Leading the suicidal “progressive” war on free speech.
An important message from Citizen Warrior:
A group calling themselves “White Roses” created a video to inform non-Muslims about Islam. It’s called Three Things About Islam. You can view it on YouTube or click here to see it on Citizen Warrior.
White Roses is headquartered in Sweden. The name “White Roses” is based on a student resistance group “Die weiße Rose” in Nazi Germany. The group became known for an anonymous leaflet campaign, from June 1942 until February 1943, which called for active opposition to Adolf Hitler’s regime.
A spokeswoman for White Roses told me, “We see a parallel here concerning the protection of free speech. As you posted today, freedom of speech is getting more and more limited. The intention in choosing this name is to make a point that there will be groups opposing the doctrine of the state and speaking their mind.”
We’re honored to say the video was inspired, in part, by three Citizen Warrior articles:
We’ve given White Roses the Citizen Warrior Hero Awardbecause they are doing exactly what needs to be done — what we should all be doing: Sharing with non-Muslims key information about Islam, making it interesting and easy to hear, keeping it non-partisan, focusing on Sharia and not on Muslims, keeping it clean and not staining it with racism or hatred, and in this case, putting it in a form that is easily shareable by others.
I’ve posted the video on a new site I’m building. The purpose of the new site is to help us reach people who might be put off by anything that smacks of Islam-bashing. I suggest you use that site to share the video with those friends and family who don’t yet know much about Islam. Here’s the video on that site: Three Things About Islam Video.
One last thing: The video presents information you already know, but its “target market” is people who don’t know very much, so it’s a good tool we can use to share with them. I hope you use it.
Also see CJR’s recommended Webinars and Videos page
by EDWARD CLINE:
Joseph Conrad, the writer, was astonished to learn early in the 20th century that Britain, his adopted country, had a “Censor of Plays.” In a 1907 essay* he wrote about the character of an individual who would assume the power and harbor the hubris as the supreme arbiter of what appeared on the British stage. Needless to say, he does not “appreciate” the existence of a censor:
“…I have come to the conclusion in the security of my heart and the peace of my conscience that he must be either an extreme megalomaniac or an utterly unconscious being.
“He must be unconscious. It is one of the qualifications for his magistracy. Other qualifications are equally easy. He must have done nothing, expressed nothing, imagined nothing. He must be obscure, insignificant and mediocre – in thought, act, speech and sympathy. He must know nothing of art, of life – and of himself. For if he did he would not dare to be what he is.”
While the Church had been censoring written and spoken speech for centuries, government censorship of plays in Britain began in earnest with the Stage Licensing Act of 1737, to protect then Prime Minister Robert Walpole from criticism by satire and mockery on the stage, and ended with the Theatres Act of 1968. But other forms of censorship subsequently were enacted in Britain, many conforming to the legislative censorship of the European Union, rendering freedom of speech in Britain contingent on those laws, which amounts to a byzantine maze of “negatives.”
Article Ten of the European Convention reads:
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
Given the woozy state of any definition of freedom of speech today, or even its practice, in virtually any country, Article Ten not so much guarantees freedom of speech, but wraps it in a Rubik’s Cube-like conceptual straightjacket which only a puzzle-master or a consummate politically correct judge would be able to grasp. It is burdened with so many qualifications and exceptions it may as well decree: “We will let you know when you are ‘free’ to say anything. Until then, be quiet, or it’s a fine and the lockup for you.”
For example, a Swedish man has been charged with “intentionally disrupting a religious or spiritual ceremony,” in this instance, the Friday call to prayers outside a Stockholm mosque, by honking his car horn. This is an example of Sweden’s fatal dhimmitude and deference to its growing Muslim population. But, I am betting that no one has ever been charged with the same offense for honking a horn outside a church while its bells were ringing.
Of course, the local Swedish law must conform to the European Convention one, or at least not conflict with it. But, how does one categorize “horn honking” as unprotected speech? Does it encourage “disorder or crime”? Does it violate “the rights of others”? Is it a dereliction of one’s alleged “duty and responsibility”? How does one reconcile the “right” not to hear a honking horn and the “right,” if you are not a Muslim, not to hear some talentless muezzin screeching and wailing for between three to five minutes every Friday afternoon?
Well, you don’t reconcile them, because these are not “rights.” On the one hand, the government frowns on literal horn honking if it bothers Muslims. On the other, it protects the equivalent of malicious horn honking, that is, the loud call to prayers. The call to prayers is “spiritual”; horn honking is not. So says fiat, non-objective jurisprudence.
While the Swedish man denies he deliberately honked his horn to disturb the congregated Muslims – we cannot know the contents of his mind, that is, what he intended – it would not have mattered had he confessed that this was his intention. He is still liable under the city’s municipal code. He disturbed the “peace” of the faithful. Period.
Read more: Family Security Matters
The Norwegian Royal Palace, located in the heart of Oslo, is surrounded by a pleasant little park called Slottsparken. It contains lawns, flower beds, and a rippling brook spanned by a footbridge. Behind the Palace is a small cabin where members of the palace guard spend their down time napping and watching TV.
A less charming feature of the park is that it’s also been the setting of several rapes – no fewer than five of them between June and October of 2011 alone. Things got so bad that the Radisson Hotel – which is just across the street from the park, a minute’s walk from the Palace – began to provide its guests with rape alarms to wear when going out for a stroll.
A newspaper profile of one of the 2011 Slottsparken rapists provides a pretty representative picture of the kind of individual who commits most of these crimes. The perpetrator was a young Iraqi man who came to Norway in 2003 as an asylum seeker. His asylum application was rejected, but – as is standard practice – he was allowed to stay anyway. Three years later, he brutally raped an 18-year-old girl outside Oslo’s City Hall and was sentenced to four years in prison. In 2009, after his release, a deportation order was issued; he challenged it in court; in 2010, he lost his case. Nonetheless, he was again allowed to stay. A year later, still in Oslo, he raped a woman outside the Royal Palace.
A Muslim asylum seeker; a rap sheet; a meaningless deportation order: in today’s Scandinavia, these are among the standard bullet points on many a rapist’s résumé.
Yes, as I’ve noted before, Scandinavian policing could be better. Much better. Especially in Oslo, where the force is woefully undermanned and underfunded. Seeing officers at work, you can get the impression they’re still being trained out of a manual from half a century ago, when Oslo was as sleepy, well-behaved, and foreigner-free as Andy Griffith’s Mayberry. Last September, an Oslo rape victim complained publicly that the cops had waited six months to take witness testimony from her thirteen-year-old son. Such stories are common. And not just in Oslo: this languorous approach to law enforcement is a familiar phenomenon throughout the Nordic countries, where the only real crime, it can sometimes seem, is to display a sense of urgency about anything.
But Scandinavia’s rising rape figures aren’t the fault of the police. As everyone without blinders on knows by now, this is a story about failed immigration policies and about Islam, which teaches contempt for infidels – especially unveiled women. As Scandinavia’s Muslim population has risen, so have the rape statistics.
When I wrote two years ago about the rape crisis in Oslo, its rape statistics had eclipsed those of Stockholm and Copenhagen, earning it the title of Scandinavia’s rape capital. Since then, however, the incidence of rape in Sweden has climbed precipitously. Daniel Greenfield reported in January that “Sweden now has the second highest number of rapes in the world, after South Africa, which at 53.2 per 100,000 is six times higher than the United States. Statistics now suggest that 1 out of every 4 Swedish women will be raped.” (Another recent study also puts Sweden at #2, but has Lesotho in the #1 spot.)
Over the last seven years, the number of rapes in Sweden has nearly tripled. During the first seven months of this year, a thousand rapes were reported in Stockholm – a 16 percent jump from last year. In three hundred cases, the victims were girls under age 15. This month the Danish paper Den Korte Avis reported that rape is now at least five times more common in Sweden – where public discussion of immigration problems is essentially verboten – than in Denmark, where the subject has been openly debated for years (leading to mild reforms that have prompted bien pensant Swedes and Norwegians to slam Danes as racists).
There’s overwhelming anecdotal evidence that rapists in Sweden – like those in Denmark and Norway – are disproportionately Muslim. The Swedish government collects statistics on such matters, but won’t release them. If it’s taboo in Sweden to discuss the country’s rising Muslim population, Den Korte Avis observed, what’s even more taboo is linking it to the rising number of rapes. An independent study, however, concludes that 85 percent of rapists in Sweden are foreign-born – primarily from North Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia.
As Scandinavia’s rape crisis has intensified, new features have emerged. For one thing, it’s spread from the cities to the provinces. There’s been an uptick in kinds of rape – such as gang rape – that were hardly ever seen in Scandinavia before. Today’s rapes, moreover, tend to be more violent than yesterday’s.
Read more at Front Page
- Muslim (paedophile) rape Jihad: 1,000 rapes reported in Stockholm in just 7 months, 300 of them involve girls younger than 15 years! (thebritanistandaily.wordpress.com)
- Rape Jihad in the West: Muslim rape wave in Sweden (atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com)
1 in 4 Swedish Women Will Be Raped as Sexual Assaults Increase 500% (counterjihadreport.com)
Rape and the Islamic Doctrine That Allows It (counterjihadreport.com)
Islam, Rape and Theology (counterjihadreport.com)
Islam: Root Cause of Grooming and Rape Wave (counterjihadreport.com)
Sacrificing Our Daughters: On the Psychology of Islamic Rape-Gangs (counterjihadreport.com)
Documentation about the Armenian genocide in 1915 which Turkey denies down to the present day.
The documentation is based on reports of, amongst others, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Berlin, the American National Archives, the Library of Congress and archives in France, Denmark, Sweden, Armenia, Russia and Turkey.
These documents, hidden for a long time in order not to harm Turkey, leave absolutely no room for doubt about the reality of the Armenian genocide.
A light sentence has been handed out to six teenage boys, aged 15 to 17, from the diverse Muslim community in Sweden for raping a 15-year-old girl in a north-western suburb of Stockholm in March. Five of the teens were found guilty of aggravated rape by the Solna District Court, with the sixth guilty of attempted aggravated rape.
Five of the boys were sentenced to over one hundred hours of community service each, and have been ordered to pay 55,000 kronor ($8,500) each, in damages to the victim. The punishment given to the sixth, if any, was not reported.
The reason given for the light punishment was the fact that the boys are minors. The Swedish court also concluded that the boys had already been already punished to some extent by having their pictures and their personal details exposed on the internet.
The attack took place in early March at an apartment in Tensta, where teens took turns raping the girl. Four of the boys confessed but denied that they committed any crime.
It is worth noting that the court never doubted that the incident took place and that it was rape. The court found the girl’s testimony to be “a cohesive, long, and relatively detailed account” that did not contain “any contradictions or elements to the story that could be considered inexplicable”
Ironically, although the UN ranks Sweden high on the list when it comes to women’s rights, a highly publicized study shows that Sweden has become the second highest rape capital of the world (after South Africa) and the highest incidents of reported rapes in Europe, twice as many as the UK, the runner-up country and six times as many of the U.S.
Read more at The Clarion Project
The May 2013 riots in certain immigrant-dominated suburbs of Stockholm raised eyebrows abroad. While I found them disturbing I cannot say that I was totally surprised by them. I’ve consistently warned against such a likely outcome under this pen name for what is now nearly a decade.
The political elites not just in Sweden but also in neighboring Denmark, Finland and Norway watched nervously as the events unfolded. Clearly, major riots by immigrants no longer take place just in slightly more distant Paris or London, but now also in the largest city in the Nordic region. The problems are getting closer.
As usual, the comments from Denmark have tended to be the most sensible ones, with the newspaper Jyllands-Posten publishing an editorial about “The Swedish Lie”. The ethnologist Karl-Olov Arnsberg and the journalist Gunnar Sandelin in their book Invandring och mörkläggning (“Immigration and Cover-up”) describe sensitive facts about immigration which are hardly ever mentioned in the mainstream media in Sweden. Swedish mass media are quite possibly the most repressive, censored and totalitarian of any Western country, which is why some dissidents choose to write under pseudonyms such as “Julia Caesar” for websites abroad.
In Norway, the former soldier Aslak Fløgstad Nore is a journalist and author of spy novels who has for some unknown reason been hailed as a brave intellectual, telling truths others don’t dare to tell. One of his idols is Sweden’s Jan Guillou, a far-Left activist and writer with pro-Islamic sympathies who, apart from being an author of spy thrillers, was paid multiple times by the KGB for providing them with sensitive information.
In addition to being an editor at Gyldendal, one of the largest publishing houses in Norway, Nore is a regular columnist at VG, the country’s largest national newspaper. On May 26 2013, Nore published a commentary in VG on the “enigmatic” Swedes after Stockholm had been rocked by a full week of riots on a scale unprecedented in modern Scandinavian history.
What were his views on the causes of these riots? Well, for one thing Nore assured us that they had little to do with Islam, despite the fact that even left-wing newspapers show video clips where shouts of “Allahu akbar”! may be heard from residents of these heavily Muslim-dominated suburbs when Swedish police officers are attacked.
Instead, Mr. Nore blamed the obligatory “racism” of the white natives, especially alleged police racism, for partly triggering the riots. Finally, he blamed the “Swedish class society” for these problems. Yes, really. Nore defines himself as a member of the political Left and is a Social Democrat, but his above-mentioned analysis is straightforward Marxism at its core. His father Kjartan Fløgstad is an established author influenced by Marxist ideology. Nore didn’t foresee similar riots coming to Norway, although he admitted that the percentage of immigrants is actually higher in Oslo than it is in Stockholm.
Read more at Front Page
by PAMELA GELLER:
Muslims rioted in Sweden for a week, burning cars and attacking police. This is just the latest in an unremitting Islamic campaign, a continent-wide jihad initiative leaving death and destruction in its wake. It is a glimpse into the present and future of Europe, due to its disastrous and suicidal immigration policies, and a cautionary tale for America.
And it isn’t just in Sweden. It’s in France as well, where there have been periodic Muslim riots, featuring the same car-burnings, screams of “Allahu akbar,” and attacks on police. All over the continent, we see the effects of Muslim immigration in Europe. When a Muslim tried to assassinate free-speech activist Lars Hedegaard in Denmark, the New York Timessmeared Hedegaard and prised Muslims.
Last year, Belgium was shaken by a Ramadan crime wave, with threats of jihad grenade attacks on public buildings. A devout Muslim called for the murder of members of a pro-freedom political party in Germany. Other Muslim thugs “patrolled” the streets of London, harassing those they believed do not conform to Islamic law. There are evenSharia zones enforced in the U.K. Gay man are targeted by Muslims who threaten them to “get out of here, you bloody fag.” In Italy recently, a jihadist was arrested in Rome and there were police raids in Milan, Palermo, Cagliari, Cuneo, and Salerno. But Muslims nonetheless are violently rioting and attacking non-Muslims in that country. In Spain, a jihadi plotted to poison the tourist water supply. A jihadi trio was arrested “in possession of explosives and poison.”
And because of this mass Muslim immigration, the Islamic antisemitism has increasingly rendered Europe hostile to Jews. Norway’s Jewish population is almost nonexistent,French Jews are fleeing in droves, and a Jewish school in Belgium has been forced to shut down. In Sweden, Muslims shot rockets and hurled pipe bombs at Jews and attacked Jews at a peaceful pro-Israel rally. In Germany, Muslims rioted, chanting “Jews out, Germans out, allahu akbar, f**k off Jews, kick the Jews out, burn the Jew.” A Hezbollah courier was found guilty of playing a role in a Cyprus jihad terror plot. Hezbollah was also behind the bombing of a bus full of Jewish tourists in Bulgaria. In Italy, a Muslim was jailed for a Milan synagogue bomb plot. There are now sweeping “no-go areas” for Jews in Europe.
Think it can’t happen here? At a Los Angeles rally, Muslims chanted “Long live Hitler” and “Put Jews in ovens.”
The mainstream media, true to form, seldom identifies the perpetrators. Instead, in a characteristic move they blamed the Swedish riots on the right and attribute it all to poverty, saying: “Some seven years of centre-right rule, however, have chipped away at benefits.”
Read more at Breitbart
By Bruce Bawer:
Night after night last week, as the tumult in Stockholm not only continued but kept spreading to more and more neighborhoods and then to other Swedish cities, the media in that country, by and large, kept pretending that it was all about things like unemployment and social marginality, all of which were supposedly aggravated by Swedish racism (and, especially, by the insufficiently respectful attitude of police officers toward immigrant “youths”); meanwhile, the foreign media, which, as the disorder persisted, found it increasingly difficult to pretend that all this wasn’t happening (the New York Times finally ran a four-sentence Reuters item about the bedlam on Thursday), largely echoed the domestic disinformation.
Of all the reports I looked at, the one that most effectively epitomized the asinine, mendacious approach of the Western media to this latest nightmare was a piece from Reuters that had no fewer than eight names attached to it. I would strongly recommend that you read the whole thing; in fact, I would suggest that it be taught in future history courses as a prime example of the high level of duplicity of which the early twenty-first-century Western media were capable when confronted with raw displays of Islamic power on their own turf. Credited to Niklas Pollard and Philip O’Connor, with “additional reporting” by Johan Ahlander, Mia Shanley, Patrick Lannin, and Simon Johnson, writing by Alistair Scrutton, and editing by Janet McBride, the Reuters piece was headlined “Sweden riots expose ugly side of” – no, not of “European immigration policies” or “Islam,” of course, but of the “Nordic model.”
Yes, it’s all the fault of the “Nordic model”: the roots of the Stockholm unrest, Reuters (and virtually every other major Western news organization that deigned to report on the disturbances) would have us believe, lay “in segregation, neglect and poverty,” in years of “fruitless job hunts, police harassment, racial taunts and a feeling of living at the margins.” And so on. Which means, I suppose, that 9/11 revealed the flaws of the American model, and the car-burnings in French suburbs reflect the weaknesses of the Gallic model, and the explosions in Madrid were all about the failings of the Spanish model, and the savage murder of Lee Rigby in London last week…well, you get the idea.
The dispatch from Reuters suggested that Sweden’s “lowered taxes” (which are still absurdly high) and “reduced state benefits” (which are still staggeringly bounteous) are responsible for rising economical inequality and segregation, and thus for the pandemonium in the streets. An Ethiopian-born woman interviewed by Reuters maintained that Swedish kids won’t play with her daughter “because she’s dark.” (There was no mention, needless to say, of the real problem in an increasing number of Scandinavian schools, namely the systematic harassment, and worse, of ethnic Swedish kids by their immigrant-group classmates.) On late-night trains from downtown Stockholm to the suburbs, the Reuters team told us, you’ll see “exhausted-looking Arabic or Spanish speaking immigrants returning home from menial jobs”; an “Asian diplomat” lamented that immigrants in the Swedish capital “are mostly selling hotdogs.”
Read more at Front Page
- PARKING TICKETS ISSUED TO CARS DESTROYED IN VIOLENT SWEDEN RIOTS — CONSERVATIVE SITE POSTS PROOF (theblaze.com)
- Swedish Multiculturalism Goes Awry (counterjihadreport.com)
- STOCKHOLM RIOTS Leave SWEDEN’S DREAMS OF PERFECT SOCIALIST SOCIETY UP IN SMOKE (secretsofthefed.com)
by Soeren Kern:
“Sweden is the best Islamic State.” — Adly Abu Hajar, Imam based in Malmö
Hundreds of Muslim immigrants have rampaged through parts of the Swedish capital of Stockholm, torching cars and buses, setting fires, and hurling rocks at police.
The unrest — a predictable consequence of Sweden’s failed model of multiculturalism, which does not encourage Muslim immigrants to assimilate or integrate into Swedish society — is an ominous sign of things to come.
The trouble began after police fatally shot an elderly man brandishing a machete in a Muslim-majority neighborhood. Although the exact circumstances of the May 13 incident remain unclear, police say they shot the 69-year-old man (his nationality has not been disclosed) in self-defense after he allegedly threatened them with the weapon.
Two days later, on May 15, a Muslim youth organization called Megafonen arranged a protest against alleged police brutality and demanded an independent investigation and a public apology.
On May 19, Muslim youths initiated a riot in Husby, a heavily Muslim suburb in the western part of Stockholm where more than 80% of the residents originate from Africa and the Middle East.
At least 100 masked Muslim youths set fire to cars and buildings, smashed windows, vandalized property and hurled rocks and bottles at police and rescue services in Husby. The riots quickly spread to at least 15 other parts of Stockholm, including the districts of Fittja, Hagsätra, Kista, Jakobsberg, Norsborg, Skaerholmen, Skogås and Vaarberg.
After two nights of spiraling violence, Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt appealed for calm, condemning the riots as hooliganism. But his plea (“Everyone must pitch in to restore calm — parents, adults”) failed to prevent more nights of unrest, during which Muslim youth set fire to two schools, a police station, a restaurant, and a cultural center, and burned more than 50 cars and buses.
The unrest — which has many parallels to the Muslim riots that occurred in France in 2005 — has shocked Swedes who have long turned a blind eye to immigration policies that have encouraged the establishment of a parallel Muslim society in Sweden.
Although there are no official statistics of Muslims in Sweden, the US State Department reported in 2011 that there are now between 450,000 and 500,000 Muslims in the country, or about 5% of the total population of 9.5 million.
Muslim immigration to Sweden has been fostered by open-door asylum policies that are among the most generous in the world.
During the early 1990s, for example, Sweden granted asylum to nearly 100,000 refugees fleeing the wars in the Balkans. Sweden has also been a magnet for refugees from Iraq; as a result of the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), the Gulf War (1990-1991) and the Iraq War (2003-2011), there are now more than 120,000 Iraqis living in Sweden. In fact, Iraqis (both Christians and Muslims) now make up the second-largest ethnic minority group in Sweden, second only to ethnic Finns.
More recently, Sweden has granted asylum to thousands of refugees from Afghanistan, Somalia and Syria, as well as from Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Cameroon, Congo, Egypt, Eritrea, Iran, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, Turkey, Uzbekistan and Yemen.
Read more at Gatestone Institute
- ‘Multiculturalism’ blamed for violent Muslim riots (wnd.com)
- Riots in Sweden raise questions about nation’s egalitarian culture (foxnews.com)
- Muslim Riots Tear Apart Swedish Capital For 5th Night (patdollard.com)
Sweden has imported huge numbers of Muslim immigrants with catastrophic effect.
Sweden’s population grew from 9 million to 9.5 million in the years 2004-2012, mainly due to immigration from “countries like Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia”. 16 percent of all newborns have mothers born in non-Western countries. Employment rate among immigrants: 54 percent.
Sweden now has the second highest number of rapes in the world, after South Africa, which at 53.2 per 100,000 is six times higher than the United States. Statistics now suggest that 1 out of every 4 Swedish women will be raped.
In 2003, Sweden’s rape statistics were higher than average at 9.24, but in 2005 they shot up to 36.8 and by 2008 were up to 53.2. Now they are almost certainly even higher as Muslim immigrants continue forming a larger percentage of the population.
With Muslims represented in as many as 77 percent of the rape cases and a major increase in rape cases paralleling a major increase in Muslim immigration, the wages of Muslim immigration are proving to be a sexual assault epidemic by a misogynistic ideology.
The statistics are skewed by urban centers where the Islamic colonists cluster. In Stockholm this summer there was an average of 5 rapes a day. Stockholm has gone from a Swedish city to a city that is one-third immigrant and is between a fifth and a quarter Muslim.
Sweden, like the rest of the West, will have to come to terms with the fact that it can either have female equality or Muslim immigration. It cannot have both.
- Shocking Predictive Muslim Rape Numbers: One in four Swedes will be raped in their life (themuslimissue.wordpress.com)
- Sweden: Muslims admit deliberate hate crimes against Swedes, and government is proposed to reward them with – jobs! (themuslimissue.wordpress.com)
- Sweden: Muslim immigrant youths say young Swedes are so wimpy…. (refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com)
- More Swedish men report being raped (thelocal.se)
- Colorado Woman Gang-Raped by Iraqi Muslims (independentsentinel.com)
I was recently emailed a documentary called: Europe’s Takeover by Islam.
This is the first part of a four-part Israeli documentary by Zvi Yehezkeli and David Deryi about the Islamization of Europe. It has been translated from Hebrew and subtitled in English.
The filmmaker is an Arabic-speaking Israeli whose appearance and flawless Arabic accent were sufficient to allow him to mingle freely with the Muslims in several “no-go zones” in Sweden and France, and to get an inside look at the Islamic mindset within the greater European community.
The film contains some shocking footage, including a middle aged, seemingly innocent Muslim mother, who then threatens to “Burn down Sweden” if her deported son is hurt in his native Iraq and an armed Muslim criminal fleeing from French police who jumps into the camera teams van and forces them to drive him to safety.
Welcome to Eurabia, 2012.
by Bruce Bawer, Front page:
You may recall that back in 2007, the series Dispatches, produced by Britain’s Channel 4, sent reporters into several mosques in that country with hidden cameras and microphones. The result was a program entitled Undercover Mosque, which – for those who didn’t already suspect that fishy stuff was going on behind those walls – was mind-blowing, confirming pretty much every claim made by the critics of Islam that had been furiously rejected by imams as sheer Islamophobia. Among other things, Channel 4 caught preachers on videotape rejecting Western law and integration into Western society; asserting the intellectual inferiority of women and the acceptability of marrying pre-pubescent girls; and calling for the murder of Jews, Hindus, gays, Muslim apostates, and British soldiers.
If you remember that program, you may also remember what happened afterwards. The British police investigated the mosques, but decided they didn’t have enough evidence to charge them with anything. At which point the cops did a 180 and reported Channel 4 to Ofcom, the UK’s answer to the FCC, for allegedly editing its footage in such a way as to misrepresent the preachers’ views. The good news is that Ofcom eventually rejected the charges; the bad news is that, once again, the critics of Islam became the heavies, the Muslims the victims. And despite Undercover Mosque‘s explosive revelations, nothing much changed as a result of them.
Now, to its credit, and to the astonishment of many, Swedish television has done its own version of Undercover Mosque. The 60 Minutes-style series Uppdrag: Granskning (Assignment: Investigation) sent two women in burkas into ten Swedish mosques. One of them carried a hidden camera; the other pretended to be a woman whose abusive husband had taken a second wife and who wanted to know the answers to these questions:
- Is a man permitted to marry more than one woman?
- Is a woman permitted to deny her husband sex?
- Is a man permitted to hit his wife?
- If so, is she permitted to call the police?
Again, for those who have been following these matters for years in North America and Europe, the results of this investigation will not come as much of a surprise. But in Sweden, where the media try their best never to approach these matters in a remotely honest way, this episode of Uppdrag: Granskning provided a rare taste of media candor.
One of the ten mosques was the Stockholm Mosque, the most prominent Muslim house of worship in Sweden. An official at the mosque, Mahmod Adam, told his burka-clad interlocutor that it’s perfectly acceptable under the Koran for a man to take four wives, so long as he can support them and treat them equally. “Understand?” he asked. “Yes,” she replied meekly. In response to which he told her, sharply, “You’re supposed to listen!” – in other words, “Shut up!”
The faux wife went on to tell Adam that her husband hits her if she so much as opens her mouth – and that he cites the Koran in his defense. Adam replied that her husband is allowed to smack her on the arm – and that under no circumstances, in any case, should she call the police on him. His final advice: to show her husband more affection.
Elsewhere the advice was similar. At the Örebro Mosque, Abdur Kadir Salad told the woman not to call the police because she’d end up getting a divorce and breaking up her family – and Muslims don’t want that, for Islam is about building families, not breaking them up. At the Islamic Center in Malmö, same advice: no police, because “they can take your kids.” At another Malmö mosque, the message was unambiguous: “Never, never consider calling the police.” Even if he hits her twenty or thirty times? Smacking himself on the arm, the imam said forcefully: “This is not hitting!”
On to Uppsala, where Abdul Wadod – who, amusingly, looked not unlike Sasha Baron Cohen with a beard – told the woman that when her husband hits her, she shouldn’t call the cops; she should apologize. Apologize? Yes. He cited what he called “a very fine hadith,” which, according to him, says in effect that a good wife responds to spousal abuse by telling her husband: “I’m sorry, I just can’t sleep until you’re satisfied with me.”
That was the overall pattern. There were exceptions. “It doesn’t matter if he ends up in prison,” said the counselor at the Islamic Cultural Center in Rinkeby when asked about how to deal with domestic violence. “You must report him to the police.” (Curiously, of all the mosques, this is the one that has the reputation of being the most conservative; I couldn’t help wondering if he’d figured out that his visitor was wearing a wire.)
The final score: at six out of the ten mosques, the woman was told that it was her duty to submit to sex with her husband. At six, she was told not to report spousal abuse to the police; at two others, the advice she received was vague or contradictory; only at two mosques was she told to go to the police. And at nine out of ten, she was told that her husband has the right to take four wives.
All of this advice, as Uppdrag: Granskning duly noted – and as the mosque employees certainly understood – is in explicit violation of Swedish law. And these mosques, as was pointed out on the program more than once, receive generous financial support from the Swedish government.
All three countries are governed by leftist elites, by political parties that redistribute other people’s money and spread the wealth around a lot. The Left has made an alliance with Islam, which wants to spread its creed around across the board and impose its ideology on non-Muslims by guile or force. There are, however, two camps of the Left. There is the Left that hates the West as much as do the Muslims, and will do anything to destroy it, even if it means its own dhimmitude and demise under Sharia law and submission. One could not imagine another group in that part of the globe more dedicated to the destruction of their own country. “We will be multicultural and non-judgmental, even if it means our own deaths. It is the right thing to do. We will be virtuous, even if it means accepting penance for our culture being superior to Islamic culture.”
It is an instance of passive nihilism in the guise of the high moral ground. The only catch is that, ultimately, this high ground must lead to Norwegians having to walk in the gutter in deference to Muslims on the sidewalk.
And there is the Left that is afflicted with the intellectual cerebral palsy of egalitarianism, moral relativism, and multiculturalism. Its members cannot and will not oppose the invasion of their own countries by Islamic hordes. Members of this group are the three countries’ intellectual elites, which, as such, advise and inform the political Left. Together with the political elite, this group holds Islam and Muslims as sacrosanct and untouchable by the least criticism, serious or satirical.
Muslims, however, do not reciprocate when it comes to Norwegian or Swedish or Danish cultural values, or women, or property or freedom of speech. They are protected by actual or de facto censorship and political correctness. For all their relativist language, it is almost as though these intellectuals have conceded the assertion by Islamic intellectuals that Muslims are in every way superior to non-Muslims. It is useless to point this out to these “thinkers,” because they will only flip the coin and reply, “Heads, we’re at fault. We shouldn’t be so culturally imperialistic in our own country.”
Bruce Bawer, in a Wall Street Journal article on February 7, “After the Oslo Massacre, an Assault on Free Speech” (the full article was reprinted in Canada’s National Post) recounted the July 22, 2011 bombing and massacre committed by Anders Behring Breivik, a Norwegian who opposed the government’s immigration and multiculturalist policies, and his own prediction last year that a backlash would be mounted, not against raping, looting, and anti-Semitic Muslims, but against Norwegians who spoke out or wrote about the irreconcilability between Western values and Islam.
This statement was harshly criticized by Norway’s multicultural left. How dare anyone speak of such issues at a time like this! […]
On the contrary, Islam’s rise in the West is a subject that needs to be discussed frankly, without euphemism or disinformation. The survival of secular democracy, individual liberty and women’s rights depends upon it.
Sadly, my prediction turned out to be far more prescient than I could have imagined. In the weeks and months following Breivik’s rampage, dozens of high-profile Norwegian leftists stepped forward to claim that critics of Islam shared responsibility for his crimes—and to call, darkly if vaguely, for action.
Norwegian intellectuals claim that because Breivik was “inspired” by what he read in various anti-jihadist bogs that criticized Islam, they all contributed to Breivik’s criminal state of mind and so therefore their authors are just as culpable. This position underscores the notion that men’s minds are merely passive receptors of ideas that cause men to act, that ideas themselves are intrinsically potent, like sugar or cholesterol, and should be regulated to prevent events such as the Oslo bombing and massacre.
This notion also applies to Muslims, as well. If Muslims weren’t offended or insulted or made the special attention of critics and authorities as likely terrorists (a.k.a., “discrimination,” “racism,” “bigotry”), there would be a halt to bombings and rapes and murders committed by Muslims, and we would all be living in a multiculturally copasetic world. Muslims, Lutherans, Catholics, and Jews would all be holding hands and dancing around a Maypole.
But it is the Muslims who benefit from such rationalizations, not their victims or their critics. Muslims are implicitly granted the privilege of saying whatever they please without risk of reprisal or censure, because they are a protected group posing as “victims.” And there is no evidence that gagging their critics leads to a cessation of Muslim crime. In fact, state or politically-correct self-censorship causes a rise in such crimes, because there is no attendant risk in committing them. Their imams or mullahs will come to their defense, as well as the infidel egg-heads and “journalists” who report the news with socks in their mouths.
Bawer offers evidence of the campaign against critics of Islam in Norway and beyond. It is an episodic sequel to Julien Benda’s The Treason of the Clerks. Benda noted that French intellectuals,
“Certain hateful utterances,” the authors insisted, “are legally and morally unacceptable.” Rejecting “free speech absolutism,” and criticizing the United States for “go[ing] the furthest in protecting the right to expression—including hateful expression,” they argued that “Norwegian editors as well as politicians” needed to make it clear that “it is not a human right to express oneself in public; and that certain hateful utterances . . . are not acceptable.”