Connect with us

Red Pill

Infidel Women: Islam’s “Spoils of War”

As the number of Muslim migrants continue to grow in Europe, the subhuman treatment and sexual abuse of “infidel” women that was once confined to third world Muslim nations has become a common fixture in the West.

Published

on

7 Views

Originally published by Ramond Ibrahim

One of the greatest but overlooked (or ignored) fact concerning Islamic aggression and violence around the world is that non-Muslim women tend to be its greatest victims.  According to a January report dealing with the Muslim persecution of Christians, “The most significant findings were that Christian women are among the most violated in the world, in maybe a way that we haven’t seen before.”  Six women were raped every day simply for being Christian, the report found.

Much of this traces back to Islamic law.  Inherently harsh—its ultimate source is a seventh century Arab man, Muhammad—Sharia is still harsher for women.  Men have “authority” over women and may beat them for disobedience.

The prophet said women are significantly less intelligent than men — two women are needed to equal one man’s testimony — and the majority of hell’s denizens consist of women, whom Muhammad further likened to donkeys and dogs in their ability to distract a man from his prayer and thereby annul it.

Such misogyny is confirmed by the headline of a new report: “UK Govt Review into Sharia Admits Systemic Discrimination Against Women …Forced Marriage Victim Made to Appear with Abusers.”

If this is Islam’s approach to Muslim women, non-Muslim women are doubly damned: not only are they, as infidels, “the enemy” by default, but as females, they are deemed even more inferior than their already despised male counterparts.

Add to this the facts that women are physically weaker—and physically more attractive—than men, and it becomes clear why they are widely seen as being, at best, “meant for one thing, the pleasure of the Muslim man,” as one Muslim told a group of young Christian girls before terrorizing and murdering one.  (Koran verses that encourage the sexual enslavement of non-Muslim women and ingrained notions of “sex-on-demand,” obviously only propel such thinking.)

The subhuman treatment of non-Muslim women by jihadi organizations such as the Islamic State or Nigeria’s Boko Haram—where “infidel” women are bought, sold, gang-raped, mutilated, dismemberedand burned alive—is relatively well known (thanks to ISIS itself, for disseminating images and videos).    Lesser known is that “infidel” women are treated in similar ways all across the Muslim world, as explained by a 2016 report:

Unfortunately, more and more women are the target of [Muslim] terrorist groups. There are numerous international incidents of women being kidnapped, raped, and forced to convert from Christianity to Islam by radical extremist groups…. Many are also sold on the open market. This brutality is not only occurring in the Middle East but in Africa and in many other places. In many of these countries, women are subject to persecution because they are considered second-class citizens because of their gender.

As minorities in both gender and faith, Christian women face double the persecution. Although we don’t have an exact number, we know that millions of women are being persecuted…. In these Muslim-dominated countries, Christian women are systematically deprived of their freedom to live and are denied basic human necessities.

Approximately 700 Christian and 300 Hindu girls are abducted, enslaved, and raped in Pakistan every year. These are very large numbers considering that Christians and Hindus each make up only one percent of the nation’s Muslim-majority population.  After a 9-year-old Christian girl was raped by a Muslim man who boasted of having “done the same service to other young Christian girls,” local residents explained: “Such incidents occur frequently.

Christian girls are considered goods to be damaged at leisure. Abusing them is a right. According to the [Muslim] community’s mentality it is not even a crime. Muslims regard them as spoils of war.”  This is why when a young Muslim girl was recently raped and murdered, Pakistan rose up in outrage, whereas the ongoing rape and murder of Christian girls (and boys) is met with deafening silence.)

A similar situation prevails in Egypt. Congressman Chris Smith earlier testified about the “escalating abduction, coerced conversion and forced marriage of Coptic Christian women and girls. Those women are being terrorized and, consequently, marginalized.”

Between 2008 and 2013 alone, nearly 600 cases of abduction, rape, and forced conversion of Christian women were documented in Egypt—again, very large numbers considering Christians are roughly only 10 percent of Egypt’s population.  A former kidnapper recently shed light on how methodical and virtually institutionalized this phenomenon is in Egypt.[1]

Unsurprisingly, then, as the number of Muslim migrants continue to grow in Europe, the subhuman treatment and sexual abuse of “infidel” women that was once confined to third world Muslim nations has become a common fixture in the West—and on the same logic.  If Christian girls in Pakistan are “meant for one thing, the pleasure of the Muslim man,” so a Muslim migrant in Germany who stalked, cursed, and groped a woman told her, “German women are there for sex.”

She is only one of countless women in Europe to be violated by Muslim men—even as Western authorities seek to suppress and dissemble over this phenomenon.  Even when about 1,000 women were sexually assaulted by Muslim migrants in Cologne, Germany, “the reaction of the media, which professes to care about women’s rights and well-being, was censorship and burying the news,” notes another report:

This is the same reaction most Western media has in the face of migrant crime waves: Witnesses were silenced or ignored and the media didn’t take its responsibility to report the truth seriously…. The exact same thing unsurprisingly happened in Sweden, a country that was once a feminist’s paradise, where women enjoyed unprecedented liberty and hyper-equality, now known for its sex crimes and gang rapes.

Titled “Rape, Murder and Misogyny: The Real Victims of the Migrant Crisis are Europe’s Women,” the January 14 Voice of Europe report gives just a few examples:

  • In Austria: A 72-year-old grandmother was raped by an Afghan minor; as a result she lost the will to live [and died].
  • In Belgium: A young girl was drugged and raped by a migrant after she asked the way to the station.
  • In France: Two teens were stabbed to death by a migrant in Marseille.
  • In Germany: A 19-year-old student was raped and murdered by an Afghan migrant.
  • In Germany: A 17-year-old girl was stabbed to death after quitting her relationship with a migrant.
  • In Italy: A Polish woman was gang raped by four migrants in Rimini.
  • In the Netherlands: A young girl was raped and almost drowned by an asylum seeker in Kampen.
  • In the Netherlands: A woman was gang raped by a group of Africans.
  • In Sweden: A girl was stabbed to death after rejecting an asylum seeker.
  • In Sweden: A woman in a wheelchair was gang raped by a group of migrants.
  • In Switzerland: Six women were sexually assaulted by “dark skinned” men.
  • In the UK: Muslim Grooming gangs targeting white girls have been around for decades.

It bears mentioning that the above examples are only the tip of the iceberg.   Among some of the many stories to surface in just the last two weeks (as of this writing), mosque attending Muslims broke into the home of a British woman and repeatedly raped her at gunpoint;  during what was described as a “horrific attack,” a Muslim man raped another British woman as she sat on a public bench; three Muslims sexually assaulted a German mother in front of her toddler in the stroller; and pants for women with alarms to ward off rapists sold out almost as soon as they were introduced in Germany.

As the Voice of Europe correctly adds, “Were these acts committed under any other circumstances they would have been classed as either war crimes or crimes against humanity……It is clear that the real victims of the migrant crisis are Europe’s women: They are quickly losing the freedom they fought for and are clear targets for guests who have been accepted into our societies.”

To put it differently, all the Hollywood stars, militant feminists and social-justice warriors who are forever raging against “sexism” in the West — but who have nothing to say about Islam’s female victims — are not “defenders of women’s rights,” but pariahs  dedicated to subverting Western civilization no less than the terrorists they  have been apologizing and essentially covering for.

—————————-

[1] A portion of his testimony follows:  “A group of kidnappers meets in a mosque to discuss potential victims. They keep a close eye on Christians’ houses and monitor everything that’s going on. On that basis, they weave a spider’s web around [the girls]…. I remember a Coptic Christian girl from a rich, well-known family in Minya. She was kidnapped by five Muslim men. They held her in a house, stripped her and filmed her naked. In the video, one of them also undressed. They threatened to make the video public if the girl wouldn’t marry him….  The kidnappers receive large amounts of money. Police can help them in different ways, and when they do, they might also receive a part of the financial reward the kidnappers are paid by the Islamisation organisations. In some cases, police provide the kidnappers with drugs they seize. The drugs are then given to the girls to weaken their resistance as they put them under pressure. I even know of cases in which police offered helped to beat up the girls to make them recite the Islamic creed.  And the value of the reward increases whenever the girl has a position. For example, when she is the daughter of a priest or comes from a well-known family….  The Salafist group I knew rented apartments in different areas of Egypt to hide kidnapped Coptic.  There, they put them under pressure and threaten them to convert to Islam. And once they reach the legal age, a specially arranged Islamic representative comes in to make the conversion official, issue a certificate and accordingly they change their ID….  If all goes to plan, the girls are also forced into marriage with a strict Muslim. Their husbands don’t love them, they just marry her to make her a Muslim. She will be hit and humiliated. And if she tries to escape, or convert back to her original religion, she will be killed.”

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

Lori Loughlin’s daughter was aboard USC official’s yacht in Bahamas when mom was charged

Lori Loughlin’s daughter was on the yacht of USC’s Board of Trustees when her mom was accused in scheme.

The Duran

Published

on

Via Fox News


Lori Loughlin’s daughter Olivia Jade Giannulli was spending spring break on a University of Southern California official’s yacht when her mother was accused Tuesday of involvement in a college admissions scheme, reports said.

Giannulli, 19, was on Rick Caruso’s luxury yacht Invictus in the Bahamas, a report said. Caruso is chairman of USC’s Board of Trustees.

Giannulli, who currently attends USC, was with Caruso’s daughter Gianna and several other friends, the outlet reported.

“My daughter and a group of students left for spring break prior to the government’s announcement yesterday,” Caruso told TMZ. “Once we became aware of the investigation, the young woman decided it would be in her best interests to return home.”

Loughlin’s daughter has since returned to Los Angeles to face the allegations that could result in her getting expelled from USC.

USC’s Board of Trustees will not decide the status of Giannulli and the other students involved in the case, but rather, the university’s president will make the decisions, according to TMZ.

Business deals in jeopardy?

Giannulli is a YouTube beauty vlogger and social media star, but in the midst of her mother’s charges, she may lose the lucrative brand-sponsorship deals she has landed over the years, Variety reported.

HP, having cut ties with Giannulli, said in a statement, “HP worked with Lori Loughlin and Olivia Jade in 2017 for a one-time product campaign. HP has removed the content from its properties.”

Giannulli also cut brand deals with partners including Amazon, Dolce & Gabbana, Lulus, Marc Jacobs Beauty, Sephora, Smashbox Beauty Cosmetics, Smile Direct Club, Too Faced Cosmetics, Boohoo, and Unilever’s TRESemmé, the report said.

Giannulli’s rep declined to comment, Variety reported. Estée Lauder Companies, which owns Smashbox and Too Faced, also declined to comment, while the other brands or companies the magazine reached out to did not immediately respond to their requests for comment.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

$250M Lawsuit Against CNN Imminent; Covington High MAGA Student Suffered “Direct Attacks”

CNN will be the second MSM outlet sued over their reporting of the incident, after Sandmann launched a $250 million lawsuit against the Washington Post in late February. 

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


CNN is about to be sued for more than $250 million for spreading fake news about 16-year-old Covington High School student Nicholas Sandmann.

Sandmann was viciously attacked by left-leaning news outlets over a deceptively edited video clip from the January March for Life rally at the Lincoln Memorial, in which the MAGA-hat-wearing teenager appeared to be mocking a Native American man beating a drum. Around a day later, a longer version of the video revealed that Sandmann did absolutely nothing wrong – after the media had played judge, jury and executioner of Sandmann’s reputation.

CNN will be the second MSM outlet sued over their reporting of the incident, after Sandmann launched a $250 million lawsuit against the Washington Post in late February.

Speaking with Fox News host Mark Levin in an interview set to air Sunday, Sandmann’s attorney, L. Lin Wood, said “CNN was probably more vicious in its direct attacks on Nicholas than The Washington Post. And CNN goes into millions of individuals’ homes. It’s broadcast into their homes.”

They really went after Nicholas with the idea that he was part of a mob that was attacking the Black Hebrew Israelites, yelling racist slurs at the Black Hebrew Israelites,” continued Wood. “Totally false. Saying things like that Nicholas was part of a group that was threatening the Black Hebrew Israelites, that they thought it was going to be a lynching.”

Why didn’t they stop and just take an hour and look through the internet and find the truth and then report it?” Wood asked. “Maybe do that before you report the lies. They didn’t do it. They were vicious. It was false. CNN will be sued next week, and the dollar figure in the CNN case may be higher than it was [against] The Washington Post.”

Watch: 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Rand Paul refuses to support emergency declaration, deepening problem

Rand Paul gives a principled reason for his refusal, and he cannot be faulted for that, but it leaves the borders open and unsafe.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

Senator Rand Paul indicated he will vote to terminate President Trump’s National Emergency Declaration on Sunday. This continues a story that seems to want no resolution.

Weeks ago, the seed to this news piece started this way:

One 35-day partial government shutdown and almost three weeks later, the debate over a statistically tiny amount of money in the US budget for the building of a border wall drags on with no solution. On February 15th, if there is no agreement that is to President Trump’s satisfaction, the government will once again descend into a partial shutdown.

And on February 15th, the President signed a continuing resolution to keep the government open through the rest of the fiscal year. This CR gave sharply limited authority of funds with regards to the border wall. This prompted the President to take it a step farther and declare a National Emergency.

This is because very few people in the US government actually desire a solution to close and secure the American-Mexican border. In fact, what we see is a government that is largely aligned against the will of its citizens.

President Trump has made repeated statements and speeches in which he outlines a fair array of facts concerning the problems experienced in the US by illegal border crossings of both people and controlled substances.

However, the issue of border security remains something that Congress only supports with words. We saw this in action both last week and the week before with the Democrat led House of Representatives voting 245-182 to terminate the National Emergency declaration. While this was to be expected in the House, on March 3rd, libertarian Senator Rand Paul, a known strong supporter of President Trump, nonetheless penned an Op-Ed piece on Fox News in which he said he planned to also vote against the National Emergency in the Republican-led Senate (emphasis added):

In September of 2014,  I had these words to say: “The president acts like he’s a king. He ignores the Constitution.  He arrogantly says, ‘If Congress will not act, then I must.’

Donald J. Trump agreed with me when he said in November 2014 that President Barack Obama couldn’t make a deal on immigration so “now he has to use executive action, and this is a very, very dangerous thing that should be overridden easily by the Supreme Court.”

I support President Trump. I supported his fight to get funding for the wall from Republicans and Democrats alike, and I share his view that we need more and better border security.

However, I cannot support the use of emergency powers to get more funding, so I will be voting to disapprove of his declaration when it comes before the Senate.

Every single Republican I know decried President Obama’s use of executive power to legislate. We were right then. But the only way to be an honest officeholder is to stand up for the same principles no matter who is in power…

There are really two questions involved in the decision about emergency funding:

  • First, does statutory law allow for the president’s emergency orders,
  • and, second, does the Constitution permit these emergency orders?

As far as the statute goes, the answer is maybe — although no president has previously used emergency powers to spend money denied by Congress, and it was clearly not intended to do that.

But there is a much larger question: the question of whether or not this power and therefore this action are constitutional. With regard to the Constitution, the Supreme Court made it very clear in Youngstown Steel in 1952, in a case that is being closely reexamined in the discussion of executive power.  In Youngstown, the Court ruled that there are three kinds of executive order: orders that carry out an expressly voiced congressional position, orders where Congress’ will is unclear, and, finally, orders clearly opposed to the will of Congress.

To my mind, like it or not, we had this conversation.  In fact, the government was shut down in a public battle over how much money would be spent on the wall and border security.  It ended with a deal that Congress passed and the president signed into law, thus determining the amount.

Congress clearly expressed its will not to spend more than $1.3 billion and to restrict how much of that money could go to barriers.  Therefore, President Trump’s emergency order is clearly in opposition to the will of Congress.

Moreover, the broad principle of separation of powers in the Constitution delegates the power of the purse to Congress.  This turns that principle on its head.

Some are attempting to say that there isn’t a good analogy between President Obama’s orders or the Youngstown case. I disagree. Not only are the issues similar, but I think Youngstown Steel implications are even more profound in the case of emergency appropriations. We spent the last two months debating how much money should be spent on a wall, and Congress came to a clear conclusion: $1.3 billion. Without question, the president’s order for more wall money contradicts the will of Congress and will, in all likelihood, be struck down by the Supreme Court.

In fact, I think the president’s own picks to the Supreme Court may rebuke him on this.

Regardless, I must vote how my principles dictate. My oath is to the Constitution, not to any man or political party. I stand with the president often, and I do so with a loud voice. Today, I think he’s wrong, not on policy, but in seeking to expand the powers of the presidency beyond their constitutional limits. I understand his frustration. Dealing with Congress can be pretty difficult sometimes. But Congress appropriates money, and his only constitutional recourse, if he does not like the amount they appropriate, is to veto the bill.

This statement by Rand Paul is extremely – and painfully – fair. It marks not the actions of a liberal but of someone who is trying to do things truly “by the book.” He cannot be faulted for this.

But his “Nay” is very poorly placed because it comes in the context of a Congress that is full of people far less committed to the vision of America and its sovereignty than he or the President are. One of the reasons stated for lax border security is that cutting off illegal immigration also cuts off very cheap labor for several industries. Some of those industry leaders donate lavishly to political campaigns, ergo, corruption.

Rand Paul, in trying to fight for what is right by the letter of the law, may be correct, but in the short term it appears to exacerbate the problem of the porous US-Mexico border.

President Trump is trying to do the right thing in the company of a Congress who does not want this, for various reasons. Some of it is because some Congressmen and women are petty, Nancy Pelosi and Charles Schumer being the crabby National Grandparents in this aspect. But add to the “resist Trump because he is Trump” lobby those people who gain from illegal immigration in the short term, and those like the new socialist crop of Congressional members who are ready to change the very nature of the United States into something like their cannabis-induced dream of Sweden (which didn’t even work in Sweden!) and we see that border security is every bit the uphill climb that President Trump has shown it to be.

The government shutdown did one very good thing: It got the American focus on the border and some opinions on the matter moved – at least among the American people.

But since when did our representatives and senators really represent us, the American people?

It has been a long, long time.

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending