t mean anything by it. It was a poor choice of words, but it was something that the interviewer had asked me, prompted by something about politics."
Bagley added that she is "very sorry about that choice of words."
Cardin noted that as a career diplomat, Bagley should be trained to more carefully choose her words.
Sen. Robert Menendez (D., N.J.), the committee’s chairman, also expressed alarm over Bagley’s remarks.
"Is it a suggestion that one group of Americans don’t have the right to engage in the political process as others do?" Menendez asked. "Words, especially for those who are going to be ambassadors of the United States to other countries are incredibly important, probably more significant than maybe in our individual daily lives."
Bagley told Menendez she holds no animosity toward Jewish people or the pro-Israel community.
How Stacey Abrams Helped Funnel Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars to an Israel-Hating Terrorist Sympathizer
Georgia Democratic gubernatorial nominee Stacey Abrams sits on the board of a foundation that funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars to an anti-Israel activist who has praised terrorists and encouraged violence against Jews.
Abrams joined the Marguerite Casey Foundation board in May 2021, business filings show. Roughly six months later, the foundation announced its 2021 cohort of "Freedom Scholars," a group of "leading thinkers and scholars … in critical fields including abolitionist, Black, feminist, queer, radical, and anti-colonialist studies." Included in the group was UCLA professor Robin D.G. Kelley, a leading Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) activist who works with groups that collaborate with Palestinian terrorists.
Kelley, who received $250,000 through the program, praised the Palestine Liberation Organization—a U.S.-designated terror group—as "revolutionary combatants" and "models for those of us dedicated to Black liberation and socialism" in a 2016 article. Three years prior, Kelley encouraged Palestinians to use violence against Israelis, calling the notion that Palestinians should only protest non-violently a "bludgeon to beat down Palestinian organizations." Kelley also advises the U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, a group that operates to advance the BDS movement on college campuses. The campaign's fiscal sponsor, Al-Awda, works with Palestinian terrorist organizations such as Hamas to grow BDS and routinely hosts convicted Islamic jihadists at its events, the Jerusalem Post reported in 2019.
Abrams’s role in funding Kelley provides a startling window into how the Democrat could handle the BDS movement and larger issues of anti-Semitism on Georgia’s college campuses should she defeat Gov. Brian Kemp (R.) in November. As governor, Abrams would appoint members to the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, which oversees the state’s public colleges and universities. Georgia legislators passed a law in 2016 that forbids the state from contracting a person or company that promotes a boycott of Israel, but a federal judge struck that law down in May 2021. Abrams opposed the law as a state representative and reportedly refused to meet with pro-Israel activists at the time.
It is unclear whether Abrams was directly involved with the grant to Kelley. When she joined the foundation's board in 2021, she emphasized that a major part of her role would be determining "how the philanthropic network targets its contributions." Neither Abrams nor the foundation responded to inquiries on her involvement with the Freedom Scholars program. Abrams has earned more than $52,000 from the foundation since 2020, her financial disclosures show.
In addition to Kelley's anti-Israel activism, the professor has called himself a "communist for life" and argued that capitalism is inherently racist. The Marguerite Casey Foundation also awarded $250,000 to a pair of academics—Angelica Chazaro and Ananya Roy—who advocate for the abolition of prisons and private property, respectively.
In May 2021, the foundation launched its "Answer the Uprising" initiative, which aims to fund groups working to "transform, defund, [and] abolish" police. The initiative was "fully supported by Marguerite Casey Foundation’s Board of Directors, which recently named seven new changemakers to the Board, including Stacey Abrams," the foundation said in a press release. One year before Abrams decided to join the group's board, the foundation gave $200,000 to the Louisville Community Bail Fund, which later paid $100,000 to free Quintez Brown, an anti-police activist charged with the attempted murder of a Jewish mayoral candidate.
Abrams ran unopposed in Georgia's May primary election and will face Kemp in November after the Republican defeated Trump-backed challenger and former senator David Perdue by 52 points in his own primary bid. Her campaign against Kemp is not her first—the Democrat lost to Kemp by roughly 2 points in 2018 but never conceded defeat, instead arguing the election was "stolen" due to "voter suppression." After her loss, Abrams launched a nonprofit "voting rights" group that sued Georgia's secretary of state to challenge the validity of the election. That lawsuit blasted the state's use of "unreliable" voting machines and even alleged the machines "switched" votes from Abrams to Kemp.
Hamas-Loving, Israel-Hating Newspaper Publisher Successfully Lobbies Biden Admin To Create Muslim Outreach Post
Homeland Security chief Alejandro Mayorkas created a Muslim community outreach position after meeting with an Arab-American activist who has cheered violence against Israel and praised the terrorist groups Hezbollah and Hamas.
Mayorkas met on March 18 with Arab American News publisher Osama Siblani, who has called Hamas and Hezbollah "freedom fighters," and other activists in Dearborn, Mich., over their concerns with racial profiling by the Department of Homeland Security. Siblani, who urged Arabs last month to fight Israel with "stones" and "guns," has lobbied DHS for years to appoint a liaison between the agency and Michigan’s robust Arab community. He praised Mayorkas after he announced the position on March 30.
"We were told to keep complaining," Siblani told his newspaper. "Mayorkas told us this time ‘we will do something about it' and he did."
The meeting emerges as Mayorkas faces scrutiny for a series of policy blunders. Republicans have called for Mayorkas's impeachment over his handling of a historic surge of illegal immigrants at the southern border. Republicans have also blasted him for forming a Disinformation Governance Board led by a Democratic activist who pushed disinformation about Hunter Biden’s infamous laptop.
The Department of Homeland Security did not respond to requests for comment about Mayokas’s meeting with Siblani and the other Arab-American leaders. Siblani’s inflammatory remarks were well documented before his sessions with Mayorkas.
The Anti-Defamation League has noted Siblani’s praise for Hamas and Hezbollah as "freedom fighters." He cheered when the the Iran-backed Hezbollah "delivered on its threat" to bomb Israel in September 2019. He reportedly praised Hezbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, as the most "honorable man in the world."
Siblani has referred to Israel as "occupied Palestine" and claimed the "pro-Israeli lobby" owns Washington, D.C. Last year, he urged a boycott of a restaurant whose owner posted "Long Live Israel" on Facebook. His anti-Israel remarks last month were at a rally alongside Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D., Mich.), the Washington Free Beacon reported. Siblani praised the fedayeen, or Islamic militants, fighting against Israel.
Siblani’s anti-Israel, pro-terrorist views have not curtailed his access to the Biden administration and Democratic lawmakers. The Biden White House invited Siblani to take part in a virtual meeting last year to discuss Middle East tensions. Siblani later bragged at a rally in Dearborn that he refused during the White House event "to apologize for Hamas firing rockets at Israel."
Siblani met with Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer (D.) last month at Arab American News offices in Dearborn. The publisher praised her for appointing several Arab-American community leaders to government posts, but criticized her for visiting Israel in 2019. Siblani claimed Whitmer accepted his invitation to visit Lebanon in exchange.
Siblani has an especially close relationship with Sen. Gary Peters (D., Mich.), the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Peters organized the community meeting with Mayorkas in March, and another event for Siblani and federal officials in Washington, D.C., in 2019. Peters, who leads the Senate Democrats’ campaign arm, spoke at the Arab American News offices on Sept. 18, 2020, at an event for the Arab American Political Action Committee. The participants quizzed Peters over his views on the Middle East and issues like terror watchlists before ultimately endorsing him for reelection. Siblani gave $250 to Peters’s campaign on Oct. 31, 2020. The Arab American Political Action Committee, which Siblani founded, gave $2,000 to Peters on Oct. 4, 2020.
On Nov. 18, 2020, Peters called on the Government Accountability Office to investigate whether the Transportation Security Administration had engaged in racial discrimination at airports and checkpoints.
Peters’s office did not respond to comment requests.
‘Proud’ of Funding: Qatar Defends Work With Biden USAID Nominee in Letter to Senate
The Qatari government defended its work with Biden administration nominee Tamara Cofman Wittes in an unsolicited letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week, saying it was "proud" of its financial contributions to Wittes’s former employer, the Brookings Institution.
The letter from Qatar’s ambassador, obtained by the Washington Free Beacon, is unlikely to alleviate Republican concerns about Wittes’s role at the Brookings Institution think tank, which raked in at least $22 million from Qatar during her employment.
It also indicates that Doha, the capital of Qatar, is going on the offensive in response to renewed public scrutiny into its funding for U.S. think tanks and Washington policy leaders. Earlier this month, Brookings Institution president and retired general John Allen resigned amid a federal investigation into his alleged work as an unregistered lobbyist for Qatar.
Wittes, the nominee for assistant administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, has denied that her policy work was influenced by the funding. But Senate Republicans grilled her over her pro-Doha statements and positions during a hearing last Thursday, during which Sen. Ted Cruz said Qatar put its "damn logo on the cover" of a Brookings policy report co-published with Wittes.
Qatar’s ambassador to the United States said he was offended by the term "damn logo" in the letter to Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Robert Menendez (D., N.J.) last Thursday.
"I watched with interest the Committee’s proceedings today to consider nominations," wrote Qatar’s ambassador to the United States, Sheikh Meshal Bin Hamad Al-Thani, noting that Cruz "questioned [Wittes] about Qatar’s past charitable contributions to support research at the Brookings Institutions, where Dr. Wittes previously served."
"I consider it unworthy of your distinguished committee when a member chooses an expletive to refer to the national emblem or flag of a sovereign state," wrote Al-Thani. "If the flag of the United States was similarly described by a government official in a foreign capital, I am confident that Senator Cruz would feel as I do about this incident."
Al-Thani added that he "would be happy to meet with any member of your committee to address questions about Qatar’s charitable contributions in the United States. We are proud of this work."
Wittes served as director of the Brookings Institution’s Center for Middle East Policy when it published a paper with the Qatari Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 2017 titled "Islamism After the Arab Spring: Between the Islamic State and the nation state." Wittes was listed as a member of the steering committee overseeing the paper, and her center’s logo appears next to the Qatari Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the cover page.
"We would like to take this opportunity to thank the State of Qatar for its support in convening the forum with us. In particular, we are grateful to His Highness the Emir for his generosity in enabling us to come together for these three days of candid discussion," wrote the paper’s co-author William McCants in the introduction.
Wittes was also director of the Brookings Institution’s Saban Center for Middle East Policy when it published another report with the Qatari Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 2012, which discussed international assistance to Arab countries. That paper included the foreign ministry’s logo on the cover as well.
Republicans on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which will need to approve Wittes’s nomination before a final floor vote can be scheduled, are seeking more information on Wittes’s involvement in foreign fundraising while at the Brookings Institution.
"The president of Brookings has resigned over this, but you ran the Middle East Center at Brookings," said Cruz during the hearing last Thursday. "Should the American taxpayers be concerned that President Biden wants to put in charge of distributing millions of dollars of taxpayer money someone who has spent years being funded by a foreign nation who is not our friend?"
Wittes said she had "no knowledge of any of these disturbing allegations regarding General Allen." She said she attended one fundraising meeting in 2012 with Qatar alongside former Brookings vice president Martin Indyk, during which they asked the Qatari government to extend its funding.
Wittes has also written positively about Qatar, a repressive nation that discriminates against gays, lesbians, and transgender individuals. Wittes described Qatar's capital city Doha as a "global gathering place for dialogue" and amplified Qatari leaders' claims that they support human rights and oppose "extremists who exploit religion to incite violence."
A spokesman for Cruz said the senator was "deeply troubled by this nomination."
"Qatar already exercises vast influence in Washington D.C., including by funding American institutions," the spokesman told the Free Beacon. "It is wildly, unimaginably inappropriate to have an operative go from a think tank where Qatar poured in billions of dollars to a position distributing billions of dollars of American taxpayer money."
Wittes did not return a request for comment.
MUSLIM Iran Executes More than 100 People Within 3 Months, Raising Concern at U.N.
Iran executed more than 100 people, including minors and women, within a space of three months in 2022, a report by U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres released Tuesday said.
The report, which was presented at the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva by its deputy human rights chief Nada Al-Nashif, said that the numbers were on the rise and the reasons for executions were becoming more arbitrary.
“While 260 individuals were executed in 2020, at least 310 individuals were executed in 2021, including at least 14 women,” Al-Nashif said.
“At least 105 people were executed, many of whom belonged to minority groups” between January 1 and March 20 of this year.
A total of 310 individuals were executed in 2021, compared with 260 the previous year.
File/Iranian officials prepare the noose for the execution of Balal, who killed fellow Iranian youth Abdolah Hosseinzadeh in a street fight with a knife in 2007, during his execution ceremony in the northern city of Noor on April 15, 2014. (ARASH KHAMOOSHI/AFP/Getty Images)
Protesters gather at Schuman Square to protest against executions in Iran ahead of World Day Against the Death Penalty (10 October) in Brussels, Belgium. (Dursun Aydemir/Anadolu Agency via Getty)
“The death penalty continues to be imposed on the basis of charges not amounting to ‘most serious crimes,’ and in ways incompatible with fair trials standards,” she told the council.
In March alone, 52 people were sentenced to death on drug-related charges.
More than 85 minors are currently on death row, she said.
Crimes that can incur the death penalty in Iran include homosexual relations, armed rebellion and “spreading corruption.”
File/Demonstrators pose behind fake prison bars as Iranian opposition protesters march in Paris during a rally to protest against executions in Iran. (AP Photo/Zacharie Scheurer)
Al-Nashif also slammed the Islamic Republic for other human rights abuses, including arbitrary arrests and excessive use of force during anti-regime protests.
“In April and May 2022, at least 55 individuals — teachers, lawyers, labor rights defenders, artists and academics — were arrested during protests, many of whom are facing national security charges,” she said.
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.
The Only Rape Where the Left Says Victim-Blaming Is Okay
Swedish officials are warning Ukrainian women living in refugee centers not to dress in a way that might provoke men from "other cultures" — code for Muslim migrants, who, in Sweden, are mostly of the Somali variety — who reside in the same refugee center.
And how do these hapless Ukrainian refugees dress, to prompt such a warning? According to Gitana Bengtsson, who has been helping them, "they usually dressed like us, you and me. There is nothing strange about it. They did not look like prostitutes. If those women lived in the city, no one would tell them how to dress." Even so, and now that summer is near, the site manager has advised them not to wear shorts or skirts that reveal their body parts.
There have, moreover, been several other reports of Muslim migrants attacking or making female Ukrainian refugees feel unsafe. In one instance, migrants broke into the hostels of Ukrainian women living with their children. "They said that Sweden was a safe country, but I have not seen that," one of these women said later. Another woman said that, in Ukraine, they at least understood and knew how to respond to threats: "[w]hen there are bombs, I know at least that I can go down to the basement and hide there" — whereas now a migrant would-be rapist might be lurking there.
These Ukrainian women, unused to Muslims, apparently need to get with the times and embrace "multicultural" living. The fact is, Western nations that house large Muslim migrant populations have repeatedly implied that if rapes are on the rise in their nations — Sweden is now the rape capital of the West, thanks to its Muslim population — that is because women are not doing "their part."
A few examples follow.
After a 20-year-old Austrian woman waiting at a bus stop in Vienna was attacked, beaten, and robbed by four Muslim men—including one who "started [by] putting his hands through my hair and made it clear that in his cultural background there were hardly any blonde women" — police responded by telling the victim to dye her hair:
At first I was scared, but now I'm more angry than anything. After the attack they told me that women shouldn't be alone on the streets after 8pm. And they also gave me other advice, telling me I should dye my hair dark and also not dress in such a provocative way. Indirectly that means I was partly to blame for what happened to me. That is a massive insult.
In 2001, Unni Wikan, a female professor of social anthropology at the University of Oslo, said:
"Norwegian women must take their share of responsibility for these rapes," because Muslim men found their manner of dress provocative. The professor's conclusion was not that Muslim men living in the West needed to adjust to Western norms, but the exact opposite: "Norwegian women must realize that we live in a Multicultural society and adapt themselves to it."
So much for the feminist claim that women are free to dress and behave as promiscuously and provocatively as they want — and woe to the man who dares cite this as justifying male sexual aggression. Apparently, this feminist refrain does not apply to Muslim men.
And who can forget when Muslim migrant mobs sexually assaulted as many as one thousand women on New Year's Eve 2016 in Cologne, Germany? Then, the city's mayor, Henriette Reker, called on the women — the victims, not their male abusers — to make changes: "women and young girls ... should go out and have fun, but they need to be better prepared, especially with the Cologne carnival coming up. For this, we will publish online guidelines that these young women can read through to prepare themselves."
In yet another instance, seven Muslim migrants raped a teenage German girl in a park, after drugging her at a disco in Freiburg. (She at least survived; in a similar case that occurred a week earlier in Italy, the drugged rape victim was left murdered.) Bernhard Rotzinger, the police chief of Freiburg, responded by saying, "We cannot offer citizens an all-risk insurance [against crime], but I can advise this: don't make yourself vulnerable by using alcohol or drugs."
"Advice" against alcohol, drugs, and reckless behavior would be much more welcome had it not been made under duress. As things stand, it is a cop-out. Or, as another report discussing the aforementioned rape in Freiburg puts it, "[t]he focus on prevention is a good thing, but also shows how German authorities and media barely hold the migrant crisis responsible for the disaster that is unfolding in Germany. Political correctness has caused officials to put the blame for the criminal acts on the women instead of Merkel's guests."
The greater irony of all these excuses is that, from the very start of Islam 14 centuries ago, European women — even completely continent nuns — have always been portrayed by Muslims as sexually promiscuous by nature, and how they dressed had nothing to do with it. This article discusses the historic roots of this phenomenon. Modern-day examples indicating that this motif is still alive and well follow:
- A 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 recollected. "They treated me like a leper, apart from when they wanted sex. I was less than human to them, I was rubbish."
- 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 recently as an adult, a court heard how she "was raped on a dirty mattress above a takeaway and forced to perform [fellatio] in a churchyard," and how one of her abusers "urinated on her in an act of humiliation" afterward.
- 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 migrants stalked a 25-year-old woman, hurled "filthy" insults at her, 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!" — afterward 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.
In short, the ancient Islamic motif concerning the alleged promiscuity of European women is alive and well — irrespective of the latter's behavior or dress — and continues to drive the Muslim rape of Western women.
Yet, even in this, Islam can turn to those "progressive," godless elements that dominate Western society for cover. For, just as "the left" has worked long and hard to portray Islamic intolerance, violence, and terrorism as the West's fault — because of the Crusades, because of colonialism, because of cartoons, because of Israel, because of freedom of speech — it now adds and legitimizes Islam's worldview concerning Western promiscuity to the list of reasons that "provoke" Muslims to attack.
Raymond Ibrahim, author of Defenders of the West: The Christian Heroes Who Stood against Islam, is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a Judith Rosen Friedman Fellow at the Middle East Forum, and a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute.
Image via Max Pixel.
Report: NYC Man Arrested Five Times During Alleged Crime Spree That Included Rape in Baltimore
A man from Queens is accused of going on a crime spree that ended with him allegedly raping a woman in Baltimore, according to court documents.
The New York Daily News reported Friday:
Subhan Zaib, 26, was arrested and released for five separate incidents in the city between May 30 and June 7. His three-borough rampage culminated with with him slashing a 19-year-old woman early on June 10 as she descended stairs in the Delancey Street/Essex Street station in the Lower East Side, according to police.
The mayhem wasn’t over, however. Zaib was finally taken into custody in Baltimore on charges of raping a woman he saw outside a Walgreens on June 14, according to court papers. He’s now being held without bail for first-degree rape.
The man’s alleged spree grew increasingly violent over a period of 12 days, the documents said. After several different incidents, he was reportedly freed without bail, according to the News report.
In one instance on June 4, Zaib made it to Brooklyn where he was accused of assaulting a woman and threatening her with a knife, but prosecutors did not ask for bail because of problems regarding the victim in the case, according to a police source.
“The victim gave prosecutors a phony phone number and she can’t be found, the source told the Daily News,” the outlet said.
Overall index crime in New York City rose 36.5 percent in March amid the state’s “soft on crime” bail laws, according to Breitbart News.
In February, approximately 75 percent of voters said they believed defunding police was a “major” or “minor” reason behind increasing violent crime across the nation, a Morning Consult/Politico poll found.
According to Breitbart News:
The survey results come as Democrats largely back away from the “Defund the Police” movement — polling and overall public sentiment have revealed that slashing police budgets in the name of “equity” and subsequent rising crime, usually in poorer and already vulnerable neighborhoods, is wildly unpopular with voters as the midterms approach.
Meanwhile, nearly all New York residents, 92 percent, believe crime was a “serious problem” in their state, according to a recent Siena College poll.
“Moreover, six out of ten New Yorkers say they are worried they could be the victim of a crime, and 26 percent are very concerned,” Breitbart News reported Thursday.
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.
Tariq Ramadan, Accused of Rape by Five Women, to Speak at French Conference
Leftists always stand with their own - no matter what.
Tue Jan 11, 2022
Leftists always stand by their friends and allies, while demanding that conservatives denounce any and all of their own who transgress perceived boundaries of acceptable discourse. This will be proven anew on January 21, when Tariq Ramadan, the once-renowned self-proclaimed Muslim reformer who is now under a cloud of rape accusations, speaks in France on The Prophet by Khalil Gibran and The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli. Accused rapists aren’t usually lionized by the intelligentsia, but for Tariq Ramadan, as has so often been the case during his tumultuous public career, the usual rules just don’t apply.
Once the West’s great hope for Islamic reform, Ramadan has been accused by several women now of violent rapes. In a video he uploaded in December 2019, he acknowledges some nebulous wrongdoing, but then claims that the accusations against him are all an attempt to discredit him, and thereby to “neutralize the Muslims.”
“We have to be clear,” Ramadan said, “that there is discrimination, stigmatization, racism that is at stake in the whole issue.” Of course! What else could multiple rape charges against him possibly be? He goes on: “And I was a symbol. To destroy me meant, let the people understand: If you want to be vocal you have to face the reality. It happened to Tariq Ramadan now, it could happen to anyone in the future.”
Anyone who is allegedly a violent rapist, sure. But RFI reported at the same time that “supporters of Ramadan, who is a professor of contemporary Islamic studies at Oxford’s St. Anthony’s College, have called the accusations against him part of a ‘international Zionist plot’ to blacken his name.”
Ah yes, the Jews. Of course! It couldn’t be that a cosseted Muslim academic, hailed and feted all over Europe and the United States despite the abject vacuity and sinister disingenuousness of his thought, began to indulge his worst impulses, now, could it? He couldn’t have been tempted to do so when it became clear that, in light of his value to Western authorities as a “moderate Muslim” who seemed to prop up their fantasies about the jihad threat, he would be allowed to get away with virtually anything – could he?
“Virtually anything” is actually an understatement. The allegations against Ramadan are particularly revolting; if they are true, he is a monstrous sadist. One of his accusers said he subjected her to “blows to the face and body, forced sodomy, rape with an object and various humiliations, including being dragged by the hair to the bathtub and urinated on.”
His sadism, however, appears to be, if the allegations are true, closely intertwined with his celebrated Islamic piety: another one of his accusers said he told her he was raping her because she didn’t wear a hijab.
He would have gotten away with it all, being just too valuable for the Western political and media elites, if it hadn’t been for the #MeToo movement. The problems arose for Ramadan only in 2017, when that movement began to gather steam and his accusers started to come forward, at which point the great reformer’s statements in response were decidedly unsatisfactory. “His last hearing,” RFI notes, “dates back to 2018 when he stunned the public by admitting to ‘consensual’ sex with his accusers, months after denying he had had no sexual contact with them.”
Since then, Ramadan has claimed to be suffering from multiple sclerosis, and has been freed on bail. Meanwhile, one of his accusers has already been beaten and threatened. It wouldn’t be at all surprising, given his connections to all varieties of powerful people, if Ramadan were cleared of all the charges. If this happens, it would be in keeping with the duplicity that has characterized his entire career. French journalist Caroline Fourest’s illuminating book Brother Tariq: The Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan concludes that this much-lionized putative “Muslim Martin Luther” is actually anything but a reformer: in reality, Ramadan is “remaining scrupulously faithful to the strategy mapped out by his grandfather, a strategy of advance stage by stage” toward the imposition of Islamic law in the West.
Ramadan, she explains, in his public lectures and writings invests words like “law” and “democracy” with subtle and carefully crafted new definitions, permitting him to engage in “an apparently inoffensive discourse while remaining faithful to an eminently Islamist message and without having to lie overtly — at least not in his eyes.” Ramadan, she said, “may have an influence on young Islamists and constitute a factor of incitement that could lead them to join the partisans of violence.”
Fourest was also the first to reveal, back in 2017, long before these new charges were levied, that Ramadan had at least four other victims besides the first woman who came forward, Henda Ayari. “A request for religious advice turned into a compulsive sexual relationship, sometimes consented to, often violent and very humiliating, before ending in threats.”
Fourest had evidence. “I presented it to a judge. But Tariq Ramadan scared him too much…. I am well-placed to know the violence of the networks of the Muslim Brotherhood when one stands up to ‘brother Tariq.’”
Those violent networks may yet prevail. “It was a plot,” Ramadan insists. “It was a political set up. And this could happen to anyone.” The worst part of this duplicitous whining is that there are hordes of deluded Leftists who will fall for it. And now they’re having him speak.
If Tariq Ramadan were a conservative non-Muslim, the rape allegations would have been the end of his career, and he would never be invited to speak anywhere. If he were, there would be a media outcry that would force a cancellation. But Tariq Ramadan is a man of privilege. Things just don’t work that way for him.
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.
The Odious Mapping Project
Conspiratorial fantasies, Jew-hatred, and the paranoid style of politics.
Richard L. Cravatts, Ph.D., a Freedom Center Journalism Fellow in Academic Free Speech and President Emeritus of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, is the author of Jew-Hatred Rising: The Perversities of the Campus War Against Israel and Jews.
As if further evidence was needed to reveal the fundamental anti-Semitic nature of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign, the recently-produced Boston “Mapping Project” proved conclusively that anti-Israel activists inhabit an ideological universe replete with conspiracies, delusions, and nihilistic hatred, both for Israel and the Jewish community as a whole.
The BDS Boston Facebook page, which promoted the map, enthusiastically cheered on this fantasy of oppression, wildly claiming, as they did, that the map “illustrate[s] how local support for the colonization of Palestine is structurally tied to policing, evictions, and privatization locally, and to US imperialist projects worldwide.”
The map was not merely an ideological map that linked various ideas and entities in an effort to expose alleged collaboration, joint sponsorships, and inter-connected social, political, and educational institutions as a guide to understanding how the missions of various groups and institutions are related in a collective enterprise—in this case, the so-called “colonization” of Palestine.
What has drawn intense criticism of the map from many is that it is actually a geographical, not an ideological, map; in other words, the pernicious aspect of it is that it plots the actual physical locations and addresses of the institutions, universities, organizations, and individuals who, the activists contend, contribute to structural racism, apartheid, colonization, land theft, and overall oppression in a vast conspiracy of the power elites to suppress freedom and, in the case of the Palestinians, specifically, to deny self=determination.
More concerning was the language that makes it clear the intention of the map is not just to pinpoint the malign agents of oppressions included there, but to provide a guide by which that structural oppression can be “dismantled” and “disrupted,” as they put it. In fact, the Mapping Project is a call for dangerous, even violent, action. "As we built this project,” the BDS Boston post announced, “we were constantly asking ourselves: What actions can BDS activists take to meaningfully narrow, if not cut off, supply lines of material and ideological sustenance flowing from the Boston area to the zionist [sic] state? How can we impose a real material cost on the zionist [sic] project, from where we are located, in order to make it more possible for Palestinians on the ground to liberate themselves?"
The notion of the existence of a manipulative, powerful, and malign “Israel Lobby” has been part of the anti-Israel dialogue for some time, at least since the publication of a book with that title published by Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer in 2008. That book focused on the alleged power of Israel in contorting U.S. lawmakers to its will, forcing it to behave, diplomatically and economically, in ways that harmed the United States and only benefited Israel.
The Mapping Project goes beyond that, first by focusing more broadly on the predations of Zionism, and, more odiously, linking a bucket full of Jewish communal organizations and others as furtive, conspiratorial agents of oppression, not only concerning the long-suffering Palestinians but also including other groups victimized by this Jewish cabal by colonization, land theft, racial injustice, anti-black policing, and a long list of alleged offenses blamed on Zionism, Israel, and, ultimately, Jews.
The characterization of pro-Israel lobbying by organizations and Jewish institutions and organizations as “manipulation”—coercive, underhanded actions whose end result would not otherwise honestly, fairly, or reasonably be achieved—this language is the very tone that has drawn such immediate and thunderous denunciation of the piece. And it is a particularly incendiary bit of language when discussing Israel, a Jewish state, for it parallels so invidiously the classic anti-Semitic canards, such as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, that purport to reveal the intention of Jews to furtively rule and dominate the globe. And, as happens here, there is the double insult to Jews: first, that they achieve this supposed sway over governments and other people by indirection, betrayal, and stealth; and, second, that in the end they are not only not admired for accomplishing these extraordinary, nearly superhuman feats, but envied and reviled for having supposedly surreptitiously achieved them.
This pattern, of trying desperately to reveal the machinations of a subversive group or groups to a world of dupes who cannot see as clearly as the paranoid historian can, is consistent with what was characterized in 1964 by historian Richard Hofstadter as “the paranoid style” of politics.
In A Culture of Conspiracy, as another example, Michael Barkun suggested that "Conspiracism is, first and foremost, an explanation of politics. It purports to locate and identify the true loci of power and thereby illuminate previously hidden decision making. The conspirators, often referred to as a shadow government,” in the Mapping Project’s world of intrigue where divided loyalties and malign intentions account for pro-Israel lobbying, “operate a concealed political system behind the visible one, whose functionaries are either ciphers or puppets." Zionists and Jews, of course, are at the center of all of this, using their immense and limitless alleged influence and finances to promote a self-serving ideology that benefits Jews themselves and makes victims of the oppressed in the Middle East and worldwide.
Such thinking, of course, is both delusional and dangerous, since the names and physical addresses were published here of some of the perpetrators of this alleged Zionist scheme to manipulate governments and society and radiate despair as it evolved. And the intent of the map’s creators is clear: “Our goal in pursuing this collective mapping was to reveal the local entities and networks that enact devastation, so we can dismantle them,” it stated. “Every entity has an address, every network can be disrupted [emphasis added].”
One revelation made obvious with the publication of this map is that the enemies of Zionism and Israel, who usually mask their anti-Semitism by contending that criticism of the Jewish state is never anti-Semitic, now apparently feel comfortable enough to engage in public, blatant attacks on Jews, Judaism, and Jewish communal and civil rights organizations as part of their contention that it is Jews, not just the Jewish state, who are guiding and maintaining this oppression. Understandably, this is the principal reason that map has been so widely and vociferously denounced as anti-Semitic both in intent and effect, as former Harvard University president Lawrence Summers once put it.
The “mapping” of the Jewish lobby actually took place last year when David Miller, former professor of political sociology in the School for Policy Studies at Britain’s Bristol University, enraged Jewish students and other external stakeholders with his vicious attacks on Zionism, Israel, and Jewish organizations in England.
At the time of the controversy, criticism was aimed at lecture slides Miller used in his “Harms of the Powerful” module, slides which Jewish students thought contained anti-Semitic tropes about Jewish power, malignancy, and manipulation.
One slide, for example, was a graphic that apparently sought to depict the Israel Lobby, and lists such nefarious groups as “ultra Zionist funders,” the Jewish National Fund, and even the Community Security Trust (CST), an organization roughly analogous to the U.S.’s benign ADL which fights anti-Semitism and addresses other Jewish communal issues—all organizations and individuals listed there purportedly working under the influence and to the benefit of the Israeli government.
The slide which drew the most attention, which perhaps served as the model for the Mapping Project’s version, was an elaborate diagram depicting dozens of organizations, all listed under the Israeli government. The structure of pro-Israel individuals, organizations, and agents delineated in the slide was complex, furtive, until now hidden from sight, and, in Miller’s paranoid fantasies, reveals a nefarious and powerful “British Zionist scene” that he had now exposed and which, he seemed to believe, proved some point about Jewish power and malignancy—exactly what the Mapping Project sought to accomplish with its own fantastical diagrams and delusional assertions about Jewish influence and power.
Miller’s slides and the Mapping Project’s map must be very meaningful to their creators, but it tells us nothing. It reveals nothing unknown, nothing sinister, nothing more than Jewish communal organizations and individuals working, sometimes alone, sometimes in concert, to protect Jewish interests, fight anti-Semitism, and support Israel. Any conspiracy or unlawful or immoral activity lives only in their minds, in the paranoic recesses of their anti-Semitic brains.
The characterization of pro-Israel lobbying by organizations and individuals as manipulation, dual loyalties, using power and influence behind the scenes, greed and money—this language is the very tone that drew an understandable thunderous denunciation of Miller’s wild ideas and the BDS activists promoting the map.
And these are examples of particularly incendiary language when discussing Zionism and Israel, a Jewish state, for it parallels so invidiously classic anti-Semitic canards, such as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, that purport to reveal the intention of Jews to furtively rule and dominate the globe. And in both instances where this enmity was expressed, there is a double insult to Jews: first, that they achieve this supposed sway over governments and other people by indirection, betrayal, and stealth; and, second, that in the end they are not only not admired for accomplishing these extraordinary, nearly superhuman feats, but envied and reviled for having supposedly surreptitiously achieved them.
In tracking anti-Semitism, the Anti-Defamation League has noted that, in 2021, “there were 2,717 incidents last year, representing an increase of 34% over 2020,” a sad all-time high for such incidents. So when the language in the Mapping Project promises to “disrupt the network” they have just identified, there is a not too veiled threat against some of the individuals and institutions they expose.
“We see our map and associated database as a resource for gathering intelligence on the agents of oppression,” the map read, and “their intersections offer possibilities for us to organize and connect our struggles” since they “support non-cooperation, community self-defense, and resistance in all its forms, [emphasis added],” “resistance,” of course, the euphemism used when activists define terror against Jews in Israel.
Paranoia and fantasies about Jewish power have been prevalent for millennia and the Mapping Project is the latest permutation of that noxious hatred. “We are all sufferers from history,” Hofstadter observed, “but the paranoid is a double sufferer, since he is afflicted not only by the real world, with the rest of us, but by his fantasies as well.”
Saudis Crow Over Biden Coming Hat-In-Hand to Riyadh The man who promised to make Saudi Arabia a “pariah” now begs them for oil. Hugh Fitzgerald
What was once planned as a quick visit to Israel-and-the-Palestinians by President Biden has become a three-way affair, with Saudi Arabia not only added to the itinerary, but has become the main event, the meeting in Riyadh with the Saudi Crown Prince will overshadow his lightning visits to Jerusalem and Bethlehem. In Israel, Biden will attend the Maccabiah Games and no doubt discuss with Prime Minister Bennett ways for Israel to tamp down “tension” in the area – even though all such tension is provoked by the Palestinians – and he will repeat, in his conversations with both Israel and the Palestinians, the latest mantra of the Bidenites, that he “looks forward to reaffirming his lifelong commitment to a two-state solution and to discuss the ways in which we might rekindle a new political horizon that can ensure equal measures of freedom, security, prosperity, and dignity to Israelis and Palestinians alike.“
I’m not sure Israel and the Palestinians can have “equal measures of freedom, security, prosperity, and dignity,” given the failure of the Palestinians to create a free and democratic society – a failure that we see in all 22 states of the Arab League, where either despots or monarchs rule, but nowhere is there a true democracy, of citizens rather than subjects. Nor can the Palestinians, with Islam stunting their mental growth, ever hope to rival the advanced state of Israel, with the astonishing inventiveness of its people. In Israel innovation is welcome; Muslim Arabs regard innovation, or bida, with deep suspicion. As for “equal measures of…..dignity,” both Hamas and the PA have shown how little they care for the “dignity” of those they rule over, people who are not permitted to choose their rulers by elections, and who are arrested or even executed for daring to criticize those rulers. Why would the people in a “Palestinian state” fare any better than they do now under Hamas in Gaza, or under the PA in the West Bank? It will be amusing, however, to hear Biden repeat that mantra to Mahmoud Abbas – all that guff about “equal measures of freedom, security, prosperity and dignity” – that is, to the very man who is now in the 17th year of his four-year term, who had his harshest critic, Nizar Banat, beaten to death, and who has amassed a fortune of $400 million consisting mostly of aid money he stole.
But then, with Israel-cum-Palestinians given their quick due, for Biden it’s on to the real object of this trip, which is to make up, in properly obsequious fashion, with Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman, so that the Saudis will turn on the oil tap wide enough to bring down the price of gas for consumers, and thereby, the Bidenites calculate, give Biden a shot at being be reelected.
The Saudis are delighted to see President Biden having to eat crow. They don’t like him. They resented his refusal to respond forcefully to Houthi attacks on their country. They have been mightily displeased with his attempt to appease the Iranians in Vienna. But most infuriating, to MbS, has been Biden’s anger over the killing of Jamal Khashoggi. During the campaign for president, Biden promised to make Saudi Arabia a “pariah.” Now Biden is going to have to go, hat in hand, to the man he knows ordered Khashoggi’s murder and continues to deny it, and to behave as if he believed him.
A report on how the Saudi commentators are gloating over US President Joe Biden’s planned visit next month, claiming that the US leader’s about-turn on his vow to make Saudi Arabia a “pariah” reflected the kingdom’s importance in global affairs, is here: “Biden to meet with Saudi crown prince despite ‘pariah’ pledge,” Reuters, June 14, 2022:
After the White House confirmed on Tuesday that Biden would meet de facto ruler Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman on a trip to the region, the Saudi commentators took to social media to praise the prince for his handling of the crisis in US-Saudi ties.
“We said it before and we did not exaggerate, they [Western leaders] will all come successively to Riyadh,” tweeted Faisal AlShammeri, a reporter at Saudi-owned Al Arabiya TV.
“Realpolitik changed the administration’s convictions,” he added.
Rights groups, in contrast, said the visit risks “fostering repression” inside the kingdom, the world’s largest oil exporter.
Everyone understands that Biden’s visit has nothing to do with morality, and everything to do with the Saudis increasing their oil production, to make up for Russian oil that been taken off the market. I doubt that Biden’s appearance – his smile and handshake with a man he considers to be a murderer — will have any effect on increasing “repression” in the Kingdom. The Saudis are largely impervious to outside pressure to improve their record on human rights, and MbS will not be any more repressive because of Biden’s visit. Besides, the Bidenites must be thinking, better repression in Saudi Arabia than a recession in the United States.
US relations with Saudi Arabia have been under strain since the 2018 murder and dismemberment of journalist Jamal Khashoggi by a team of Saudi operatives in the kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul.
Biden had refused to deal directly with Prince Mohammed following a US intelligence report implicating him in the killing. The Saudi government denied any involvement by the prince, saying the murder was a heinous crime by a rogue group.
The Saudi denial is nonsense, of course. MbS ordered the killing of Khashoggi, and now he has his severest American critic coming to Riyadh, prepared to ignore the Khashoggi affair. Upon Biden’s return to Washington, he will no doubt give a press conference on his trip, and when he is asked “did you discuss with the Crown Prince the killing of Jamal Khashoggi?” will blandly answer that “I promised to keep my conversation with the Crown Prince about the helpful role Saudi Arabia can play in calming the world’s oil markets and that’s exactly what I did.”
Comment:
But Washington’s desire to improve ties with Gulf monarchies has become more urgent following Russia’s Feb. 24 invasion of Ukraine, which highlighted the relevance of Gulf oil producers as Europe looks to cut its energy dependence on Russia.
Biden’s July 15-16 visit to the kingdom, where he is also due to attend a summit of Arab leaders, ends his campaign pledge to make the kingdom a pariah as he struggles to combat high US gasoline prices and build a united international front to isolate Russia.
Former Saudi intelligence chief and senior royal Prince Turki al-Faisal blasted critical remarks, carried in US media, about the prince and the kingdom’s human rights record and suggested Biden was trying to save his presidency.
“It is the tanking popularity of the president that brings him to us. It is his legitimacy that he hopes to bolster by meeting with our crown prince,” Prince Turki wrote in an op-ed published in the Saudi newspaper Arab News on Saturday.
Yes and no, Prince Turki. Yes, of course Biden is coming to Saudi Arabia to “save his presidency.” But no, it’s not his “legitimacy that he hopes to bolster” by meeting with the Crown Prince. In fact, the photograph of a smiling Joe Biden shaking hands with MbS will likely lead only to ridicule at home. What he wants is not “legitimacy,” but lower prices at the pump; it’s the economy, stupid. Biden figures that if gasoline is still above $5 a gallon this November, his party could lose both houses of Congress, ending his hopes to pass his agenda and making much less likely his reelection in 2024. If the Saudis do as he wishes, and increase their production sufficiently to bring down that price to below $4 a gallon and keep it there, Biden thinks he has a fighting chance to be reelected.
Prince Turki and other commentators highlighted Saudi Arabia’s importance, whether for regional and energy security or global politic
Saudi political scientist Hesham Alghannam tweeted that the visit was taking place with “our conditions and interests.”
Rights advocates said Biden’s visit risks “encouraging new abuses and further entrenching impunity” in the kingdom where the prince, widely known by the initials MbS, has cracked down on dissidents and opponents during his swift rise to power.
The Crown Prince doesn’t need Biden’s appearance to give him the go-ahead to crush his domestic opponents. He is the man, remember, who in November 2017 imprisoned more than 400 of Saudi Arabia’s most powerful people, among them Saudi royals, tycoons, and generals, and held them hostage in the Riyadh Ritz-Carlton until they promised to disgorge some of what the Crown Prince claimed were their ill-gotten gains. With this display of his power, the Crown Prince managed to claw back more than $106 billion for the Saudi Treasury.
Thirteen human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch and London-based Saudi group ALQST, last week issued a joint letter urging Biden to secure the release of detained dissidents and remove travel bans on others, including US citizens, before he visits Saudi Arabia.
Biden is not going to raise the issue of human rights. That would fatally vitiate his mission, by angering the Crown Prince. Bringing up human rights will simply remind the Crown Prince of all the unfavorable things Biden has said about him in the past, in connection with the murder of Khashoggi. Biden, though his mind wanders, will have practiced enough with his advisers to stick to the script in Riyadh. Increased production of oil by the Saudis, will be his most important order of business. He will also repeat to MbS his previous pledge to the world that “Iran will NEVER get a nuclear weapon on my watch.” Some may snicker that Biden can promise, but in the end it will not be America but Israel that will make sure that pledge is kept.
From Biden’s point of view, his contrite appearance in Riyadh, and his assurance that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon should be enough to win over the Crown Prince. Another million or two barrels of Saudi crude daily could do wonders for Biden’s presidential prospects. Isn’t that, for Joe Biden and the Bidenites, all that really matters?
No comments:
Post a Comment