Mark Steyn delivers withering assault against pro mass immigration liberals who openly mocked the young victims of gang rape by Muslim migrants in Europe.
I am ashamed to admit I didn’t grasp the importance of the Munk Debate held last week in Toronto. But now I do, and I feel it is my duty to share this particular exchange so as to try to win some hearts and minds over to the side of sanity, prudence and security when it comes to the question of mass Muslim refugee resettlement and immigration to Europe and North America.
Held in Toronto’s Roy Thompson Hall on Friday, April 1, the Munk Debate put forward the following motion concerning refugee policy: “Be it resolved: Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” Arguing the pro side: Louise Arbour, former UN Human Rights commissioner, and historian Simon Schama. Opposed to the motion: journalist Mark Steyn and Britain’s UKIP party leader Nigel Farage.
The Munk tradition is to poll the audience before and again after the debate. The first poll was 77% in favor of the motion, 23% opposed. After the debate, the pro side dropped to 55% and the con leapt up to 45%, a huge, 22% shift, revealing how a dynamic elaboration of the facts of the case can persuade people of the dangers of welcoming mass numbers from an alien culture into Western societies.
Barbara Kay writing at the National Post described what she considered to be the point at which the opinion of the room began to shift towards the “con” position:
To some audience members… Steyn dwelt excessively on the sexual crimes we’ve all read about in Cologne, Hamburg, Malmö and elsewhere. So it apparently seemed to Arbour and Schama, because they mocked Steyn for it in their rebuttals. Arbour sneered at both Steyn and Farage as “newborn feminists” (she got a laugh), while Schama disgraced himself with “I’m just struck by how obsessed with sex these two guys are, actually. It’s a bit sad, really.” (That got a very big laugh.) I took one look at Steyn’s glowering face after that remark — Schama will regret having said it to his dying day, I know it — and I kind of felt sorry for those two liberals, because I knew what was coming.
Steyn slowly rose and riposted, in a tone of withering contempt, “I wasn’t going to do funny stuff. I was going to be deadly serious. (But) I’m slightly amazed at Simon’s ability to get big laughs on gang rape.” Vigorous applause. He went on, “Mme Arbour scoffs at the ‘newfound feminists.’ I’m not much of a feminist, but I draw the line at a three year old … and a seven year old getting raped.” Vigorous applause.
I think that was the moment those of the audience who did change their minds got it…
Watch the video below (or here) to get the full impact of Steyn’s response. The expressions of the audience behind him reveal their shock at his thundering recitation of mass rapes of innocent European children by Muslim migrant savages in public parks, swimming pools, and even in a city hall.
Virginia Hale at Breitbart News presents a fine synopsis of the evening, highlighting this archetypal example of the blindness of the EU’s immigration policy, cited by Steyn:
Revealing the horrifying realities on the ground in Europe, as a result of the presence of more than a million refugees, Steyn described how “a fortnight after acing a training course on treating women with respect” a 15 year old Afghan dragged a Belgian caterer at a refugee centre down to the basement and raped her.
The dark irony, duly noted by Steyn, is that Mme Arbour was “the first prosecutor to charge rape as a crime against humanity and the author of several reports on rape as a ‘weapon of war’.” As Mark Steyn puts it in the exchange below, citing Arbour’s influence in the Sudan genocide, “rape is not about sex, but about power.”
In other words, according to Mme Arbour’s own definitions, when Muslims rape European women and children — in public places in their home towns — it needs to be seen as an act of war, and indeed a war crime, and should be dealt with as such.
Hale also reports on Nigel Farage’s powerful argumentation concerning the existential threat posed to European civilization:
“There is no one on this side of the argument saying that all Muslims are bad” but that their arrival in such large numbers has resulted in the “once-sleepy city of Malmo” now being the “rape capital of Europe.”
Responding to Simon Schama’s assumption that, because previous waves of migrants had assimilated, this wave would be no different Farage echoed his shocking claims last year of some Muslim migrants posing a threat to the security of European nations, differentiating the current refugee crisis from “any other migratory or refugee wave in the history of mankind” in that “never before have we had a fifth column living in our communities that hates us, wants to kill us and wants to overturn our complete way of life.”
Tragically, most people don’t know what is happening, but as the Munk debate proved, when we have the opportunity to present the truth, we have a very strong likelihood of winning people over to the side of reason and righteousness and the defense of Western civilization. The debate win by Steyn and Farage swayed the audience from almost 80% in favor of mass Muslim immigration to a nearly even split with the opposed.
Barbara Kay concludes:
The pro side was happy to talk about “your tired, your poor, your huddled masses,” because they’re abstract images, which liberals like… They’re feel-good words but that shouldn’t make the poet who wrote them in 1883 the author of global refugee legislation in 2016.
A civilized culture, which takes centuries of painstaking collaborative work to create, can be easily destroyed, and quickly. This is a reality conservatives understand, but liberals, consumed by guilt for past collective sins, and morally disarmed before the Other, choose to ignore. The Munk debate illuminated this important distinction, and for a change, realism won.
Mark Steyn closes his rebuttal by asserting that the diabolical epidemic of Muslim migrants mass raping European children in public places cuts to “the heart of the question.” Indeed it does, for the 21st century West is finally being confronted with precisely why conquered Christians in the 7th century considered the invading Muslims a chastisement for their sins, Islam to be religion non grata and Muhammad the forerunner of the antichrist.
Video of the pivotal exchange below. Watch Mark Steyn’s closing statement here. Watch the full debate here. Share widely.
Don McKellar says
Devastating.
But the hopelessly delusional head-up-their-ass leftists will need a THOUSAND such devastating debates pounded into them before they realize how incredibly naive and asinine they have been with regards to the horrific, ugly truth of Islam.
Miro says
Leftist apparently means retarded.
Huck Folder says
ergo: LEFTARD
rappini says
Good luck trying to change how a liberal thinks. If liberals didn’t have their stupid ideology, there wouldn’t be liberals because that’s all they have.
Shane says
I am afraid that most liberals are so brainwashed into believing that Islam is no worse than any other religion that it will take many more jihad attacks and rapes before they learn the lesson. It is shameful that these liberal twit debaters would make jokes out of women and children being raped by Muslim savages.
Fessitude says
“I am afraid that most liberals are so brainwashed into believing that Islam is no worse than any other religion”
They don’t think that. They think Islam is better than Christianity and Judaism. Leftists are not relativists, they are absolutists — they believe the white West is inferior to all non-white non-Western cultures, and par excellence, the best of all is Islam.
P.S.: I almost thought twice about typing the word “white” in my comment above; since no doubt most readers would misunderstand me as arguing for some kind of white power racism, rather than – as I was – noting the relevance & influence of reverse racism among the Politically Correct Multi-Culturalists. For it is they who make white and non-white relevant factors in adjudicating who is better and who is worse on the relative scales of sociopolitical and historical justice (e.g., only the white West is guilty of slavery and genocide, etc.).
Then I said screw that. The very fact that the West is anxiously worried about being misunderstood as “racist” whenever it brings up the relevant concept of white, is one of the reasons why the PC MC paradigm, incoherent as it is, remains so formidable as a mass cultural and psychological worldview. And as long as that paradigm & worldview remain dominant in the West, the West is doomed to be destroyed by Mohammedans by the end of the 21st century. So why should I help reinforce its memes? We all need to start undermining its memes at every turn, in every way, in this war of ideas we are in.
They don’t think that
Angemon says
There’s no such thing as “reverse racism”. There’s only racism.
Fessitude says
Scratch that last phrase in my comment above…
Myrtle says
They cannot seem to realize that to make fun of those who have been raped puts them in the same category as the rapist.
gravenimage says
rappini, I don’t think Mark Steyn was trying to change the minds of these witless leftists–instead, he was pointing out their appalling moral lapses for the benefit of the audience. Given the results of the before-and-after polls, I’d say he did a great job on these points.
Bishop Guy-Julian says
so true!
Rob Porter says
Don McKellar, I’ve watched this debate and mostly liked what Mark Steyn and Nigel Farage said during it – and that they won the debate. In fact I admire both of these men, but one thing disappointed me – and maybe they played a bit of game over this so as not to alienate the pansy Canadian audience – and this was both men saying: ‘I’m not saying that Islam is a bad religion’. Of course Islam is not just a bad religion, it’s a mindlessly evil and satanic bit of dung-bag filth ideology. In this regard I kept wish that both Mark and Nigel Farage had the knowledge of Islam and that Qur’an that Robert Spencer has.
Slevdi says
They are highly visible to the world so it would be very dangerous for them to say it like you do.
Thomas Hennigan says
They and many others could do with a crash course on Islam, using the excellent material produced by Bill Warner. Then there are Robert Spencer’s books. These days any responsible person should feel obliged to do such a study.In the 1930s, there was a great majority of clueless lefties and others regarding Nazism and Stalin. Once reality hit, it didn’t take very long for most people to wake up. It is already happening as people are fed up of Obama, Merkel, Cameron, Hollande & Co.
gravenimage says
Thomas Hennigan wrote:
They and many others could do with a crash course on Islam
……………………….
Actually, Thomas, Mark Steyn has written quite widely on the Jihad threat. His best books on the subject are “America Alone” and the post-Obama up-date, “After America”.
He also has a fine site, which along with a host of other topics covers Jihad:
http://www.steynonline.com/
He is not the scholar of Islam Robert Spencer is, but he is a staunch Anti-Jihadist nonetheless.
Fessitude says
…both men [including Mark Steyn!]saying: ‘I’m not saying that Islam is a bad religion’.
Really!!!??? I haven’t watched the full video. If you’re correct, that is deeply disappointing – but, alas, not surprising. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen what I thought were stalwart counter-jihadists suddenly blurt out PC MC hiccups & burps like that (what I call “asymptotic tics”). If no one in the counter-jihad ever tells them to knock that nonsense off, they likely never will. And such nonsense may well have the cumulative effect of retarding our progress in waking up the West to defending itstelf against destruction at the hands of Muslims (and at our own hands, in this very way)
Gungadin says
I would like to suggest that one of these libs would get to know a rape victim….I’m a 78 year old guy whose known two women BEFORE they were raped…..their emotional change from outgoing gregarious women that were filled with life to two gals who were SHELLS of their former selves after suffering through their attacks. One woman was blinded in one eye….the other is still trying to recover from all her wounds both physical AND emotional. Prison incarceration of rapists is too NICE of a sentence to satisfy societies needs for justice……I submit rapists should be taken out and shot just like the rabid dogs that they are !!
DD says
Even worse when it happens to children. That the two people in the debate were able to joke about children being raped shows how evil their own hearts are.
Shmooviyet says
Thank you for your comment. All adult rape survivors could attest to the effects you witnessed. There will always be the “what did you do to provoke him?” attitude from some, which just piles on to any already-present shame, guilt or self-blame.
The terror and confusion for a child victim causes lifelong ‘warps’ on a developing personality.
I applaud Mark Steyn for his righteous fury in citing just a few examples; obviously the leftist eye-rollers would have preferred those messy details be left out of the discussion.
TH says
Jihadis should be transported to some remote island in the Pacific and spend he rest of their days laboring there to cultivate food to feed themselves. The U.S. France and the UK have plenty of such islands. They could be put to good use this way. I mean uninhabited islands, as I wouldn’t want to impose these monsters on the natives.
gravenimage says
I’m a survivor of child rape–that we are now letting in hordes of “refugees” *known* for rape and child rape horrifies me.
Kudos to Mark Steyn and the others who take a hard stance against this insanity.
linnte says
I was shouting YES YES(fist in air) when Mark was berating those Liberals. And my chin DROPPED when he brought up the stand that woman had previously made about rape. At that very moment she became an enemy of rape victims. I am right there with ya Graven! Rape is a life long nightmare. Bless you!
gravenimage says
Thank you, linnte. I don’t want anyone else to go through this.
Christianblood says
A genuine piece of Righteous indignation from Mark Steyn.
Unfortunately, the few remaining people who are able to express their righteous indignation like Mark Steyn did in the video above are immediately labeled as “fascists” in the ailing West today.
Western Canadian says
“Christianblood says
April 7, 2016 at 6:37 pm
A genuine piece of Righteous indignation from Mark Steyn.
Unfortunately, the few remaining people who are able to express their righteous indignation like Mark Steyn did in the video above are immediately labeled as “fascists” in the ailing West today.”
And yet again, the brain dead product of the soviet educational system, spews forth his ignorant hate filled drivel!! The ‘few’ remaining people are growing in numbers, and pushing back… You can’t understand that, obviously, since when you were under the fascist boot of the soviet union, far from pushing back and fighting for freedom, you rolled over and bared your bottom for your masters.
Having been and still being that much of a failed human being, it is obvious why you hate the west so much!! You MUST loath those who are you superiors, those who DO fight back!
Jay Boo says
Rape Gang Culture
Muslim males sexualize women.
They refuse to make any contact because in their minds interaction can never be platonic as in the case of the exaggerated modesty public face Muslim males show when many infidel witnesses know their name and who to blame.
Such as:
Switzerland — Muslim refuses to shake hands with teacher.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjiC4E-UrMs
————————–
Of course, when Muslim males feel anonymous the situation is 180 degrees opposite and their repressed obsession with women as sex objects comes out like a beast.
Carolyne says
I don’t think there is any other organized group which has as its core value this constant preoccupation with sex and forcing sex on unwilling partners. Mohammed (Poop be upon him) must have been seriously mentally ill to be so cruel and a murderer to boot, among many other foul things.
Mae says
Liken Mohammed to Ernesto “Che” Guevara. They were both psychopaths and both are “prophets” to the International and Domestic Left. The leftie propaganda surrounding these two men makes one gag.
mortimer says
Carolyne wrote: no “other organized group … has as its core value this constant preoccupation with sex and forcing sex on unwilling partners”
Mohammed was preoccupied with the issue of Dominance/Submission. All relationships in Islam are based with that dualism.
Sex in Islam is all about Dominance/Submission…including the helpless of child marriages, cousin marriages, arranged marriages, sex with slaves, sex with houris in paradise (they are basically slaves) and even with necrophilia, which Mohammed practiced, thus hallowing it in the minds of Muslims.
Rape is indeed a form of Islamic warfare against the dirty kufaar who are considered ‘MUBAA’ or ‘licit’. We might say: the kufaar are ‘fair game’…’fair game’ to lie to kufaar, ‘fair game’ to hunt and enslave kufaar, ‘fair game’ to rob and plunder kufaar, ‘fair game’ to rape the kufaar. They have it coming to them because they do not admit that Mohammed is a prophet.
Mohammed is the prophet of enslavement.
Christianblood says
mortimer
I am surprised that you didn’t call Mark steyn a “fascist” after his strong criticism of the Western elites in the video above.
Western Canadian says
Noncb, even for you, that comment is utterly stupid. Which is really saying a lot!!
TH says
The fact is that immigration is another form of jihad. The Islamic calendar begins with the hegira of Mahommad from Mecca to Medina for a very good reason.
Champ says
As Mark Steyn puts it in the exchange below, citing Arbour’s influence in the Sudan genocide, “rape is not about sex, but about power.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Not buying that one. Of course rape is about sex, as well as power, too. To say that “rape is not about sex” is beyond absurd and that statement doesn’t even make sense.
Sandra Lee Smith says
No,sir, it’s about power, control, and humiliation of the victim; sex in a rape is merely a WEAPON! As a survivor, I have experience you apparently do not. Rape, is,in fact, much more akin to murder than anything else.
maghan says
There was case recently in Germany when a Muslim refugee saw a young boy of 10 in a swimming pool and just caught the boy and raped him. The boy needed surgical intervention.
When questioned about his act, the Muslim refugee said that “it was an emergency. He hadn’t had sex in some months so he couldn’t control his sexual urges”. Surely, rape does involve the gratification of sexual desires?
gravenimage says
I don’t think it’s really about impulse control–it’s about another kind of control–that of controlling their victims though violence and humiliation.
gungadin says
Sandra….my sincere compliments for coming forward with your posting…..As I said in my earlier positing I have known two women who were raped. One woman described in detail what she endured from TWO men acting in concert to beat, rape, torture and humiliate her and her infant daughter.
The details of the rape had me CRYING for her; I was so moved by her pain….
Rape IS all about POWER and Humiliation of the victim….And if it were in my power, I would take a convicted rapist and put a bullet into his head. He deserves NOTHING LESS.
Champ says
Rape IS all about POWER and Humiliation of the victim
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes, rape is about *all* of those things, but it’s also about sexual gratification, since the rapist generally achieves an orgasm.
Carolyne says
since you have been a victim or rape, I hesitate to disagree with you, So, since the rapist certainly gets sexual gratification from the act, how does it relate only to power? I am sorry to have to say this, but you are perhaps an expert on the particular rape which happened to you, but not all rapes, especially those by sex-starved and degenerate Muslims.
Gungadin says
Carolyn: I was not the VICTIM of a rape….I just knew two ladies that were victims of rapists…..both of them I knew BEFORE and after they were raped. The transformation of their personalities was dramatic to put it kindly.
What troubles me is the political correctness in this world of ours and as an extension of that the “permissiveness” of all matter of things that might have been looked at in the past as “just men being men”…..A good man treasures a woman he does NOT brutalize her…
Champ says
Carolyne wrote:
So, since the rapist certainly gets sexual gratification from the act, how does it relate only to power?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is the point that I was trying to make, as well. Of course it’s about sexual gratification–for the guy, but certainly NOT the woman. There’s no getting around this fact since this *is* a “sex” act.
Fessitude says
Yes, it’s Both, not a matter of Either/Or. The likely psychological motivation of those who stubbornly insist that “rape has nothing to do with sex” is that they are so anxiously concerned to withhold anything remotely resembling normal and undepraved to the rapist, it moves them into this extreme analytical position. If they only could see that to accord the rapist both motives (both motives fused into a diseased combination), this in no way softens our revulsion & condemnation of him and of his act
The better, and more accurate, way of putting the horrific crime of rape is that the rapist gets a twisted sense of sexual gratification from humiliating, overpowering, violating and terrorizing the victim.
Champ says
Sandra, I am not a “sir”, but I am a woman.
Yes, rape is about power, but it’s **also** about sexual gratification for the guy–certainly NOT the woman. And, yes, these men are using their penis as a weapon, so I completely agree with you there. But to say that rape isn’t about sex is absolutely ridiculous. We will just have to agree to disagree. Take care.
gravenimage says
Like Sandra, I was also the victim of rape.
Personally, I think it’s about both power *and* sex–but only the worst, most twisted and perverse kind of sex–lightyears different from sex as a healthy expression of love and romance.
Ultimately, it may not matter exactly how we categorize it–as long as we all agree, as we do, that it is utterly contemptible.
Belmonto says
They get their sexual gratification from the power they have over the victim???
Mirren10 says
Champ says:
”Not buying that one. Of course rape is about sex, as well as power, too. To say that “rape is not about sex” is beyond absurd and that statement doesn’t even make sense.”
I agree, Champ. There is absolutely no reason it cannot be about *both*, and I agree with you that it generally is.
I don’t understand the rationale underlining the insistence that it is *only* about power. Certainly the Rotherham rapists, and the mass rapes in Sweden, et al, were about power (it’s what the filthy kuffar deserve, we are superior muslims), but also, unquestionably, sexual *gratification*.
Carolyne says:
”So, since the rapist certainly gets sexual gratification from the act, how does it relate only to power?”
Exactly.
Sandra Lee Smith says:
”No,sir, it’s about power, control, and humiliation of the victim; sex in a rape is merely a WEAPON! ”
Dear Sandra, no-one here is trying to belittle the fact that rape is a heinous crime, and I totally agree with you it merits the death penalty – just that, as Carolyne points out, the rapist gets sexual gratification from the act. *As well* as power, control, and humiliation of the victim.
And may I say how much I admire your courage in stating the horror that happened to you. Bless you.
Champ says
Mirren10 wrote:
And may I say how much I admire your courage in stating the horror that happened to you. Bless you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes, Mirren10, and I second this sentiment, as well.
Take care, my friend 🙂
Salome says
Champ–whatever you think about the sex/power question, Mr Steyn was just using the feminist of a certain generation’s logic against her. In context, it made perfect sense and was a winning point.
Westman says
Mark Steyn eloquently described how the political class’ gilded isolation makes them unfit to make dislocating changes to society; essentially buffered from the havoc they create. The correctional feedback of elections usually comes too late to save society from a major mis-step of elite leadership.
The condescending attitude of elite liberals, with unproven notions, was palpable in this debate. What is it about holding national and international political offices that turns men into legends in their own minds, and the rest of us into minions within those same minds? Being educated in the best schools certainly doesn’t bring automatic wisdom with the learning.
Westman says
I should add that the political class’ gilded isolation makes them unfit to protect society because they will hold onto unproven notions, dissipating themselves in meaninless social parties and pursuits, until the citizens come knocking on the door. Cake is not the correct response to hunger, nor is cultural relativism the correct response to the destruction of liberty.
gungadin says
Westman…….excellent post !! And you are RIGHT their “gilded isolation” of the world around them surely DOES make them unfit to protect society…..when they hob-nob with others of their class, there is NO WAY they can relate to the average man or woman on the street who’s just trying to dodge the druggies, muggers and rapists that prey on the ill prepared….
It must be nice to live in a world where personal safety is assured by 24 hour round the clock armed protection…. Neither I or you –I assume — unfortunately will never know that level of security.
Carolyne says
They will take the path of least resistance so as to not upset their privileged way of life.
UNCLE VLADDI says
Louise Arbour also used to be a (liberal-appointed) Justice of Canada’s Supreme Court.
Now she openly supports muslim child-rape gangs in public.
There’s a lesson here for those RINOs now plotting to accept Obama’s nominee.
PS: Kathy Shaidle also recently covered this fiasco; see here:
http://unclevladdi.blogspot.ca/2016/04/famous-liberal-hypocrites-cheer-muslims.html
UNCLE VLADDI says
Like all criminals, leftists are defeatist masochists at heart, having no faith in being able to trust even them selves, and so in stead choosing to slander everyone else as being equally untrustworthy.
Like Muhammad, their defeatism leads to self-fulfilling prophecies, where they attack everyone else, first, then blame their victims for having “made” them attack. Their alibis to excuse their criminal choices are that there is no free will and there were no choices to be made; they pretend to be victims at the mercy of inevitable, “predetermined/predestined” force: victims of society/mere products of their environments, and of course slaves of “allah.”
Masochists pretend to “control” their fears (in stead of trying to learn to recognize and fix mistakes and solve problems by paying attention to their fears) BY causing the same, worst-case scenario, pain-causing problems they fear the most.
(Hence libertine “liberalism,” where they pretend that it’s noble to pretend that fear doesn’t exist, and so always want to “progress” to “freedom” from the fearful pain of self-restraint).
In this way, they hope to avoid the fear of pain, by pre-emptively inflicting that pain on themselves (thus cancelling the auxiliary pain caused by the fear)! See?
But while not ALL criminal negligence is masochism, all masochism IS criminal negligence.
And of course, such criminals are also always all about the subjective double-standards:
What they advocate for in public may be only an attempt to sway everyone ELSE to SUBMIT!
Being selfish, they embrace hypocritical double standards, wanting rights without responsibilities, to never be offended by having their feelings hurt by the painful truth of being accused of their crimes.
And others are expected to have only responsibilities to them – to embrace suicidal masochism as their highest virtue – “TO GO ALONG” (with their criminal lies) “TO GET ALONG” (with the lying criminals)!
“Be a sport! Gimme a pass! We’re all only victims, right?”
In that way alone, (by posing as a “victim”) the Devil pretends he doesn’t exist.
😉
UNCLE VLADDI says
Humans may well go extinct because of liberals.
Liberals (like all other sub-sets of “criminals”) are basically hypocrites and masochists, who always pretend to be able to “control” their fears BY causing those very same, worst-case scenario problems (like by inviting in hordes of savage barbarians they KNOW want to murder us all) which cause the very pains they fear the most. “If we don’t let the violent criminals have their way with us, then they’ll have their way with us anyway! And if we don’t rush in first, some other fools will surely beat us to it!” So far this criminal negligence seems to be working out for them, because it enables their other motto to have force: “There’s No Money In Solutions!”
The best way to control people (because criminals feel they need to pre-emptively control the reactions of their potential victims) is to convince them they can’t manage their own affairs, by seducing them with the devilish temptation that they are always really only helpless victims.
Victimology is also a great excuse for all your other crimes, because criminality requires free-will intent, and victims are always claiming to be helpless before all sorts of “inevitable” predestined force. They all claim to be victims of “society” (what
Marxists call ‘Historical Predeterminism’) and so mere products of their environments, while their equally criminal muslim brethren claim to be helpless yet proud slaves of allah.
Therefore, to criminals, the only real crime is to accuse a criminal (“victim”) of his crimes.
Rob says
Douglas Murray also saw the importance of the Toronto debate:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/04/no-simon-schama-people-worried-about-gang-rape-and-fgm-arent-obsessed-with-sex/
He skewers Schama beautifully and the time point Douglas suggests watching is well worth it.
Thanks Robert for weighing in too.
Matthieu Baudin says
“…Steyn … went on, ‘Mme Arbour scoffs at the “newfound feminists.” I’m not much of a feminist, but I draw the line at a three year old … and a seven year old getting raped.’ Vigorous applause…”
Steyn’s use of the ‘drawing the line’ notion was obviously effective in bringing many in the audience in touch with their conscience. We aught to make use of this notion time and again because it highlights the Achilles Heal of Postmodern attitudes. Today’s Postmodern liberals have lost touch with any base line or standards of human decency; they have lost themselves in a belief system that recognises no essential right or wrong, good or bad, universal human rights or even the sanctity of human life; all is levelled by an abstract notion of cultural relativism, where each cultural entity follows its own rules and values.
‘Drawing the line’ is a fine notion for bringing sanity, compassion and universal expectations for basic decency in behaviour, back into the arena. It is no exaggeration to say that Postmodern amoral logic, takes us so far down it’s path, that we come to accept any level of abuse, even the rape of our children.
Fessitude says
The problem with that metaphor is that it’s relative and subjective in the wider marketplace of ideas (a marketplace unfortunately dominated by PC MC). Steyn’s smug opponents here also have a line they draw — they refuse to “paint with a broad brush” all the decent Muslims who are not raping, not stabbing, not exploding. And on that principle they derive their smugness, feeling on the side of the angels of Liberal Progress against “bigotry” and “racism”.
As long as the Counter-Jihad doesn’t address the Problem of Muslims in General, and articulate an analytical argument defending the proposition that all Muslims are the problem — rather than constantly shirking this on the defensive and thereby playing by the rules of the PC MC Mainstream paradigm – this bickering will continue interminably; while Rome burns around us and the Mohammedans take over, decade upon decade.
Angemon says
Fessitude posted:
“As long as the Counter-Jihad doesn’t address the Problem of Muslims in General, and articulate an analytical argument defending the proposition that all Muslims are the problem — rather than constantly shirking this on the defensive and thereby playing by the rules of the PC MC Mainstream paradigm – this bickering will continue interminably”
Translation: “Shut up, close your eyes and blindly do as I tell you because I’m right and I don’t have to prove anything I say”. You know why people, left, right or centre, are squeamish about painting any group with a broad brush (see what I did there)? Because, as I’ve proved to you, generalizations don’t apply to all individuals. And as long as you keep insisting that they do and they must, you’ll get no traction here. I could expand on this, but it’s pointless with you – you’ve shown to be immune to logic.
Anyway, how do you propose to tell who’s a muslim and who isn’t? I’ve been asking you this for almost two years now, and I still have to get an answer from you on that. Or by “ALL muslims” you mean “well, just some muslims, but it’s better than nothing”?
Godless says
Angemon your first paragraph appears to just be personal attacks and merely asserting that you have proved in the past that generalizations don’t apply to all individuals. If generalizations never work then please find me a Muslims that does not admire Mohammad.
Your second paragraph look like your only attempt at an actual argument.
Angemon “Anyway, how do you propose to tell who’s a muslim and who isn’t? I’ve been asking you this for almost two years now, and I still have to get an answer from you on that. Or by “ALL muslims” you mean “well, just some muslims, but it’s better than nothing”?”
It sounds like you are saying we can’t always tell who is Muslim and who isn’t therefore not all Muslims are part of the problem. That would be a bizarre thing to say though. Maybe I am mistaken. What is the argument here?
GravenImage, Champ, Mirren am I mistaken? What is Angemon trying to say here? Please restate his argument for me.
Angemon says
Godless posted:
“Angemon your first paragraph appears to just be personal attacks and merely asserting that you have proved in the past that generalizations don’t apply to all individuals.”
What “personal attacks”?
“If generalizations never work then please find me a Muslims that does not admire Mohammad.”
“Generalizations never work”? Did I say that? Where?
“Your second paragraph look like your only attempt at an actual argument.”
Because dismissing the first paragraph as not being an argument when it clearly is is sooooo much easier than countering it.
“It sounds like you are saying we can’t always tell who is Muslim and who isn’t therefore not all Muslims are part of the problem.”
It sounds that way to you two because you’re addled. And dishonest. And liars.
“That would be a bizarre thing to say though.”
You said it, not me. You’re just trying to ascribe it to me.
“Maybe I am mistaken. What is the argument here?”
See above.
“GravenImage, Champ, Mirren am I mistaken? What is Angemon trying to say here? Please restate his argument for me.”
Huh, Champ, GI, Mirren? Remember who used to ask you to explain my posts to him? Voegelinian. I bet voegelinian gave “Godless” the bullet points and told him to word it as he saw fit. And I bet he did that because writing it himself and asking “Godless” to post was what got them busted – last year I noticed how “Godless”‘s posts were indistinguishable from voeg’s and pointed that over and over until voeg couldn’t hide it any longer and ended up confessing he met “Godless” on paltalk and asked him to come here defend him.
Champ says
Godless wrote:
GravenImage, Champ, Mirren am I mistaken? What is Angemon trying to say here? Please restate his argument for me.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Godless, Angemon’s query to Fessitude’s claim is very straightforward:
“Anyway, how do you propose to tell who’s a muslim and who isn’t? I’ve been asking you this for almost two years now, and I still have to get an answer from you on that. Or by ‘ALL muslims’ you mean ‘well, just some muslims, but it’s better than nothing’?”
And here is Fessitude’s claim:
“As long as the Counter-Jihad doesn’t address the Problem of Muslims in General, and articulate an analytical argument defending the proposition that all Muslims are the problem”, etc …
So the burden of proof is on the person making the claim, which is Fessitude, and NOT on Angemon.
Godless, really, your questions ought to be directed at Fessitude, and no one else. Ask him the same questions that Angemon offered, since we would *all* like to hear his specific plan. Also, I find it odd that you needed clarification, from others, on Angemon’s straightforward questions.
Again, Fessitude is making the claim, so the burden of proof is on him.
gravenimage says
Godless wrote:
GravenImage, Champ, Mirren am I mistaken? What is Angemon trying to say here? Please restate his argument for me.
……………………….
I’m not sure why you’d think I would be able to do that. I certainly don’t speak for Angemon here.
Angemon says
gravenimage posted:
“I’m not sure why you’d think I would be able to do that. I certainly don’t speak for Angemon here.”
GI, remember who else asked people to explain my points to him? Voegelinian. By now, the role of “Godless” here should be obvious: “Godless” is to say and do to others what voegelinian wishes to say but fears it would harm his reputation or whatever. For example, “Godless” accused me of saying something and editing my post to prove him wrong. Of course, there’s no edit function available for commentators on JW, so anyone making such a statement would be laughed out – and with good reason – so voegelian didn’t do it, he had someone doing it for him. In fact, you don’t see “Godless” engaging in normal exchanges with others. Most, if not all, of Godless’s posts were aimed at me, and contained nothing more than baseless personal attacks, strawmen, obfuscations and lies. Such as saying that I edited a post to make him look bad.
Mirren10 says
”What is Angemon trying to say here? Please restate his argument for me.”
It’s perfectly plain to me. I don’t speak for Angemon here, either.
Angemon says
Mirren, as I told GI, remember who used to demand what Godless is asking? “Someone explain me what Angemon is saying”. Voegelinian. I bet if we were to take a good look at Godless’s face we could see the outline of voeg’s fingers around Godless’s lips.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/8d/bc/08/8dbc082ad6d50d3d7feeec1c02ea6a6f.jpg
Jay Boo says
IMHO
I have no problem with Fessitude making wild generalizations that all Muslims are the same. Fine, so be it. It may even have some element of truth. Let him offer his ” relative and subjective ” (opinion).
Of course, that is not Fessitude’s real point anyway.
His real point is attempting to prove his supposed anti-jihad credentials are better than others.
———————————————————–
Angemon was correct to write:
“Translation: “Shut up, close your eyes and blindly do as I tell you because I’m right and I don’t have to prove anything I say”. “
Jay Boo says
Fessitude — Shame on you
Very sleazy
If you wish to say all Muslims are the same, just say that.
But instead, rather than let the merits of your own inadequate arguments stand on their own you misrepresent another commenters good points to divert into a convoluted voeg rabbit hole.
Fessitude begins by writing
“The problem with that metaphor is that it’s relative and subjective in the wider marketplace of ideas….”
Leave it to Fessitude to ‘rise above’ relative and subjective ideas with his supposed intellectual objectivity while Fessitude avoids debating what Matthieu Baudin actually wrote.
Excuse my French but
Once an insufferable Fesse always an insufferable Fesse.
Jay Boo says
In contrast
What does Fessitude have to comment of the recent article?
((Dr. Omar Ahmad and The Agony of the “Decent Muslim”))
————————————————————————————–
One would think that Fessitude would be all over that considering all Muslims the same meme.
Instead he invents shallow excuses to attack and nitpick other commenters while gloating about his self-endorsed pumped-up anti-jihad credentials.
No Fear says
Tommy Robinson, on an Al Jazeera interview, described Mohammed’s well documented vile behaviour and he was censored by Al Jazeera. Enough is enough. I have joined Australian Liberty Alliance.
Aussie Infidel says
I have also joined ALA (an appropriate name for an anti-Islam party), and so have hundreds of others. The political elite in Australia are just as ignorant of the problem of Islamization and the dangers it poses to democracy as anywhere else. I have spoken with dozens of politicians over many decades, and most of them haven’t got a clue. They haven’t even read the Quran, let alone understand all the other nuances of this pernicious ideology. The leftists Mark Stein confronted are typical of the ‘useful idiots’ in all Western countries – old cultural Marxists left over from the cold war, who unfortunately have infiltrated our universities and other centers of learning. It’s time for a new political movement to push the dinosaurs aside, and confront Islam head on. Time for beating around the bush is over. To safeguard our future, we must act now before it is too late.
http://www.australianlibertyalliance.org.au
The situation with the US primaries, makes me think it’s about time for Americans to act also.
maghan says
What is a “cultural Marxist”. You mean Millian liberal rather. Marx wrote mainly about the dynamics of capitalism–not much else. That’s what you find in Das Kapital. So where do people get this silly idea that some effete liberal posturing has anything to do with Marx?
Fessitude says
Karl Marx’s ideas were interpreted and disseminated by countless pundits, demagogues, and intellectuals in ensuing decades; an original toxin that percolated outward in myriad forms, so to speak.
Hope says
No Fear and Aussie Infidel,
Bravo, both of you, for joining the ALA! I commend you for your willingness to take a stand and get involved.
Norman says
“Postmodern liberals have lost touch with any base line or standards of human decency; they have lost themselves in a belief system that recognises no essential right or wrong, good or bad, universal human rights or even the sanctity of human life; all is levelled by an abstract notion of cultural relativism, where each cultural entity follows its own rules and values.”
Brilliant.
Cultural relativism is almost exclusively the domain of effete Leftists in government, the media and academia. The average working.class person (at least in America: black, white or Hispanic) is not so deluded, and the working class is in the majority.
So perhaps there is still some small glimmer of hope.
Baucent says
Steyn demolished them in that video clip.
David M says
Yes, you could see it in their body language: “Oops, I’ve been found out, this guy knows what he is talking about. Damn!”.
Fessitude says
I didn’t see that at all; I saw their smugness remain intact. After all, they can rest comfortably knowing that they are on the side of the angels, taking a stand against “bigotry” and “racism” and “painting with a broad brush” the great majority of Muslims who are just leading ordinary lives not raping, not stabbing, not exploding — the Muslims Who Just Wanna Have a Sandwich (in Ben Affleck’s immortal words).
Bea says
Bravo Mark, I can’t remember the last time I saw two people get a payback like that in a debate. Well done and the two morons who think that gangrape in public places is something to make fun of really deserved it.
Kathy says
I’m sincerely delighted that Uncle Vladdi was impressed by my little column.
Alas, him posting the entire thing on his own blog means I get paid less for my work 🙂
If folks want to see the official version (with the bonus of wading through all 600 or so of the, er, entertaining comments), PLEASE go here instead! Thanks muchly.
http://takimag.com/article/an_evening_with_the_rape_me_first_kill_me_last_crowd_kathy_shaidle
Sam Hawkins says
Hello Kathy, I already read your article at Takimag (via link from Steyn Online). Big thumbs up, it’s got just the right doses of informative reporting, first-person perspective, righteous outrage and snarky entertainment!
I also stepped into the comments section below your article but that turned out to be a waste of time. It’s overrun completely by crazed antisemitic trolls, with whom no reasoned discourse is possible.
Fessitude says
Kathy Shaidle is a solid journalist with a good eye on the important facets of this complicated Problem of the Problem (the problem of the various ways in which the West fails to grapple adequately with the primary problem — of Islam).
gravenimage says
Excellent, Kathy. I love your work. Thank you for posting the link.
Darius says
In Australia we have a word for people like Mark Steyn…..LEGEND!!!!!!! – oh, and to any allah worshippers who are reading and are the product of many generations of 1st cousin marriage,….that means he’s a awesome guy who just kicked butt.
Christian says
I have been following JW articles and comments made by readers. It is sad that readers of JW only talk but no action done to save European and all western countries. Many of the western countries leaders like the German chancellor only consider they must be kind and help the so call migrants because the migrants are so pitiful. But do the Western countries leaders stop and think that these migrants are only acting. I am shock that Westerners can be so stupid and fall into these muslims trap. Furthermore the Western countries leaders did not consider the consequences when taking these muslims in. muslims are different from other religions like Buddhist, Taoist, etc in that they will never I repeat never integrate into other even their host countries society. Instead everyone must into integrate into their religion because they think their religion is more superior and all other religions are inferior. It is really sad to see what is happening in the Western countries as Westerners are destroying themselves.
maghan says
The belief that Islam is superior to other religions is just stupid. Ergo most Muslims are just rank low IQ dummies. Proof: the IQ of Arabia is about 80. But make that 75–so as not offend the cretins. Pakistan is also 80. Syria is about 75080.
Those dumb Muslims who hold this “Islam is the best religion” is like a man who believes that camel piss can cure malaria.
gravenimage says
Christian wrote:
I have been following JW articles and comments made by readers. It is sad that readers of JW only talk but no action done to save European and all western countries.
…………………..
Actually, this is not accurate. Many posters here also act against Jihad in the “real world”.
But I would not denigrate the work of education done here at Jihad Watch, either–JW has a *huge* readership, and many articles are also picked up and diseminated by other bloggers.
Fessitude says
Every action begins with an idea. Ergo, ideas are important to action.
The realm of actions includes good actions, bad actions, and well-intentioned actions that may be counter-productive or faulty. The realm of ideas (thinking, analyzing, communicating, educating, discussion, debate) can help the realm of actions by optimizing the chances that the good (if not “best”) ideas are pursued more often than the bad or faulty ideas (i.e., a process commonly known as quality control).
Thirdly, since the problem is that our broader, mainstream West – including main institutions like government, news media, academe, and arts & entertainment (yes, let us not minimize the influential role they play in informing popular culture) — is persisting in being remiss in its obligation in educating itself about the dangers of Muslims following their Islam in order to take necessary action to inform and protect society, it becomes incumbent upon the Counter-Jihad to take up the slack.
However, precisely because the Counter-Jihad remains minuscule, compared with the broader mainstream throughout the West, the Counter-Jihad cannot take actions that Western governments would, and should take, to begin to remedy this problem of Islam. The best thing the Counter-Jihad can do is in the war of ideas theater of this broader war – for we are not the government, we are not an army (we don’t advocate lynch mob militias – and even if we did, we’d get shut down in a New York minute by our own mainstream).
In the “battle spaces” of the war of ideas, the Counter-Jihad’s main role is to wake up the mainstream West around us to the danger of Islam.
This has been a public service announcement in defense of ideas, and we now return you to your regularly scheduled broadcasting…
gravenimage says
Good post.
Angemon says
“This has been a public service announcement in defense of ideas, ”
Brought to you by the person who can’t stand dissenting ideas.
Western Canadian says
Good one dude!!
Nathan Brazil says
Know islam = No Peace
Know Peace = No islam
Les says
There are two kinds of people: the wise, who know they are fools; and fools, who think they are wise. Socrates.
Obviously the Libtards think they are wise
Dan says
The left always argues like that because having no facts to back their case they can only go for emotion.
Slipping in more “zingers” has always their best tactic to win because it keeps a crowd uninformed and gives appearance of wit.
Thinking requires knowing the facts and the ability to apply logic, whereas even the drunkest, most uneducated lout can be swayed by emotion.
cs says
Retarded and arrogant.
Angemon says
Which isn’t the case here. We’re talking about masses yearning to conquer, subjugate and humiliate.
Dennis says
I applaud Mark on his presentation. I am a liberal myself, and when I see wrongs being done I must oppose them. Having lived in Muslim countries I know, first hand, the limited mentalities of ordinary people when any fundamentalism is imposed upon them. Witness the European dark ages, the terrible persecutions of Jews and followers of the old religion. But today it is most definitely Islam which is most dangerous because its hold upon people makes them believe that only they are right and have the blessings of some god to persecute, dominate and destroy others.
Fessitude says
” Witness the European dark ages…”
Read Those Terrible Middle Ages: Debunking the Myths (which discusses not only the mythic meme of “middle ages” but also of their “darker” forbear) by Régine Pernoud. A review here:
http://catholicreviewofbooks.com/those-terrible-middle-ages-debunking-the-myth/
sham says
ISLAM AND ILLEGAL SEXUAL RELATION:
24: 19. Verily, those who like that (the crime of) illegal sexual intercourse should be propagated among those who believe, they will have a painful torment in this world and in the Hereafter. And Allâh knows and you know not.
4:16 And the two persons (man and woman) among you who commit illegal sexual intercourse, punish them both. And if they repent (promise Allâh that they will never repeat, i.e. commit illegal sexual intercourse and other similar sins) and do righteous good deeds, leave them alone. Surely, Allâh is Ever the One Who accepts repentance, (and He is) Most Merciful.
5:5. ………….not committing illegal sexual intercourse, nor taking them as girl-friends. And whosoever disbelieves in the Oneness of Allâh and in all the other Articles of Faith [i.e. His (Allâh’s), Angels, His Holy Books, His Messengers, the Day of Resurrection and Al¬Qadar (Divine Preordainments)], then fruitless is his work, and in the Hereafter he will be among the losers.
17: 32. And come not near to the unlawful sexual intercourse. Verily, it is a Fâhishah [i.e. anything that transgresses its limits (a great sin)], and an evil way (that leads one to Hell unless Allâh forgives him).
70: 29. And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts from illegal sexual acts) .
30. Except with their wives and the (women slaves and captives) whom their right hands possess, for (then) they are not to be blamed,
31. But whosoever seeks beyond that, then it is those who are trespassers.
23: 1. Successful indeed are the believers.
3. And those who turn away from Al-Laghw (dirty, false, evil vain talk, falsehood, and all that Allâh has forbidden).
5. And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts, from illegal sexual acts)
6. Except from their wives or (the captives and slaves) that their right hands possess, for then, they are free from blame;
7. But whoever seeks beyond that, then those are the transgressors;
24: 3. The adulterer marries not but an adulteress or a Mushrikah and the adulteress none marries her except an adulterer or a Muskrik [and that means that the man who agrees to marry (have a sexual relation with) a Mushrikah (female polytheist, pagan or idolatress) or a prostitute, then surely he is either an adulterer, or a Mushrik (polytheist, pagan or idolater, etc.) And the woman who agrees to marry (have a sexual relation with) a Mushrik (polytheist, pagan or idolater) or an adulterer, then she is either a prostitute or a Mushrikah (female polytheist, pagan, or idolatress, etc.)]. Such a thing is forbidden to the believers (of Islâmic Monotheism).
24: 26. Bad statements are for bad people (or bad women for bad men) and bad people for bad statements (or bad men for bad women). Good statements are for good people (or good women for good men) and good people for good statements (or good men for good women), such (good people) are innocent of (each and every) bad statement which they say, for them is Forgiveness, and Rizqun Karîm (generous provision i.e.Paradise).
24: 21. O you who believe! Follow not the footsteps of Shaitân (Satan). And whosoever follows the footsteps of Shaitân (Satan), then, verily he commands Al-Fahshâ’ [i.e. to commit indecency (illegal sexual intercourse, etc.)], and Al-Munkar [disbelief and polytheism (i.e. to do evil and wicked deeds; to speak or to do what is forbidden in Islâm, etc.)]………….
25: 68. And those who invoke not any other ilâh (god) along with Allâh, nor kill such life as Allâh has forbidden, except for just cause, nor commit illegal sexual intercourse and whoever does this shall receive the punishment.
60: 12. O Prophet! When believing women come to you to give you the Bai’â (pledge), that they will not associate anything in worship with Allâh, that they will not steal, that they will not commit illegal sexual intercourse, that they will not kill their children, that they will not utter slander, intentionally forging falsehood (i.e. by making illegal children belonging to their husbands), and that they will not disobey you in any Ma’rûf (Islâmic Monotheism and all that which Islâm ordains) then accept their Bai’â (pledge), and ask Allâh to forgive them, Verily, Allâh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
16: 90. Verily, Allâh enjoins Al-Adl (i.e. justice and worshipping none but Allâh Alone – Islâmic Monotheism) and Al-Ihsân [i.e. to be patient in performing your duties to Allâh, totally for Allâh’s sake and in accordance with the Sunnah (legal ways) of the Prophet SAW in a perfect manner], and giving (help) to kith and kin (i.e. all that Allâh has ordered you to give them e.g., wealth, visiting, looking after them, or any other kind of help, etc.): and forbids Al-Fahshâ’ (i.e all evil deeds, e.g. illegal sexual acts, disobedience of parents, polytheism, to tell lies, to give false witness, to kill a life without right, etc.), and Al-Munkar (i.e all that is prohibited by Islâmic law: polytheism of every kind, disbelief and every kind of evil deeds, etc.), and Al-Baghy (i.e. all kinds of oppression), He admonishes you, that you may take heed.
6: 151. Say (O Muhammad SAW): “Come, I will recite what your Lord has prohibited you from: Join not anything in worship with Him; be good and dutiful to your parents; kill not your children because of poverty – We provide sustenance for you and for them; come not near to Al-Fawâhish (shameful sins, illegal sexual intercourse, etc.) whether committed openly or secretly, and kill not anyone whom Allâh has forbidden, except for a just cause (according to Islâmic law). This He has commanded you that you may understand.
42: 37. And those who avoid the greater sins, and Al-Fawâhish (illegal sexual intercourse, etc.), and when they are angry, they forgive
53: 32. Those who avoid great sins and Al-Fawâhish (illegal sexual intercourse, etc.) except the small faults, verily, your Lord is of vast forgiveness…………….
70: 29. And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts from illegal sexual acts) .
30. Except with their wives and the (women slaves and captives) whom their right hands possess, for (then) they are not to be blamed,
31. But whosoever seeks beyond that, then it is those who are trespassers.
60:12 O Prophet! When believing women come to you to give you the Bai’â (pledge), that they will not associate anything in worship with Allâh, that they will not steal, that they will not commit illegal sexual intercourse, that they will not kill their children, that they will not utter slander, intentionally forging falsehood (i.e. by making illegal children belonging to their husbands), and that they will not disobey you in any Ma’rûf (Islâmic Monotheism and all that which Islâm ordains) then accept their Bai’â (pledge), and ask Allâh to forgive them, Verily, Allâh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 89 :: Hadith 320
Not to join anything in worship along with Allah, (2) Not to steal, (3) Not to commit illegal sexual intercourse, (4) Not to kill your children, (5) Not to accuse an innocent person (to spread such an accusation among people), (6) Not to be disobedient (when ordered) to do good deeds.
Muslim :: Book 17 : Hadith 4238
Ubida b. as-Samit repnrted: I was one of those headmen who swore allegiance to Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) that we will not associate anything with Allah, and will not commit adultery, and will not steal, and will not kill any soul which Allah has forbidden, but with justice nor plunder, nor disobey (Allah and His Apostle), then Paradise (will be the reward) in case we do these (acts) ; and if we commit any outrage(bad, violence) (and that goes unpunished in the world), it is Allah Who would decide about it. Ibn Rumh said: Its judgment lies with Allah.
Jack Diamond says
Except “illegal sexual intercourse” for Muslims does not include sex with captive women in any form of jihad (of which hijrah is a part) or sex with slaves all-inclusive; and that absent a dhimmi pact or formal peace treaty, kuffar “blood and property” are for the taking by Muslims (“I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped (but Allah) and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform all that, then they save their lives and property from me.” Bukhari v.1 bk2 n.25). A state of war is the norm, not the exception. And the spoils or booty of kaffir property includes their women.
“There are no animals viler than those who do not believe and remain unbelievers.” Qur’an 8:55; “They are the worst of creatures” 98:6; “a Believer will not be killed (in retaliation for killing) an Infidel” (Abu Dawud bk.39 n.4491) The less-than-human view of the kuffar applies especially to their women, whom these invaders routinely call “whores”.
Further, manuals of Islamic law like the Hanafi “Hidayeh” state a Muslim man can essentially do what he wants in foreign countries (no punishment for Zina -fornication- or adultery committed in a foreign country, “punishment is not incurred by committing whoredom in (a) foreign country. First, the Prophet said ‘punishment is not to be inflicted in a foreign land’; second the Musselman magistrate has no authority in a foreign country”).
Bill Warner: “raping women is used in jihad because it works as a tactic of war. It spreads shame among the kafir men and women and begins the process of subjugating the kafir women. In short, it teaches everybody their place in Islam–submission.”
Egyptian Sheikh Abdul Khaliq: “the only business of the Muslim is to humiliate the kuffar and make him surrender to Islam or to Islamize him, thus preventing a greater corruption by undertaking a lesser one. For the reality and the root of the relationship between a Muslim and a non-Muslim is enmity and war (suras 8:39 and 9:29).”
Dacritic says
Quran 4:24 And [also prohibited to you are all] married women except those your right hands possess.
Quran 33:50 Prophet, We have made lawful to you the wives whom you have granted dowries and the slave girls whom God has given you as booty.
Sahih Bukhari – Volume 3, #432:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri that while he was sitting with Allah’s messenger we said, “Oh Allah’s messenger, we got female captives as our booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?” The prophet said, “Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.”
Sahih Muslim 3432—Allah’s Messenger sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah’s Messenger seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that: “And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (4:24)” (i.e. they were lawful for them when their Idda period came to an end).
Sahih Muslim 3371—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 (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.
Sahih Al-Bukhari 4138—We went out with Allah’s Apostle for the invasion of Bun 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 [same as “azl” above]. So when we intended to do coitus interruptus, we said: “How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah’s Apostle 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.”
Sahih Muslim 3384—Jabir bin Abdullah (Allah be pleased with them) reported that a person asked Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) saying: I have a slave-girl and I practice azl with her, whereupon Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: This cannot prevent that which Allah has decreed. The person then came (after some time) and said: Messenger of Allah, the slave-girl about whom I talked to you has conceived, whereupon Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: I am the servant of Allah and His Messenger.
So….. It seems to me that “legal” sexual intercourse for Muslims include also the raping of sex slaves and female POW’s. The Muhammad/Allah duo (I can’t help but be reminded of Arnold Wesker from Batman every time I think about Muhammad) certainly have very……unique standards of what is “legal” or “illegal”.
Fessitude says
In Islam there is no rape, theft or murder — not because it does not enjoin what these words denote in any rational, civilized semantics; but rather because Islam’s lexicon is demonically Orwellian — whereby peace is war, love is hate, good is evil, mercy is terror, order is disorder, justice is murder, marriage is rape (and lawful sex is rape), tolerance is slavery; etc.
Fessitude says
Oh, and the pinnacle of this Orwellian madness that is Islam: God is Satan.
linnte says
Damn Sham! You can’t even see the truth when it hits you over the head. We have a saying here in the USA, the proof is in the pudding. Meaning what Muslims DO COMPARED to what YOU wish they would do, is diabolically opposed! THOUSANDS of women and children have been assaulted and raped by MUSLIMS in Europe and Britain because they are NON BELIEVERS of your demon god Allah. WAKE THE FUCK UP! You should be talking to your own people, not us here on Jihad Watch. Tell MUSLIMS they should not rape women, not me! SHAME ON YOU! You embarrass me with your cowardly opinions.
Fessitude says
Sham knows this; he’s not engaged here in honest communication, but rather in a mode of Disinformation.
Angemon says
Fessitude posted:
“Sham knows this; he’s not engaged here in honest communication, but rather in a mode of Disinformation.”
Indeed, and the antidote to disinformation is information – I hope to read rebuttals to sham’s disinformation from you.
Mirren10 says
” … I hope to read rebuttals to sham’s disinformation from you.”
Don’t hold your breath. Fessitude prefers to take aim at those who are supposed to be his allies.
As I posted a while ago, he’s no ally of mine.
gravenimage says
The repulsive sham spammed:
ISLAM AND ILLEGAL SEXUAL RELATION:
24: 19. Verily, those who like that (the crime of) illegal sexual intercourse should be propagated among those who believe, they will have a painful torment in this world and in the Hereafter. And Allâh knows and you know not…
………………………………..
Of course, as Jack Diamond ably notes, raping Infidels is *not* considered illegal sexual intercourse in Islam. Raping Infidels is perfectly Halal.
More:
And whosoever disbelieves in the Oneness of Allâh and in all the other Articles of Faith [i.e. His (Allâh’s), Angels, His Holy Books, His Messengers, the Day of Resurrection and Al¬Qadar (Divine Preordainments)], then fruitless is his work, and in the Hereafter he will be among the losers.
………………………………..
This includes any non-Muslims, since even Christians are held to violate the “Oneness of Allah” with their belief in the Trinity.
Ergo, Christian and other Infidel women are fair game for Muslim rapists.
More:
70: 29. And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts from illegal sexual acts) .
30. Except with their wives and the (women slaves and captives) whom their right hands possess, for (then) they are not to be blamed,
………………………………..
And–as the witless sham has done before posting this–he actually *confirms* that Muslims can be considered “chaste” if they not only marry multiple wives–including children–but also if they rape female slaves and captives.
This last–captives–are *exactly* how rape victims are regarded.
Does he somehow fail to realize that he is proving our point about Muslim rape?
More:
31. But whosoever seeks beyond that, then it is those who are trespassers.
………………………………..
True–consensual pre-marital sex; Haram and carrying the death penalty, raping captives and sex slaves; completely Halal. *Ugh*.
More:
5. And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts, from illegal sexual acts)
6. Except from their wives or (the captives and slaves) that their right hands possess, for then, they are free from blame;
………………………………..
sham loves this barbarism so much he has to cover it twice; either that, or he has just lost track of his spam. Oops–not just twice, since he covers it again later in his post.
More:
24: 26. Bad statements are for bad people (or bad women for bad men) and bad people for bad statements (or bad men for bad women). Good statements are for good people (or good women for good men) and good people for good statements (or good men for good women), such (good people) are innocent of (each and every) bad statement which they say, for them is Forgiveness, and Rizqun Karîm (generous provision i.e.Paradise).
………………………………..
Yes–but Muslims use these words differently from civilized Infidels. As they see it, it is “good” to rape innocent women, including girls.
But as they see it, condemning such barbarism is “bad”, because that is “un-Islamic”.
More:
25: 68. And those who invoke not any other ilâh (god) along with Allâh, nor kill such life as Allâh has forbidden, except for just cause, nor commit illegal sexual intercourse and whoever does this shall receive the punishment.
………………………………..
“Allah” allows a great deal of killing, as well–just as he allows rape.
More:
and forbids Al-Fahshâ’ (i.e all evil deeds, e.g. illegal sexual acts, disobedience of parents, polytheism, to tell lies, to give false witness, to kill a life without right, etc.), and Al-Munkar (i.e all that is prohibited by Islâmic law: polytheism of every kind, disbelief and every kind of evil deeds, etc.), and Al-Baghy (i.e. all kinds of oppression), He admonishes you, that you may take heed.
………………………………..
Yes–refusing to convert to Islam is an “evil deed”–raping Infidels, not so much…
Doesn’t sham realize what he is admitting here? Or perhaps he does know, and just considers this Da’wa.
Gamaliel says
The amazing thing is how Arbour after hearing Mark Steyn didn’t change her mind and closed with a statement to the effect that the opposition to Muslim immigration of today is just as ignorant and bigoted as the opposition to previous immigrant groups. No previous immigrant group ever unleashed a crime and rape wave comparable to what the Muslims have done. No previous immigrant group had the intent of overthrowing the freedom that came to share. After listening to Mr. Steyn that was obvious to everyone except Ms. Arbour. Ms. Arbour is an intelligent woman, she has the IQ to understand what Mr. Steyn was saying but she is determined not to understand and to support a policy that is bringing disaster to Europe.
Fessitude says
I alluded to this in my comment above:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/04/video-mark-steyn-blisters-leftists-who-mocked-victims-of-muslim-rape-gangs/comment-page-1#comment-1412858
sham says
BIBLE AND RAPE:
Numbers 31:17-18
Now therefore kill every male among the little ones (taph), and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the female children (taph), that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
As we start reading from verse 17, it begins by Moses commanding his soldiers to execute all the male children (infants), and all the women who have slept with a man, in other words women who are not virgin. When we get to the next verse (v. 18), Moses tells his soldiers that they can take for themselves all the female children.
Now the question arises, why are the male children not shown any mercy, get executed, but the female children left alive? It is obvious from the words, “for yourselves”, Moses meant that they can have the female children for their own pleasure, to cohabit with.
When I started examining Numbers 31:17-18, reading the Hebrew words for verse 18 at the end, one word was left unexplained. This is not the case of just one English Bible translation, all the modern Bible translations have blatantly crossed out the word. The word I am referring to is ‘lakhem’ (or lacham), this word is left unexplained. This same word (lacham) is used in many other passages such as: Exd 1:10, Deu 1:41, Jos 10:5, Jdg 1:8, 1Sa 31:1, 1Ki 12:24, Isa 19:2, in all these verses mentioned, when the Hebrew word ‘lacham’ is used , it means:- ‘fight’, ‘fought’, or ‘warred’.
Deuteronomy 22:28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Expanded Bible (EXB)
10 When you go to war against your enemies, the Lord will •help you defeat them [give them into your hands] so you will take them captive. 11 If you see a beautiful woman among the captives and are attracted to [desire; fall in love with] her, you may take her as your wife. 12 Bring her into your home, where she must shave her head and cut her nails 13 and change the clothes she was wearing when you captured her. After she has lived in your house and cried for her •parents [L father and her mother] for a month, you may marry her. You will be her husband, and she will be your wife. 14 But if you are not pleased with her, you must let her go anywhere she wants. You must not sell her for money or make her a slave, because you have taken away her honor [humiliated; exploited her].
The command from Yahweh to soldiers, whoever goes out to war and he sees a woman, if he is attracted to her, he can “TAKE” the woman and force her to marry him after one month of mourning. Does that sound anything like this passage forbids rape? The word ‘Take’ is in itself evidence that the woman was taken without her consent i.e., she was forced. Verse 14 makes it even more evident by the words:- “because you have •taken away her honor [humiliated; exploited her]”, in other words you raped her, you have humiliated her enough, just let her go if you like to, not what she wants, but what the man desires.
Judges 21:20 And they commanded the Benjaminites, saying, “Go and lie in wait in the vineyards, 21 and watch; if the daughters of Shiloh come out to dance in the dances, then come out of the vineyards and seize each man his wife from the daughters of Shiloh, and go to the land of Benjamin. 22 And when their fathers or their brothers come to complain to us, we will say to them, ‘Grant them graciously to us; because we did not take for each man of them his wife in battle, neither did you give them to them, else you would now be guilty.’” 23 And the Benjaminites did so, and took their wives, according to their number, from the dancers whom they carried off; then they went and returned to their inheritance, and rebuilt the towns, and dwelt in them.
The elders held another meeting to discuss how they could provide wives for the remaining 200 men. Somebody remembered that many of the virgins from the tribes participated in an annual feast at Shiloh. If the remaining 200 men of Benjamin hid near the place, they could each kidnap a girl and take her home as a wife. (Warren Wiersbe Bible Commentary Page 473)
Baucent says
So what’s your point?
jasnan jack says
He means that the Bible is also equally as bad as the Koran, but he forgets to mention that no Western nation and its people accept that the Bible is the rule of the lords and it has to be followed and it is beyond criticism, whereas in muslim countries the Koran and the hadith are the constituition and law and it cannot be criticised, therefore in muslim countries we have
1. stoning of adulterers.
2. cutting hand of thieves.
3. Death for homo sexuality.
4. death for blasphemy and apostasy.
5. discrimination based on religion.
6. Political thugs always in power and enforcing religion and terror.
7. Death for promoting aethism, equality.
The horrors are endless but he will not mention it.
Hope says
jasnan jack,
Excellent response! That is exactly the point.
Dacritic says
And yes… there were no 1,000 men harassing women in Cologne like a pack of wolves in Germany before the Muslims came in.
Dacritic says
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Expanded Bible (EXB)
10 When you go to war against your enemies, the Lord will •help you defeat them [give them into your hands] so you will take them captive. 11 If you see a beautiful woman among the captives and are attracted to [desire; fall in love with] her, you may take her as your wife. 12 Bring her into your home, where she must shave her head and cut her nails 13 and change the clothes she was wearing when you captured her. After she has lived in your house and cried for her •parents [L father and her mother] for a month, you may marry her. You will be her husband, and she will be your wife. 14 But if you are not pleased with her, you must let her go anywhere she wants. You must not sell her for money or make her a slave, because you have taken away her honor [humiliated; exploited her].
“…if you are not pleased with her, you MUST LET HER GO ANYWHERE SHE WANTS. YOU MUST NOT SELL HER AND MAKE HER A SLAVE.”
Doesn’t sound like Islam’s prophet, does it.
gravenimage says
More crap from sham. No Jew or Christian is raping women today and citing the Torah or the Bible.
Would that this were true of pious Muslim rapists regarding the Qur’an.
mortimer says
How can a high-ranking judge like Arbour make a joke about rape?
Joan says
Brilliant debate by Mark & Nigel!
When God is taken out of schools & our governments..what is left govern them? We are left with leftist who have dumbed downed the masses which have been radicalized to spread their message. Just look at ou schools and universities. What is the purpose of mass immigration…to destabilize the countries, take down all borders, cause militant uprisings which leads to government takeover.
Mark my words…we ain’t seen nothing yet…and it won’t be that great utopia they are dreaming of.
davej says
Disturbing that a Western audience, having heard the explicit reality of Muslim sexual predation and violence against women and children would still support the liberal position (55%).
Testimony to the depth of their denial and ignorance.
The disguise of being a legitimate but “oppressed” Religion works very well for the Islamic criminal gang.
Paleologos says
Mark Steyn is one of my heroes, along with our own Robert, Geert Wilders, and blessed too few others.
I urge all who come to Roberts page to read Mark Steyn’s definitive work …
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0895260786/?tag=mh0b-20&hvadid=3523238231&hvqmt=e&hvbmt=be&hvdev=c&ref=pd_sl_2dvzqhfp4q_e
… written almost ten years ago.
You will be shocked at how many of his predictions on the world wide spread of islam are coming true.
R/
Paleologos
gravenimage says
Paleologos wrote:
Mark Steyn is one of my heroes, along with our own Robert, Geert Wilders, and blessed too few others.
…………………….
Hear, hear, Paleologos!
Anushirvan says
Schama is a capable historian with regards to the historical early modern area. (particularly 17th and 18th century) But he should leave it at that and stop overestimating his capabilities. He’s not qualified to put his nose into contemporary issues, seeing as he has been living to far away in the past with his mind in order to appreciate fully what’s happening at this stage in history.
gravenimage says
Yes–I admire much of Schama’s work. But he shows himself to be a moral idiot here.
Mae says
A man using his phallus as a weapon is a crime and for good reason. That crime has as its overarching intent to take something from a woman by forcing her to be a momentary physical slave to his need for power. That he ejaculates and gains a few seconds of pleasure is completely beside the point and incidental. Any person offering sympathy toward a rapist of women by saying he has sexual needs should be soundly reprimanded.
Rape is a malfunction of the true nature of mating, which is not a slam-bam but a commitment both to the woman and to her child. Mating is part of our spiritual life. As such, mating/family is the basis of civilized societies.
The brainwashing of men under Islam is thorough. It demands the faithful follower of Allah to think that women (and in some cultures such as Afghanistan, boys) are there only for rape, and I use the word “rape” because the wife has no say in any sexual act under the domination of her Islamic husband who adheres strictly to the Koranic text.
As for raping children, anyone defending THAT should be shunned from civilization and literally thrown to the wolves.
A society completely under the domination of Islam is a wicked society, full of evil and evil intent. Hatred of women in any society, however, is the reason for rape…not the need for sexual gratification. A man who cares not for the sexual gratification of his female partner is no better than a rapist.
davej says
The reality and profitability of sex groomers in the UK:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/04/a_look_inside_britains_muslim_sex_grooming_gang_scandal.html
Sam says
Mark Steyn = Another hero of mine. True freedom fighter.
gravenimage says
Video: Mark Steyn Blisters Leftists Who Mocked Victims of Muslim Rape Gangs
………………………..
I love the impassioned Mark Steyn. As he noted, he often deals in wry humor–but not here. He does *not* suffer moral idiots gladly.
And I’m sorry to hear this from Simon Schama. I knew little of his politics, but had admired his work as an art historian.
Paleologos says
Mark might have ably punctuated his speech by showing this short video to people who think the muslim invasion is benign, and rape is a joke item. muslims bring something in addition to rape, too. …
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5t9U9r9Kfs
R/
Paleologos
ECAW says
I looked up Javed Achmed Ghamidi who Schama cites as a progressive Islamic scholar. He does address what I think is the central question in all this ie do Mohammed’s calls to jihad have an expiry date or not. He thinks that they do but his reasons for doing so are even loopier than Mohammed’s original loopiness:
“Ghamidi believes that there are certain directives of the Qur’an pertaining to war which were specific only to Muhammad and certain specified peoples of his times (particularly the progeny of Abraham: the Ishmaelites, the Israelites, and the Nazarites). Thus, Muhammad and his designated followers waged a war against Divinely specified peoples of their time (the polytheists and the Israelites and Nazarites of Arabia and some other Jews, Christians, et al.) as a form of Divine punishment and asked the polytheists of Arabia for submission to Islam as a condition for exoneration and the others for jizya and submission to the political authority of the Muslims for exemption from death punishment and for military protection as the dhimmis of the Muslims. Therefore, after Muhammad and his companions, there is no concept in Islam obliging Muslims to wage war for propagation or implementation of Islam.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javed_Ahmad_Ghamidi
Baucent says
Even loopier is the thought that the Jihadi types after reading that little opinion piece will throw down their weapons and utter “What a silly mistake we made”.
Sam Hawkins says
Well, at least this proves that in theory, an interpretation of the koran that does not include include violent jihad in the present day is possible. No chance of it being adopted on a wide scale, however. Unless one of two things happens:
(1) total and utter crushing defeat of militant Islam, nothing short of the unconditional surrender by the Nazis after WW II followed by denazification will do, or
(2) Muslims being quarantined to fight until themselves until they have killed so many of their own that eventually it dawns on them they would be better off with a neutered version of the koran, or better still without the koran altogether
Chances of either (1) or (2) happening are lower, unfortunately, than continuing inroads by Islam into our countries and degradation and deterioration of our societies.
linnte says
I wish someone would convince the rest of the extremist Muslims of that theory. I am no scholar, but I can read with excellent comprehension. That theory of Ghamidis seems like a huge s t r e t c h to me. And let’s not forget that even if Jihad weren’t valid in this day and age, Sharia law is violent in and of itself.
gravenimage says
Good point, linnte. The aim of every pious Muslim is to impose brutal Shari’ah law–only a handful, such as the “heretical” Amadi hedge at using violent Jihad to achieve that imposition. This still leaves all forms of “stealth Jihad”–lawfare and the demographic weapon especially.
But more–most Muslims like Ghamidi are not actually opposed to violent Jihad–they are just taking that stance to convince the potential victims of Jihad that this is not a real fear and they should not protect against it.
gravenimage says
Thanks for that on Ghamidi, ECAW. In “Islam and the Modern World–Qital, Jihad, and Terrorism” he meretriciously writes:
“There is a lot of confusion about Jihad. One such misunderstanding is that the Muslims consider it their religious duty to bring other nations under their subjugation whenever they get an opportunity. If this happens to be the religious obligation of the Muslims, they are obviously a threat to the world peace. It is, therefore, necessary to analyze the concept of Jihad in the light of the Quran….”
http://www.javedahmadghamidi.com/books/view/qital-jihad-and-terrorism
Of course, if Ghamidi *really* believed that Jihad is so limited in the Qur’an, he would be pointing this out to “mistaken” Muslims like those in ISIS and Boko Haram–not marketing it to decent Infidels.
But like any other Taqiyya artist, his real goal is to whitewash Islam and to confuse the hopeful Kuffar. Shame on Schama for being taken in by this crap.
DP111 says
Louise Arbour: She made history with the indictment of a sitting head of state, Yugoslavian president Slobodan Milošević..
Yup. Poor man was defending his European country from a plague worse then Ebola.
Veritas says
Sorry, but the author missed the point of the debate. In spite of being shown to be smug, callious, and indifferent to the disaster that is the refugee program the Canadian audience still voted to allow exploding Mohammads in. They shouted for more.
Facts, reality, and the truth will never beat the dogma of the Left. Leftism is a mental illness. You can’t cure the insane.
Henry Jones says
“I am ashamed to admit I didn’t grasp the importance of the Munk Debate held last week in Toronto.”
You probably would’ve grasped it, if the focus of this war on terror did not switch from saving lives and speaking up for one’s rights, (like what was done for Rifqa Bary), to drawing cartoons in Texas.
Although the latter is important, I think the former has a far more lasting impact in the fight for human rights.
I have always stated that I understood the meaning of and wished the Contest participants well, and agree with the importance of their work. I just prefer the good ole’ days where specific action was taken to try and save individuals.
Its good to see some people are still focusing on the most effective battles.