The Utrecht Tram Mujahid Gets Life in Prison

H. Numan reported a couple of weeks ago on the trial of Gökmen Tanis, the “Dutch” tram jihadist of Utrecht. In March of 2019 Mr. Tanis shot and killed four people and wounded six others in a terrorist attack on a tram in the Dutch city of Utrecht (he later confessed to the crime). At the conclusion of his trial, prosecutors recommended that he be sentenced to life in prison.

Last Friday the panel of trial judges took the prosecution’s advice and sentenced the perpetrator to life. Many thanks to FouseSquawk for translating this article from De Telegraaf:

Tram shooter Gökmen T.: Life in prison

by Saskia Belleman

Utrecht: Tears flowed in the hearing room of the Utrecht court where a handful of victims and their family members heard the sentence of life imprisonment for the tram shooter, Gökmen T. (38).

That, according to an audibly cold court president, Ruud Veldhuisen, is the only suitable punishment for Gökmen T., who on March 18 of last year “sowed death and destruction” on a tram at October 24th Square.

The court: “With no other goal other than to take lives, Gökmen T. stepped on the tram that day like a normal passenger. He then drew a pistol with which he shot at unsuspecting passengers in cold blood with calls to his god, Allah. Not once, but several times over the course of two minutes.”

The court spoke of “horrifying acts” by Gökmen T., which he justified by reducing his reality to an unreal rectilinear “we” vs. “you”: We Muslims are being destroyed worldwide by you democrats. That was the finish for him.

The experts in the Pieter Baan Center who examined him think that his acts did not come from a deeply-felt belief, but rather out of frustration over a failed life. The court: “Radicalizing and embracing extremist views as an unconscious strategy of dealing with problems and setbacks in his life.”

[Caption below picture: In one of the court hearings, Gökmen T. spits at his defense lawyer, Andre Seebregts]

The court accepts the conclusions of the experts concerning personality disorders and diminished accountability. But it estimates the danger of recidivism much higher than the experts do.

Despite his diminished accountability, the court finds that a temporary prison sentence in combination with compulsory TBS treatment does not do justice to the actions of Gökmen T. Life imprisonment is the only option from the point of view of punishment and the security of society. Moreover, the court wants to send a clear signal to others who might intend to carry out this type of attack. Then this is what follows: Life imprisonment. “That his crimes can be attributed to Gökmen T. in a lesser degree doesn’t change this judgment,” said the court.

Continue reading

“It’s Their Interpretation of Islam”

“It’s Their Interpretation of Islam”

by Michael Copeland

“Ah, but it’s their interpretation of Islam”, we are assured by smooth-talking muslim speakers. Journalists have picked this up, and dutifully write about “an extremist interpretation” that lies behind the latest atrocity. This assurance about interpretation is surprisingly successful. It is designed to make us doubt what Islam’s source texts mean, including — and this is the crafty part — those whose meaning is clear and obvious. We can easily be taken in by this appealing and fair-sounding assertion. It puts us off the scent. That is the idea.

First, it is necessary to clarify what is meant by an “interpretation”. If an instruction says “give away one tenth of your income to charity”, that does not require an interpretation. The meaning is quite clear, and the instruction can be exactly followed. An “interpretation” is different. Say a politician repeatedly evades an interviewer’s question with some bland generalisation. Eventually the interviewer says, “I’ll take that as a ‘No’”. That is an interpretation. It is quite a different matter from the straightforward following of what a text says.

Bearing in mind that the Koran — all of it — forms part of Islam’s law, how does the “interpretation” allegation stand up to the test?

Let us see. We can take commands and instructions from the Koran and Hadith and compare them with what muslim leaders and speakers say.

Hatred

Koran 60:4 praises the “excellent pattern” shown by Ibrahim when he said (to the Jews):

“Between us and you enmity and hatred forever….”.

How do the spokesmen treat that?

  • Osama bin Laden: “Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us.”
  • Osama bin Laden: “Battle, animosity, and hatred — from the Muslim to the infidel — is the foundation of our religion.”
  • islamqa.com: “Muslims in the West must have … enmity and hatred of the kaffirs.”
  • Alminbar.com: “You should hate them, disown them and their religion.”
  • Abu Usama, Birmingham: “No one loves the kuffaar. We hate kuffaar.”
  • Anjem Choudary: “As a muslim I must have hatred for everything non-Islam.”
  • Yousuf Makharzah, muslim cleric: “Animosity towards the Jews is an obligatory religious duty, and one of the signs of the believers.”

Killing

The Koran commands:

  • “Kill the non-muslims wherever you find them” 9:5
  • “Kill them wherever you overtake them, and expel them from wherever they have expelled you….” 2:191

What do the clerics say?

Continue reading

The Peaceful, Tolerant Muslims of India

The two videos below provide snapshots of Islamic ideology in India. They are particularly apropos today, given the recent violent Muslim riots in Delhi, in which dozens of people were killed. (See these articles from Struggle for Hindu Existence for detailed information on events in Delhi: Article 1, Article 2, Article 3)

Many thanks to Janya for the translations, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling.

The first video shows the communal response planned for a man who “insulted Islam”:

The second video is a more generalized death threat against Hindu political leaders in India:

Video transcript #1:

Continue reading

“You People Will Never Be Safe” — Jihad Killings in Islam

Michael Copeland has revised this article from 2013 (originally posted at LibertyGB) and brought it up to date.

“You People Will Never Be Safe” — Jihad Killings in Islam

by Michael Copeland

The killer of Lee Rigby in Woolwich, his hands dripping with blood, told the person filming him:

“You people will never be safe.

We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you.”

Why is that? It is Islamic teaching. Islam has standing instructions concerning non-Muslims, the filthy kuffar, the unbelievers. Many, many verses in the Koran — over 100 of them — command the fighting and killing of non-Muslims, or violence towards them, to establish the supremacy of Islam. The Koran — all of it — forms part of Islamic law. For example, from sura 9, the very chapter, “At Tawba”, specifically cited by the killer, verse 5:

“Kill unbelievers wherever you find them.”

The instruction is ongoing:

“Fight the unbelievers and kill them until all the rule is Islam” (8:39)

As the former terrorist Walid Shoebat asks (What the West Needs to Know video):

“My question for the West is this: what part of ‘kill’ don’t they understand?”

After all, only one “interpretation” is available.

Islam is not ‘pick your own’. The tenets of the ideology are expressed in the Koran, the hadith (traditions) and Islamic law, and the leeway is nil.

“It is not fitting for a believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and his Messenger, to have any option about their decision…”

says Koran 33:36. The Koran is promoted as “true from eternity to eternity”, explains Sam Solomon, former professor of sharia law. Every Muslim is required to believe the Koran: he is not permitted to want or believe anything different. Dr Salah al Sawy, Secretary General of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America, is emphatic. For matters that are in the scriptures, he rules:

“The Muslim community possesses no power except to acknowledge and obey.”

All have to submit. Islam means “submission”. “Submission” is code for Control.

Concerning violent jihad, killing to establish the religion, Melanie Phillips in The Mail makes a sweeping generalisation:

Continue reading

Islamic Pedagogy in Pakistan

The following two videos discuss the practice of Islam in Pakistan, and particularly the way non-Muslims are treated in Pakistan.

The first video is an excerpt from an interview. It’s not clear whether the two speakers are in India or Pakistan, but they are talking about Pakistan.

The second video is an appeal to India for help for Hindu women and girls in Pakistan.

Many thanks to Janya for the translations, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling.

Video #1: The curriculum in Pakistani madrassas

Video #2: The plight of Hindu girls in Pakistan

Video transcript #1:

Continue reading

Tommy Robinson in Copenhagen

As you all know by now, last week Tommy Robinson received the prestigious Sappho Award from the Danish Free Press Society in Copenhagen.

The full speech given by Tommy after receiving the award is embedded below. But first, there’s an interview with Tommy from the Danish MSM — an antagonistic one, of course; how could it be otherwise?

Many thanks to Tania Groth for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling (the transcript at the bottom of this post only includes the Danish portion at the beginning, and not the English-language exchanges in the interview):

Below is Tommy’s entire speech, as posted on the YouTube channel for the Free Press Society. Now that they’ve uploaded more than an hour of Tommy Robinson, how long do you think it will take before their channel is yanked?

By the way — I feel compelled to point out that in his speech Tommy made extensive use of Tania’s translation of a Danish TV clip, which was subtitled by Vlad and posted here last September. It’s good to have been of service to the cause:

See also Steen’s report on Tommy’s speech (in Danish).

Transcript of the introduction to the interview:

Continue reading

Deception by Muslims: Learning Curve Needed

In his latest essay Michael Copeland discusses what has been pointed out here repeatedly in the past: Islamic scriptures and teaching require believers to engage in sacred lying whenever it serves the cause of Islam.

Deception by Muslims: Learning Curve Needed

by Michael Copeland

“Act like you are his friend. Then kill him.”

So urged Sheikh Mubarak Gilani to his Muslim listeners concerning non-Muslims, kafirs. He was advocating two of Islam’s teachings: deception of kafirs and killing of kafirs.

Islamic deception

Islamic deception has an Arabic name — taqiyya. It is a well-developed doctrine. In short it authorises Muslims to deceive the kafir in the cause of Islam. One of Islam’s most important theologians, Al Ghazali (1059-1111), set out the position a long time ago:

“Understand that lying is not wrong in itself. If a lie is the only way to achieve a good result [for Islam], it is permitted.”

“Permissible Lying” is how taqiyya is featured in the Manual of Islamic Law, Reliance of the Traveller (r4). In the Muslim Brotherhood’s secret “Strategic Plan”, the “Explanatory Memorandum”, it is included as “Using deception to mask intended goals”. It is part of their strategy for “destroying the Western civilisation from within”. This explosively important document was captured through alert police work.

An observant traffic officer in Maryland in 2004 saw a car being driven across the Chesapeake Bridge with a woman in a hijab taking a video of its structural members. He pulled it over. The driver was a Hamas activist. The driver and the passenger were arrested and their Virginia home searched. In a secret sub-basement was a stash of Arabic documents, including the Explanatory Memorandum. Subsequently this became critical evidence in the largest terrorist-funding case in American history, the Holy Land Foundation trial.

Islam’s doctrine of killing non-Muslims has been its blood-soaked track record for the last nearly 1,400 years. It cannot be missed. Islam’s history is one of repeated attack, killing, slave-taking, piracy, extortion, subjugation, humiliation and forced conversion of non-Muslim peoples, and the annihilation of their cultures. Churches, temples, and synagogues have been destroyed and triumphal mosques built in their stead. Great swathes of the Near East and North Africa that were previously Christian, even Spain and part of France, have been forced to be Islamic, with great cruelty and barbarism. Formerly Buddhist Afghanistan, Zoroastrian Persia, and Hindu India have all experienced the same. The process is in full swing in Nigeria, Myanmar, East Timor, the Philippines, Sudan, and elsewhere. The tainted BBC euphemise these conflicts as “separatist insurgencies”, but they are all instances of Islamic jihad.

Jack Merritt and Saskia Jones were deceived by Muslim jihadi Usman Khan. Khan had been imprisoned for planning terrorist mass murders. In prison he had claimed that that he wanted be rehabilitated. It was taqiyya. He joined a “Learning Together” programme in which the two were involved.

Killing kafirs

Unfortunately the “Learning Together” programme had not started on its own Learning Curve about Islam. The management had not informed either themselves or their personnel of basic Islamic doctrines. Had they done so, they would have been alerted not only to Islam’s Permissible Lying, but also, critically, to Islam’s standing instruction to kill kafirs.

Continue reading

“We Are At War”

Michael Copeland’s latest essay reminds me of two lines in “There is a War”, a song by Leonard Cohen: “There is a war between the ones who say there is a war / and the ones who say there isn’t.”

“We Are At War”

by Michael Copeland

“We are at war and I am a soldier,” said Mohammed Sidique Khan, one of the London 7/7 murderers. Lee Rigby’s killer told the court, “I am a soldier… This is a war… I’m a Soldier of Allah”.

Observers who are alert to Islam’s objectives have little difficulty in accepting this. Public broadcasters and politicians, by and large, though, do not accept it. They are uninformed: as a result they are incredulous. Stephen Sackur of BBC Newsnight scowled with disbelief when Anjem Choudary informed him that kafirs are not innocent — basic Islamic doctrine — and that Britain has always been the Realm of War. The BBC knows better, apparently. Recently in France the very well-informed Eric Zemmour insisted to his interviewer:

“Civil war! —Yes. We are in a civil war. — We are… excuse me!”

His interviewer did not appear to be convinced: perhaps he thinks he knows better. The media, and, more seriously, Western governments, have yet to receive the memo.

The blogger ECAW writes, “In 2005 four British born Muslims blew themselves up on the London transport system, killing 52 people, citing religious and political motivations. I was angry about it but was elsewhere, and otherwise engaged, and I went back to sleep.”

Sleep

ECAW probably speaks for many, many more. Why did we go back to sleep? Was it anything to do with repeated assurances from our leaders that these four had misunderstood their Peaceful Religion, that they had warped, twisted, perverted it and so on — you know the rest? ECAW is no longer asleep. His acronym explains: “Everything Changed After Woolwich”.

But… but… but we cannot be at war. War means Arnold Schwarzenegger… and helicopters… and commandos… and tanks. Let’s face it: most of our mental images are owed to Hollywood, and we hardly even realise it. No. War is not all heroic and exciting. It does not need to be continuous: it can be gradual. Wars in the past dragged on for decades — the Thirty Years’ War, the Hundred Years’ War, the Napoleonic Wars. Islam itself is, by its own doctrines, in “a permanent war institution” against the West, which is “Dar al Harb”, the Realm of War. “Britain has always been Dar al Harb”, Anjem Choudary assured BBC Newsnight.

The US has suffered many jihad attacks: 9/11, Fort Hood, Little Rock, Chattanooga, San Bernardino, Boston Marathon, Orlando night club, van ramming in New York, subway bomber, and so on. Britain has undergone a large number of attacks: Lockerbie, London 7/7, London 21/7, the foiled airline liquid bomb attack, the fertilizer bomb plot, Glasgow airport, the London night club failed car bomb, the beheading of Lee Rigby, the beheading of Palmira Silva, the murders of young Kriss Donald, Charlene Downes and others, the anti-EDL bomb plot, the Manchester concert bomb. Add the ongoing taking of thousands of vulnerable underage girls as sex-slaves, including one murdered at home with her family at night by arson. Add all the assaults on young men, and the carving out of Muslim-only ghettoes by the aggressive thuggery of White Drive-Out. The picture emerges of widespread and sustained hostile actions, complete with multiple victims. How many attacks are needed to qualify as a war? Certainly a state of hostility exists, with casualties.

Continue reading

Five Years After Charlie Hebdo: The West is on its Knees

Tuesday was the fifth anniversary of the massacre at the offices of Charlie Hebdo in Paris, in which Islamic terrorists murdered twelve people in the name of Allah. In the years since the attack, the West has become even more craven, and is even less willing to engage in frank discussion about the nature of Islam or the Islamization of Europe.

As usual, Mark Steyn has the most cogent remarks on the topic:

Instead of sharing the risk, the bigfoot media behaved exactly as they had a decade earlier. At my old London home The Daily Telegraph some gutless pansies decided that their reporting on the story could only be accompanied by carefully blurred images of the late cartoonists’ work in order to avoid giving offense — turning Mohammed into a perpetually pixelated prophet, as if (to reprise a gag I did in 2005) poor ol’ Mo’s entered the witness protection program.

Which is in fact the precise opposite of what’s going on: cowardly media pixelate Mohammed as a way of fast-tracking themselves into the witness protection program, or so they hope. On TV, one of the few surviving Charlie Hebdo staffers attempted to hold one of the offending covers on screen, only to have the camera lurch away. Around the world, the dead cartoonists’ professional colleagues, almost to a man, agreed that the preferred response was some or other limpid, evasive, self-flattering variant of “the pen is mightier than the sword”.

But that line doesn’t work if your pen’s filled with White-Out…

[…]

To be honest, it makes me vomit to see people holding these Princess Dianafied candlelit vigils, and using the hashtag #JeSuisCharlie — I am Charlie — and in effect appropriating these guys’ sacrifice for this bogus solidarity. It makes me sick to see all these ‘the pen is mightier than the sword’ cartoons that have appeared in newspapers all over the United States, Canada, Britain, Germany, France, Australia, everywhere, from other cartoonists, again expressing solidarity with these very brave men — but not doing what they did…

I’ve been on enough events in Europe with less famous cartoonists than these who live under death threats, live under armed guard, have had their family restaurant firebombed — it’s happened to a Norwegian comedienne I know — have come home and found their home burned, as a Swedish artist I know happened to. And all these people doing the phony hashtag solidarity, screw your phony hashtag solidarity. Let’s have some real solidarity — or if not, at least have the good taste to stay the hell out of it.

That would have been asking too much. In the days that followed almost all those who claimed to be expressing solidarity with Charb were, in fact, signaling very clearly that they preferred to live on their knees.

[…]

That’s why free speech matters. Without free speech, there are only the official lies — about who’s killing Jews in Copenhagen, who’s sexually assaulting women in Cologne — and there is nothing to say in response to either except to crank up the old joanna for one more chorus of “Imagine”.

What happened on January 7th 2015 was terrible. But our response to it made it more terrible, and emboldened civilization’s enemies. With respect to the late Charb, the choice is not between dying standing up or living on our knees — for those who choose to live on their knees will die there, too, cringing and craven…

Read the whole thing.

There has been a lot of talk on French TV about the fifth anniversary of the Charlie Hebdo slaughter. Below are two video samples. Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translations, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video #1: Marika Bret, the former Social Relations Director for Charlie Hebdo, discusses the increase in the Islamization in the five years since the attack.

Video #2: Remarks by Jean Messiha. According to Wikipedia, as glossed by MissPiggy:

Jean Messiha is an Egyptian-born French economist, high-ranking civil servant, political advisor and candidate. He became the deputy under-secretary of management at the Ministry of Defence in 2014. He is the spokesman for “Horaces”, a group of high-ranking civil servants and business executives who meet once a month and discuss the National Front (now National Rally) party platform. He was a candidate in the 2017 French legislative election.

Mr. Messiha tells the audience, “You’d best learn to pray in Arabic.”

Video transcript #1:

00:00   That’s what we blame Charlie [Hebdo] for. We blame Charlie for being secular, but it’s only been
00:03   50 years that Charlie [Hebdo] has been secular. —It goes after all the religions.
00:06   Exactly, it treats every religion the same.
00:09   Actually, when you put the word religion in a drawing,
00:13   if you place the word Islam in a drawing, afterward
00:17   there are miles of messages and those messages are death threats. For the past five years,
00:24   I’ve been going to the police station every month or so to file a complaint
00:28   about death threats, not insults. Death threats.
00:31   Yes, that’s what Riss [Sourisseau] also said in his interview yesterday in the Sunday paper.
00:35   It’s necessary to file complaints each time.
00:38   You live in a bunker at Charlie Hebdo. We need to remember that
00:41   people still live under police protection.
00:45   We’ve all heard about the different events that have taken place
00:49   over the last few days. Thibault de Montbrial, a fierce advocate of secularism,
00:53   says that the threat is even stronger
00:57   today than five years ago. —The threat is stronger because it has become home-grown. The reality is
01:03   that this threat is strong, because this barbaric and deadly ideology
01:08   has permeating a number of minds.
01:12   As we’ve seen in recent days, people will do anything to explode what they have to explode.
01:22   So, yes, it is strong, it is very strong and along with that, to top it all off,
01:27   no president, no government, no minister of the interior is doing anything against it. —Yes.
 

Continue reading

Free Steen’s Computers!

Steen of Snaphanen has been a good friend for almost thirteen years, since my first trip to Copenhagen in April of 2007, when he put me up in his flat.

Steen is an accomplished photographer and manages the most popular blog in Denmark. He is also a dissident — he speaks out about immigration and Islamization, publishing uncomfortable truths that give the Danish political establishment heartburn.

Steen was arrested and interrogated last May because he posted a link to a site that linked to the video of the murder of two young Scandinavian women in Morocco, who were killed by mujahideen. To assist them in their enquiries, the police confiscated Steen’s computers and other equipment.

That was eight months ago. Steen has not been charged, and the police still have his equipment. He has written a letter to them, demanding the return of his work tools, and posted about it yesterday at Snaphanen.

Steen’s ability to put pressure on the police is limited. All he can do is publicize what happened, and urge his colleagues among dissident bloggers to do likewise. I recommend mirroring this post (or writing your own) on websites and forums, in order to help bring pressure to bear from outside Denmark.

Michael Jalving is the most popular blogger at the Jyllands-Posten website. Mr. Jalving also wrote yesterday about Steen’s plight. Many thanks to Signe for the translation:

Free Steen Raaschou’s computers, photographs and SD-card

The blogger Steen Raaschou was arrested last year for doing his job. Copenhagen police still have not returned his seized work tools. Why?

One of my friends from the Danish writing community, the blogger Steen Raaschou of Snaphanen.dk, who taught me quite a lot about Sweden, courage and photography, was woken up early in the morning back in May of 2019 by a squad of police officers. Apparently they were not in the wrong place, since they arrested and interrogated him because five months earlier he had shared the recording of the bestial assassination of the two Scandinavian girls in Morocco. The same way they arrested Jeppe Juhl, then a parliamentary candidate for the party Nye Borgerlige, and another blogger for Jyllands-Posten, Jaleh Tavakoli.

Both the authorities and the mainstream media treated the murders as unmotivated bad luck — not jihad. Steen Raaschou corrected the misunderstanding by linking to a site that linked to the jihadists’ video.

The arrest was bizarre. And it seemed not coincidental that it happened just before an election.

The 68-year-old blogger had his home ransacked during the arrest and a lot of electronic equipment was seized. It remains confiscated.

It must be added now, as Steen himself has done, that §264d of the law is quite fair. Depending on how it is interpreted.

[Jalving quotes the paragraph. Steen has not violated anyone’s privacy.]

The accused, as I understand it, has not been charged with anything. But the authorities still refuse to return two computers, an external hard drive with ten years of photographs, an SD card, etc.

What is going on with the police? What is the cause of this treatment? Is it simply bureaucracy? Or is there really someone in the Danish police that loves to harass people who do not like Islam?

In that case the words of Ulrik Høy (R.I.P.) after the arrest are yet relevant: “Arrest me too! Preferably along with Lars Hedegaard, so we can have a game of cards in the prison cell”.

Now, Steen Raaschou writes to the police, and I quote:

To whom it may concern:

In four days it will have been eight months ago that you arrested me as if I were a dangerous terrorist, and seized my work tools. Let me tell you what you already know: You do not have time for 68-year-old unpunished persons like me […] The interrogating officer said that day to Jeppe Juhl: “We greatly regret this, but it is political, you know.”

Continue reading

A Knife Rampage in Villejuif

Last Friday a man with a knife stabbed three people in a French park, killing one and wounding the other two, before being shot dead by police. The attack took place in a southern suburb of Paris called Villejuif (which I gloss as “Jewtown”, although no Jews are known to reside in the district).

The murderer was a recent convert to Islam. He was carrying a Koran in his backpack, and reportedly shouted “Allahu Akhbar” at the police, but was said in media reports to have shown no signs of “radicalization”. His family said that he had a history of mental illness.

The two videos below discuss the Jewtown Stabber’s Ball in the Hautes-Bruyères park. Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translations, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling.

The first video is a brief news report about the stabbings in the park:

The second video reports that another passerby would have become a fourth victim, except for the fact that he was able to prove he was a Muslim, and thus his life was spared:

Video transcript #1:

Continue reading

What the U.S. House Impeachment Inquiry Wouldn’t Ask Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch

The issue of the Armenian Genocide has intersected with impeachment politics, due to the involvement of Marie Yovanovitch, who in addition to being the former ambassador to Ukraine is also the former ambassador to Armenia. David Boyajian has the report.

What the U.S. House Impeachment Inquiry Wouldn’t Ask Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch

by David Boyajian

Turkey, the increasingly wayward NATO member, has been making more national and international headlines than usual.

On Oct. 29, for instance, the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed (405-11) Resolution 296. It recognized the Armenian, Assyrian, Greek, and other Christian genocides committed by Turkey.

A contentious, widely criticized White House meeting involving President Trump, Turkey’s autocratic President Erdogan, and Republican senators then took place on Nov. 13.

Two days later, Marie L. Yovanovitch, dismissed by President Trump in May of 2019 as U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, testified on national TV before the House Select Committee on Intelligence’s impeachment inquiry. Her dismissal, she alleged, occurred because Trump attorney and confidant Rudy Giuliani, Donald Trump Jr., Fox News hosts, and others had been slandering her as disloyal to the president.

There are intriguing links among the House’s Genocide resolution, the Trump-Erdogan-Senators meeting, and Yovanovitch who was Pres. George W. Bush’s (“Bush II”) Ambassador to the Republic of Armenia.

What no Democratic or Republican committee member dared ask Yovanovitch — and what she didn’t wish to discuss — was her apparent 13-year-long failure to criticize the scandalous dismissal and forced early retirement of a fine American diplomat, John Marshall Evans.

Evans was Bush II’s ambassador to Armenia (June 2004 to Sept. 2006). Yovanovitch followed him in that post (Sept. 2008 to June 2011).

Due to senators’ revulsion at Evans’ dismissal, the ambassadorship stood empty for two years.

Armenian-American communities always host U.S. ambassadors to Armenia. In February of 2005, Ambassador Evans told them, “I will today call it the Armenian Genocide” because “it is unbecoming of us as Americans to play word games.”

It was an honest admission of America’s 90-year-long recognition of Turkey’s extermination (1915-23) of 1.5 million Armenian Christians. But the State Department disliked Evans’ use of the word “genocide.” Turkey cried foul too.

At Turkey’s insistence, the State Department tells American diplomats and presidents to avoid the G word (genocide) regarding the Armenian extermination. Such spinelessness, while typical of the State Department’s traditional obsequiousness towards Turkey, is a disgrace.

Yet Ambassador Evans was simply echoing, as but one example, President Reagan’s Proclamation 4838 in 1981 which cited “the genocide of Armenians.”

Regrettably, post-Reagan presidential statements commemorating the Genocide have avoided the G word. They employ euphemisms such as “annihilation,” “forced exile and murder,” “infamous killings,” “terrible massacres,” and “marched to their death.”

Continue reading

Mohamed the Butcher Becomes Mohamed the Rapist

A number of years ago, after reading so many stories about rapes and bestiality by Muslim men, I said sardonically to Dymphna: “Muslim men will rape anything that has a hole, and if it doesn’t have one, they’ll cut it a new one — that’s why they all carry knives.”

In the intervening years what began as a sick joke morphed into depressing reality as I read more and more about the rapin’-’n’-gropin’ proclivities of Islamic males. For a Muslim man the principal method of interaction with objects in his environment seems to be to rape them — women, girls, men, boys, infants, corpses, donkeys, goats, swans, and many other species too numerous to mention.

The story below from Philosophia Perennis is a case in point: a Muslim man in Germany took revenge on his wife’s ex-boyfriend — a fellow Muslim — by raping him, with the help of a couple of buddies.

By the way — this case has a Mohammed Coefficient of 100%

Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translation:

Trial in Görlitz: Mohamed A. allegedly raped the ex-boyfriend of his current partner

by David Berger
November 30th, 2019

Out of jealousy, a 33-year-old Tunisian is said to have brutally raped his present wife’s ex-boyfriend, the 35-year-old Pakistani Saif U. in Görlitz with the help of two other Arabs. “Mohamed locked the door from the inside. Then two more Arabs came along, beat me and kicked me, pressed me to the ground.” Then the 35-year-old Pakistani Saif U. was undressed and raped. Saif gave his testimony yesterday in tears before a court in Dresden.

Mohamed the butcher comes from Tunisia

And the prosecution seems to be certain that this description is correct, even if the Tunisian perpetrator Mohamed A. (33, butcher), who is now on trial, continues to deny the crime. Mohamed A. had already been sentenced in the summer to 3 years and 9 months imprisonment for raping the cook Saif U. in Görlitz. The reason: The victim had once been together with his present wife Anita (28). Mohamed A. was obsessed with the idea that Saif U. had contacted her again to take her away from him. Due to procedural errors, the Federal Supreme Court overturned the verdict, and the trial is now taking place again.

What do the “Fck AfD” T-shirt wearers have to do with the rapist Arab?

Male rape is much more common than generally assumed. And it also has serious consequences, especially if the men have a migration background in which passive anal intercourse (“treating him like a woman”) is considered degrading for a man: “A prejudice that men who have been raped are less traumatised than women is absolutely wrong, on the contrary. Studies show that the long-term effects of rape, whether male or female, usually have serious consequences for life. In addition, men are exposed to greater social stigmatisation, leading to even greater psychological damage for male rape victims.” (according to Wikipedia) Male rape by men is then understood as revenge or simply as violent domination. The now widespread German slogan “Fck xxx (Nazis, AfD, etc.)” remains attached to this anarchistic, misogynistic paradigm.