Pennsylvania: Two Muslim inmates, one a rapist, sue prison system over strip searches

You wrote: 'I only mention this because Robert subtly links their crimes to their religion and insinuates that they rape and murdered because they are Muslims.'

You're a liar! Robert Spencer did not state explicitly or implicitly that the crimes these men committed was anything to do with Islam. The article expressly states that the two men claim that Islamic law "prohibits a man from exposing his genitals to anyone but his spouse."...

That's all! You're a lying clown!

A far more salient point is that mohammedism appeals to brutish thugs, because it sanctions brutish behavior and paints it as being "holy."

No wonder so many prison inmates convert to islam. It's right up their alley. It's validation and does nothing to help the poor soul learn to live for others rather than his own flesly lusts.

So in that sense, there definitely is a connection between mohammedism and crimes, especially rape and brutality towards infidels and those that are not islamic enough.

just imagine. you are here either as a troll or a true muslim. nevetheles notice that no one is botherig and if any they are respecting your freedom of speech. in pakistan you would be hanged by your ball and in Saudi Araibia by your throat,
M

If Islam allows Muslims to rape non-Muslim women then why is it that two men that raped a white American in Saudi were executed? If what you say is correct one would assume that they would of been rewarded and 10000s of American women would not be visiting or working throughout Muslim countries !!!!!!

Yes, Robert did subtly use their crimes, but you might lack the cognitive proficiency to read in between the lines. And I guarantee you the words rape and murder had an effect on your perception of them and you naturally linked the religion and crime to increase your disgust with them and Muslims as a whole. Again, you lack the ability to 1) decipher that they were not Muslims when they committed their crimes and 2) Realise how your perception was coaxed.

Also, look at the title. Two Muslim inmates, ONE RAPIST, sue prison system over strip searches.
The fact that the one rapist part was added says a lot because the story is about two Muslims suing for being stripped search, their crimes are not the focal point of the story and also if the rape part was added why was "and one murderer" not added to the title? Because the word rape brings out more emotion and disgust than murderer and the fact that you guys are brainwashed into thinking that Muslims are running around raping as part of their religious beliefs adds to the impact that the word rape will have on your perception of the convicts and, again, on a wider context increase your disgust and fear of Muslims.
In any impartial commentary their crimes would only be used descriptively e.g "X, who was jailed for rape" as would the fact that they converted while in Prison.

I agree and so they should for certain types of crimes. E.g If Ted Bundy was jailed, instead of executed, I would of much rather he did real time than live in prison that was akin to a 3 star resort with gym, pool tables, classes, good food, tv, playstation etc.

Funny how muslims bumble in here and try to change the narrative--when the story is about muslims--convicted felons, no less--demanding special priveleges and exceptions (again).

Don't get me wrong...I also know that people of all types commit the worst of crimes. But it seems that people of only ONE type are demanding special treatment on RELIGIOUS grounds--can you guess to which type I refer?

And, by the way, this is Jihad Watch, not "People of All Types Watch."

Capische?

Mamode Rawat,

"Funny how the fact that they reverted in prison"

"Reverted" is not a fact. It is a pious Islamic propaganda term for converted. If you are claiming that they converted to Islam from some other non-Islamic belief in prison, that is indeed possible. There's nothing in this article about that, though.

"[...] and were not Muslim when they committed their evil crimes"

Again, how do you know this? Do you have another more detailed article about this case?

They may have been Muslim when they committed the crimes.

Another possibility: People who are inclined to commit such crimes are more inclined to embrace Islam.

"...is conveniently not mentioned."

It's not mentioned in the AP article.

"Don't get me wrong, I know people of all types commit the worst of crimes but I only mention this because Robert subtly links their crimes to their religion and insinuates that they rape and murdered because they are Muslims."

If that's the basis of your interpretation, then you'd have to blame AP for setting up the association merely by reporting the details of the story. However, I suspect that the story is featured on JW because it is relevant to the issue of special accommodations for Muslims.

Hi, CGW,

Well, he's welcome to try! And he's welcome to fail, like all those before him. This ain't the Huffington Post here!

Hope all is well with you, sir...

G

MAmode Rawat wrote:

"Funny how the fact that they reverted in prison and were not Muslim when they committed their evil crimes is conveniently not mentioned."

What is funny is your assuption about "reverting" in prison, while it may be true, it is certainly not mentioned in the article. So why wouod Spencer make a claim he cannot substantiate?

Mamode Rawat wrote:

"...but I only mention this because Robert subtly links their crimes to their religion and insinuates that they rape and murdered because they are Muslims."

He did no such thing. He is explicit that the article illustrates Muslims demanding special treatment due to their supposed Islamic piety.

Mamode,

"If Islam allows Muslims to rape non-Muslim women then why is it that two men that raped a white American in Saudi were executed? If what you say is correct one would assume that they would of been rewarded and 10000s of American women would not be visiting or working throughout Muslim countries !!!!!!"

If she was white and American (i.e., from the U.S.), that doesn't necessarily mean she's a non-Muslim. You would first have to present evidence of this case so that we can have a look at the important details. Rape in some cases is indeed illegal and is harshly punished in Islamic law. However, in Islamic law, Muslim males are permitted to rape their wives and the female slaves or captives they own. Those are the traditional laws; I am not sure of Saudi Arabia's current laws on this.

If I take your account as a given, and that two Muslim men raped a non-Muslim woman, and that the Islamic rules of evidence were met to establish the guilt of the rapists, then we can assume (a) that this non-Muslim woman was not a wife or legally held slave/captive of the men, (b) the Saudi authorities do not overtly and officially view themselves at war with the United States, and (c) the Saudi authorities may view themselves as having some kind of contract such that Americans are protected on their land.

"Yes, Robert did subtly use their crimes, but you might lack the cognitive proficiency to read in between the lines. And I guarantee you the words rape and murder had an effect on your perception of them and you naturally linked the religion and crime to increase your disgust with them and Muslims as a whole."

Again, rape and murder were mentioned in the AP story.

"Again, you lack the ability to 1) decipher that they were not Muslims when they committed their crimes and 2) Realise how your perception was coaxed."

Very well. Show us evidence to support your claims here.

"Also, look at the title. Two Muslim inmates, ONE RAPIST, sue prison system over strip searches.
The fact that the one rapist part was added says a lot because the story is about two Muslims suing for being stripped search, their crimes are not the focal point of the story and also if the rape part was added why was "and one murderer" not added to the title? Because the word rape brings out more emotion and disgust than murderer and the fact that you guys are brainwashed into thinking that Muslims are running around raping as part of their religious beliefs..."

There does seem to be a conspicuously large amount of rapes being committed by Muslims against non-Muslim women in Europe, Australia, South Asia, Sudan, and other areas. Based on the accounts coming out of Europe for example, there is a widespread belief among Muslim males that the non-Muslim women are fair game for being raped. They are variously viewed as "sluts", the enemy's women, and imams blame them for being raped because they don't conform to Islamic codes of behavior and dress.

"...adds to the impact that the word rape will have on your perception of the convicts and, again, on a wider context increase your disgust and fear of Muslims.
In any impartial commentary their crimes would only be used descriptively e.g "X, who was jailed for rape" as would the fact that they converted while in Prison."

My views on the Islamic laws and widespread attitudes among Muslim men is based on the evidence that I've seen over the past several years. It has nothing to do with Robert's word choices when he makes comments about an article.

let me answer this: Yes.

Islam does permit rape and murder of non-Muslims!! Islamic history of last 1400 years provides ample proof of it. Just because Saudia hanged two men for raping a white woman is not a proof that Islam does not allow such criminal activities. Look at the present day cases of rapes in Norway, Denmark and other European countries where Muslim immigrants are predominant in committing rapes of native non-Muslim women. They do seek out white women for committing this dastardly crime. Islam is a criminal ideology, invading, looting, raping, murder, all started with Muslims going out to spread Islam. Islam permits criminal behavior and that is why it appeals to all those criminals in prison who convert to Islam.

Robert doesn't have to provide any linkage, it is self evident!!

Mamode Rawat, you said:

If Islam allows Muslims to rape non-Muslim women then why is it that two men that raped a white American in Saudi were executed? If what you say is correct one would assume that they would of been rewarded and 10000s of American women would not be visiting or working throughout Muslim countries !!!!!!

Islam does not as a rule permit Muslims to rape non-Muslim women if those non-Muslim women are guests, as in Saudi Arabia. But outside the realm of Islamic rule, rape of non-Muslims is permitted in various circumstances by Muhammad and Islam:

In core Islamic texts, Muhammad allows his soldiers to rape captive women:

From Sahih Muslim, a canonical hadith collection:
Book 008, Number 3371:

Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa'id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him): 0 Abu Sa'id, did you hear Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al-'azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger [Muhammad] (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.

Notice above that Muhammad did not say, "do not compel your captive women to have sex with you." He merely says it does not matter if his soldiers withdraw before ejaculation, because souls destined by Allah to be born will be born regardless. Further:

From Sahih al-Bukhari, the most canonical hadith collection:
Volume 5, Book 59, Number 459:

Narrated Ibn Muhairiz:
I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa [battle at which Muhammad was present] of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interruptus, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah's Apostle [Muhammad] who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist."

Again notice above that, in answer to his soldiers' queries Muhammad doesn't say "You must not force your captives to have intercourse with you." He says only that coitus interruptus, withdrawing prior to ejaculation, is pointless, because souls predestined to exist will exist regardless.

Again in Sahih al-Bukhari:
Volume 7, Book 62, Number 137:

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle [Muhammad] about it and he said, "Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection."

Thus Muhammad does not forbid his men to rape their captives, but merely says that it's better not to do coitus interruptus. His men were to keep going till coitus was complete.

------------------------------------------

The heading of Chapter 29 of Sahih Muslim, a canonical hadith collection, is

"IT IS PERMISSIBLE TO HAVE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH A CAPTIVE WOMAN AFTER SHE IS PURIFIED (OF MENSES OR DELIVERY). IN CASE SHE HAS A HUSBAND, HER MARRIAGE IS ABROGATED AFTER SHE BECOMES CAPTIVE"

And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess...

Get it? Muhammad's Allah is telling his soldiers, "go ahead, boys, you can do your captives, including the married ones."

Meanwhile:

69% increase in rape attacks on non-Muslims in Oslo, Norway; vast majority of rapes done by members of the growing Muslim population

-- QuotingIslam.blogspot.com

Let me help you read between the lines.

Both of the prisoners want to be afforded special treatment in accordance with a religious belief that prohibits them from exposing their genitals to women not their wives.

It adds a well deserved level of ironic emphasis to note that one of them is a rapist who obviously had no problem exposing his gentials to his victim.

Perhaps you could check into the rapists background and get back to us; just to see if anyone here gives a damn.

>"Get it? Muhammad's Allah is telling his soldiers, "go ahead, boys, you can do your captives, including the married ones."

You would think Mamode will know his hadiths well. Oh yeah, that taqiyya thing is playing it's part!!

Based on the accounts coming out of Europe for example, there is a widespread belief among Muslim males that the non-Muslim women are fair game for being raped. They are variously viewed as "sluts", the enemy's women, and imams blame them for being raped because they don't conform to Islamic codes of behavior and dress.

That is correct Kinana of Khaybar. They also refer to non-Muslim women as "uncovered meat."

Once again, a Muslim comes to Jihad Watch, insults every non-Muslim poster on the thread, and then, with a whining variation on the argumentum ad misericordium, complains that Robert Spencer is stirring up hatred toward Muslims.

There is no question that Islam is repugnant. Everything from the Qur'an, to the Hadiths, to the Sira, shows this to be true. By insulting everyone, Mr. Rawat represents Islam well, proving himself a true product of his creed.

As was his intent from the beginning, Mamode Rawat is sure to get the opprobrium he's looking for. He will deserve it.

This ain't the Huffington Post here!

My point exactly, Big George.

Regards.

"If Islam allows Muslims to rape non-Muslim women then why is it that two men that raped a white American in Saudi were executed?"

You troglodytes have absolutely no shame in making up the facts as you go.

There was no "white American" woman raped in Soddy Barbaria. Google doesn't even turn up any instances of "white American" men being raped in that cesspool of islamic supremacy.

However, there have been plenty of Indonesian, Malaysian, Bangladeshi, and Pakistani women raped in the heart of musloid jurisprudence.

Guess what, obfuscating musloid? Not one of your fellow testacled co-cultists was beheaded for raping any of those women who are a mix of kaffir and arselifter non-Arabs.

All of the women, kaffir and arselifter alike were punished with whippings for getting themselves raped.

As for the religion of the arselifters in the article YOU are reading between the lines, it is obvious from their names they are not born troglodytes. They chose to be troglodytes.

I can't speak for the others here, but their CHOICE of ideology (supremacist, misogynist, institutionalized violence), does influence, greatly my opinion of them whether they are rapists or philanthropists.

Show me a sweetly smiling octogenarian who believes mad mo was a great man and I will be as disgusted by her as I am with you and your more pro-active co-cultists who slowly saw people's heads off and use rape as a weapon.

I feel as strongly and equally disgusted by all members of your cult no matter their ethnicity, age, social status, legal status, or gender. Just like I feel as equally and strongly disgusted by members of other supremacist groups.

That's just how I roll. If you don't like it, too bad. It's your choice to be in thrall to and a water carrier for the single most disgusting two-legged creature to mar the face of the earth with its presence.

Of course he's being dishonest, consider the following:

- in the US, the percentage of Muslims in the prison population is about 20% - while Muslims make up only about 1% of the overall population in the US

- In Bangladesh, 98% of the rapes happen to non-muslim women, but non-muslim women make up only about 5% of the population in Bangladesh

- In Oslo, there were 48 rapes from January-October of 2011 - 45 of them by Muslims. According to some analyses, nearly 100% of the rapes in Oslo, are committed by Muslims.

The co-relation is so high that causality is the obvious answer. Muslims, crime and rape are inextricably linked - the data on this is overwhelming.

Great post, I_C.

"If Islam allows Muslims to rape non-Muslim women then why is it that two men that raped a white American in Saudi were executed?"

They were sacrificial lambs....it was a sham execution to appease American officials...appeasement of the Americans was needed to insure the billions of dollars is aid money would continue uninterrupted...Islam has no problem sacrificing its people when it comes to fleecing the Infidels..

Yeah, in the famous Clintonian philosophy: "It's the religion, stupid!"

Mamode,

"They execute two rapist for raping an American and its a sham execution."

You said the Saudis executed two Muslim rapists for raping a non-Muslim woman. Can you provide us with a news article or other evidence to support your claim?

Mamode,

"100+ Million women choose to wear the hijab and live as Muslims and their suffering from stockholm syndrome."

There is no clear evidence that Muslim women choose to live as Muslims. To have clear evidence of that, you will first have to abolish the punishments for public apostasy. Make sure that people are free to openly criticize and question the religion, and choose which religion (or non-religious beliefs) they want to follow, then we can assess what people freely choose to follow.

I also note that you did not reply to my previous comments, perhaps because you are unable to refute or address them?

"Funny how the fact that they reverted in prison and were not Muslim when they committed their evil crimes is conveniently not mentioned. Don't get me wrong, I know people of all types commit the worst of crimes but I only mention this because Robert subtly links their crimes to their religion and insinuates that they rape and murdered because they are Muslims.

Mamode, there was no mention by Robert of the religious preference of the criminals at the time they committed their crimes. What you don't understand is that Americans are used to sociopaths, psychopaths, pedophiles, murderers, wife-beaters, hate-mongers, etc, etc, etc, (ad nauseum) converting to islam while in prison. That is why most Americans (Robert EXCLUDED) consider islam to be a
gutter religion" that is only practiced in the US by criminals.

Robert is much more fair-minded than you give him credit for.

Now.....quit trying to play that whinging muslim crap on the rest of us. We are tired of hearing muslim wailings from your incessant "pity-parties". We don't care if your muslim egos are wounded. We are simply fed up with muslims attacking/killing us and then turning around and screaming hysterically about how muslims are the real victims.

You little crybabies need to grow up and start acting like adults!

Don't have a clue what your on about

I don't think so, LJ. Click on his name and refer to his FB page.

"Gay" Saudi Arabia:

http://barenakedislam.com/2012/05/02/pat-condell-sticks-it-to-gay-saudi-arabia/

I am on your side Mamode!

100+ Million women choose to wear the hijab and live as Muslims and their suffering from stockholm syndrome.

Ha ha That was nice sarcasm. Every thinking man knows those women are not suffering from stockholm or any other syndrome. The prophet(saw) already explained 1400 years ago why they wear hijabs- because those muslimahs are deficient in intelligence. That's why! Those who are not deficient, like fineliving56, Allah takes their deen away. Because Allah does whatever he wants.

And these infidels here at JW make up stuff about them suffering from this or that syndrome. Allah has blinded them and they will never know the truth.

Yes! "Small" hehe.
And the other guy: "Pearlie"!
Sounds like a cabaret duo "Small and Pearlie".
"Oh the Shark has
Pretty teeth dear
And he shows them
Pearly white"!
Pearlie could do Mack the Knife
but I don't suppose Small would be too keen to play in "The Full Monty!"
Or maybe he failed the audition for not being up to the part.
Well there you have it. Case solved!
Two disgruntled inmates with an axe to grind. Or should that be scimitar?

BAAARRRFFFF!

You should have given us a heads up for disturbing content! LOL Cheese and crackers but that is one ugly bastard.

Did you notice junior jihadi's FB groups include: F*CK America, jihad, and jihad islam? I bet you this clown has dhimmwitted friends who think he's "modern, moderate, nice chap, as British as I am!"

This dirtball belongs to groups like that and has the unmitigated gall to think that Robert's post causes "hatred towards muslims."

Typical blame-everyone-but-ourselves musloid mentality.

They just keep rattling the cage and the tiger is getting angrier.

"male inmates should be dealt with by male COs (corrections officers) as female inmates should be dealt with by female COs."
--I think you're right. I was surprised even a bit shocked to hear that this guy was strip searched in front of female COs. Prisons are supposed to be places of rehabilitation after all. "Correctional institutions". Not just punishment. What message does cross-gender searches send? Especially to a sex-offender?

Au contrairè, je connais bien. Buffoon.

@Kinana of Khaybar
"There is no clear evidence that Muslim women choose to live as Muslims" The fact that over 100 million women are Muslim puts it beyond a reasonable doubt that they do choose and believe in Islam. So the burden of proof is in your court, not mine. Your the one making the allegation that goes against all the facts and statistics so you prove your theory. Remember over 100m so lets give a conservative estimate of 350m Muslim women that believe in Islam and to various degrees practice it. Now from that to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they are all, or even the majority, or heck even 50% of them, are forced and oppressed will take some doing. And NO! stories of Taliban or the odd honour killing here or there or the odd miscarriage of justice will not get you the conviction you want.
P.S What about the 10000s of White/Black/Latina women that convert to Islam every year?

As for the rape. It received a paragraph in the international papers probably because comments if it was a headline would of been in favour of them getting executed. It happened, believe me or don't believe me its your choice

Here we go again…

Apparently, non-Muslims have to give proof for their valid statements, as in Kinana for the perfectly balid statement he made:

First, the mooslime wants proof for his own point of view...
>> So the burden of proof is in your court, not mine.

next - some whining about what kind of proof it wants
>> And NO! stories of Taliban or the odd honour killing here or there or the odd miscarriage of justice will not get you the conviction you want

But our Islamist troll does not care to give any proof for his statements at all:
>>As for the rape....It happened, believe me or don't believe me its your choice

There’s a reason we contribute by sending man to moon, while Muslims “contribute” by resorting to baccha-bazi (or sexual slavery of little boys)

Mamode,

I don't know where you are getting your figures. As long as Muslims, including Muslim women, are threatened with death or other harsh punishments for publicly leaving Islam, you don't know what percentage would choose to leave the religion. Only when the threat of punishment is completely removed would you have a fair test.

"As for the rape. It received a paragraph in the international papers probably because comments if it was a headline would of been in favour of them getting executed. It happened, believe me or don't believe me its your choice"

It's more a question of having a look at the relevant information reported in the story.

Here's what can happen to a non-Muslim woman in an Islamic country:
http://www.couriermail.com.au/travel/news/queensland-woman-tells-of-her-jail-hell-in-united-arab-emirates/story-e6freqwo-1226028684306
"A QUEENSLAND woman spent eight months in a United Arab Emirates jail for adultery after complaining to police about being drugged and raped by co-workers."

"Ms Gali said she was never warned by her UAE employers that she could be charged with adultery and face prison if she complained of being raped, without having four adult male Muslim witnesses."

---------------------

Good post! She is right on folks.

Mamode, people here don't seem to be buying your line. Annoying bunch of folks, what with insisting on all that "Western" stuff, you know, like proof, logic, accuracy, truth, etc. Stuff that Allah would never stand-for!
Do you wonder why the lack of acceptance? Here's my answer:

Islam may be big where you are, but it's going NOWHERE in the USA! I'm an American, I'm proud of that, and the very LAST thing in this world I'm going to do is answer to some fat-assed, flea-bearded, moronic imam in his islamic getup--who tells me that it's OK to murder my children, or disfigure my little girls' genitalia, or have several wives, or that cleavage causes earthquakes, the world is flat, and I can have sex with my dead spouse and that a low-life, 7th Century warlord and pedophile is any kind of "prophet." And that goes right down to having a hot dog at the ballgame and a cold beer after I mow my lawn.

I could go on--and on--but you get the idea, right? Islam has NO future in this country. It's toast here! So, enjoy it where and how you can if that's your thing. But, thank God, it'll never be mine. And, I think you'll find most Americans agree.

Hope that helps...

You rock, Big G.

Check out this thread and help out if you can:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/05/leading-us-muslim-jurist-female-genital-mutilation-an-honor-in-islam.html

Peter

I think you might be onto something.

Because Muslims don't just torture their victims.

They also seem to go in a lot for flinging excrement at people, smearing excrement on church walls, that kind of disgusting stuff.

Which suggests they wouldn't like the idea of being on the *receiving* end of that kind of treatment.

So the stocks and a public shower of soft, smelly stuff might be just the ticket.

Let's see what effect the Riddikulus! charm has on these Mohammedan boggarts.

(There is an excellent portrait of a character very like these boasting, threatening, Mohammedan Rage Boys, in C S Lewis's novel for children 'The Horse and His Boy'. Read it - specifically, the chapter 'Rabadash the Ridiculous', which I encourage you to read, it's highly entertaining, *especially* to people like us who can see precisely which 'culture' Lewis was mercilessly parodying. The rhetoric used by the captured Calormene prince is very, very reminiscent to the sort of language we hear from jihad gang bosses and mullahs and sheikhs and the likes of Mahmoud Ahmedinejad. And he meets a most humiliating fate...).

Final observation: I remember that some time ago there was a terrible kerfuffle when Geert Wilders stated acerbly that if a person like Mohammed (he, Wilders, assumed in this 'thought experiment' that the person was not the Protected Species, Muslim) and took a little girl to bed and generally went on a crime spree, doing various of the other things Muslims firmly believe Mohammed did (hey, sleeping with a woman's fresh corpse in the grave..?), he'd have been arrested and 'tarred and feathered and ridden out of Holland on a rail". I do believe Wilders mentioned tarring and feathering. One could always use molasses instead of tar.

Hi DDA.

Thanx for the additional thoughts and especially thanx for the suggestion that I read C.S. Lewis' "The Horse and His Boy." I have read the mandatory Chronicles of Narnia series and part of the "The Screwtape Letters" but that is it as far as my familiarity with Lewis goes. I will add your recommendation to my reading list.

You got me especially interested in the book because of your observation that the captured Prince was named Calormene which appears to by a synergy of the Latin word Calor for heat and the Greek verb μένω which means stand (i.e. withstand), last, or stay.

So your depiction of the prince and C.S. Lewis' name for the prince are in accord. I suspect as I read the book that I will find all sorts of overt and hidden symbols planted by Lewis to suggest he had Islam in mind. If I find anything of especial interest, I will pass it on to you as repayment for the reading suggestion.

Your comment on the molasses and feathering seems like an equally good approach to what I suggested and it definitely won't cause any physical harm to the culprits. I like the irony of turning terrorists into sweet young things. I'm almost laughing at them already.

As long as the festivities you envision go on YouTube or some Internet site for permanent humiliation of the Muslim culprits I subscribe to the idea enthusiastically.

To me, it is the world-wide loss of honour that is important in this approach. If the festivities are confined to a prison, the effect of the punishment is nowhere near as great and totally non-redemptive.

A philosophical thought for you to ponder DDA: why have the stocks, pillories and like punishments disappeared? They were not, from what I've read, physically harmful. They did seem to work as a deterrent (in honour-based societies). They also allowed the public to feel that they had some say in the administration of justice through their rotten tomato pelting and verbal remonstrances.

I have a theory on why this method of punishment has fallen into disuse and I direct it towards the left. (Warning! Warning! Crackpot conspiracy theory about to unfold).

Most of the research I have done on the reasons for decommissioning the pillories and stocks seems to indicate that it is based on the theory that such punishments are "demeaning to the dignity of Man." Interestingly, those who have argued this have never shown that Man has dignity.

Even if they could prove the dignity of Man concept they would be hard pressed to show that any other punishment wouldn't be demeaning in one way or another.

The demeaning of dignity sometimes gets spun into other garments that are intended to camouflage it. For instance, the theory that 'justice should be restorative not retributive' is really about allowing the culprit to keep his dignity in all sorts of ways. You may note that this concept, which comes from the left, has a parallel in the Islamic principles of Qisas (equal retaliation) and Diyya (bloodmoney).

Paying a restorative amount (in either society) does not stop future acts of evil by the perpetrator. If anything it enables them. There is no disincentive to committing such acts.

The way I see it, Muslims and leftists take themselves way too seriously. Just as there is no fun in Islam there is no fun in being a member of the left. You don't make fun of a devout Muslim and you don't make fun of a devout (unapologetic) leftist.

We saw this played out quite manifestly by Tommy Trudeau during his various appearances on Glazov and Gang. He was kidded, almost always in a good and fun way but he almost went off the deep end over it. Trudeau obviously believes the rest of the Glazov gang were demeaning him (in some cases true) and he showed that was an extreme no-no. Obviously, he is much to important to be belittled.

So where am I going with this?

Well, Trudeau, in my estimation, was evincing a major trait of the liberal left psyche. He obviously was an extreme case but that does not invalidate using him as an example. How do you think Trudeau would react to being in stocks for one day while being pelted with stinky stuff? You can bet that his liberal left 'community' would react more or less the same way. They couldn't bear the loss of self-worth.

Now to how the left sees themselves. They seem to have this romantic idea that they are revolutionaries moving the world on to bigger and better things. I have seen sitcoms and even straight movies where parents tell their kids about the glorious night (and I mean 1 night) that they spent in jail standing against oppression (the government.) They also weave in the thought of how they were respected by the rest of society for taking such a moral stand.

Even songs go along that line. The Abba song "Fernando" is an example. It too is about 1 romantic and glorious night years before when the singer and Fernando stood for liberty with the stars shining bright etc. etc. I love the song but the premise is junk. To me, it's just another liberal left recruiting song about the glory of revolution.

Well they can't do that spin-doctoring if there is evidence that daddy (or mommy) got pelted with rotten tomatoes, feces, and other disgusting material. The image gets even worse if the kids find out that a whole town turned out to do the honours, showing that most people viewed what mommy or daddy did with contempt. Similarly, Abba wouldn't be writing a song about Fernando if they had to tell you about him being put in stocks and pummeled with offal. It just isn't as romantic I suppose.

I think we forget that many if not most of the leftists today are parents who will be more than willing to proselytize their kids to their politics. That obviously will involve spin-doctoring and lying to their progeny. Society can nip this off in the bud if the 'romantic' component of revolution and treason is replaced with the reality of humiliation and public opprobrium. The kids are more likely to think that mom and dad were jerks.

So, the left can't allow humiliation to be used as a punitive measure in the administration of justice because such an administration would expose them for what they are, moral and ethical miscreants worthy of contempt by the public at large.

Ooops. I forgot to mention that I like your suggested name for the judicial sanctions I suggested. The Riddikulus Charm seems to work 'just right' on so many levels.

Even so, I think J.K. Rawlings would spank both our bottoms if the sanctions were so named.

I did find an alternate phrasing for your christening sentence. You would have been equally correct to have phrased it: "Let's see what effect the Riddikulus! charm has on these Mohammedan buggers." Hmmm better stop this before she does give me a spanking.

Pennsylvania: Two Muslim inmates, one a rapist, sue prison system over strip searches

He's a rapist, sure, but he's a modest rapist.
......................................

Besides, this is bullsh*t. Strip searches are not intended to humiliate prisoners—they are intended to ascertain that inmates are not secreting contraband or *weapons* on their persons. If prison authorities were to suspend strip searches, they would be putting themselves *and the other inmates* in danger.

More:

The Philadelphia-area men, 58-year-old Pearlie Dubose Jr. and 57-year-old Elwood Small say in their federal lawsuit filed in Johnstown that Islamic law "prohibits a man from exposing his genitals to anyone but his spouse."...
......................................

That this was said *by a rapist* couldn't be more ironic. Apparently "exposing his genitals" *to his victim* was just fine...

Mamode Rawat wrote:

Funny how the fact that they reverted in prison and were not Muslim when they committed their evil crimes is conveniently not mentioned. Don't get me wrong, I know people of all types commit the worst of crimes but I only mention this because Robert subtly links their crimes to their religion and insinuates that they rape and murdered because they are Muslims.
......................................

Well, he's right—Robert Spencer *doesn't* mention this. But then, this *is not* something he omitted that was reported in the AP article. In fact, I did a Google search, and could find no evidence that these vicious creeps are prison "reverts".

Interesting that Mamode Rawat would *assume* that this pair are prison converts. Certainly, it is common for criminals to convert to Islam—one can see the attraction for violent criminals, after all, since Islam sanctions and even *sacralizes* so much violence—but it is also common for Muslims to commit violent crimes in general, so we really have no specific information here one way or another.

More:

If Islam allows Muslims to rape non-Muslim women then why is it that two men that raped a white American in Saudi were executed?
......................................

I couldn't find any information on an internet search of this case, either. Mr. Rawat, links, please.

More, replying to Kinana of Khaybar:

Remember over 100m so lets give a conservative estimate of 350m Muslim women that believe in Islam and to various degrees practice it.
......................................

For someone who claims to have received a university education in Britain, Mamode Rawat's grammar is very poor—i.e., using "your" for "you're" and such matters. Still, everyone makes mistakes, especially in a casual forum such as this—I am certainly no exception.

Still, regarding "350m" to be a percentage of "100m" seems particularly egregious. I suppose they are no longer teaching maths at British university...