Sign In
0 Items (
Search
Comments (19)
In National Review, Quadrant Editor John O’Sullivan writes of the horrific sexual abuse of German women by mobs of young Middle Eastern and North African men:
If we exclude divine favor as an explanation of [Islam’s] long advance, as Christians and post-Christian secularists presumably should, the rules that explain it include capital punishment for leaving Islam (a.k.a. apostasy), which is presumably a disincentive to doing so; strict rules for regular public prayer, which strengthen group solidarity; a privileged position for men over women, amounting in practice to ownership of them as either wives or concubines; a hierarchical structure within Islamic society that places Muslims in a position above non-Muslims in law, government, and social life; and a religious orthodoxy that endows Muslims with a general superiority (and sense of superiority) over others in non-Islamic societies.
Taken together, these rules help to shape a Muslim community that is cohesive, conscious of its separation from the rest of society, resistant to influences likely to undermine its cohesion, self-policing through its male members, and — because its sense of superiority is not reflected in its actual status either locally or globally — prey to resentment and hostility toward those whom it blames for its unjust subordination.
All of which leads to scenes like those outside Cologne’s station on New Year’s Eve. O’Sullivan continues:
But the most disturbing effects occur when the Muslim sense of superiority over non-Muslims combines with the Muslim males’ sense of superiority over women. Last year that combination produced the scandal in Rotherham, in which no fewer than 1,400 young women, most of them white, working-class “Christian” girls, were raped, tortured, beaten, abused, prostituted, passed from hand to hand, and abused in almost every conceivable way by gangs of Muslim men of Pakistani background who despised their victims as sluts and “worthless.” Their story, which is heart-rending, is told here. But the same basic narrative, varying only in the details, was replayed in Oxford, Birmingham, Oldham, and about 20 more medium-size English provincial towns in the last decade.
The shame of such widespread sexual abuse is not confined to its Muslim male perpetrators. It is shared by the police, by local councilors, by social workers who were supposedly caring for some of the victims, by MPs who didn’t want to know what was happening, by the negligent media, and by local Muslim leaders. These different “facilitators,” however, were driven by different motives. The police, the local authorities, the child-protection agencies, and the media turned blind eyes to the scandal (even when distressed girls directly sought their help) from fear of being accused of racism and Islamophobia; local Muslim leaders employed that fear to deter investigations and to protect the good name of their community.
As for the perpetrators, they were driven not solely by lust but also by communal politics and a particular contempt for non-Muslim girls.
The entire article can be read here. Social engineers, ardent multiculturalists and politicians who favour feel-good pap over harsh reality will want to skip it.
Islam promotes a low view of humanity, which is why is a fundamental explanation as to why its proponents are capable of treating others in ways we find unimaginably brutal. Theirs is a pantheistic religion. Allah exists as a singular, impersonal, unapproachable entity, existing beyond and above all things. Everything in the world is subordinate to Allah’s capricious ‘will’, including humanity, and this induces the famous Islamic fatalism.
Islamic worship is mechanical and dehumanising, and Muslims aren’t even expected to understand the Quoran or the lines they recite. They must simply obey, and everyone is expected to fall into line, including non Muslims (and this might answer the question of how moderate Muslims will ultimately respond to radicals).
This contrasts with the Wests triune, Christian god, with his personal attributes and direct involvement in creation, which has promoted our high view of humanity. Also, Christianity has always required hard evidence and history to provide a convincing case for itself (think of the miracles of Jesus as saying, “Let me prove it to you.”).
Take your pick between these two views of reality, because ultimately I think the west is going to have to choose either one or the other whether we like it or not.
This is an excellent summary of the main issue facing the West. The failure of national leaders to understand this simple but true message will lead us to an anti-democratic and highly centralised mysogynistic society – to our peril.The case before us is that stark!
I join in lauding pgang’s prescient comment above.
The ABC and MSM constantly remind us that Islam is a superior culture to ours.
Where are the Feminists? now that there is a real threat to their sisters?… that are silent and say nothing for fear of being accused of racism. They will expect the men whom they have despised and mocked to defend them. Perhaps we should ask them now to defend the peace they so obviously despise. Send in the feminists … the Islamists will run from them in fear.
Let’s be clear; western feminism is about careers, glass ceiling, equality and life-choices. It has nothing whatsoever to do with helping other women, particularly from third world countries.
It has nothing to do with helping women from the wrong class or who vote for the wrong party or express any ideas contrary to the Leftist’s revealed truth that only white men are wife-bashers, rapists and oppressors who enjoy incest with their daughters, sister and cousins. All men from all other races and cultures are victims of white male aggression and imperialism.
With this article I am beginning to understand the previously inexplicable egotism I had observed in Muslims, including the women.
Jenkins:
It has long been well understood in psychology that expressions of belief in one’s own superiority are there to hide feelings, founded on whatever, of inferiority.
The Muslims of the world have a helluva lot to feel inferior about. The Islamic nations are not exactly scientific, technical or cultural lighthouses. Quite the opposite.
The Islamic death penalty for apostasy comes from the same imperative as that for desertion in war, as practised by all armies I know anything about. The Koran is a warrior’s handbook, and Islam is at war with the rest of the world. Its quiet aim is an eventual world takeover, which Christianity used to strive for as well.
Unfortunately for its chances in this quest, Islam fell at its first hurdle. The Sunni/Shia divide is as old as Islam itself, and sectarian warfare between Islam’s two halves has killed more Muslims than any number of military encounters over the years with western armies; and has arguably helped keep Islamic civilisation in stagnation and backwardness. As long as Islam’s clerics maintain their stranglehold on education, this situation will likely continue.
It’s not just the schism that has held them back. It’s the fact that the vast majority of middle-eastern Muslims have low IQ, and ridiculously high levels of consanguinity. Iran is the exception, as they’re Persians, the majority of whom share ancestry with Europeans. One could argue perhaps that the schism in Islam in the middle east is an ethnic proxy war.
acarroll:
“It’s the fact that the vast majority of middle-eastern Muslims have low IQ, and ridiculously high levels of consanguinity.”
Could you give me your source for that?
For IQ I suggest Chapter 6 in Richard Lynn’s “Race Differences in Intelligence. An Evolutionary Analysis”, a scholarly book with an appendix of 43 pages listing about 800 references.
For consanguinity read http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3419292/ and the 43 references appended to that article.
Or open your eyes and mind and look around.
I think we need to get the term taharrush gamea into the English language, its going to be needed more often. Its the game of sex abuse to keep women in submission, another one of those little cultural artefacts that apparently we should all celebrate.
I notice that the Australian has a new piece up under the headline “Cologne sex attacks: vigilantes vow to rid streets of migrants” – reprinted from The Times. It starts off …
Vigilantes have vowed to “clean up the streets” of Cologne amid a fevered atmosphere of recriminations that has gripped Germany after the New Year’s Eve sex attacks by migrants.
Notice “vigilantes”, and not “Far Right-wingers” or “Islamophobes” or “Xenophobes” which The Australian usually runs with. I wonder if there is a change in the wind, and whether it will reach Australia?
While the terminology is encouraging news, the phenomenon itself is cause for worry. Let’s hope that unsavoury elements, such as skinheads and the like, will not discredit the genuine vigilante’s activities of protecting their country against barbarism.
I am always surprised that so many Muslim women seem not to understand that wearing the niqab or hijab in countries like Australia announces to all in a very in-your-face manner as if to say ‘what are you going to do about it?’ that they consider themselves separate from Australian society, not subject to the mores or laws of Australian society and belonging to a religion and society that enforces their second class status.
Even more extraordinary are the feminists who refuse to condemn the sexual crimes of Muslims against white women and children on the grounds that most white men have been just as bad in the past and many still are.
Disliking and criticising Islam is not xenophobic since Islam is neither ethnic nor racial. There is no such thing as Islamophobia since disliking it, even hating it, is entirely logical and reasonable. And yet these types of crimes committed against non-Muslim whites are racist, xenophobic and hate crimes. Why not say so?
Reading about the treatment of German girls on New Year’s Eve by Muslim men suggested to me that many Muslim women would be fearful of similar treatment if they appeared in public without their hijab. Maybe their choice to wear one has more to do with self preservation than any other consideration.
Taharrush gamea. Thank you Alistair for noting this term referring to the victimizing culture game of female sex abuse in public by Arab males. Previously there were alarming reports of such abuse on Western female journalists during demonstrations in Tahria Square in Cairo, and now we witness the abuse on New Years eve in various European cities with groups of multicultural males intent on groping and raping.
This is the latest very serious culture problem released on us by multiculturalism and yet governments are in denial!
Just found this article that is a interesting read on this subject.
http://quillette.com/2016/01/07/original-sin-the-sexual-motivation-of-religious-extremists/