Tel-Chai Nation

Mark Tapson's reviewing Robert Spencer's new book, "Holy Hell", which is about the crisis of sexual violence employed in the Muslim world, and the non-Muslims who practically normalize it on their part:

Last year in France, three Muslim boys kidnapped a Jewish girl on her way home from school. One of the attackers reportedly told the victim, “I know you’re not Muslim… So, what religion are you?” When she told them, they called the girl a “dirty Jew” and proceeded to gang-rape her, which they filmed. Afterward the boys asked the girl to convert to Islam and made her swear by Allah that she would tell no one.

But she reported the crime, and in the trial this past June, two of the boys were given seven- and nine-year prison sentences for the gang rape of a minor on the basis of religion. They were 13 at the time of the crime. The third boy, who had been 12, was sentenced not to prison but to five years in an educational facility, because he was “below the age of criminal responsibility.” The presiding judge noted, “There is no doubt that [the victim] would not have been assaulted or raped if she had not been Jewish.”

Why were the rapists so intent on verifying that their victim was non-Muslim? Why did they denigrate her Jewishness? And why did they insist she convert to Islam?

The explanation lies in the riveting, brand new book Holy Hell: Islam’s Abuse of Women and the Infidels Who Enable It, an urgent, fearless exposé by the indefatigable Robert Spencer. It irrefutably demonstrates Islam’s theological justification for rape, sexual abuse, and sexual enslavement of non-Muslim girls and women worldwide.

[...] Spencer begins, in an introduction titled “The West’s Rape Crisis,” by explaining why rape rates in Muslim countries are generally extremely low. First, many rapes there go unreported because the behavior involved simply isn’t considered a crime. Second, the Qur’an specifically allows for the rape of non-Muslim women as a legitimate sexual outlet for Muslim men. Again, such activity is not viewed as criminal.

Spencer goes on to note that Islamic scholars defend Qur’anic passages asserting that Muslims may marry, or simply have sexual relations with, “those whom you acquire through war,” for children or women taken captive – “those whom your right hands possess” – thus become the spoils of war, and consent therefore is simply not a factor.

Non-Muslim women also contribute to their own victimization – or so Muslim scholars declare – by not obeying Islam’s modesty laws. Wearing the veil is viewed as protection against sexual molestation; women who do not cover themselves are considered fair game. Just as with consent, male self-restraint is simply not a factor.

The judge's note about the victim's ethnicity, unfortunately, is very naive. What if the victim were Armenian? Considering what a horror the Armenian Holocaust during WW1 was like, it's stupid to say the victim would not have been raped if she hadn't been of a certain background or dressed in a certain way. In a related subject, Hugh Fitzgerald comments on how one of the Muslim boys who raped a Jewish girl had his sentence commuted, and of course it's a bad thing, no matter his age:

There was no previous “integration” into the larger society, and there will be no “reintegration” for these moral monsters when they are released. They’ll go right back into their Muslim society, treated by other Muslims as victims, and feeling sorry for themselves that they were ever punished for raping a Jewish girl who, for being who she is, a Jewish girl, deserved the treatment she received. In prison, among older Muslims, these two boys are likely to become more fanatical in their faith.

Let’s be clear: Muslims, with a handful of exceptions, do not want to integrate into the larger society of Infidels. They are taught in the Qur’an that they are the “best of peoples” (3:110) and non-Muslims are the “most vile of created beings.” (98:6) Why would the “best of peoples” want to adopt the values and mores of those who are “the most vile of created beings”? And why would they want even to be friendly with those non-Muslims, when the Qur’an tells them not to “take Christians and Jews as friends, for they are friends only with each other”? (5:51)

The third boy was only 12, younger than the others and according to German law “below the age of criminal responsibility.” Instead of prison, he will spend five years in an “educational facility,” that is, a special school for underage malefactors. He won’t change. Whatever he is taught in that school, it will not shake him from the conviction that Muslims can do what they like with infidel girls, and especially with the despised Jewish girls.

This is why in the USA, there's laws for trying children as adults, depending on the severity of the crime. Of course, if the boy won't change, that's because nobody will give him corporal punishment or proper psychological treatment and persuasion to stop adhering to Islam. And if not, is it any wonder that incarceration in an "educational" facility will fail?

Labels: anti-americanism, anti-semitism, dhimmitude, islam, jihad, misogyny, Moonbattery, political corruption, sexual violence, terrorism