Sacrificial Virgins

Our Israeli correspondent MC adds a gloomy coda to what was originally intended to be a three-part series.

Sacrificial Virgins
by MC

I was not going to write the fourth part of what otherwise was a trilogy, as its subject is not particularly nice, but events have made it a necessity. Events all across Europe where Muslim morality — or the lack of it — have put more than half our population into abject fear.

Whilst President Obama and his administration are waging non-violent war against Israel, and Swedish dignitaries are playing the old, old game of anti-Semitic blood libel at the behest of foreign (Muslim) relations, they are allowing forced religious prostitution of young girls and women all across Europe, Canada and, one must assume, the US. No cases have yet come out in the US, but one can be sure that the motivation is there, but maybe, just maybe, the thought of an angry father, armed to the teeth, is more than the average ‘brave’ Muslim sex jihadist can contemplate.

Religious prostitution was common in classical times, and the young girls may well have been sold into slavery. We thought these events had been left behind in our history, but think again.

1,400 girls as young as 11 were abandoned to the religious sex trade in Rotherham in the UK by the Religion of Socialism to appease the sexual appetites of the Muslim ‘Religion of Peace’ community for young flesh. The reason: community cohesion and avoidance of ‘peaceful’ violence.

Tell me: is there anything that socialism does not corrupt?

There have so far been no arrests of police or public servants in Rotherham, and I strongly suspect that there will never be any. It would not be individual criminals on trial. It would be socialism itself.

The mass molestation in Cologne has exposed the sheer folly of our EU-centred society, and the emerging North American Union society. That unarmed women cannot protect themselves against unarmed men is a given, and ‘keeping a distance’ is not possible when the males ‘own’ the space that the women have to move through to get to safety.

It is all too easy for three men to remove the clothing of a woman, most of which is elasticated and slips down easily. It then acts as a hobble denying further movements. In a public square or a train station there is no reasonable defence for the lone unarmed victim.

The simple solution is to allow women a weapon, but this is against the religious dogma of socialism where only the almighty god State can authorise its own priesthood with weaponry to ‘protect and serve’ the innocent compliant.

If the will were there, those women would be protected, but the will is elsewhere. There are other needs which must be met, and the women are abandoned to unwilling prostitution; sacrificed on the altar of Political Correctness.

I had it drummed into me at an early age that “birds of a feather flock together” and that if I joined a gang that I too would be considered jointly guilty of anything the gang did. But the application of this rule is now selective — members of so-called ‘victim’ cultures are innocent of joint accountability; conversely all ‘right-wingers’ are Nazis because of their associations.

Under my culture, no Muslim can be trusted where women are concerned because their book says that my women are their sexual playthings, and they hold their book to be above my culture. But the socialists will prosecute me if I defend ‘my’ women against these sexual predators, as can be seen in Rotherham where concerned parents were threatened with arrest.

Why? Because they think that I am a greater threat to their religion and its aims than Muslims are, I must be suppressed, my manhood must be suppressed, the fight must be knocked out of me. My ‘white supremacist’ culture and upbringing makes me likely to fight back; culture and upbringing make me likely to dissent. And whilst socialism condones violence, it cannot cope with criticism, so I am therefore the greater threat and must be silenced.

‘Right-wingers’ have no rights. They are fair game for all left-leaning organisations, Muslims are violent, but do not disrupt the aims of the Left. The real conservatives of the real Right, however, (now relabelled ‘Far-Right’ to tar them with the ‘Nazi’ brush) can stop the Left dead in its tracks.

The impact of the Cologne gropefest has been great. It was an eye-opener, a reality check that must now be managed in a way that sidelines the hurt, the sexism and the racism, and places all blame on the victim. German woman must be made to understand that when a Muslim man says ‘drop ’em, blossom’ he has the full backing of Merkelism behind him.

There is a risk here: will the Germans finally realize that the Führerprinzip is not in their best interest? Will Germany finally throw off a leader culture?

I strongly suspect that the answer is no, and that compulsory Lebensborn [meaning “fount of life”; founded on 12 December 1935 to counteract falling birth rates in Germany, and to promote Nazi eugenics] is the aim, that the best way to integrate the new blood into the Volk is by seduction and rape by the superior manhood.

Hitler liked the virility of Islam. He wished he had been born into Islam, because Judeo-Christianity was weak:

“If Islam despises Christianity, it has a thousand fold right to do so: Islam at least assumes that it is dealing with men… Christianity destroyed for us the whole harvest of ancient civilization, and later it also destroyed for us the whole harvest of Mohammedan civilization. The wonderful culture of the Moors in Spain, which was fundamentally nearer to us and appealed more to our senses and tastes than that of Rome and Greece, was trampled down (— I do not say by what sort of feet —) Why? Because it had to thank noble and manly instincts for its origin — because it said yes to life, even to the rare and refined luxuriousness of Moorish life!… The crusaders later made war on something before which it would have been more fitting for them to have groveled in the dust”

Germany is like the tenderfoot cowboy buffoon who wants to leap into the saddle to imitate the film stuntmen. He misses and goes over the top to land back in the dust the other side.

Nazism and Communism are the socialist twins. The integrity of German womanhood must be sacrificed to the sexual needs of a million lusty males. Females do not own their bodies; their wombs are the property of the State.

And it is not just in Germany.

It has taken hundreds of years for women to get some sort of equality in western society, to be considered as a real person and not just as a sex kitten and baby incubation machine. Now it seems we must throw it all away — no action in Rotherham and inertia in Cologne.

In Muslim countries women have to hide behind closed doors and black veils. The shame-based society leaves them no option. In Islam, women have no mind, only the ‘meat’ of her body is ‘Halal’ for man to enjoy. Nasrin (2007, p.62) lamented,

My mother used ‘purdah’. She wore a ‘burqa’[the black veil] with a net cover in front of the face. It reminded me of the meat-safes in my grandmother’s house. One had a net door made of cloth, the other of metal. But the objective was same — keeping the meat safe“.

Burqa system is completely a religious matter in Muslim society. In no other shame-based society black veils are used and the guilt-based societies cannot even think of it. Muslim society suffers from huge ‘abnormal’ shame. Darkness around covering the head means covering her brain. This sick idea of burqa originated from Muhammad’s and Allah’s sick mind. Allah wrote in the Qur’an,

“O Prophet, tell your wives, your daughters and the believing women to draw their veils close to them, so it is likelier they will be known, and not hurt” (Q: 33.59).

In Urdu, women are called ‘aurat’ (عورت), which came from the Arabic word ‘awrah’ (عورة). The Arabic word refers to the genitals of a woman’s body, in a simple and straightforward word, which is called the ‘vagina’. It means, the entire body of a Muslim woman is a huge walking vagina and nothing else (Warraq, 1995. p. 316).

Nikah’ (Muslim marriage, النكاح) is an Arabic word whose literal meaning is penetration (Kaleeby, 2002; Warraq, 1995). It can be pronounced as ‘Nokh’, which again means the ‘awrah’, the giant vagina, i.e., the entire body of a Muslim woman. When the word ‘Nikah’ is used to mean marriage, the actual meaning is not marriage but literally ‘sexual penetration’.

In sum; according to Muslims, women are ‘sex objects’. Muslims’ attitude towards ‘sex’ is almost same as that of an animal. Marriage is never a sacrament with him; it is openly a commercial transaction. It never occurs to him to be ashamed that he treats women as prostitutes or animals; he would rather be ashamed of the opposite. Muhammad was guilty of every sex crime known to man, so are the Muslims.

The Divine law of Allah, Sharia, does not recognize ‘forced sex’ on women after marriage. There is nothing called marital rape. The wife is a legal sex-slave of the man (often next to three other equally helpless wives). In prostitution, a customer does not need to bother about the sexual gratification of the prostitute. Similarly, the sexual desires and preferences of the women are not recognized in Islam. Marital rape incidents are too high in Bangladesh, as Azad (1995, p. 240) lamented,

For a woman, the first night after marriage is the night of forcible sex. In Bangladesh, the number of marital rape incidents is several times higher than any other rapes.”

Elsewhere, Azad (1995, p. 248) again lamented,

Here [Bangladesh], there are single rapes and multiple rapes. Here; father rapes daughter, son-in-law rapes mother-in-law … top executive rapes sweeper of his office, teacher rapes girl student, Imam rapes the kindergarten girl, brother-in-law rapes the sister-in-law, father-in-law rapes daughter-in-law…”[original in Bengali, translated by author].

For Muhammad sex was a narcissistic expression of power — emotional and physical. Similarly, conquest of the body of a helpless woman is a status symbol for Muslims. This is the proof of his virility. Like Muhammad, Muslims show a disturbing lack of conscience while treating women. The cruel activities against women allow the Muslims to express their narcissism through the “conquered” women and to transform them into instruments at the service of his narcissism. In Muslim society, there cannot be a meaningful family life. The whole society hates women virulently, passionately and uncompromisingly and this Narcissistic irrational hate is original and inherent.

— From “Unmasking Mohammed” [pdf] by Sujut Das

Women everywhere in Europe must therefore sacrifice themselves to serve the sexual needs of millions of Migrants. It is the only possible solution.

Need one say anything more?

“Women, if you like your freedom, you can keep it…”*

*   Attributed to the elusive Barry Soetoro, an undocumented Indonesian Muslim last heard of hiding under an alias in the DC Beltway area.

MC lives in the southern Israeli city of Sderot. For his previous essays, see the MC Archives.

30 thoughts on “Sacrificial Virgins

  1. I wonder when the Germans and the Britons and the rest of Western civilization will wake-up ,join the dots and recognize the truth?It needs to be spoken out loud .It needs to be acted on .The silent majority must fight back.

    Our only chance is Trump.With Trump in our corner we can fight political correctness and protect our womenfolk.

    These days the E.U is America’s lapdog.

    Trump can bring them to heel.

    • I doubt Trump will “protect our womenfolk,” whether now or in the future.

      Donald Trump is on his third wife. Whenever a wife starts showing signs of (gasp!) age, like normal human beings, she’s no longer of use to Mr. Trump and he dumps her. Perhaps with a $ettlement of large $ize; perhaps not. Additionally, his public and disparaging remarks about women (referred to in the first GOP debate by Megyn Kelly) are too numerous to be swept under the carpet.

      He has no use for women who question him, women who age like normal people, women who can’t afford gobs of plastic surgery and hair-do’s/wigs to portray eternal youth, etc. In other words, *real* women.

      I do appreciate that Mr. Trump has drawn attention to the horrible effects of unlimited illegal immigration, but how many of his own casino employees were illegals? Does anyone know? Did he care? He certainly didn’t give his women (or men!) employees sufficient notice when he declared bankruptcy repeatedly and threw people out of work.

      Trump is for Trump; anyone else who thinks he is for *them* is, IMHO, fooling themselves.


      • I don’t think the behaviour you quote necessarily implies Trump’s lack of respect for women.

        • what other president or presidential candidate was known for his “bimbo eruptions”? Clinton’s behavior toward women is clinically pathological. In the real world he’d have long since been processed through the legal system as a predator.

          Not that The Donald isn’t a misogynist. However, his multiple marriages don’t hold a candle to Bill’s behavior and there is now some question that he might be back in the White House, complete with interns? Ugh.

          PS He and Bill Cosby are a matched set.

          • Try visualizing Bill Clinton’s ENABLER as the First
            Female President of the United States. It’s obvious
            that the “bimbo eruptions” were Hillary’s job to
            handle. She jabbered, “It’s a “Vast Right Wing
            Conspiracy!!”, and the media parroted her lies.
            Nothing has changed.

            IF the Senate had stood with the House of
            Representatives back in the day when they saw
            Bill’s antics as the danger they were to the Republic;
            we would have long since been shed of the ever
            looming “Clinton Legacy”. Appointments for
            Chelsea and later for the Clinton grandkids; and
            the reality looms large and ominous.

            Bottom line; some Clinton fans back in the day
            said, “It’s just about SEX! It’s NOTHING!” It is;
            however, quite odd that during that time there were
            some puzzling trips by foreign “diplomats” to tour
            some of our top secret facilities.

            Bill Clinton as First “Laddie”? More shades of the
            “Obama Legacy” disguised as the “Clinton Legacy”.

      • Excuse me? All of Trump’s wives have been willing participants.

        If I were a woman, he wouldn’t be my type, but he didn’t rape anyone or do anything nasty. They all knew what they were getting into. I’d say that most of them probably did better out of the deal than he did, actually.

        While he’s not my type, I’d have no worries leaving my daughter in his company.

      • I don’t think Donald Trump (gauging from things he has written and said in the past and in the present) is going to do much for European women. I think he might protect Americans, but his focus is on Ameerica…he would want a good deal from anyone else.
        This is probably as it should be.
        The same goes for Putin and his Russia.
        These two guys are strongmen: they play by those rules (and they are real strongmen, not posers like Adolph — who had to latch on to the perverted manhood of Islam and some hodgepodge hocus pocus reading of Teutonic paganism to feel any juice, this is worth noting). That means that they at least appear to be always working for their people first. Trump, and Putin, might be talked into defending Christendom (and Israel) because their people would like it…but both of those have been out of vogue for a while in Europe…

    • Whilst I agree that Trump might help by breaking the hold of the power elite, I would not put my trust solely in him; once he gains power, we do not know if he will become part of the problem once more.

      The important thing is to let those Republicans who have so betrayed their voting public know that their actions have consequences, those ‘republicans’ who have supported the O administration need to be slung out, no questions, no excuses; they are traitors and liars, they need to be recalled.

      I suspect that Trump will not make it to the WH, somehow, I suspect that it will be a Bush, Clinton run off; same old, same old. That is of course, as long as a convenient ‘State of Emergency’ does not force the suspension of the election….

      Exactly what can the US people do if the Republican Convention selects Bush? Think about it. Any kind of demonstration of ‘people power’ will enable O to remain in place, and with emergency powers…..

      If Trump runs as an independent then Clinton gets in and the GOP will then be secure and happy in their poodleship. Same old, same old.

      Game, Set and Match to the communist gangsters.

      If at all, any change is going to come from the States themselves; if they are willing and have the virile tenacity to so do. Cultural Marxists do not like violent confrontation, they work from the shadows, they do not like exposure. [redacted]

  2. In promiscuous, free love, free sex european society- soon [redacted].

    [You tried this one before. Please give the race stuff a rest. When we publish a post specifically focusing on race-related topics, you can let loose then. Meanwhile, leave off the “miscegenation” comments.]

  3. The great Swami Vivekananda (1863 – 1902) had this to say about women and their place in this world:

    “The best thermometer to the progress of a nation is its treatment of its women.”

    “There is no chance for the welfare of the world unless the condition of women is improved.”

    “Woman has suffered for aeons, and that has given her infinite patience and infinite perseverance.”

    “The idea of perfect womanhood is perfect independence.”

    “There is no hope of rise for that family or country where there is no estimation of women, where they live in sadness.”

    • What is with this feminist obsession with “independence”?

      Nobody is independent except maybe some survivalist hermits living off the land by themselves.


      [Note: women may be everything you say, but there will not be a flame war on this website about how awful women are, or how mean men are…There are plenty of other sites where you can have those wars to your heart’s content.

      NOT ONLY THAT,but keelie was quoting a very traditional source, not a feminist.

      Stop this, you guys.]

      • That’s ok, I think I can answer my own question. The real goal of the emphasis on “independence” is to divide people to such an extent that everyone ends up being dependent on the “master computer” known as the state.

        But somehow it never gets stated that the real issue is independence from the undependable, not dependence on the dependable. And the latter requires mutual dependability.

    • Keelie–

      This is a nice collection of aphorisms about women. However, the one that says,

      “The idea of perfect womanhood is perfect independence.”

      is mistaken, imo. There is no such thing as “perfect independence”. Certainly not in this life. We are born dependent. As we grow and mature we arrive at a mutual interdependence with those we love and trust.

      “perfect independence” is an oxymoron. Even if it existed it would be a state of perfect sadness…

      • Also, I’ve yet to meet anyone, man or woman, with infinite patience and/or infinite perseverance. Thank God.

        My husband is immensely patient and I’ve never met anyone with his ability to persevere but neither of those qualities are infinite. We are finite beings…

        Hope this dude has something nice to say about men, too. I’m sure tired of the bad rap they’ve been getting since, oh, the 1960s or so. Men are made out to be buffoons, charlatans, power-mad, etc.

        Not all men are Bill Clinton or Bill Cosby. Not all women are Hillary Clinton or Imelda Marcos…we’re all flawed human beings and #gendermatters. Vive la difference between men and women.

        • Yes – I understand what you are saying. And I’m certain the Swami could and would give you (and Nimrod) a viable answer.

          Like the Baron said, these are not my words, simply quotes, and I don’t know exactly how accurate they are.

          Perhaps it would be worthwhile looking at the quotes in a “negative” manner. Instead of saying “perfect independence” it may be useful to call it “perfect non-dependence”. Although nothing is perfect, what it means is that women should be able to look after themselves and not be forced to be dependent on their husbands or other family members. That’s a personal choice, of course, but in some societies it’s not a choice in the least.
          The Swami – all those years ago – gave lectures on “Our Women” (women of India) as well as on Education, both of which are still very relevant. These were transcribed into little booklets.
          I’m not selling anything; I understand, in a limited fashion, the tone of the man, and the power of his highly discriminative mind. He came to America (Chicago) during the 1890s, for the Parliament of Religions, and caused quite a stir in some quarters.

          • Well, my guess is that what he’s talking about is freedom from all situations where a woman would be told that she isn’t allowed to do something (business transaction for example, or filling out some official paperwork) and she should go get her husband to do it for her.

            In first world situations though we seem to be having problems with the opposite extreme where people want to be so independent from and undependable toward the people around them that there is zero sense of community and everyone is too dependent on an unreliable state bureaucracy that doesn’t represent their best interests.

    • Hitler had this extract from ‘Antichrist’ printed in a booklet and issued to frontline troops under his authorship. That implies that he more than approved of it. If you had followed the link it is made clear that it was a very clear echo of Nietzsche.

  4. I’m not sure anyone can bring “them” to heel. They are what they are and have no intention of changing. The reports coming out of Europe are horrifying. In a matter of a few short years, Europe is no long “civilized” it seems.

    What next? Burkas for all women in the west?

    I see that Angela is now saying the immigrants will return to their countries when “the war” is over. I’m not holding my breath on that so-called promise.

    People who do not know history are condemned to repeat it, and here we go again.

  5. The subjugated Spanish were subjected to the full horror of Muslim rule as exemplified in the one hundred virgins per year treaty they were forced to sign. In terms of this treaty the Spaniards had to hand over 100 white virgins a year to the Muslims for use in their harems… Arthur Kemp – 1300 year jihad.

  6. Nothing is more dangerous than a people who have nothing to lose. If you believe that your societies are in such dire straits; then the time to take action is now. [redacted] That is the message that has been sent to you by your new arrivals. They know that you are cowed by your governments into submission. That is why they commit these crimes.

    [redacted for fomenting viokence, brutality, etc.]

    • you first, pathfinder. Please let is know how your suggestions work out. Especially your plans for the police chief’s house.


      • We don’t seem to be having the same problems that you do at the moment. If we do; I will be the first to take my suggestions. I see by your redaction that you have already lost. Good Luck. You will need it.

  7. 1,400 girls as young as 11 were abandoned…

    Bad as that figure is, it represents merely the ones they’ve officially confirmed as “enriched”. In truth, it’s more than that in Rotherham and much, more more than that elsewhere. Rotherham is a small and unimportant town that few British people could find on a map.

Comments are closed.