WATCH AND SHARE WITH YOUR FRIENDS:
BY RAYMOND IBRAHIM
Are Western women responsible for provoking Muslim men into raping them? Some Europeans certainly seem to think so.
Recently, a 20-year-old Austrian woman waiting at a bus stop in Vienna wasattacked, beaten, and robbed by four Muslim men from Afghanistan. From her statement:
[One attacker] started [by] putting his hands through my hair and made it clear that in his cultural background there were hardly any blonde women.
So how did Austrian police respond? They told 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 8:00 pm. 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.
She is not the first European victim of Muslim attackers to be blamed. According to FrontPage Magazine editor Jamie Glazov:
Cologne Mayor Henriette Reker’s response to the assaults under her watch [1,000 German women were sexually molested and raped by Muslim migrants] has been to reprimand the victims, suggesting that they had asked for it.Reker has vowed to make sure that women will change their behavior, so that they don’t provoke Muslims to sexually assault them again. There will now be published “online guidelines” for women to read so they can prepare themselves …
Oslo Professor of Anthropology Dr. Unni Wikan’s solution for the high incidence of Muslims raping Norwegian women is not for the rapists to be punished, but for Norwegian women to “take their share of responsibility” for the rapes because Muslim men found their manner of dress provocative.
Norwegian women, she has counseled, “must realize that we live in a Multicultural society and adapt themselves to it.”….
…He explained that mass immigration is a doctrine of Islam, known as hijra, to help bring the entire world under Islamic law.
“The type we’re most familiar with is jihad by the sword, but it is by no means the only form of jihad,” he explained. “People who are Muhajirun, people who immigrate to a foreign country for the sake of implementing Islam, receive the same reward in heaven as those who fight with the gun. It’s an implicit understanding. They know from the time they were children, if they immigrate, if they became Muhajirun, they are guaranteed the same reward as the Mujahedeen, the ones who fight with guns.”
Such a tactic can be seen in the dramatic demographic changes in Europe in the past decade, which has witnessed a steady stream of immigrants from Islamic nations who have largely refused to assimilate.
Has our own government already surrendered to Islamic jihad? A national security insider uncovers the terrible truth. Philip Haney’s “See Something, Say Nothing” is available now from the WND Superstore.
Haney also drew attention to the declared intentions of the Muslim Brotherhood, which has wielded influence within the White House itself.
“The point of the Muslim Brotherhood is to implement Shariah law, starting in their own homeland and then working out from there,” he explained. “If you look at their logo, you’ll see it has two crossed swords. That means implementation and enforcement of jihad internally and implementation or promotion of jihad externally.”
The Muslim Brotherhood, said Haney, even declares its threatening nature to the world.
“If you look at the word at the bottom of their logo, it means ‘prepare,’” he said. “That is derived directly from Quran 8:60, “Prepare yourself to terrify your enemy.’ If people say that terrorism is not in the Quran, they are not telling you the truth, because the word ‘turhibuna’ is in the Quran and it means to terrify. It is actually part of the logo or the motto of the Muslim Brotherhood. They say that dying for the faith of Allah is their highest aspiration. And that jihad is a high calling. That is part of their motto as well. So this group that we have been told repeatedly is a moderate peaceful representation of the religion of Islam is by no means peaceful.”
BY ANDREW C. MCCARTHY
“…Drawing on an interview with Mateen’s ex-wife and on aspects of Mateen’s behavior that have been uncovered so far — e.g., frequenting gay bars, possibly using a gay dating app — the Times reasonably speculates that Mateen may have been gay and deeply conflicted about “his true identity out of anger and shame.”
The paper, however, steadfastly avoids asking: What could have caused such wrenching self-loathing?
After all, if he was gay, Mateen would hardly have been the first person to experience great anguish over his sexual preference, despite the fact that American culture has dramatically normalized homosexuality. Yet, those people manage to control their psychological turmoil and depression without walking into a gay club and committing mass-murder.
Assuming that the “he was gay” angle pans out, what could cause such deep conflict in Mateen that he would carry out such an atrocity?
Part of the explanation — probably the explanation — has to be sharia supremacism…”
Filed under: Islam, Sharia Law, Terrorism, Western Civilization, Willful Blindness | Tagged: Islam, Omar Mateen, Orlando, sharia law, terrorism | Comments Off on Orlando and Willful Blindness at The New York Times