When "Bad Becomes Normal"

A rape epidemic has spread over Europe and many other locations hosting Islamic immigrants. "The Muslim perpetrators themselves boast that their crime is justified since there (sic) victims were, among other things, not properly veiled."

Western group engaged in cultural relativism agree that such odious behavior is "normal" for young Muslim men and thus should not be held against them. Parents of young Muslim rapists can not understand why their children are considered criminals for engaging in the "totally natural act of raping an obvious immoral woman, i.e., one who does not dress nor live under the laws of Sharia," even within countries of the West.

What is the psychology of this behavior? A FrontPage Symposium attempts to explain this phenomenon.

First, deep divisions exist between the sexes as "mandated by Allah."

The Koranic order says that the man has to "go to the woman" whenever he likes, to "enjoy her however he likes", and to discipline her in case she develops her own ideas like sexual self-determination.

Over the centuries this basic frame had been filled with a lot of "prophetic" instructions as to what disastrous role the woman could play if the man as Allah's deputy does not carry out this divine licence of fertilizing control. Insofar the woman is looked upon from a "higher" biologistic viewpoint regarding her as "seed field" that - under strict male surveillance signalled by "Islamic correct" veiling - guarantees for the continued survival and expansion of Islam.

"Pure Islam" looks open Muslim "dissidents": apostates, rival sects, as "consisting of unbelievers." Disobedient Muslim women and all non-veiled women are included in this group. "Pure" Muslim men are compelled by "prophetic" tradition to wage religious war - jihad - against them. Rape is therefore a tool of war against the non-believer and the disobedient.

The ontological being in Islam is not defined by individual right but clearly as (an) integral part of the community in terms of a whole and "holy" entirety." In this context the primary form of human being is seen in the male that assumes the right and duty to assist Allah in conserving and expanding his "umma", meaning his community.

Men are pure and it is their right and obligation to dominate and, if necessary, to punish the impure female.

The speakers go into a lengthy clinical discussion of the "infantile" pathology demonstrated in this cultural group that manifests in rape. They determine that the culture is archaic and retrograde.

A "war mentality" exists among all Muslim males. Rape is used as a weapon against disobedience of any kind by "non-believers" of both sexes. Male prisoners are sodomized to "achieve the enemy's maximum degradation," and even Muslim women pose a

"possible internal enemy containing even a double danger: her alleged disobedience is a bio-political security risk for the Islamic entirely and her independent 'devilish' sexuality represents a religious blasphemy, contaminating male purity. Both have to be dealt with according: beating, raping, torturing, stoning, killing.

Bad is becoming "normal" in the accommodation many Westerners are affording their anti-social behaviors committed in West in the name of cultural-relativistic multiculturalism and political correctness. They are starting to "adjust to Muslim political 'sharia' demands based on the growing radical Islamist influences as well as oil price pressure." Islam will be expanded, the main goal of Islam since the beginning by Mohammed, through this "silent Jihad": demographics and Western accommodation.

Why is the raping of unveiled women now spreading widely in non-Muslim countries?

First, political Islam does not consider any country to be a non-Muslim country, only a country where Muslims have not penetrated to sufficiently impose Muslim law.

Salafists like Tariq Ramandan have introduced a new definition for Western countries:

they should no longer been seen the traditional way as Dar ul-harb, the space of war, but as Dar el-dawaà, the invitation to Islam, or Dar ash-shahâda, the space of testimony.

This is the soft, "more acceptable to Westerners" Jihad that is "paving a way for Muslims to take possession of countries formerly belongin the Dar ul-harb, which before our time were conquered by force and the rule of Qur'anic law or, waiting, "keeping quiet, not touching the property (including the women and children) of the enemy until strength and numbers gave them means.

Dar el-dawaà and Dar ash-shahâda are two of the trickiest inventions ever to reach the goal of conquest: at a quick and superficial glance it means resigning from the conversion of the West to Islam, permitting everybody to keep on in his belief, but on closer examination that means what the French call "l'entrisme", unnoticed penetration.

Unnoticed penetration, a term that ironically has a sexual connotation, for through demographics and rape, sex is their most potent weapon.

Muslims know that they are not living in a hostile as new mosques are being constructed and the location of any mosque is a "component of the Islamic world."

Ash-shahâda, testimony by Muslims on the virtues of Islam, is part of the perpetual war against infidels "who refuse too submit and who are
"not behaving according to Qur‛anic laws," and thus "have to be punished."

The new definitions, dar ash-shahâda and dar el-dawaà, are having a "severe impact on Muslims, especially on young Muslim men. "People not behaving according to Qur‛anic laws are to be punished even strong now."

The Muslims are not any more restricted by the laws of Dar ul-harb, that has evaporated without notice, merely by changing the definition. The inhabitants of our countries are to obey to Muslim male supremacy and Qur'anic laws.

The jihad against infidels is conducted on each and every level. Terror and suicide bombing on level, rape against women who, "by their behavior in public are "asking for rape," is punishing them and their husbands and families as "alleged disobedience" against Islam, implying that those who been given the opportunity to "hear the word" and have not converted, are disobeying Allah's mandates and plans for the world. This challenge is a must for Muslim men.

An unsettling turn of events is the amount of accommodation and justification afforded these contradictory principles that are clearly alien to the concept of Western personal freedom.

Many in the West hold the concept of freedom promoted by ethnologues. For them, "freedom is that each 'culture' may it be as inhuman as can be, is entitled to prosper even on our soil, even to placing the responsibility on the rapists' victims themselves who are accused of "provoking rape" by their "immoral behaviors and improper dress."

It is incomprehensible to grasp the fact that rape is also political. Naturally, in an all-contained system such as Islam, one understands the psychological, sociological, and political basis of all things, including rape. In the West, rape politics is the bailiwick of feminist groups who "turn a blind eye" toward the rape problem as long as they are able to "keep up their business connections." In doing so, Feminists and Leftists are enabling the "slow penetration" mentioned by the French.

An example is the view of Norwegian Professor Ms. Unni Wikan:

Norwegian women must take their share of responsibility for these rapes, as they are not dressing and behaving according to Muslim understanding. The Norwegian women, in her view, are to realize that they live in a multicultural society and adapt themselves to it, as Mark Steyn reported already in 2002.

One must ask why Norwegian women must adapt to immigrant Muslim mores in their own country rather than requiring Muslims to adapt to Norwegian customs and mores?

The "mildest behavior" considered a provocation: singing, smiling, talking, being alone for one minute in the same room with the rapist, having answered a question in an inappropriate way, wearing clothes which are not strictly in obedience with what is locally considered Muslim rules, all of these innocent behaviors are seen as misconduct authorizing "revenge."

Separation between males and females is absolute in Muslim society. Marriage is a financial arrangement between two families and the sensual and sexual aspect of the arrangement is: suspicious, evil, and therefore an act of aggression. Sexual "revenge", containing violence, can be naturally considered as the automatic answer to the "provcations" described above or two reasons:

1) Religious - the male is almighty and dominant, made after the image of God. Women are a "necessary evil," created to tempt males, and the female body is the closest thing to the Devil, requiring domination as an act of faith. A male will consider any suspect behavior as an evil temptation and a religious challenge. Thus, whatever will happen won't be the result of his own will and he believes he has received advanced absolution for an act that "he knows is against his own religion," for he is not abusing a woman but fighting an inner Devil. Absolute power brings self-deception.

2. Primitive chauvinism -

...since males in chauvinist societies are deprived of all natural pleasures resulting from what we consider a normal relationship between men and women, beside sexual ones, the level of frustration is very high and the fear of impotency even higher. A male tempted must react. The automatic result to frustration and fear is usually violence. In this case, sexual violence.

Muslim rape statistics in Western Europe are astounding and appalling:

A friend of mine is a retired chief of police, who used to be in charge of the security of a major city in the south of France. He reported to me that his men had to face an average of 10 rapes a week, 80% made by Muslim young men. 30% being what we call, in French, a “ tournante “, meaning that the victim is being raped by an entire gang, one after the other, often during an entire night.

More appalling is the parental reaction to their sons' bad behavior:

in most cases, the parents not only would back up their rapist children, but also would not even understand why they would be arrested. There is an instant shift in the notion of good and evil as a major component of culture. The only evil those parents would see, genuinely, is the temptation that the male children had to face. Since in most cases the victims were not Muslims, the parents’ answer and rejection was even more genuine: how could their boys be guilty of anything, when normally answering to a provocation by occidental women, known for their unacceptable behavior?

Read it all.

The danger is not the rape. The danger is the slow, inexorable unseen "penetration" into Western society and the appearance of giving up and giving in.