Rape Squads and Saudi Dollars

article-2270216-1732CA54000005DC-892_634x434By James Lewis:

Forget Springtime for Hitler. In the Era of Obama we have official Arab  Springtime for Morsi, complete with Muslim Brotherhood rape squads going out for the very moral purpose of teaching  Egyptian girls and women never to escape their sacred house arrest without a  male escort. This is Shari’a law as enforced in Saudi Arabia as well as in the  city of London.

StrategyPage,  an excellent military website, gives us this information about who is paying for the worldwide jihad. On the Sunni side of the  street it turns out to be our friends the Saudis:

“Where exactly did the current crop of Islamic  terrorists come from? Basically, they came from Saudi Arabia… Saudi Arabia was  also exporting billions of dollars, and thousands of Wahhabi preachers…  Because of international media networks,  Islamic terrorism was no longer a bunch of separate  problems…”

And  there we are today. The Saudis are using their billions to export 7th century  Arabian barbarism to the rest of the world, and the Iranian mullahs across the  Gulf are exporting their version to Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Gaza, and Syria.  But basically it’s two flavors of the same criminal ideology, which sanctifies  rape and killing for the sake of Allah.

Read more at American Thinker

See also:

The Sexual Pathology of the Libyan Attackers

By Mark Tapson:

Soon after the terrorist attack that left four Americans dead in Libya, reports began coming in that U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens was not only murdered by the Muslim mob, but also sodomized both before and after his death, and his corpse dragged through the streets. This grotesque defilement was willfully suppressed by the mainstream media, who were focused like a laser on a much more horrific story: presidential candidate Mitt Romney talking like a conservative at a fundraiser. Thank goodness that in these difficult times we can count on the media to cover the news we really need to know.

As FrontPage Shillman Journalism Fellow Raymond Ibrahim writes,

Sexual abuse and degradation is a common tactic used against non-Muslims, especially women, as the repeatedly raped Lara Logan found… Nor are men immune from such rapes. In fact, the photos of Ambassador Stevens—stripped of clothes, bloodied and tortured right before he was killed—very much resemble the photos of Gaddafi right before he was killed. One U.S.-supported “freedom-fighter,” for example, can be seen sodomizing Gadaffi with a rod as others dragged him along.

Ibrahim finishes by noting that “the al-Qaeda affiliated men who sexually abused and killed Gaddafi are the same men who sexually abused and killed America’s ambassador.”

This revelation about the sexual denigration of the reportedly gay Ambassador Stevens raises several questions. First, when are so-called liberals going to shed the rose-tinted goggles of multiculturalism and get in touch with a righteous anger about a pathologically anti-gay, ragingly misogynist, mob culture that sexually violates and murders innocents?

When are American progressives, who whine about a mythical Republican War on Women, going to denounce this perverse sexual pathology in Arab culture? When are leftist academics, up in arms about the Bush administration’s enhanced interrogations of hardened terrorists, going to vent their fury against a culture that routinely commits sexual torture and mutilation?

Gay rights supporters work themselves into a lather over the Chick-Fil-A restaurant chain, which discriminates against neither gay employees nor gay customers. I suppose they’re unaware that most Arab and African nations walked out of an historic UN Human Rights Council debate on gay rights earlier this year, refusing to legitimize homosexuality. When are the “liberals” going to break their monastic silence about a theocratic culture that hangs gays from cranes, as in Iran, where President Ahmadinejad famously claimed they don’t have the problem of homosexuality there?

Obviously these are all rhetorical questions designed to underscore the left’s disgusting hypocrisy, because the answer to all of them is never. Breaking free of the mental bondage of multiculturalist indoctrination would cause the entire world view of leftists to come crashing down. They must cling to their delusion or risk a complete psychological meltdown.

Another question: If suspicions of Ambassador Stevens’ homosexuality are true, why did the administration send a gay man to an unstable hotbed of Islamic fundamentalism? Did it not realize that the possible discovery of his sexual orientation could have ramped up the danger for Stevens? Kevin Dujan at Hillbuzz reports that a Serbian consulate employee named Dino

told me it was no secret that Chris Stevens was gay and that “it was stupid to send him to Libya as the ambassador when he was a known homosexual.”

Dino explained in great detail that the brutal sodomizing of Stevens’ corpse was something that Muslims do to show the “utmost disrespect to the body” and that this is “a great insult in Islam” reserved for homosexuals. ”It is like making him a woman in death and he will be a woman now after life,” the Serbian explained to me.

Women should find it pretty offensive that this process of degrading a corpse through rape is considered “making him a woman in death” and “a woman after life.” Why aren’t feminists taking to the streets to condemn this misogynist barbarism? Oh, I forgot – they’re busy picketing Washington for free birth control, costumed as vaginas.

Read More at Front Page

See also: Sexual Jihad – Demoralising and Humiliating the Infidels by Sexual Degradation (Info on Islam)

The Rape of Christopher Stevens

By Raymond Ibrahim:

By obsessing over the 14-minute YouTube Muhammad video and its maker, the mainstream media ultimately exonerates the inexcusable and murderous response of the Islamic world.

There is only one question: did those who make this movie break any law?  No, they did not—and so the matter should end there, and the media should move on.  Focusing on those who did not break any American laws as a way to take the focus off those who murdered and initiated an act of war against the United States is not only misleading; it validates and gives Islamic blasphemy laws precedence over American freedoms.

Worse, even if making movies deemed offensive to Muslims was illegal in the U.S., the fact is, these embassy attacks, which “coincidentally” began on September 11, have nothing to do with the movie.  On September 10, I wrote an article titled “Jihadis Threaten to Burn U.S. Embassy in Cairo.” The demand that the U.S. release its imprisoned jihadis, including the Blind Sheikh, was behind these threats.  There was no mention of  “offensive movies.” My source, El Fagr, an Arabic website, reported all this on September 8.

In other words, several days before Muslims were angry about this movie they were threatening to burn down the U.S. embassy in Cairo.  I had even seen sporadic Arabic reports, from months back, talking about “extremist elements” threatening the embassy.  The movie is just a pretext—aided and abetted by the media, not to mention the Obama administration: Hillary Clinton called the video “disgusting and reprehensible,” wording which is more befitting those who murdered (and possibly raped, see below) Americans; the U.S. embassy itself apologized for those who “hurt the religious feelings of Muslims”; and the administration asked YouTube to remove the 14 minute trailer.

Thus the U.S. administration validates Islam’s blasphemy laws and, once again, aligns itself with America’s jihadi enemies.

Seventy-year-old, retiring Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) put it well, when he suggested that the administration’s response to the embassy attacks was akin to a court asking a rape victim for an apology, saying: “It’s like the judge telling the woman who got raped, ‘You asked for it because of the way you dressed.’”

Nor is the rape entirely allegorical.  According to the Arabic website Tayyar, “the American ambassador in Libya [Christopher Stevens] was sexually raped  before being killed by the gunmen who stormed the embassy  building in Benghazi last night [Tuesday, September 11],  in protestation of a film insulting to the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings upon him.”

Read more at Front Page