Sexual Terrorism, a New Weapon for Global Jihad - The West 3/3

Koran verse 2:223
Your wives are a tilth for you, so go into your tilth when you like, and do good beforehand for yourselves, and be careful (of your duty) to Allah, and know that you will meet Him, and give good news to the believers.
Hat Tip: Keizers & Kleren

Continued from Part 2 -  India

Introduction: In the previous posts we looked at the plight of Rinkle Kumari in the land of Sindhi, Pakistan where the Court buckled under the pressure of a feudal clansman. The enforced conversion to Islam and the ensuing marriage to a Muslim man, turned out cover for organized sexual exploitation. A pattern is emerging of forcible conversions, abductions and sexual exploitation emanating from the Dar-Al-Islam in every direction of the wind: called many things, it's proper definition is sexual terrorism. The phenomenon turns out to be centuries old. In Europe it used to be known as 'white slavery'. We know it today as the lover boy confidence trick or simply (gang) rape.

"Love" or "reproductive jihad", or "Romeo jihad" is the grooming of girls for marriage with a view of conversion, industrial scale child bearing for demographic dominance or sexual exploitation for financial gain. Young Muslim boys and men reportedly target school and college girls for conversion to Islam by feigning love.

Whatever the tactical aim, the crimes have a psychological effect of terrorism on the minorities and the women involved. In the realm of Islam it's perpetrated on minorities, in the West the victims are local girls, as we shall see in the last instalment of the series. The women themselves are mere objects and in themselves insignificant. On a strategic level the purpose is cultural and psychological pressure on local populations.

How the politically correct classes in the West are dealing with these cases is simply appalling and a deep disgrace! Not to mention the mainstream media and the judiciary that abuse the cases to further than own amoral political and multicultural agenda. One case in the UK stands out particularly (details - GRAPHIC!).

The Crown Prosecution Service of the United Kingdom, rather than correctly identifying the crime as part of the global Jihad, have attributed the problem to "Asians" in general. This is morally outrageous! This is how far political correctness will take us on the path of nihilism and the inversion of good and evil.

Read here how utterly despicable a severe crime is treated as a 'social problem' in the UK. A case is made by an evil hate pomo that the perpetrators should be excused on the grounds that oral and anal sex is taboo in their cultures...and we need to talk about it.

Rather than sticking to the truth wherever it may lead, indicting Islam as the case may be, completely innocent minorities are lumped with zealots and terrorists so as not to offend Islam. It marks the end of the rule of law and the beginning of a subjective, corrupt justice system. This is death of the state. Tolerating, aiding and abetting evil, it has become an accomplice of evil.

The "Asian community" rightly reacted with due indignation!

These isn't an isolated case by any stretch of the imagination. Systematic serial gang rape and sexual abuse by Muslim men is happening all over the Western world, but it disappears into the crime statistics as simple vice or rape cases. Meanwhile the epidemic in Norway and Sweden has become notorious.

Rape with a view to intimidation:  in the video below a gruesome Afghan rape marathon in a Swedish refugee camp and the reaction to it by an evil, Socialist, policor pomo. Never mind the victims. This is the price exacted for the blessings of peace and multiculturalism. In a few hundred years Islam will have caught up with us, and we'll live happily ever after, is the logic behind their inhumanity. There is however no good reason why  Islam would have an evolution that is similar to that of Christianity. Given its world view that is in fact highly unlikely.



Read the series on Readlist


Updates on pOmoLanD

2009: Reintroducing Class Justice

The blatant class justice and 'reverse' racism on display all over the Western hemisphere and how this is apparently the natural standard for entire cohorts of postmodernists, is reaching fever pitch!

Case in point: Sonio Sotomayor, Obama's pick for the US Supreme Court.

Bear with me, as we explore the concepts and definitions of objectivity and subjectivity in various fields.

Here's part preview of Chapter 2 of "The Dystopia of Paradise": Definitions

In philosophy subjectivism means that reality (the object) is dependent on human consciousness (the subject) for its existence. Man does not need to concern himself with the outside facts of reality to attain knowledge. The mind has the power to create reality in conformity with his wishes. Inner pathos, not reason, therefore is man's primary tool of cognition.

In subjectivism reality is not a collection of objective facts, but merely an illusion of a real world. Albert Einstein once asked a subjectivist, "do you really think the universe is not there when you aren't watching it?" A subjectivist might legitimately ask, "If I die overnight, will the sun rise tomorrow?" 

There are two kinds of subjectivism, depending on the view of who creates 'reality.' In modern times the notion was introduced by Immanuel Kant. He stopped just short of proposing the possibility of personal 'realities'. Instead he posited social subjectivism, the collectivist idea that social groups create their own realities. 

Followers carried the idea to further extremes: there is no reason why mankind should not consist of competing groups, each with their own type of consciousness, vying with others for the control of reality.  Postmodernists (Leftist and Rightist subjectivists) built on Marx's social version that consisted in a dialectic of oppressing versus oppressed classes. The Nazis, following in their footsteps, substituted social class with race.

Postmodernism (now mainstream) furnished ethnic groups with their own mental constitution, a racial or cultural version of subjective 'truth,' that may be invalid for others. This is what present day multiculturalists term 'the narrative'. More on the subject of polylogism in the post "Why Multiculturalism is Racist and Evil".

Socially the outcome of subjectivity is segregation; in postmodernism it is multiculturalism. A multicultural society is a socially subjective political system: an archipelago of distinct autononous cultural and racial islets (others would say, ghettos). Although politicians like to present the doctrine as synonymous with 'a society consisting of multiple cultures' this is emphatically not the case. On the contrary, it is legalized segregation and the diametrical opposite of 'melting pot.' 

As long as all groups abide by the principle that each and every culture is equally valid and autonomous in its own right, it is just the dissenters, apostates and outcasts who are thrown under the bus. But as soon as one tribe starts developing theories about its own supremacy, or becomes envious of more successful ones, or becomes predatory - to mention but a few wildly speculative possibilities - it's back to the drawing board of human civilization for the survivors (if any).

In a social or a political context subjectivism becomes best visible in socialist/liberal policies - such as corporatism (quotas set aside for certain groups), affirmative action programs, subsidies, grants and preferential treatment for minorities, actually empowering cultural and racial minorities by shifting capital, power and rights from the 'powerful' to 'powerless'.

All this is opposed by objectivity, which aims at applying one set of rules or standards to all, without regard for the person in question, or his social, racial or cultural identity.

On the philosophical level objectivism rests  on the view that reality exists independent of the human mind. The subject perceives the object to acquire knowledge of it. Instead of the introspection involved in subjectivism, the attention is directed outward, to facts outside consciousness.

In a social or political setting the objective approach seeks to apply equal rules and treatment for all concerned, without regard of the individual involved - baron or beggar - or his particular circumstances or background: murder is murder, no matter who committed it.

Objectivity has been the highest standard of moral judgment for a very long time. Laws and regulations may be codified with a view to objective application, but if judges apply justice with more empathy for Latina women than Caucasian men, the result is arbitrary whim, reverse class justice, racism.

Charles Krauthammer in a recent interview explains what the consequences are for all of us if Obama's 'sympathetic' notion of empathy is introduced into the justice system.

Question: do we seriously believe that President Obama - previously US Senator and attorney of Civil Rights Law, teacher of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School - introduces legal subjectivism just to be 'nice', do we?

And how hard can it be to explain to those who believe that racism does not exist in the 'oppressed', the injustice of reverse class justice?

- Filed on Articles in "The Pomo Presidency" -