Saturday, April 21, 2012

More on Muslims Raping Indigenous British Girls

The Eid celebrations referred to in the Daily Mall article appear to me to be from August 2011. Eid marks the end of Ramadan, the month of fasting for Muslims. Since the end of Ramadan typically is celebrated with feasting, these individuals apparently felt that, in addition to enjoying full bellies, an addition of native British girls would provide that extra something for the vent. Of course, the fact that the girls were not willing participants in the modified Eid party did not hold the gentlemen back from getting what they wanted.

Excerpts for the Daily Mall artcile (Link at top) follow: (With a few comments from me)

"A group of Muslim men who abducted and raped two teenage girls as part of their Eid celebrations laughed in court yesterday as they were jailed for a total of 38 years.
The girls, aged 15 and 16, were lured miles from their home to a dingy hostel.
In a horrifying weekend-long ordeal, they were plied with alcohol and repeatedly raped by two men, Shamrez Rashid and Amar Hussain, before being offered to a number of others who also ‘used them for sex’.
The 16-year old was forced to have sex six times with four different men.
The younger victim was raped by one man and then sexually assaulted by another.
One defendant, Rashid, 20, was said to have claimed the girls had enjoyed the sex, which he said had taken place as they celebrated the Muslim festival of Eid.
‘It was Eid,’ he said. ‘We treated them as our guests. OK, so they gave us [sex] but we were buying them food and drink.

It wasn't so bad, we fed them, and they were sluts anyway-

They could have anything they wanted. They enjoyed it.’
His accomplice Amar Hussain, 22, claimed the girls were ‘slags’.

After raping the girls, they ‘in effect offered them up to their friends, introducing a string of young men into the house’.
Over the following 36 hours, the girls were subjected to almost constant abuse, despite begging their attackers to stop.
The 16-year-old was left with bruising all over her face and neck after she was forced to perform a sex act on Hussain.
She was then forced to have sex with Rashid and a third man, Adil Saleem, while others watched.
The court heard how she held on to a doorframe to try to stop her attacker dragging her into a bedroom, but was pushed inside and the door locked behind her.

The assailants found the whole thing quite amusing-

The five defendants laughed and smirked as the horrifying details of their offences were described in court yesterday.
Rashid – who had already been found guilty of two rapes, an attempted rape, child abduction and an attempted sexual assault – grinned, laughed and made gun gestures in the dock."

... Islamic mob actions in the court-

"His supporters in the public gallery hurled abuse at the judge as he passed sentence later."

The political pressure to remain politically correct is tremendous; Western men are to refrain from acting manly enough to cause invaders to think twice before attacking native women, the police are to avoid appearing as if they are unfairly targeting Muslims for prosecutions, British groups who desire to protect their native identity (in the face of unchecked Islamic immigration) are labeled as Fascists, and the same label goes to those who express concern about flagrant and terribly expensive abuses of the British welfare system. In addition to the above, the authority of Western parents (That of Muslim fathers is OK as far as the Left in concerned) has been undermined to the point that they have difficulty exercising any control over their children, thus leading to instances in which young girls wind up hanging out with men who turn out to be violent criminals. These come together to create a climate in which aggressive, criminal, and very violent individuals from a faith that encourages abusive behavior feel as if the have free reign over the place. It’s a party as far as these guys are concerned, and they don't want to miss out on the fun.

As I have noted in previous posts, too many Muslims in Europe appear to have taken to treating their new host nations as battlefields in which the  Muslim tradition of three days of pillage can be extended until their religion/socioeconomic system is firmly established as the dominant political power. This three-day period of being cut loose to steal, rape, enslave, etc, is normally intended for the successful end of a siege. The current state of Europe, though, where a substantial subset of Muslim community leaders/organizers have proclaimed their intent to establish full control of Europe by Democratic means (Once there are enough of them in any nation they can call for a new Constitution and make this occur), seems to be the perfect breeding ground for an extended state of pillage while the electoral siege is ongoing.

This has to be stopped now.

Excerpts on a post from a week ago concerning the above paragraph can be read below:
Note that the bottom of the below-linked post has more links to posts in which some of the more brutal attacks on indigenous Europeans are covered.
This system makes the taking of sex slaves and the use of females from conquered peoples (in this case, ethnic Europeans) for sex a perfectly acceptable thing.

"And all married women are forbidden unto you save those captives whom your right hand possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. (Muhammad Pickthall's English translation of the Quran)."

Note that the fact that these women may be married has no bearing on the Muslims. If they are taken in war then they are fair game. The link has many more quotes, by the way.

Leftist apologists for Islam will be quick to point out that other cultures did the same thing. Well, that was a long time ago for other cultures. The last time that slavery in Western Culture existed was before 1865 (Brazil - 1888), Europe having abolished it earlier. The closest parallel to a European people taking slaves of their nearby enemies as the Koran, written in the 7th century AD and still in force today, directs and allows for Muslims, can be found in the Iliad, which records events before 1200BC. Note also that slavery, although finally officially dropped by the last nation to allow it, Mauritania (Muslim nation ), is still practiced in this and other nations. They just call it different things.

One thing, among many, that Western students have had withheld from them, is the Islamic custom of three days of pillage following the successful conquest of a city. Islam provides this tradition for the weary and exhausted fighters in the service of Allah. Not that the Islamic conquests or their rule is presented in schools in anything other than good terms in the first place, indeed, the Christian Kingdoms of Spain are depicted in a bad light for daring to retake their land in the Reconquista. The customary three days of pillage, though, is a really juicy detail about which our children are not told. They may learn about the Ottoman Empire, and in doing so the fall of Constantinople must be briefly covered, but the atrocities suffered by its inhabitants in 1453 AD* will never be made known. Leftists, despising free nations or peoples, go to great lengths to extol the virtues of the Ottomans and their Empire. It is held up as a shining example of tolerant rule of many different peoples. They ignore the systematic taking of Christian boys to be raised as Muslim slave-soldiers (Janissaries) and Christian girls for the harems. They also ignore what happened once the defense of the city collapsed and Muslim soldiers burst into the city founded by Constantine over a thousand years earlier:

(*That's what happens when no proofreader is around. I never caught my typo. 1053, which was first typed into that spot, also happens to be a year that had importance for both the Eastern and Western Churches- the excommunicated each other. I was re-reading the post and realized that typed in a year for the Fall of Constantinople was 400 years off.)
"Commencing the last assault Sultan Mehmed II promised his troops three days of unbridled pillage of the city. Having stormed into Constantinople the Osmanli Turks used every moment to satisfy their instincts. In the rage of the battle with taking no notice of people they slaughtered everyone they met, and blood ran in torrents in the streets. The sackage broke out: the Turks rushed to the Palace of Blachernae and hastily took all the valuable assets out. Someone ran to Chora Churches and brought the precious shrine – the icon of Virgin Hodegetria, it was said to have been painted by Luke the Evangelist. The Turks ripped the riza off and cut the icon into four pieces[1]. They dragged praying women and children by hair out of the churches and beslaved them. They raped nuns and murdered men on the spot. "
"As soon as the Turks broke into the city they began to seize and enslave anyone who came their way. Anyone who resisted was slaughtered by the edge of the sword, and heaps of bodies covered the ground. “There were unprecedented events: all sorts of lamentations, countless rows of slaves consisting of noble ladies, virgins and nuns, who were being dragged by the Turks.46 In his zeal for Allah, Mehmet had ordered that the city, since it had resisted, be looted for the traditional three days according to Islamic law. But before the first day was up the Sultan brought in his police and put an end to the looting. The loss of the city for the Greeks meant not only an end of empire, but it also marked the start of almost four hundred years of captivity. For Mehmet it was the beginning of Ottoman rule, which would last until the 19th century. Under the rule of future Sultans the Ottoman Empire would continue conquering Christian lands, right up to the gates of Vienna in Austria. "

Note that is this case the three days were changed to one.

The opportunity for booty in the conquest conquest of non-Muslim nations has been an integral part of Islamic warfare since its inception.Below is a quote that illustrates that this was no distortion of Islamic though but was encouraged by Mohamed himself:

"Amr's great distinction is that he was made military commander direct by the Prophet. In appointing him Mohammed said, "I am sending you forth as commander of a troop. May God keep you safe and give you much booty." When Amr answered, "I did not become a Muslim for the sake of wealth, but for the sake of submission to God," the Prophet rejoined, "Honest wealth is good for an honest man"-- a maxim which Amr doubtless remembered.... (page 202)" (Sources below)

No comments:

Post a Comment