Writes Henda Ayari: “I have been silent for several years for fear of reprisals, because by threatening to file a complaint for the rape of which I was a victim, he did not hesitate to threaten me and also tell me that we could ‘take it to my children.’ I was afraid and I kept silent all this time.”
Tariq Ramadan, hailed as a Muslim reformer despite not rejecting any tenet of Qur’anic Islam, is the grandson of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hasan al-Banna. Ramadan is renowned as a “moderate” and never identified with the outlook or policies of al-Banna, despite the fact that Ramadan has praised and never repudiated his grandfather. With these threats, if Ayari’s allegations are true, Ramadan does appear to be a true exponent of the Muslim Brotherhood.
“French author Henda Ayari accuses Tariq Ramadan of rape,” Middle East Eye, October 20, 2017:
French author Henda Ayari accused on Friday philosopher and Islamic theoretician Tariq Ramadan of rape. Ayari, 40, said that the influential academic had sexually assaulted her in a hotel room in Paris in 2012.
“I decided to file a complaint against Tariq Ramadan for what he did to me,” she said on Facebook. Ramadan has not yet responded to the allegations….
Ayari said she was raped by the UK-based academic on the sidelines of the congress of the Union of Islamic Organisations of France when he allegedly invited her to join him in a hotel room.
She also claims that Ramadan threatened her family to prevent her reporting the alleged rape.
“I have been silent for several years for fear of reprisals, because by threatening to file a complaint for the rape of which I was a victim, he did not hesitate to threaten me and also tell me that we could ‘take it to my children.’ I was afraid and I kept silent all this time,” she said on Facebook.
Ayari’s lawyer, Jonas Haddad told Le Figaro that his client had filed a complaint for “rape, sexual assault, voluntary violence, harassment, intimidation” with the Rouen prosecutor’s office on Friday afternoon.
AFP also reported that it had seen legal documents detailing the complaint.
Ramadan, 55, who is a professor of Contemporary Islamic Studies at Oxford University, is the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood and is enormously influential among Muslims throughout Europe.
He calls for believers to embrace and practice Islam in a thoroughly modern manner, and he advises Muslims on how they can fully integrate into European societies without betraying the universal laws and values of Islam. His books include “What I Believe” and “Radical Reform, Islamic Ethics and Liberation”.
However, critics accuse Ramadan of anti-Semitism and promoting the oppression of women, claims that he denies….
“As a matter of modesty, I will not here give precise details of the acts he has caused me to suffer. It is enough to know that he has benefited very much from my weakness,” she wrote, adding that she was “slapped” and “abused” when she told her alleged attacker to stop.
“I still spoke in my book in a whole chapter changing its name, not to be sued for libel, but today I can not keep this secret too heavy to wear, it’s time for me to tell the truth,” she said on Friday.
Hugh Fitzgerald says
There is a God.
gravenimage says
Darkly hilarious.
Jon says
No fucking way that there is a god. At least not one that is loving or just.
Terry Gain says
My loving God gave us free will. You are aiming at the wrong target.
Jack says
If there were less suffering and premature death in the world, there would be more freedom. Dying prematurely or being bed-ridden with some debilitating illness inhibits the expression of free will.
Max Publius says
Throw him out of Europe. Give him to the ummah, to whom he gives his allegiance. She can stay if she is truly ridden of Islam. He is a carrier of Islamic evil mores, he is a colonist, just as Brits born in India were never native Indians. Much worse, he is a brood parasite giving nothing of value to Europe and he’s a cowardly rapist.
Babs says
Sack him from his tenure at Oxford for starters, however much money was given to “encourage” the college to offer it to him.
gravenimage says
Grimly, I have to say this does not surprise me. Islam is the religion of rape.
There is no “reforming” that.
Tariq Ramadan has always been an equivocal figure *at best*–though even here at Jihad Watch, some have been taken in by his Taqiyya.
Krazy Kafir says
I will always contend that the most dangerous muslims, of all, are the, so called, moderates. They are nothing more than carriers of the worst ideology to ever curse this planet. The proverbial sheep in wolf’s clothing
Hugh Fitzgerald says
Six years ago I wrote about another scandal starring Tariq Ramadan, the scandal of his Boughten Professorship at Oxford. I think now is the appropriate time to re-post it. The defender of the Muslim Brotherhood, founded by his beloved grandfather, Tariq Ramadan is the sweetly sinister taqiyya tosser and Defender of the Faith, possibly to be brought down not because of all that, but because he turns out, according to his accuser, a fellow Muslim (she was once a fervent Salafi who has seen the light) to be guilty of “rape, sexual assault, voluntary violence, harassment, intimidation.” Well, Al Capone was finally locked up, not for extortion or murder, but for tax evasion. Any port in a storm.
If he puts you in mind of Harvey Weinstein, do remember that Harvey Weinstein, unbelievably awful as he is, never threatened the way Tariq Ramadan is said to have threatened the children of his victim. (“take it to the children”), nor did he slap anyone around, the way Tariq Ramadan is said to have done. Oh what the hell, let’s think of them as brothers under the skin. Convivencia!
TARIQ RAMADAN, WITH HIS BOUGHTEN PROFESSORSHIP?
The torturer’s apprentice, or at least his son, Mehdi Hashemi Rafsanjani, is the subject of an Oxford Student article that I have just posted. Many months ago, the news that the London School of Economics had awarded a Ph.D. (or a D.Phil.) to that deep student of the human condition, Seif al-Islam, son of the late Muammar Qaddafy, and that the doctoral dissertation in question was written by others (and the scandal of papers being written, over the last four decades, in universities all over the Western world, for rich Arabs and Persians and Pakistanis, entitles us all to believe that none of those degrees can be taken seriously, that none of those supposedly educated people did their own work, and that they are to be under suspicion until they can prove otherwise, and give evidence of their being educated and — a lesser thing — vocationally trained).
But the greatest scandal of all is the appointment, to fill a chair created, and paid for by some Arab potentate (The waddling emir of Qatar? The mediagenic, hawk-on-hand folkloristic Sultan of Oman? I forget.) for the precise purpose of giving a particular propagandist a better perch from which to conduct his sweetly sinister campaign on behalf of Islam throughout the Western world.
That man, with his bought-and-paid-for professorship, is Tariq Ramadan. He’s the grandson of Hasan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. He offers example after example, in his every public appearance, of Taqiyya and Kitman, of lies and semi-lies, that are piled up so fast, one cannot keep up and rebut each, so even the best prepared debater finds it hard to deal with him. He had, for a time, been teaching in Geneva. But what with Caroline Fourest’s book (“Frere Tariq”) and his being taken apart in two widely-viewed appearances (one with Nicolas Sarkozy at his best, and the other with Alain Finkielkraut), it was time for Tariq Ramadan to leave the French-speaking world, where too many people had his number, and to light out for the English-speaking territories in Dar al-Harb, that is England, and beyond England the big prize, America. But first he tried the Netherlands. He arranged to have a chair created for him, with Arab money, at a university in the Netherlands. But soon he realized that would never do — he would need to be in England, and necessarily, at Oxford or at Cambridge (though the University of London, that is the SOAS, might do in a pinch).
Tariq Ramadan would not settle for being a lowly lecturer at St. Antony’s College, where for decades the Middle Eastern wing (not the East European and Russian wing, which has always been legitimate) was under the iron rule of Albert Hourani, who ran a diploma mill for Arabs (among them: Rashid Khalidi) and strolled benignly among his charges, a kind of fat abbot dispensing his favors. So he had a chair created at Oxford, one that was meant for him — after a comical “international search” — to be filled by him, Tariq Ramadan. And did the dons at Oxford, those who were in Arabic or Middle Eastern or Islammic studies, who depend so much on contributions from rich Arabs that are constantly dangled before them, raise a ruckus about this bought-and-paid-for professorship? They did not. They were either silent or, still worse, publicly ecstatic about such a fine and worthy appointment. The whole thing nauseates.
And for a while Tariq Ramadan continued his campaign, the one where he says “We [the Muslims] are here” and “we are here to stay” and “there is nothing you can do about it” and then he goes into another mode, that of sweetness-and-light, until those such as Ibn Warraq, or Ayaan Hirsi Ali, lay him flat in a debate. He’s much happier dealing with those who, being Westerners, are afraid to believe what they learn about Islam, can’t quite believe it, and are eager not to believe it, to convince themselves that there really is no problem, or if there is one it can quite easily be solved.
But now Tariq Ramadan has been, for the past ten months, unusually – for him — quiet. Why? Well, what can he say about the events in Egypt, the country to which he belongs, even if he thinks he is entitled to consider himself a European because he happens to have been born and raised in Europe, but as a fanatical son of a fanatical father who was the son of a still more fanatical grandfather? Well, what can Tariq Ramadan say about Egypt? Can he come out on the side of the tiny secular and liberal opposition, that fears the Muslim Brotherhood? Of course not. Can he speak up about the persecution of, and murderous attacks on, the Copts? No, he can’t. He won’t. So for now he is lying low.
The OxfordStudent should look into the funding for Tariq Ramadan, look into how he received his appointment to a professorship at Oxford, look into his soi-disant “scholarship.” That would require investigative reporting of a high level. But it would be fun, for someone. It would be useful, for the entire academic world, to see the rot and corruption, of Arab money deployed, not only to build Centers of Islamic Studies at such places as Durham and Exeter, where only those willing to defend the faith of Islam, and deflect criticism from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the Emirates — that is, from the donors who vigilantly monitor all of the appointments of these centers, and make sure that no independent, much less critical voices, are kept on.
Yes, a series on “How Tariq Ramadan Got His Professorship” — starting with his decision to leave the French-speaking world, and his false start in the Netherlands, and the St. Antony’s College lectureship, and finally the scheme to buy him a chair, that has worked out so well for him, and so badly for the image of Oxford, and no doubt for the morale of those professors who deserved their appointments, and for the morale of those who never got professorships but who know perfectly well about the scandal behind Tariq Ramadan’s appointment.
The scandal of those who have been admitted as students (interesting the way all of the rich and powerful Muslims want to study, or have their children study, in the West, for as many years as they can — yet they still do not ask themselves why, why it is that Christian-run or Western-run schools in their own rich but wretched countries, are what the Muslim elite wants for its own children, or why it is that they must send them to the West for an education) has received its due. The son of Rafsanjani here, the son of Qaddafy over there, dozens of Saudi princelings and princelettes way over there — that’s easy.
But the scandal of Tariq Ramadan’s professorship is more important. And so are all the ways that Muslims, and non-Muslim apologists for Islam, have been helping and hiring one another, and promoting one another, all over the academic departments of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies in the United Kingdom, and throughout the Western world.
It has been laid bare — by, among others, Martin Kramer.
But there has to be a continuing effort at exposure.
Why not a series, in a major London paper, rather than in an Oxford student paper, on Tariq Ramadan, and his Resistible Rise?
gravenimage says
Thank you, Hugh.
jude says
Excellent reading. Thanks.
CelticToTheBone says
The rot runs deep.
CelticToTheBone says
Perchance Hugh, might you say whether you are British Commonwealth educated or American, or otherwise Western? I ask because my own background is a bit of a combination and I recognize common elements in your style.
The Irishman.
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
The fact that Western academia is ‘bought-and-paid-for’ is unfortunate but not a tragedy. It can act to reform itself, or wither away and come to be regards as superfluous. (Many North American youth now choose trades and apprenticeships over academia in order to find their way in the world.)
What is a tragedy is that the UK, as a whole, seems to have been ‘bought-and-paid-for’ by big middle eastern money.
Babs says
None of what you write is at all surprising.
The archetypal muslim male believes he is the centre of the universe and that women are a lesser species, put on earth for his use and pleasure.
Ramadan has always been a sight too smooth and plausible for comfort.
Westcoastjohnny says
This is the clown who wants a ‘moratorium’ on stonings for adultery etc in Islamic countries instead of an outright ban.
I guess there is so much to discuss before deciding on a ban! So much nuanced thinking required!
gravenimage says
*Repulsive*. This is what passes for “moderate” with Muslims.
Hugh Fitzgerald says
Why should Tariq Ramadan be sentenced according to the laws of French Unbelievers? He deserves the verdict of Muhammad.
Here’s the relevant hadith:
“When a woman went out in the time of the Prophet for prayer, a man attacked her and overpowered (raped) her. She shouted and he went off, and when a man came by, she said: That (man) did such and such to me. And when a company of the emigrants came by, she said: That man did such and such to me. They went and seized the man whom they thought had had intercourse with her and brought him to her. She said: Yes, this is he. Then they brought him to the Messenger of Allah. When he (the Prophet) was about to pass sentence, the man who (actually) had assaulted her stood up and said: Messenger of Allah, I am the man who did it to her. He (the Prophet) said to her: Go away, for Allah has forgiven you. But he told the man some good words (AbuDawud said: meaning the man who was seized), and of the man who had had intercourse with her, he said: Stone him to death.”
gravenimage says
Generally, Muslims don’t care much about men who rape–particularly if the victim is an Infidel. They are more apt to stone the victim to death.
lebel says
Apparently the prophet is an exception.Ms. Islam expert
CogitoErgoSum says
The good deed that the actual rapist did by his publicly confessing in order to save an innocent man’s life was not left unpunished. The lesson to be learned by future Muslim rapists: never admit to committing rape (and make certain there are never four or more male witnesses … preferably none). Exceptional!!!!
carol says
Likely Moe really wanted to stone the confessor not because of the rape but because he had shown compassion for the falsely accused man and thus some independent, non-subservient character. That would surely be more hateful to the Mohammed we all know!
gravenimage says
Of course, the “Prophet” of Islam himself regularly raped kidnap victims, captives, and sex slaves.
He even chided his followers for *not* raping their kidnap victims because they were concerned about it affecting the ransoms.
Pretending that Muhammed, of all people, was intent on punishing rapists could not be more sickeningly grotesque.
Of course, lebel knows this–he just hopes that we don’t.
Shmooviyet says
Hugh Fitzgerald: Thank you for re-posting your article on the story behind Ramadan’s paid-for title of “UK academic” for those of us who didn’t see the original.
“Islamic Ethics” indeed.
Michael Copeland says
Middle East Eye says that Tariq Ramadan “advises Muslims on how they can fully integrate into European societies”. How reassuring.
This is how he advises them:
“Tell the infidels in public we respect your laws and your constitutions, which we Muslims believe that these are as worthless as the paper they are written on.”
“The only law we must respect and apply is the Sharia.”
See “Tariq Ramadan: Respect” at Liberty GB:
https://libertygb.org.uk/news/tariq-ramadan-respect
Gbox says
He tried to be mainstream and appear civilized, but his inner Muslim won the struggle.
lebel says
Jewish guy rapes woman = A hollywood mogul rapes woman
Tariq Ramadan accused = All Muslims are rapist, Islam is evil he did it because he’s a Muslim. Let us focus exclusively on this in the context of the Weinstein scandal
I never believed in white or jewish privilege but it exists. If are white, christian or jewish, you race or culture is not taken into account when you do something bad and your community is not collectively responsible.
I was waiting for jihadwatch to jump at the first Muslim accused.
gerard says
lebel Hardly the first muslim accused. Ever heard of the Rotherham rape gangs? ever heard of the rape capital of the world? … Sweden? Ever heard of the rapes in Calais or in Germany? and numerous others…Even so no one has said all muslims are rapists and Ramadan is accused not tried and found guilty.
Historian says
Perpetrators of sexual assault of the vulnerable (children, women, social subordinates) by the more powerful is a problem in many societies and perps indeed hail from all religions and none. The significant difference if the assaulter is Muslim is that Islamic jurisprudence actually enables sexual assault if the victim belongs to certain vulnerable groups because it does not have reasonable or fair standards regarding evidence (female testimony is counted as half of male; infidels cannot testify against Muslims at all; sexual crimes need to be witnessed by 4 males–an absurd standard of proof for assault in particular). In response to feminist criticism that older Western laws on sexual assault were biased against victims, contemporary Western societies changed laws to give women, children, social subordinates and other vulnerable people a more reasonable chance at convicting assailants. This was possible in part because those laws, unlike shariah, made no claim to be God’s laws. In addition to unfair testimony standards, Quran and especially hadith contain injunctions that implicitly justify abuse of females who are insufficiently ‘modest’ in dress; some hadith explicitly state that a married woman has no right to refuse her husband; Quran and hadith justify sexual relations (generally in the context of forced marriage) with prepubescent girls and with slave females–both of whom by definition cannot consent to sexual relations. So while males born into Muslim societies are probably no more inclined to assault than males born into other societies, Islamic jurisprudence enables a great deal of sexual assault that other legal systems do NOT enable and at least make some provision for penalizing.
Islamic jurisprudence’s extreme sexism and its ideology of socio-religious supremacy encourages many Muslims–including many living in Western societies– to denigrate both female and non-Muslim testimony and agency. Islamic texts linking supposed female ‘immodesty’ to assault teach many Muslim males to view any female who does not dress as ‘modestly’ as they think proper as fair game. Plenty of evidence indicates that these attitudes motivate some Muslim males to sexually assault non-Muslim females in UK, Scandinavia, Germany, Austria etc.
Michael Copeland says
“Any woman without a headscarf is asking to be raped”,
Imam Shahi Mehdi, Denmark
“It is their punishment for disbelief”
Maulana Bulandhahri
gravenimage says
lebel’s implication that Judaism teaches rape–as does Islam–is of course completely unfounded.
But then, this repulsive apologist for the savagery of Islam has always been dishonest.
Shmooviyet says
Late here, but, @Lebel, you have apparently missed the storm of anti-Semitic comments regarding Weinstein. There are plenty out there in ‘net world, like you, who jump at the chance to attach his deeds to ‘Jewishness’ and all that privilege– rather than his simply being an individual scumbag who used his H’wood power over girls, women and who knows who else.
Weinstein’s acts will NOT be explained away by his faith– if he has any. (You truly believe that??) The allegations against TR likely WILL be, by his co-religionists and the teachings of the ever-moral prophet.
jude says
As Gomer Pyle would say, Surprise suprise!. Not.
Carolyne says
This is just Islam as usual. This is what they do. This is what they are. One cannot civilize a sub-human beast.
Guest says
Don’t insult Martin Luther
gravenimage says
This is meant sarcastically, Guest.
Islam_Macht_Frei says
Looking forward to all future references to this snake to read: “….accused rapist Tariq Ramadan….”
Ketziah says
This woman is brave to come forward to report the rape, especially after such awful threats against her kids. Not to mention the stigma and nasty rumors come with speaking out.
Society focuses too much on how skimpy a woman’s clothes are, or how flirtatious she is. They act like it’s her fault, like she’s “asking for it.”
But some women wear skimpy clothes because it makes them feel good about their appearance, or their ‘flirting’ could just be teasing. They aren’t asking for sex. All too often, some men assume that a skimpy outfit or sly smile is a free-pass for sex.
No outfit, no attitude, excuses rape. If a woman says no and tries to get away, forcing her/threatening her into having sex anyway is a crime. Even if a woman were to walk around naked—while it wouldn’t be a smart idea—it still would NOT give men a right to attack her.
Real men don’t need to force a woman. Real men are understanding, respectful.
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
Mohammadism is not reformable. Every so-called reformer risks death. If the reformer survives and makes changes then the result is either a new sect of Mohammadism or a completely different religion.
Georg says
“I have been silent for several years for fear of reprisals, because by threatening to file a complaint for the rape of which I was a victim, he did not hesitate to threaten me and also tell me that we could ‘take it to my children.’ I was afraid and I kept silent all this time.”
What is it with these experts on The Religion of Peace?
Phemmy says
Please it is dis-honouring to associate Martin Luther the Reformist in the Christian Faith with this Rapist of a Human Being, besides i really wonder if that religion can truly be reformed. Ayari is quite lucky she’s in France, she would have been sentenced to another round of sexual abuse, because the worth of her allegation is just a quarter perhaps or half that of the Rapist Ramadan.
But can this religion truly be reformed, wherein more than half of the content of the Quran preaches and prescribes hatred against others.
gravenimage says
This headline is intended sarcastically.
Marty says
didn’t tariq get this wrong? shouldn’t he have raped a nonmuslim woman since she is worthless anyway? please advise what is going on here. Thanks.
gravenimage says
Oh, Muslims rape Muslim women all the time, too. If they can get away with it, they figure she deserved it.
Wyldeirishman says
Speaking as a theologically-conservative Lutheran who’s about as stodgy and unyielding as a basket of week-old muffins, and knowing full well the sarcastic intent of the headline of this article…
…LOL.
Babs says
The man has a history of lying:
A particularly chilling example of Ramadan’s taqiyya was his failure to condemn suicide bombing unequivocally was Ramadan’s interview with the Italian magazine, Panorama, on 23rd September 2004, in which, when he was questioned about the legitimacy of perceiving Israeli children as targets for suicide terror, he was quoted as saying:
“I don’t believe that an eight year old child is a soldier. These acts are condemnable; therefore one has to condemn them in themselves. But I say to the international community that they are contextually explicable, and not justifiable. What does this mean? It means that the international community today has placed the Palestinians in a situation where they are delivered political oppression, which explains (not justifying it) that at a certain point people say: we don’t have arms, we don’t have anything, and so we cannot do anything other than this. It is contextually explicable but morally condemnable.”
Although Ramadan’s answer appears internally consistent, even reasonable, upon first reading, when looked at more closely it is a prime example of the moral relativism and casuistry which seems to pervade many arguments put forward even by some moderate Muslims in order to deflect criticism of the more extreme behaviour of their co-religionists. Ramadan condemns the murder of children in and of itself, but his statement that it is “morally condemnable” is contradicted and may be thought to be fatally flawed by his assertion that it is “contextually explicable.”
Once again, Ramadan explains this away in terms of the Muslim persecution narrative, ie the actions of the international community against the Palestinians. Ramadan reacted to criticism after the publication of his views by denying that he had ever said such things. Unknown to him, however, the journalist had tape-recorded the interview.
Carolyne says
He is disguised as a Westerner and looks sort of OK, but I bet he has hairy shoulders. You can put them in a nice suit and make them resemble a civilized man, but it’s just a disguise.
James says
The link to the rape-allegation article on “Middle East Eye” just takes you to the general homepage… A direct link to a story about the allegation on France24.com is: http://www.france24.com/en/20171021-france-tariq-ramadan-muslim-scholar-accused-rape-sexual-assault-henda-ayari-ex-salafist .
Robert Spencer says
Apparently Middle East Eye took their story down, but at this point, the allegations against Tariq Ramadan have been widely reported.
Valkyrie Ziege says
; The only reason that Muhammadans identify as, or with, “Martin Luther”, is based on Martin Luther’s 1543 a.c.e. tirade against Jews, titled “On the Jews and their Lies”, most likely brought on by another of Martin Luther’s bouts with constipation.
If any of these “Greeting cards” couplets “scholars” actually studied Martin Luther’s works, they’d discover he said “The Qur’an should be exposed to scrutiny”, and he considered Muhammadanism as “a tool of the devil”, whose only purpose was fulfillment of Biblical eschatological prophecies, i.e., Kill the Antichrist, and punish sinful Christians, as part of bring on the “end time”.
Now you know why civilized countries are allowing in Muhammadans, and making excuses for their bronze-age atrocities. Because of a book written by insane men who are members of the “He-man, woman-haters club”.