UK: Muslim gang kidnapped and raped two girls as part of their Eid celebrations

They are here because Blair, Straw, Blunkett et al wanted to 'rub the Right's nose in diversity'. Apparently 'mass immigration has "enriched" Britain, and made London a more attractive and cosmopolitan place.'

Perhaps someone could explain this to the two schoolgirls in the article above.

For details of the Labour immigration policy see here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

The current government doesn't seem to be doing much better, either.

Unfortunately the UK prisons are full of muslims because inmates are converting to islam to get better treatment and food. That's how our prisons have become. Still eight years is eight years I suppose, sigh!

The obvious answer is they shouldn't be. I have yet, however, to understand the motivation by some to let this scum live among us though.

You have plenty of choice where to send them then. Be even more choice when the oil runs out or we all drive electric, soon I hope;-)

Sadly we will be lucky if they serve three years and as you say the authorities will bend over backwards to accommodate their every whim.

Just what I was thinking. About 30 days in jail for contempt of court for each of the supporters sounds about right.

"London a more attractive and cosmopolitan place"

Yes, it seems that a higher crime rate makes a city more attractive and cosmopolitan. London has surpassed New York in that category. European cities in general, after generations of being far safer places than American cities, have now caught up, thanks to importing millions of Moslems.
But maybe Obama and his leftist cronies can restore America to the lead, by importing millions more Moslems to the U.S. Oh, wait....

"ISLAM IS REPREHENSIBLE, EVIL, SATANIC!!"

Hear, hear, Aprilyn! ...these men are vile and demented barbarians; and laughing at the judge as if above the law. Later, the peanut gallery hurled abused at the judge? Outrageous! And although the headline doesn't give the details of what happened to them, I hope that they were escorted outside by police and not allowed back in.

I am afraid that these will not get the child rapist treatment that is meted out to prisoners by other prisnors in the USA. Since UK jails are full of muslims, these child molesters and rapist will join the rest of their muslim brothers in an easy life of halal foods, korans, and prison mosques, as well as good treatment. Their crimes aren't considered crimes by other muslims.

...on the words of the imam (Hilali) in Australia, linked in my previous comment:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/013729.php

Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali, leader of 300,000+ Australian Muslims, blames women for being raped. [Excerpts]
“THE nation's most senior Muslim cleric has blamed immodestly dressed women who don't wear Islamic headdress for being preyed on by men and likened them to abandoned "meat" that attracts voracious animals.”
[...]“Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali also alluded to the infamous Sydney gang rapes, suggesting the attackers were not entirely to blame.”

[...]“In the religious address on adultery to about 500 worshippers in Sydney last month, Sheik Hilali said: "If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat?
"The uncovered meat is the problem."
“The sheik then said: "If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would have occurred."”
[...]“He said women were "weapons" used by "Satan" to control men.”
[...]"It is said in the state of zina (adultery), the responsibility falls 90 per cent of the time on the woman. Why? Because she possesses the weapon of enticement (igraa)."

Bunty,

I've been following this issue for several years. There is a widespread attitude among Muslim males that non-Muslim women are fair game. It is preached by imams that non-Muslim rape victims are to be blamed for rapes if they did not follow strict Islamic behavioral and dress codes. These views are widely accepted and taken for granted. They view us as crazy for our views that the rape victim is not guilty at all. They view us as weak because, well, they're still alive after they do it and we find out about it.

I don't think that those Muslim students in my cited story literally read the Quran one day and said "Aha! We can rape the non-Muslim women!" Rather, their cultural Islamic views, informed over centuries by the Quran, Hadith, Islamic laws, the imams, the attitudes of their families, etc., indicated that they already knew it's Islamically okay to rape the non-Muslim women.

Edna

how long have you been reading here?

Tommo, for example, is very unusual among jihadwatch commenters in framing the situation in the UK as 'white' vs 'nonwhite'.

The majority of all regular readers and commenters are well aware of the fact that this is not about ethnicity: I ('white' Anglo-Aussie) have more in common with the black South Sudanese-background Christian woman who attends my parish church, than I would have with the 'jihad sheilas' (of white Anglo-Aussie background who converted to Islam and married Muslims and have had their passports confiscated by the Authorities on suspicion of having or having had dealings with jihad plotters).

This struggle - which has been going on for 1400 years on three continents (and since the 20th century, on five: add the Americas and Australia to Asia, Europe and Africa) - is driven on the one hand by the jihad imperative hardwired into Islam, and by the non-Muslim (whether black or white or or any other colour, whether Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Zoroastrian or animist or, today, secular/ atheist [see Western China]) to defend themselves against the Mohammedan onslaught.

I do not think that it is bigotry to recognise that Islam is dangerous and aggressive and that the Ummah, the human gestalt composed of actively professing Muslims embedded in a mass of passively-professing Muslims, is generally bad news for the surrounding or neighbouring non-Muslims, once it attains what might be called 'critical mass'.

The Ummah, or Mohammedan Mob, is the sheltering sea within which the jihadists, the sharia-pushers, the terror raiders, swim and from which, ceaselessly, they emerge in obedience to the central dynamic of Islam. Joseph Schacht who spent years studying Islamic texts and Islamic history put it this way, in 'An Introduction to Islamic Law': "the Islamic attitude toward unbelievers, is the law of war: they must be converted, or subjugated, or killed".

Abduction and gang rape, when consistently carried out by multiple gangs of Muslim men - who always against victims who are *always* non-Muslim women, not only in the UK but in the Netherlands and Denmark and other places where Muslims have established themselves in large and growing local colonies, might be seen as ways of making the local non-Muslims "feel themselves subdued" (as per Quran 9: 29).

Ever read an article called "To Rape an Unveiled Woman"? Look it up.

The paradigm of master-slave dominance/ subjection or submission suffuses Islamic thought and practice at every level. It could be argued that slavery - enslavement, the taking and making of slaves, the conditioning and 'grooming' of people to make them into pliable and uncomplaining tools - is *the* core paradigm of Islam.

And so I don't see Islam as a sort-of-okay religion that happens to have nasty bits around the edges.

It's the central paradigm - slavery - that I find absolutely repulsive. Because it's about people killing their own souls - killing empathy, creativity, *thinking* - and then proceeding not only to attempt to kill other people, but to **kill their souls**, to make them into the equivalent of animals or furniture.

I don't know how much and what you've read.

But here is French sociologist Jacques Ellul discussing Jihad.

http://www.dhimmi.org/Foreword.html

He wrote it as foreword to Bat Yeor's "The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam".

And here is Nicolai Sennels, Danish psychologist, talking about what he learned when working at close quarters, often one on one, with criminal young people from Muslim families.

http://frontpagemag.com/2010/05/05/among-criminal-muslims/
Among Criminal Muslims

"My experience from working with Muslims is that the culture developed under Islamic influence supports the development of certain psychological characteristics.

"I had Muslim clients from most of the Muslim world: most of the Middle East, Muslim countries in Africa, Pakistan and ex-Yugoslavia.

"I did not register any major differences between the mentalities between these countries {which represent, one may note, wildly different ethnicities - Arab, black, South Asian, 'white/ Slavic' - dda}.

"The only real importance deciding the impact of Muslim mentality was whether the client himself identified himself strongly as belonging to the Muslim society or not."

And then there is this, from ex-Muslim Ali Sina:

http://formermuslimsunited.americancommunityexchange.org/2010/03/13/exposing-the-myth-of-moderate-islam/

Exposing the Myth of Moderate Islam

..."Every “moderate” Muslim is a potential terrorist. The belief in Islam is like a tank of gasoline. It looks innocuous, until it meets the fire.

"For a “moderate” Muslim to become a murderous jihadist, all it takes is a spark of faith.

"It is time to put an end to the charade of “moderate Islam.”
"There is no such thing as moderate Muslim. Muslims are either jihadists or dormant jihadists – moderate, they are not."

There are plenty of non-white girls raped by Muslims too in the West. You will not get my support for being a White supremacist a$$ clown. Before 9/11 I use to hear about Pakistani Muslims raping Indian and European looking girls especially in the UK. The police had a difficult job tracking them down, because the Muslims are well organised to cover each other up. The Muslim community provides witnesses 20 a cent.

Edna - some people here, who support the JW forum, are not so familiar with the English language as a natives American. I try to keep my level of English here that helps everyone including the non-native English speakers.

Aprilyn: "This behavior by muslims (the whole family), is typical 'cultural' behavior from ALL muslims."

And then Aprilyn's petty bigotry, "ALL muslims."

____________________________________________________________

Edna Pierce,

You take exception to Guy Macher statement... "Tell me again why they (Muslims) are permitted to live among us."

I ask you, do you and those who you love and hold dear, want to live among those who believe in permissive Islamic scriptures and cultural practices, that promot acts of violence against women; namely "rape"?

Also, you take exception to my statements, so I ask you, is it "petty bigotry" to tell the truth about Islam? Truth is not "hate" speach, it is quite simply the truth.

Who are these "men of deplorable attitude(s) and their supporters," who follow permissive Islamic scriptures and cultural practices? Are they Muslims? Are they those who believe in the words of the qu'ran, of mohammed and allah?

Are "ALL" muslims evil... vile...terrorist...? No, but Islam, the religion that muslims believe in IS! Islam destroyes the normal thought process; the noraml "moral process" of men and women. Many people believe in a natural law of good and evil. Where a man or women knows right and wrong, i.e. the killing of an innocent man or women is wrong... where "rape" is a reprehensible, evil act, ect. In Islam "good and evil" are defined by whatever Islam mandates as good or evil, this is "Islamic law". Therefore the killing of innocent non-muslims just because they are non-muslims is "good". The rape of women, both muslim and non-muslim is acceptabel. The "rape" of non-muslim women is the "right" of muslim men, because they are "fair game" - they are considered "slaves" - "war booty" . Who gave them this right? According to mohammed allah did, and it's recorded that way in the qu'ran, which means it's the law of their god, allah, and can never be changed.

Answer me this.... where are the Muslim protesters? Those muslims who are outraged by this vile act of raping under age young girls and also women? Pardon me but I can't quite hear their (the muslim), voices... is that because they are silent? I also don't see the muslims marching in protest against this vile, reprehensible act of rape; even though muslim women are raped... so I ask again, is this in-action on the part of muslims, an act of silent acceptance of their religious beliefs? And if so what does a society do about it?

Well for starters tell the truth! Don't whitewash it! Murder is murder... Rape is rape! If the foundation for the murder(s)and rape(s), are the permissive Islamic scriptures and cultural practices of the believers in Islam then fight to preserve your own beliefs and culture! Unless you believe that your own befiefs and culture are worthless! In that case either lay down and die or convert!

It's not "petty bigotry" I have, it's outrage! Outrage at a vile, evil, perverted "Tolitarian ideaology" that wants to rape, destroy, and murder my beliefs and way of life; also, the lives of those I love and hold dear.

I'm outraged! ....I am outraged that muslims rape, murder and destroy and then cry out how oppressed they are by the free world. I am ouatraged that muslims never protest or cry out about the rapes, murders, acts of abuse and terror against non-muslims, and the countless viel, evil acts of terrorism throughout the world. I am outraged at the Muslim Society living within the boarders of "free societies" that, never so much as raise a "peep" against the reprehensible acts of violence; and I say to muslims everywhere, "by your silence you are condemed".

If muslims don't like our laws, religions, our "free" way of thinking and life, they can simply move and go back to or re-locate (live) in a society that is more to their liking.

My society may not be perfect, it may need changes, but it is a WORTHY SOCIETY, A FREE SOCIETY! I like it and I'm NOT CONVERTING! I'm also not going to live under Islamic Law!

ISLAM WILL NEVER DOMINANATE MY WORLD, OR SOCIETY! AND THAT IS NOT PETTY BIGOTRY THAT IS TRUTH!!!

There should be war on our streets until the predators are too scared to come out of their houses. Don't rely on the police or rule of law - it's all loaded against the white man.

I agree completely.

I would like to add that while it is absolutely true that the "police or rule of law ...is loaded against the white man" the overarching objective of the left rulers is total destruction of the “evil” Western civilization. The fact that the West has been created and is sustained by the white man makes him the primary target of the assault. If the utopian multicultural paradise should ever materialize it will include all races standing proudly next to each other - and the white one; on its knees and happily self flagellating into extinction.

Dumbledoresarmy,

Last summer (2011) was when I became an anti-Islamism activist. I've devoured dozens of books, watched hundreds of hours worth of debates, lectures, symposiums, news programs, scoured websites, etc. Among all of it were three of Robert's books, and in August I subscribed to the JW daily digest and have read probably close to 65% of the articles posted since then. I know that doesn't seem like much compared to those of you who've been around JW for years, but it's still a glut of information and most of it is pretty depressing - which is one of the reasons I don't comment often. There are only so many ways to say, "That sucks."

My knowledge is far from encyclopaedic, but you'd be hard-pressed to name a major player on the anti-Islamist scene that I'm not at least passingly familiar with, including Nicholai Sennels and Ali Sina. I share your disgust with many of Islam's tenets. And as a regular JW reader, I'm familiar with your comments as well... so when I saw you'd replied I had a sneaking suspicion I was about to be inundated with an impassioned re-hash of one or more Islamist injustices.

And please don't take that as a dig, because it's not meant that way. You're a prolific commenter here, and you have patterns, that's all. Everyone does, including myself on forums I frequent.

So I also know that racism like Tommo's isn't the order of the day at JW. What is commonplace, however, is lack of squawking when the Tommos of the blogosphere do show up here.

And comments like Aprilyn's and Guy Macher's are extremely commonplace at JW. If I had a dime for every time I've read someone here spew that we should kick all Muslims out of our Western countries, I'd be able to afford a trip to the Jessica Mokdad conference in Dearborn next weekend (I'm already registered! Anyone want to donate an airplane ticket? No? Didn't think so).

I don't know why you saw fit to delve into the myth of moderate Islam, but can only guess it might be because I objected to Aprilyn's bit about "ALL Muslims." Now, I have many quibbles with the idea that Islam can only ever be interpreted as it is by the Islamists who control it today, but to get into my reasoning on that would require a much longer post, as if this one isn't already long. But leaving that aside, Aprilyn's comment is still false on its face, and bigoted. That kind of crap is one of the reasons why Robert Spencer and other anti-Islamists (or anti-jihadists, as Spencer would prefer) take tedious pains to preface every freakin' speech they make with, "Of course not ALL Muslims are... I don't make that assertion, never have made that assertion... most Muslims are peaceful individuals who are busy with their everyday lives..."

It's groan-inducing to watch Robert be so conscientious about making those statements, and then an Aprilyn comes along on JW and starts sneering at "ALL muslims."

My only point was and still is that the Aprilyns, Tommos and Guy Machers of the anti-Islamist movement do it far more harm than good, and they ought to be criticized by readers around here far more than they are.

I too agree with the statement by "Tommo... There should be war on our streets until the predators are too scared to come out of their houses."

I don't necessarily agree that the, "police or rule of law - it's all loaded against the white man." It's not the skin color that determines the moral character of a man or womam. This is not a "race" war, but a war against the loss of "freedom".

I believe that the "predators" are using our own freedoms" and "laws" against us. Also that the "other" predator, the liberal left, who hates "free" society will do anything and everthing to destroy the "freedoms" of the free world. The liberal left has long attacked the freedoms in America, and they are just getting stronger. We need to acknowledge "the liberal left" for what is it, an enemy of free people and free society.

I believe in the statment that, freedom it's free that it must be carefully guarded and fought for by a free people.

I think “race war” is a rather vague concept, and I’ve never referred to it and neither did Tommo. However “white man” the historical civilization-building and civilization-carrying agent is a very real thing - also for the forces who wish to destroy it. Namely Islam and the Liberalism (or the Left, as some prefer to call it).
As said, the war is against the West, or white civilization and, like every war, it practically expresses itself “personally” through coercion, harassment and bigotry against individual members of that civilization, whose vast majority happens to be white.

The Left believes that the true progress of humanity can only happen when the traditional Western values -its moral and spiritual truths - are rejected and destroyed on every societal level. If in the process some hapless whites are hurt it is unfortunate, but unavoidable. The march of the history mustn’t be stopped by such trifles. As Lenin said, you can’t make omelette without breaking some eggs.
Do you have problem believing that "police or rule of law - it's all loaded against the white man”?
Do you remember the OJ Simpson process? You don’t really believe he would get “not guilty” verdict had he been white, or do you? Would cop-murderer Mumia escape execution had he been white? Just look at “lynch-Zimmerman-now” madness. I am sure you must see a pattern of anti-whiteness emerging?
Yes, it is secondary in the sense that the whiteness of individual persons is not the target, but the whiteness of the Western civilization is.

Also I don’t think to refer to the “liberal left” as “enemy of free people and free society” is very useful considering that the “liberal left” presents itself as the champion of people and promoter of freedom - indeed the sole authority on what is freedom. We should insist that our is the greatest and best civilization and our freedom can not exist without it. If keeping it alive requires keeping some people out then we should keep some people out. Even if it means that “some people” happen to be mostly non-white.

To Edna Pierce,

You answered "Dumbledoresarmy" and I admire him greatly, he has a wealth of knowledge and the ability to convey it in written form, but I wish you had addressed me, Aprilyn.

I agree with you a vast majority of muslims are for the most part hard working people, who want to live their life and faith as they see fit. I don't have a problem with that. Muslim who "just" want to worship "allah" have that right; people have a right to believe whatever they choose. This is a basic "freedom of choice" to which all people have a right. My problem comes with those who's beliefs put my life, the lives of my loved ones and/or other innocent people in jeopardy! I don't believe that anyone has the right to murder, kill, destroy just because their faith says they can; just because a person believes differently!

Now, your argument is with my statment "ALL" muslims and you call it "bigoted". I don't agree with you, because people are accountable for both their actions and in-actions.

The actions of the "jidhadists" are seen in the bloody bodies and the destroyed homes and buisness of others. But the in-actions of "peace loving muslims" are seen also. They are seen in the "silent" acceptance of the jidahists' acts, and also, they are a "silent" statment of these peace loving muslims, that Islam is supreem.

The statments, "All it takes for evil to florish, is for good men to do nothing," and "by your silence you are condemed" are true! Muslims of good moral character must do something!

It would be refreshing to hear a muslim speak out against these reprehensible acts! To see muslims protesting against rape, murder, and terrorism!

So I ask you,

1) Where is the muslim outrage over the murders, rapes, the abuses by muslims on non-muslims?
2) Where is the muslim outrage over the thousands of acts of terrorism by jihadists'?

.... I'm sorry, maybe you can tell me why I can't hear the muslim "voices" of protest over these evil, vile and reprehensible acts! And every muslim, living in a free society, has not only the right, but the freedom to voice his or her outrage! And muslims should be outraged, since their religion has been hijacked by these extreemist! Right is right, and wrong is wrong, correct? Where are the muslims of good moral character that understand that murder, rape, and destruction in the name of Islam is unacceptable!

The problem is that those good, peace loving muslims who never "voice" an outrage, do believe that what is happening to non-muslims worldwide is acceptable, righteous. Allah's will!

I have been a student of history and my heart breaks when I look back on WWII and the silence of good, loving people in countries everywhere, who denied the Jews admittance into their countries. And by doing so condemed those Jews to death!

By the silence of good, peace loving muslims they are condemed! Condemed, because they have "silently" chosen to support acts of violence and evil. In their "silence" they shout loud and clear that their Islamic beliefs are the only acceptable ones.

Good peace loving muslims should join with non-muslims, but sadly that won't happen, because allah, mohammed, and the qu'ran say non-muslims are not to be trusted and ultimatly, "Only" allah's law is correct.

I'm not sorry if a muslim or some liberal lefty looks at my "post" and says it is bigoted, because I know I am not! I just happen to know that truth is not hate speach and muslims should be outraged by murder, rape and destructive acts, and there should be a "voice" of muslim outrage.

"Good peace loving muslims should join with non-muslims, ..."

"Good peace loving muslims" is an oxymoron.
Or rather "good" and "peace loving" means something different for a "good muslim" and for us. Good muslim follows the precepts of kuran and example of muhamad. The kuran commands murderous hatred of non-muslims and muhammad followed perfectly these commands. Therefore muhammad for a muslim is and always will be the best muslim - indeed the best human being.

The closer one follows the example of muhammed (the worse toward the infidel one is) the better muslim one becomes. A muslim who doesn't hate us, and wishes peace with us is a very bad muslim because he doesn't take kuran and muhamed seriously.
Therefore as far as we are concerned the only good muslim is a bad muslim. And the best muslim is an ex-muslim.

Edna,

With Jihadwatch's very open and "mostly unmoderated" commenting policy, in most cases it is up to commenters to take each other to task over questionable language. This can unfortunately become a time-consuming and distracting enterprise. In the rare instances where I see a comment that (a) clearly and unambiguously states or recommends something morally outrageous, like genocide or illegal or unwarranted violence, or (b) makes blatantly dehumanizing statements against Muslims generally, or (c) involves very persistent and disruptive trolling, and I happen to see it, I notify Jihadwatch about it and leave the judgement to them. Sometimes there may be educational value in leaving some comments up to be discussed and debated.

I share your sentiment about unhinged comments in general, although in this case there is ambiguity and room for interpretation in the comments you quoted above. They are problematic, but perhaps not as bad as you think. That some commenters say "all Muslims," when it is obviously factually incorrect, is indeed annoying and unfair for some to tar all Muslims. I see that Aprilyn has corrected that in response to your post, though I haven't yet read all of her comment.

Guy Macher's suggestion does not necessarily imply advocating deportation of all Muslims, or that all Muslims are barbarians, though that's a possible interpretation. (He may be referring to a more limited subset, such as those who rapists or violent criminals). If he is advocating total deportation of all Muslims, though, while I disagree with that, I don't think that's outside the bounds of rational and ethical discussion for future consideration. Geert Wilders has suggested that it may be necessary to deport millions of Muslims from Europe, including much of the criminal population which is to a large extent Muslim. I myself have suggested that, all things considered, several western countries, if they want to save themselves in the long term, are going to have to deport or otherwise facilitate the emigration of massive numbers of Muslims (specifically those who support sharia and jihad), and cut off immigration from Muslim countries (i.e., so long as they fail to reject sharia and jihad).

The comment you cite as the worst was this one by Tommo:

"Where are the young white guys who should be taking these vermin on? Muslim men are raping their women, the white mothers of tomorrow, but there is no retaliation. There should be war on our streets until the predators are too scared to come out of their houses. Don't rely on the police or rule of law - it's all loaded against the white man."

You objected to the comment as follows:

"Tommo, you do have one thing going for you: economy with words. You eloquently packed racism, a call to violence and appalling misogyny ("their" women, indeed) into only 23 of them. And, again, your vitriol is indistinguishable from that of Islamists' when "Muslim" and "white" are switched."

I can't read Tommo's mind, but based on these statements, I can't say for sure he is being racist. He could be, but perhaps not. His comments are not recommending violence against anyone based on race. He is suggesting that there is racism against whites, in a violent form by the Muslim rapists who target white girls, and in non-violent form by the authorities who are part of an official culture that is often perceived to discriminate against whites. His call for violence may be purely of the defensive sort that citizens sometimes must engage in to defend others, such as the violence needed to fend off, immobilize, or capture rapists. Or he could be expressing a desire to beat up the rapists--a common immediate emotional reaction that many people have when they read such stories. I have to say that I, too, was angered enough by this news report--in the context of so many such reports--that I put off adding a comment until I had time to cool down a bit and reflect.

I think Tommo does transgress by suggesting that people not bother to involve the police and instead take matters into their own hands. As bad as the situation with official "politically correct multicultural" (for lack of a better term) and pro-Islamic attitudes of the authorities in the U.K. have become, I don't think the situation has yet reached the point where police would refuse to do their jobs in cases where the rape victim is white.

Regarding defending "their women", I don't think this is necessarily misogynist in the sense of claiming ownership of the women. Rather, it may be a sense of "their women" in the same sense as "their loved ones," "their daughters, sisters, mothers, friends or girlfriends, wives, etc." and those whom they have a responsibility to defend; or it may involve a broader sense of tribal or civilizational (because most westerners are, or at least were, white) loyalty.

Of course, there is no need to limit this to white people defending white people, or even just non-Muslims defending non-Muslims. When we are talking about rape happening in our societies, everyone has a responsibility to defend the victims, punish the criminals, prevent these crimes, no matter the race or religion.

This particular story happens to be part of a widespread phenomenon, not just in the U.K. but throughout much of the West where there are significant Muslim populations, whereby many Muslim males believe it is permissible, or at least much less of an offense, to target and rape non-Muslim women. White western women are profiled and targeted by Muslims first and foremost by their appearance. Their appearance is what tells the would-be Muslim rapist that the would-be victims are probably non-Muslim and probably more "promiscuous" than Muslim girls and women. Moreover, they are readily recognizable to the would-be Muslim rapists as the women of the "infidels" (kuffar and harbis) who are waging war against Islam (e.g., in Afghanistan; or socially through criticizing it). There is also a widespread belief, among non-white non-Western men, both Muslim and non-Muslim, that white women are "sluts," "whores," etc. This perception is probably augmented by the Western media depictions of women that are spread all over the globe. White women in the U.K. and elsewhere are targeted according to such beliefs.

The "vermin" he refers to appear to be sadistic rapists of the sort featured in this story. Vermin is an objectionable term, in that it seems to be too weak and too strong at the same time. It seems too strong, because it is a gratuitous insult and incorrect to refer to people, even terrible criminals, as (non-human) animals. It seems too weak, because the sadistic rapists are actually worse, in the sense of having some degree of conscience and knowingly committing great evil; whereas literal vermin--destructive rats, insects and the like--are not evil.

So, in a best case scenario, I think Tommo's comment was mostly about a defensive reaction to the crime of rape and to the anti-non-Muslim, anti-white views and actions of some Muslims such as those in this case, as well as politically correct biases in official society that discriminate against whites. I'm not sure if the best case scenario interpretation I suggest is correct; your (Edna's) interpretation may be closer to correct; or Tommo's actual intended meaning may be somewhere between these alternatives. Yet I would be reluctant to condemn Tommo's rather ambiguous comment outright as racist and misogynist without knowing more about his views (and as far as I can recall the first time I've seen a Tommo comment).

I'm reasonably sure though that Tommo should have been clearer about what he meant to avoid these kinds of potential misunderstandings on such hot-button issues.

I agree with the statment "Good peace loving muslims" is an oxymoron. Also, I agree with the rest of what you have to say about the Qu'ranic precepts followed by "good muslim". When you talk about good muslims and peace loving muslims you are speaking "double speak".

What I was trying to do was to answer Edna Pierce, who objected to my comment '"All" muslims, do or are'. Edna Pierce stated she found my comment false and bigoted. Which I don't agree with.

The total comment I made, which I stand by is, "This behavior by muslims (the whole family), is typical "cultural" behavior from ALL muslims, when any sex crimes (of muslim men), are punished by societies." And what is the typical behavior I was refering to, well it's just as I stated, "This reprehensible attitude is not just the "rapists'" - it's the attitude of the whole muslim society. In these rape cases the whole muslim family gets involved, they hurl insults, lies and vulgarity at the victims. Those who dare to proscute and pass judgment receive threats. The whole of muslim society basicly says, "how dare you judge our behaviour".

I was trying to state that the whole muslim community whether silent or active (in violent jihad or just vocal opposition), holds in contempt the laws of the "Free societies" in the free countries where they live.

Edna Pierce while well meaning and someone who has tried to familiarize herself with what Islam is and is trying to do, is still miss-lead. She speaks of Islam as if it can be reformed when she states... I have many quibbles with the idea that Islam can only ever be interpreted as it is by the Islamists who control it today,... she either doesn't understand the "role" she is to play in Islamic society or she ses's Islam through "rose colored" glasses.

What I object to is the "silence" on the part of those peaceful Muslims who are "just" (my addition), busy with their everyday lives...". I see in this muslim "silence," there acceptance and approval of muslims who perpetrate these reprehensible acts of violence; and I find this unacceptable.

If Islam has really been hijacked by extreemists jihadists' then those muslims who are offened by their actions of violence, should speak out. There should be an out cry of outrage, which has not and is not heard, by these so called "peaceful muslims" who are just busy with their everyday lives.

And I for one am outraged at the muslim attitude which says, "we (muslims) are the victims; that free men and women need to tolerate muslim behavior and Islam. I say when Islam starts to tolerate others I will re-think the toleration issue, because as it stands right now, we the free people of the world do tolerate muslims.

Aprilyn,

"You answered "Dumbledoresarmy" and I admire him greatly, he has a wealth of knowledge and the ability to convey it in written form,".

Dumbledoresarmy is a she. I too appreciate her contributions.

Thanks for the heads up on Dumbledoresarmy, I was not aware of her gender.

UK: Muslim gang kidnapped and raped two girls as part of their Eid celebrations
.........................

Can you even imagine a Christian, Jew, or Buddhist talk about kidnapping and raping girls as *part of their holiday celebrations*? me neither.

More:

Enjoying the sex slaves allowed by the Qur'an (men may enjoy "what your right hands own," 4:3) and Islamic law.
.........................

And "sex slaves" is *just* how they regarded these two poor girls.

More:

A group of Muslim men who abducted and raped two teenage girls as part of their Eid celebrations laughed in court yesterday...
.........................

Scum.
More:

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...

His accomplice Amar Hussain, 22, claimed the girls were ‘slags’.
.........................

this is what they *always* say. The Muslim idea is that Infidels are promiscuous and so enjoy any sex—*even rape*.

More:

He said it was quite obvious they had been frightened of the men, but this had had ‘no effect at all’ on their attackers’ behaviour.
.........................

Of course not. If anything, the fact that these girls were afraid probably enhanced the experience for their vile Muslim rapists.

More:

‘They were still children and still living with their families,’ Judge Inman said. ‘In a civilised society, such people should be helped. You all abused them.
.........................

Well, yes. But Islam is not "civilised society".

More:

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.
.........................

God, I hate Islam.

More:

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

Here's the vicious Ummah showing support for these vile rapists. They should have been removed from the court.

D wrote:

Basically identical to the Bilal Skaf gang rapes here in Australia, right down to the abuse from their supporters to the judge/victims, & blaming the victims.
.........................

Very true, D. Virtually identical to the wave of Muslim rapes of Infidel girls in Scandinavia, as well. Islam is a rape culture, and sexual assaults will skyrocket wherever Muslims gather in sufficient numbers.