This week’s counterjihad chatfest, The Glazov Gang, features our hero, Jamie Glazov, in an intense and illuminating confab with Gavin Boby of the UK’s Law and Freedom Foundation. Boby continues to recount his battle against Muslim rape gangs in Britain (to see Part I, click here). In this riveting episode, Boby discusses his report on this horrifying phenomenon, “Easy Meat,” and takes horrified viewers inside the world of Muslim rape gangs.
As if that weren’t enough, the second video features Daniel Mael, a courageous and stout-hearted junior in the gloom and darkness of Brandeis University. He is also a reporter at TruthRevolt.org. He discusses Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Brandeis and double standards, and calls out the Leftist Gestapo on his campus.
Peter Buckley says
Here is the document:
http://lawandfreedomfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Easy-Meat-Multiculturalism-Islam-and-Child-Sex-Slavery-05-03-2014.pdf
Why not facebook/Twitter ? Islam is dying………..of shame.
Meanwhile, here’s some incredible news from China:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/10776023/China-on-course-to-become-worlds-most-Christian-nation-within-15-years.html
And South Korea:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8322072.stm
Incredible, eh? For years, all and sundry have been saying Islam is the world’s “fastest growing religion”. Now they know the truth……
Angemon says
“For years, all and sundry have been saying Islam is the world’s “fastest growing religion”.”
http://xkcd.com/1102/
Jay Boo says
TRUE MUSLIMS
The left would cower and say the evidence is hard to follow and understand.
Investigation of court system (not media) reveals 91 % of the perpetrators are Muslim.
I will not offend the left by calling this criminal political ideology a criminal political ideology.
Jay Boo says
on the 2nd video (Brandeis University)
If Ayaan Hirsi Ali is allowed to speak and the honorary degree reinstated we might expect the left & CAIR to petition President Obama to issue a very critical sound bite.
RonaldB says
Daniel Mael is undoubtedly a courageous person and independent thinker. However, I can’t help thinking there is an intellectual inconsistency which has to be dealt with. It’s not only him, but it is a general dilemma.
He criticized Brandeis for acting on a judgement of Hirsi Ali’s work, saying that the university should encourage free speech of all kind, agree or disagree. In the same program, he condemns Harvard students for having their picture taken by the grave of Yassir Arafat, surely one of the more reprehensible individuals of the twentieth century.
Would Mael have defended the prerogative of Brandeis to present an honorary degree to one of Arafat’s defenders, as he spoke on the oppression and injustice of the Jewish state of Israel? I say this to illustrate that it is unrealistic to claim that a university must make no judgement at all on the contents of the ideas presented under its auspices.
I think a lot of the anger was generated when Brandeis first invited, then disinvited Hirsi Ali. It was correctly viewed as having displayed cowardice and spinelessness by allowing its actions to be dictated by protests and publicity, rather than by logic or principles. Brandeis would have been far better off to have said at the beginning, we don’t agree with Ali’s principles or advocacy, and we don’t want to provide a platform for her.
At least that would have displayed some backbone, and their position could be criticized and debated. But, the principle they would have taught was “take a stand and stick by it.” I’d far rather they did that, than to even display another show of cowardice by now giving into the pressures to reinvite Hirsi Ali.
Students need to learn integrity and courage, even more than they need to learn the “correct” position. By the way, Mael has displayed far more than his share of both. He puts his position out in public, subject to criticism and examination, rather than hiding behind a wall of smoke and backroom politics.
Rob Crawford says
Difference — Ali is defending liberty; Arafats evil spawn want tyranny. If Brandeis cannot tell the difference, it is no longer a place of learning, but a cesspit of ignorance.
mortimer says
Gavin Boby understands the RAGE-FILLED SADISM of SUPREMACISTS!
Mohammed’s abuse of women targeted disbelievers to humiliate, to degrade, to demoralize and exterminate them. Mohammed’s favorite sex slave was a Christian slave.
In Islam, rape is GOOD…just don’t do it to a Muslim. All Muslim men understand this.
Bettina says
Hullo, Mortimer 🙂
With respect, your statement: “In Islam, rape is GOOD…just don’t do it to a Muslim. All Muslim men understand this” overlooks the MASSES of Muslimahs raped by their husbands because surely that doesn’t count, or those legally force-fed to their rapists in marriage, or those who cannot file rape charges against male relatives or strangers because they, themselves, would be imprisoned on promiscuity charges — in culturally sadistic catch-22 fashion. So how many millions of raped Muslimahs, out of 1.4 billion muzzies, are you ignoring?
Islam is the most evil thing to plague humankind, but never more so than in its sadistic treatment of its own women. Only now is the West paying attention, now that the muzzies are targeting our own female populations.
Charli Main says
@ Bettina
” Islam is the most evil thing to plague human kind, BUT NEVER MORE SO THAN IN ITS TREATMENT OF ITS OWN WOMEN”
Yes, Bettina— not even DEAD MUSLIM WOMEN ARE SAFE from Muslim men. I wonder how many JW posters know that in Islam it is perfectly legal to rape a dead woman?????
” Muslim scholars unanimously agree that sexual intercourse with a dead woman is permitted, based on the example of the prophet Mohammed.
In Islam it is known as ” farewell intercourse”
There is NO punishment for having intercourse with a dead woman or animal
AL Khalib Al Sherbini. 2/521 and numerous other Muslim Jurists, far to many to quote here.
Islam is wall to wall evil filth and corruption. How can any sane person subscribe to its doctrine.????
PS you haven´t posted for a while. welcome back
Bettina says
Thank you, Charli, for your heartfelt corroboration of my perspective — you’re the only one who’s followed-up on it.
And thanks for welcoming me back! Life matters took precedence for awhile…
I did however hold CNN’s feet to the fire in my outrage over its absolute silence on the boko haram Easter massacre in Nigeria!!! I posted here 2 links to CNN’s email, but no takers it seems… A little bit disappointed.
gravenimage says
Is is good to see you posting again, Bettina. Hope you are well.
And you are quite right about Islam and rape—the “Prophet” himself raped a dead woman, and it is considered *laudable* by pious Muslims.
Here’s the Hadith:
Narrated by Ibn Abbas:
“I (Muhammad) put on her my shirt that she may wear the clothes of heaven, and I slept with her in her coffin (grave) that I may lessen the pressure of the grave. She was the best of Allah’s creatures to me after Abu Talib [Fatima, the mother of Ali]”
The translation of “slept with” here is almost always that used to indicate ‘had sex with’.
Some Muslims claim this is a weak Hadith—but it is not the only reference.
Imams regularly argue about how long a woman can be dead and her husband still have sex with her—most of the decisions seem to be around six hours. That was the law proposed under the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
Moroccan cleric Zamzami Abdul Bari said marriage “remains valid even after death”—meaning that Muslim men can still demand sex from their dead wives.
joeb says
In Boby’s speech in Australia recently, he said his organisation, this year, is going to start opposing the planning applications for every single new mosque in England. Incredible. And when they have their feet under the table with respect to that, they will go after the mosques which operate unlawfully ie without planning permission. This will have the net effect of not just stopping the increase, but actually decreasing the number of mosques should they be successful to even a reasonable degree.
Glazov describes him as a modern day freedom fighter, which he truly is.
joeb says
http://vladtepesblog.com/2014/04/18/gavin-boby-in-australia-sticky-post/
Forgot Boby’s Aussie speech link
Jay Boo says
North Carolina has anti-Sharia laws
Does anyone know if (New Jersey) does as well?
New Jersey school sued over ‘under God’ in pledge
http://news.msn.com/us/new-jersey-school-sued-over-under-god-in-pledge
Jay Boo says
Note: Massachusetts sued also for Pledge of Allegiance
RodSerling says
Daniel Mael posts what appears to be the leaked faculty petition, with signatories.
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/revealed-brandeis-faculty-letter-pressured-president-drop-hirsi-ali
I recognized the names of a few individuals who were probably clueless as to what they were signing. I was disappointed however to see that Jytte Klausen had signed it. Disgraceful. Read about Jytte Klausen here:
http://www.brandeis.edu/facultyguide/person.html?emplid=8cfea83c0a70191751f1d16c96473b7b795d7e0a
http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=9780300124729
The cartoons that shook the world book is sans cartoons.
RodSerling says
In the faculty petition, the writer(s) claim to agree with Hirsi Ali in her work in opposing “forced marriages” and “female genital cutting” and “honor killings”. They add that “[t]hese phenomena are not, however, exclusive to Islam.”
1. Hirsi Ali didn’t claim that those phenomena are “exclusive” to Islam. She focuses more on Islam because that is her area of knowledge and expertise, and these phenomena are overall much more prevalent among Muslims than among other groups. In addition, Islam today “legitimizes” these practices more than other religions.
2. Not mentioned anywhere in the faculty petition are some of the practices and policies Hirsi Ali opposes that are either exclusive to, or much more prevalent in, Islam today. These include persecution of, violence against, and killing of (a) apostates of Islam, (b) critics of Islam, (c) homosexuals, (d) non-Muslim minorities such as Christians, Jews, atheists, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. Another practice that Hirsi Ali is known for opposing is marriage and sexual intercourse between adult males and an underaged girls, approved in Islam due to the Quran, Hadith, and Muhammad’s example. There is no mention of this abhorrent practice in the faculty letter. The letter contains no support for ex-Muslims or any of these other persecuted groups; the author of the letter appears much more concerned about protecting the image of Islam. Indeed, there is no mention of the most obvious and immediate problem: Hirsi Ali is threatened with death for having left Islam and spoken about it publicly, and possibly tens of millions of others are kept silent and in fear due to Islam’s official and unofficial policy of killing apostates. Finally, Hirsi Ali is also outspoken in discussing the jihad threat. No word in the faculty letter about that.
The petition presents as “horrible,” warranting rescinding the honorary degree, the following examples:
No factual evidence is presented to counter Hirsi Ali’s claims. It is simply assumed that they are all egregiously false. In fact, there is plenty of evidence to support every one of Hirsi Ali’s claims in the above statement. (It would be redundant for me to present the evidence here, but as I listed above, Islam legitimates several kinds of murder).
Again, what part of these statements is not factually correct or justified by the evidence? And note: Hirsi Ali did not mean to suggest killing all Muslims or Muslim civilians or anything like that. She was talking about defeating an ideology using multiple means, including military means against the militants, and education and persuasion for others.
The final statement in the faculty petition letter is, besides containing irrelevancies, so absurd and obviously ideologically-motivated (to the point of unintended self-parody) that I will simply reproduce rather than refute it:
gravenimage says
Rod Serling wrote, quoting from the Brandies petition:
“We cannot accept Ms. Hirsi Ali’s triumphalist narrative of western civilization, rooted in a core belief of the cultural backwardness of non-western peoples.”
……………………………….
This is part of the problem, isn’t it? The “politically correct” would rather countenance the horrors of FGM, forced child marriage, and the stoning of rape victims, than admit that it is the hated West that opposes such crimes against humanity. Madness…
RodSerling says
Indeed, Graven.
The author(s) of the letter can’t even admit to the few objectionable items they cited, hiding behind euphemisms and broad ambiguous generalities. You say FGM, they say “female genital cutting.” You say “forced child marriage,” they say nothing about the practice often involving adult males marrying very young girls. You say stoning of rape victims, they say nothing about, stoning, or punishing of rape victims, or even rape itself.
I would estimate that most of the author(s) and the signatories are utterly evil and disgraceful. I know the mindset of many of these academics in those areas. Those of them who know about these problems but are covering up and enabling them in order to attack the West are obviously evil. The ones who were probably clueless about these issues, who signed without first doing due diligence and research on the subject matter–Hirsi Ali and her causes–have committed the recklessness/negligence kind of evil.
All of them, the authors and the signatories, should each be scrutinized in detail. I suspect, apart from a few who were truly ignorant and reckless, most on that list are Islamists, Islamist sympathizers, or various other kinds of radicals whose views would appear outlandish if exposed to the general public.
Alas, there is only so much time in the day. We have jobs, responsibilities, studies, etc.
RodSerling says
Some other practices unique, or relatively distinctive, to Islam, which Hirsi Ali opposes and which were not acknowledged in the letter signed by these Brandeis faculty:
–Harsh sharia punishments for adultery (including stoning) and premarital sex (lashes, imprisonment, etc.). Today, Islam is unique in officially implementing these punishments or maintaining the real threat of punishing people for them in many countries. Muslims are also distinctive in that much larger percentages of them, compared to people of the other major religions, approve of these punishments, as has been shown for example in polls by Pew. This is sharia, but there is no mention of sharia in the letter.
-Islam having the absurd standards-of-evidence requirement of four male witnesses to sexual crimes, whilst also allowing pregnancy and confession as evidence, leads to the situation where females who report rapes or who are impregnated as a result of having been raped are deemed guilty of zina if they cannot produce four witnesses. Hence, in some Islamic countries, such as Pakistan, the jails are loaded with women who’ve reported rapes and who are unable to produce four male witnesses. This “four witnesses” nonsense is also unique to Islam.
-Islam legally permits a husband to beat his wife, and this is widely accepted among Muslims according to polls.
-Islam legally permits a husband to rape his wife (see Afghanistan, for starters–wouldn’t want to impose our modern Western laws on them, now would we?).
-Islam legally permits a Muslim man to marry up to four wives simultaneously. Islam is not unique in this, but is distinctive in having a much higher percentage of practitioners and supporters of it
-Islam legally permits a Muslim man, whether married or not, to have an unlimited number of sexual slaves and concubines (the Quran calls them “right hand possessions”), whom he can also rape.
-Islam requires females of child-bearing age (which according to Islam begins at puberty) to cover up, conform to a dress code. Of the Muslim women in France who wear the niqab, for example, the majority say they were forced by husbands or Islamists to wear it.
-Islam permits , encourages, and justifies the rape of non-Muslim women and girls by Muslim males, as well as the blaming of the victims (i.e., for not conforming to Islamic dress and behavior codes for females).
-Islam permits, encourages, and justifies the use of rape as a punishment and as a method in warfare (e.g., for precedents in the Islamic texts see Muhammad’s conduct and his instructions to his jihadists in battles; and for Muslim implementations today see, e.g., past couple of decades at least in Sudan; also see Muslim rape gangs who rape non-Muslim girls in the U.K. and other parts of Europe; rape of children by jihadists at Beslan; and so on).
-Islam permits slavery, which is still practiced in some Islamic countries, and even sometimes by individual Muslims living in the West
-Islam permits human trafficking, including for the purpose of sexual slavery
-Islam permits adults to beat children who don’t go to prayers or who don’t pray or recite the Qur’an correctly.
How did the letter author(s) manage to avoid all of these things that Hirsi Ali opposes, which are aspects of Islam practiced by many Muslims today? Easy: They just made a vague breezy statement referring to a few practices that sometimes occur associated with non-Muslim religions and cultures, for the purpose of absolving Islam and to defend the image of Islam.
Clare says
If #
45. Joseph Lumbard, NEJS, IMES, HOID, PRS
is representative of signatores, they surely must be a motley lot. And if not Mulsim, inconsistant.
Bettina says
To All Wonderful Watchers:
From here on in, I shall never again take the trouble to capitalize ANY words relating to muzzies — their cursed death cult of islam, their leaders of any stripe, their psycho idol, their murdering-rapist gangs, and any other muzzie-relevant items that cross my path.
And here’s to you, stink-filled trolls, in your vain attempts to trick, manipulate and lie to our Watchers. You’re only one click away from being banned on our anti-islam activist website.
judi says
Totally off subject, I love Jamie Glazov’s outfit. Really sharp!
Bettina says
There is no part of this conversation to which your comment is relevant. This is a good place to learn things — something deeper than clothing choices.
Judi says
Lighten up Bettina – I was only making a comment! I read this website for the same reasons you do.
Bettina says
Sorry, Judi — That disgusting islam and its blind-sheep followers have me losing touch with lots of things…
Clare says
No kidding…he looked very cool.
jamie glazov says
Thanks Clare! 🙂
jamie glazov says
Thank you judi 🙂
Nick M says
The only acceptable photo to take next to a grave of a mass murderer or a terrorist is one with the person being photographed at the minimum giving a thumbs down though giving the middle finger to the grave’s occupant is more preferable. Urinating on the grave is a crown achievement though one should never risk one’s own life over such a wonderful photo opportunity.
Remember that you can always refuse to take a group photo by making an excuse that you are for example very car sick and will vomit any second, and don’t want to disrespect the monument of such a great person by vomiting all over it and thus bring eternal shame to the professor who was king enough to bring you there.