Will the West Please Stop Siding with Criminals?

by Khadija Khan
March 24, 2017 at 5:00 am

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10098/siding-with-criminals

What is agonizing is that people either enjoyed or criticized the joyful act of a teenager, but no one seems to be noticing that this public trial and her forced apologies only mean further isolation for the young Muslim women.
Most horrifying is that it seems that even the West has started to buy into the version of "modesty" that these extremists in the Middle East have been forcing on women.
Why has no one -- especially politicized, self-absorbed women's groups -- come to help? Instead, as in the recent Women's March, they have been advocating for more women's imprisonment.
It is important for as many people as possible, both in Britain and world-wide, to say how much they love her beautiful spirit and that they totally stand by her right to dance, sing, play or have fun.

The growth in systematic abuse of women, especially by Islamists in the West, requires democratic governments to introduce strong measures to stop this abuse, before abusive mullahs start harassing women of all faiths, to force them to submit to their wishes.

The recent threats and harassment of a British "Hijabi girl" by Islamists in Birmingham, England, merely for a video showing her dance, have re-exposed the ugly face of this autocratic mindset that owes its existence to extremist states such as Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Enslaving women in general and inflicting repressive agendas -- such as domestic violence, sexual abuse, segregation, allowing no say in choosing a partner, education or profession, with abysmal living standards often part of the abuse -- is just a small measure of the jihad that the Islamists have managed to unleash across the globe.

The video of "Hijabi girl" (her name is not known), happily dancing in public, was recorded and uploaded to the internet by bystanders.

The video led to aggressive shaming and harassment of the girl by the local Islamist "morality police": men who ranted against her "impious" act and reportedly made her apologize publicly online.

Sobbing, she admitted how supposedly evil and shameless she was to have brought such dishonor to her family and religion.

It is important for as many people as possible, both in Great Britain and world-wide, to say how much they love her beautiful spirit and that they totally standby her right to dance, sing, play or have fun. These are very normal human activities.

Have things come to such a pass that now. even in Britain, only the most courageous can spontaneously express feelings of fun?

What is agonizing is that people either enjoyed or criticized the joyful act of a teenager, but no one seems to be noticing that this public trial and her forced apologies only mean further isolation for the young Muslim women.

To accept this coercion would be just a call on young Muslim girls to be quiet and submit, rather than ever even to think about showing their normal, lighter side. Most horrifying is that it seems that even the West has started to buy into the version of "modesty" that for centuries these extremists in the Middle East have been forcing on women.

The human rights groups seem to have become so apologetic towards the extremist abusers that they now turn their backs on the victims of these abuses -- the people who need human rights groups the most. Perhaps they believe that supporting the poor girl would mean offending Muslims or the "symbol of Islam" (hijab) -- which means they endorse the extremist version of Islam and the abuses that come with it.

The poor girl was shown no solidarity by any supposed champions of liberal causes. Instead, she was thrown to the hounds and left to face her torment alone.

It is also sad that the girl's family has probably also given up, possibly due to the threats, and possibly out of fear of these extremists.

The massively destructive, wrong-headed political policies of Western governments -- such as keeping silent on the abuses of women by Muslim extremists involving, for example, underage and forced marriages, female genital mutilation (FGM), sharia courts in the UK and accepting the existence of no-go zones where the extremists enjoy impunity and thrive -- are also to be blamed for the increase in violations of women's rights. Politicians and the policy-makers are apparently too scared of being accused of committing some fabricated "Islamophobia" or "infringing on the rights of Muslim citizens", so they choose to keep their eyes shut to the plight of these women.

An image from the video "Right to choose: Spotting the signs of forced marriage - Nayana", produced by the UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office. In 2013, 1,302 victims of forced marriage sought help from the British government's Forced Marriage Unit.

This is not an isolated incident in which a young Muslim girl was victimized by the extremists just for innocently being herself. In Canada, famous video blogger named Froggy, of Pakistani origin, suffered similar harassment. She was also vilified by puritanical extremists for wearing a hijab but living a Western lifestyle by hanging out with young men and uploading videos of teenage fun.

In Darmstadt, Germany, 19-year-old Lareeb Khan was killed in 2015 by her parents when she decided to take off her hijab and pursue a normal life. Her father, Asadullah Khan, claimed that he had killed his daughter to save the honour of his family. He alleged -- whether it is true or not we do not know -- that the girl was having sexual relations with a boy of whom her family disapproved.

Her mother admitted to being present at the time of Lareeb's murder, but claimed she could not rescue her due to both fear and illness. Lareeb's sister, Nida, however, stated that her mother was an accomplice to the crime, and used to thrash her.

In a pathetic attempt at exculpation, Lareeb's parents claimed that they were victims of the extremist Pakistani state and society. However, they chose, when they were given refuge and protection by a Western state, to impose similar abuses.

Extremists use shaming and harassment as punishment and deterrence for any woman in their communities who tries to break a barrier to regain her life.

This double edged-sword not only silences the victims of the abuse but also sends a message to the other women also not to try to escape their imprisonment.

Why has no one -- especially politicized, self-absorbed women's groups -- come to help? Instead, as in the recent Women's March, they have been advocating for more women's imprisonment.

The notion that a hijab or a conservative lifestyle is a matter of choice for Muslim women might sound sympathetic to Westerners. It is not. In reality, there is no choice. The supposed choice is, in fact, a one-way street from which trying to exit can cost a woman her life.

These extremist Muslims need to be taught by society itself that they must respect individual freedoms and equality -- by law.

Many liberal women, doubtlessly well-intended, seem love to wearing hijabs supposedly "in solidarity"; what they do not understand is that for millions and millions of Muslim women, who dare not say so, it is not a symbol of freedom and "protection" -- like a slave-owner "protecting" his property -- but of repression and imprisonment. It is forced upon women, now even in the West, and, worse, with the wholehearted complicity of the West.

It is also a time for governments purportedly in favour of human rights no longer to sweep these mafia tactics under the carpet.

It is time for politicians, governments, policy-makers, clerics, human rights groups and "liberals" to stop siding with criminals who commit assault, battery, and even murder, and to start protecting their citizens.

Khadija Khan is a Pakistan-based journalist and commentator.

© 2024 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Recent Articles by Khadija Khan

Britain: The Hijab as the Entry Point for Islam, 2018-02-21
Western Feminists: Hijab Hypocrisy, 2018-02-15
Germans Tackling Exploding Anti-Semitism?, 2018-01-14
Heroic Women Fighting for Freedom, 2018-01-02
UK: Perversions of Justice, 2017-12-05

receive the latest by email: subscribe to the free gatestone institute mailing list.

Comment on this item

33 Reader Comments

Sala Abrahim • Mar 24, 2017 at 19:39

The more extremists gain a foothold in any Muslim society, the more repression will be unleashed against women who will lose their freedom and humanity under the established order. Taliban Afghanistan and currently Pakistan are examples.

I don't think wearing the hijab will lead to piety as extremists suggest- in the same vein I don't think growing a beard and becoming an Islamist will stop a man from killing innocent people walking the streets of any European city.

Extremism is not religion because there is no compulsion in religion according to the scripture. It's an attempt to control societies, oppress women and -radicalize the young.

Reply->

Allan A'Dale

Sala Abrahim • Mar 26, 2017 at 06:25

"No compulsion in religion according to the scripture" That is true according to the Christian gospels; if you are talking about Islam I fail to understand how you can say that.The sura where this appears is 2:256. A version closer to the Arabic says "There is no compulsion in religion-----" meaning true belief cannot be compelled in people. Also because Islam states that all people are Muslim from birth compulsion toward them to accept any other faith should not be allowed. Islam has no problem with forcing people into Islam as is shown by the 3 choices for non Muslims in a conquered Non Muslim state; convert, pay the jizya and become dhimmi or death. That is actually quite compelling.

Verse 2:256, along with many others, was abrogated and the later verse has precedence over the earlier verse because Allah says that if he causes a verse to be forgotten or abrogated, he will bring a better one. Allah orders Muslims to fight the infidel until their is no disbelief/persecution in the land and belief is only for Allah.

The ahadith also say that Muhammad said that he had been ordered to fight the people until they say that none has the right to be worshipped than Allah. There are other telling statements such as whoever leaves the religion,kill him. Muhammad also stated,"I have been made victorious by terror" Over the centuries this has resulted in the killing of millions of non Muslims over a large part of the world.

Reply->

Ora • Mar 24, 2017 at 15:46

Khadija Khan is absolutely right in using the word "purportedly" in the statement, "It is also a time for governments purportedly in favour of human rights no longer to sweep these mafia tactics under the carpet." The trouble is that it is easier to turn a blind eye to them. Why get in trouble with the Islamist fanatics?

Khadija Khan previously stated, "These extremist Muslims need to be taught by society itself that they must respect individual freedoms and equality -- by law."

Unfortunately, they seem to have a law of their own and the police are reluctant to get involved.

Reply->

Bisley • Mar 24, 2017 at 14:38

The simple explanation for this is that nearly all the human rights groups, women's rights groups, etc. are dominated by leftists -- and that most leftists have, for some unknown reason, decided to ally themselves with Islam.

They give unquestioning support to anything, no matter how stupid or evil, done by their political parties in the name of advancing their ideology, or done in the name of Islam. This is very similar to the reason that so many good, non-violent Muslims support terrorism in the name of Islam, or at least tolerate, or refuse to condemn, or oppose it. Why so many people refuse to think, and support what they see as "their side" without question, is beyond my understanding.

Reply->

Harvey Wine • Mar 24, 2017 at 14:03

The Muslim culture is steeped in tribal origins and continues to this day. The crux of the problem is that in the Muslim culture there is no tolerance for infidels (non believers). This covers Muslims as well. You only have to look at Sunni vs Shia who hate each other enough to have Custer's last stand. It is not that the west has taken in it's Muslim immigrants and had segregation with the local population by the host country not trying to integrate. It is a case of the Muslim by their own choice who wish the host country to change to their value system. By way of example. When Afghanis use poppy as a financial means of monetary exchange and have for centuries, and the west tells them the destructive effects of narcotics, and to burn the fields and raise rice what do you think happens?

The host countries should make it known that all immigrants are guests until they can accept the rules of the host country, whether it be language or any other values. If you do not accept under a trial period of extreme vetting and time frame after vetting to be determined by the host country than do not even come.

Sounds too harsh well lets look at the other side. Take Saudi Arabia for example. How many churches, temples, other religions are present in their country, not to mention other middle east countries?

These middle east countries, using Saudi Arabia, have more than enough land to take in immigrants with over 1 million empty facilities during non pilgrimage to Mecca.

It would seem more logical to pour efforts into keeping their culture in their region and using western approaches of a piece core to teach their own people agriculture to sustain their population along with programs to make them more successful within their own borders. How does integration into Sweden with a climate difference, language barrier, western religion help the Muslim immigrant other than a very high welfare system where the explosion in the welfare population will exceed the budget of that country and bankrupt an entire country?

This is the reality in real time and is the direction for the rest of western society. Welfare and billions of dollars going out to a non productive population. In conclusion we all have choices. It is up to the people and their elected politicians to seriously look at those choices.

Reply->

Ian MacDougall • Mar 24, 2017 at 13:48

Khadija Khan (if that is her real name) has written a most important and courageous article here.
The Islamic world is crowded with fettered dancers: many like the innocent "Hijabi girl" longing to express themselves honestly, and facing repression and reprisals for doing so from the other inmates of the mental prison that is Islam.
She and those like her are driving wedges into that rotten edifice and watching the cracks grow. This sort of thing does not have to go on for long before the whole thing crumbles, as the mediaeval Catholic Church did in Europe.

Reply->

D. Davies • Mar 24, 2017 at 12:27

We must stick up for women, though I feel some of our British women (and fashion models), let us down by dressing quite indecently. I would not object to the government making rules for both extremes of dress. Government should ban the wearing of Islamic dress except upon certain occasions when National costume would normally be worn, as is customary in our western countries. These people must become westerners or they should go back to where they belong.
There is a great deal of anger in Britain because our governments have been allowing so many aliens into our country and trying to destroy our national life. It will end in civil war, I fear.

Reply->

Pat Walker

D. Davies • Mar 24, 2017 at 17:17

I do not believe the scarf should be banned. If that is to be banned, so should the western custom of any woman wearing any kind of hat. The full body burqa for the women should be banned because it conceals a person's identity and also because the wearer looks like a terrorist. The scarf alone, that does not conceal the face, should be a matter of choice, and quite frankly, is attractive in many instances. It is also a wonderful alternative to a "bad hair day". The scarf is actually much more attractive that many hairstyles that women choose to wear. Some models I have seen were absolutely gorgeous with the scarf added to their western clothing.

If we were to ban the scarf, then what of hats, or western women who wear scarves in inclement weather? Should your royals give up their beloved hats? Would your queen?

Reply->

jayell

Pat Walker • Mar 25, 2017 at 00:27

Western women, particularly from the traditional 'working class', have worn scarves round their heads for centuries, but this would have been only as head/hair protection. The practical reason for the scarf would be obvious. Not so Muslim women, who wear them as a sign of social separation, possibly with an element of religious bigotry. The motivation here is also very obvious. That muslim women should then complain of any kind of rejection as a result of THEIR initial act of rejection shows a pathetic lack of self-awareness and awareness of others, again suggesting an underlying bigotry. No one in the West likes a bigot, least of all a bigot who shows contempt for others by assuming the privilege of ignoring their sensibilities.

Reply->

Robinson Crusoe

Pat Walker • Mar 26, 2017 at 12:33

You misunderstand the purpose of the head covering in Islam. It most certainly is not to make a woman look attractive. It is a sign that she is a believer, and accepts that her beauty is to be concealed so as not to lead men into lust and sin. It also is a protection for her from Muslim men who might be tempted to assume she is available for sex.

Muhammad's wives did not cover themselves until a companion noticed that they were not covered and told Muhammad to have his wives covered after he recognized one going to an open space at night to relieve herself. The wife went home embarrassed. Then Muhammad said that Allah had revealed to him that women must be covered. They must not reveal their beauty. This also means the whole body, not just the hair. Neither must a woman allow her contours to be seen, or wear makeup in public. Basically a woman, in Islam, is seen as a sexual temptation for Muslim men which must be hidden. A woman who does not cover herself can be regarded as available for sexual relations, whether she likes it or not.

In sharia-controlled Muslim states women must cover, they have no choice. In the West women are often pressured by family and community to cover herself so she still has no choice. A law to ban the covering is to protect women from this coercion.

Reply->

Pat Walker

Robinson Crusoe • Mar 26, 2017 at 14:58

I fully understand your explanation. I was inferring that the scarf is attractive to many Westerners, including myself, when worn with Western clothing, not shapeless tents. Many Western, non-Muslim women have viewed the scarf as attractive, particularly when the woman is wearing makeup and attractive clothing, as is in the case of models viewed online and in magazines. I personally love hats, too. However, I defer to your response that the scarf is a symbol of oppression for Muslim women. Hats for Westerners are an option, not mandatory, so yes, there is a difference. For the sake of those women, the scarf should be banned. Thank you for your clarification of the scarf.

Reply->

Long John Silver • Mar 24, 2017 at 12:16

It is a terrible indictment of Britain's political and justice system that this poor girl received no assistance during her torment by the Islamic thugs. These young women who are abused in this way are British citizens and must be made aware that they cannot, lawfully, be treated like this.

It is pointless expecting the "feminist" movement to support her. Most of these set ups are merely hard left organisations interested in furthering Marxism. They have adopted Islam as an ally. They have no genuine interest in the rights of Muslim women,or women in general.

But once again we have this reference to "extremist" states where, presumably "extremist" Muslims rule. There is no such thing! The behaviour this young woman was pilloried for is forbidden by Islam, not extremist Islam, just Islam. It is condemned in the Koran or ahadith or both.

To claim that "extremist" Islam is to blame does not help, it just excuses Islamic doctrine. "Muslims" who find this wrong must face up to facts; Islam is wrong. An honest person who finds himself in a religion or ideology that offends him should, must, leave it.

Reply->

Ora

Long John Silver • Mar 24, 2017 at 19:09

Long John, you say, "An honest person who finds himself in a religion or ideology that offends him should, must, leave it." It's easy for you to say but did you know that the penalty for a Muslim who leaves his religion is death? Thus, many are afraid to leave their religion. There are even cases where an apostate, as those who leave Islam are called, have been killed by their own family members.

"According to Abdul Rashied Omar, the majority of modern Islamic jurists continue to regard apostasy as a crime deserving the death penalty"

Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam

Reply->

Terence Curry

Long John Silver • Mar 25, 2017 at 06:45

It isn't only in Britain that this sort of thing is becoming commonplace. Sweden is virtually lost to the west now. Not too long ago, a number of Muslim youths were convicted of gang rape. They were given a virtual slap on the wrist as punishment. In his summing up, the judge seemed to indicate that the girl should have known better, and his underlying words were almost boys will be boys. Germany has similar problems, since Merkel opened he doors to all and sundry. One thing that is noticeable is that right or wrong, Muslims must be allowed to do whatever they want as long as it is legal, and the definition of legal when it comes to Islam and Sharia is becoming more blurred by the day. Again, not all that long ago Britain tried to ban the burqa, in Universities and public places. the demonstrations were immediate and overwhelming, the ruling was quickly dropped. Women's rights groups said nothing; certainly nothing of any use. It's all right to ban the wearing of a crucifix, or openly wearing a top with a religious message on it. No one says a word. Try infringing on a Muslim's rights. We seem like lemmings to be rushing to throw ourselves over the cliff tops into the arms of Islam. It wouldn't be so bad if Islam was a mainstream religion. Any constructive thought shows it for what it is; the creation of a highly sexed paedophile.

Reply->

Long John Silver

Ora • Mar 25, 2017 at 15:05

Yes I am well aware of this but it does not affect Muslims living in the West to anything like the same degree as those living in Islamic countries. If Muslims come to the West to escape Islam, why do they insist on bringing it with them and defending the indefensible?

Reply->

Terence Curry

Long John Silver • Mar 26, 2017 at 16:12

The simple answer is that the are not; at least the vast majority of them are not; coming to escape Islam or sharia. They are coming to colonise and eventually to subjugate. Until then they will go on playing the martyr, and saying look at how nasty everyone is to us, because they don't understand us. Some of us, understand only too well. Islam is indefensible. It cannot logically exist, in a normal sane world, being nothing more than the product of a power crazed paedophile. How he can be dubbed a perfect man. Perfect in what? Killing, daylight robbery, and preferring young girls. Since he had many more than the 4 wives he could be allowed, not to mention the hordes of concubines. His predilection for sex explains why when the placard come out in their demonstrations, they tell us they intend to take our women as war booty. Just like Mr. perfect.

Reply->

Long John Silver

Terence Curry • Mar 28, 2017 at 15:30

Of course, my comments were rhetorical. It is Jihad by immigration. After the conquests of the lands of the Middle Eastern Christian states, large scale Muslim migration was encouraged, along with deportation and murder of Christians, Jews and others. This way the native Christians etc. were relatively quickly reduced to minorities in their own lands.

Reply->

Jessica Davidson • Mar 24, 2017 at 11:40

We have to stop being afraid of being called Islamophobes (or whatever). We are letting the Left dictate the narrative, and the terms of how we must behave and communicate. We have to break the cycle. It is not wrong to be afraid of something that can kill you, or something that has declared its intent to kill you. I imagine there are a few looney-tunes who think that is all Muslims, but I bet that the vast majority of people who recognize Islamic sharia-supremacy for what it is, know how to tell the difference between a Muslim who subscribes to it and a Muslim who wants to live in a free society. Let's start lining up with the freedom-loving Muslims, and stand up tall to the supremacists.

Reply->

Israel Hands

Jessica Davidson • Mar 25, 2017 at 18:46

A Muslim who does not want to follow Islam as outlined by Allah and Muhammad is not a Muslim, he is an apostate and or a "hypocrite". Muslims are not permitted to adhere to their own version of Islam. What would be the point anyway? A "moderate" Muslim is still stuck with a blood thirsty killer, robber, child marrying slave owner as a role model. Does any moderate person want that? A moderate Muslim still has a deity that he is expected to worship that commands his followers to kill infidels, take slaves for sex, changes his mind, hates "infidels" and urges world conquest. What sort of god is that to base a moral life on? This god wants infidels punished in this world and has invented the most appalling tortures for them in the next. This god promise his followers who kill (infidels) and are killed in the process, instant access to a sensual paradise where such followers are provided with numerous maidens and other pleasures. Is that a god that should be worshipped by moderate people? I don't think so. Islam is what it is and cannot be anything else and remain Islam.

Reply->

Edward Cline • Mar 24, 2017 at 11:19

The West will stop siding with criminals, especially Muslim ones, when it finally understands what Islam is all about, which, among other things, is enslaving women as disposable or acquirable sexual commodities, and enslaving men as deferential, emasculated kaffirs. Islam is not compatible with any decent, rights-protecting political and/or legal system, and was never meant to be. Sharia is a polity for doofuses.

Reply->

b.a. freeman

Edward Cline • Mar 24, 2017 at 17:04

the left has the blood of these women on its hands. it controls the levers of power of the State, and it controls the media, yet it not only does nothing to help the victims, it encourages their victimization. most who spout this bulls**t are simply too lazy to check out islam for themselves, but the leaders of the left have the time, the ability, and the responsibility to check it, yet they act like they have not. that tells me that they are traitors who very likely *have* learned about islam and are willing to use it as a tool to destroy the republics they run. they are culpable for the murders and tortures the victims of islam endure. in my book, that means that once rationality resurfaces (if ever - it might be too late), they need to serve time in prison as accessories to criminal acts. this bulls**t has to stop.

Reply->

Nicola • Mar 24, 2017 at 10:10

Thank you for this well written article by Khadija Khan, I find it so offensive that our Governments are not doing more by imposing laws in this country- Britain against this growing infrastructure of radical Islam, that is a psychological harmful oppression. These religious and political leaders are trying to dominate countries bending the societies into dysfunctional cultures based on fear, shame, arrogance and violence.

Reply->

Richard • Mar 24, 2017 at 09:54

Leaders in the West long ago lost their nerve in dealing with Islam. Over the years the predominantly white Christian cultures of Europe and more recently, the US, have lost their way due to misplaced White Guilt. Instead of remaining proud over the fact that the ancestors of these current leaders made the modern world, they apologize for it. Like the whipped dogs they have become, Western leaders are idle observers of Islam's barbarism. When their citizens have had enough of this cowardly posture, they will rise up, send the Seventh Century cultists packing and retake their rightful place of authority within their lands and cultures.

Reply->

Dean • Mar 24, 2017 at 09:42

We in Canada know what it means to have a government that wants their citizens to become dhimmis.

The Canadian government yesterday passed motion M-103 which are, in fact, blasphemy recommendations protecting Islamists from criticism and the first step towards islamization.

A major player in the Muslim Student association at York University is now an MP and she has been leading this campaign. PM Trudeau is a child-like leftist who agrees with anything that takes places power into the hands advocates for drugs, Islam, communism and anarchy.

Feminists are now a loosely configured group whose mandate is to seek revenge, especially against "white males," and strives to special concoct obfuscatory gender language to divide us up into as many sexual groups as they can discern.

Recently, Professor Jordan Peterson was violently turned away from McMaster University for opposing the new gender-speak Orwellian language.

See: http://m.thespec.com/opinion-story/7202162-dreschel-mac-protesters-try-to-prevent-controversial-professor-from-speaking

The problem is that there are no longer adults in high positions. The top caters to the lowest common denominator and is afraid of being branded as racist, Islamophobic or right-wing by the leftist-indoctrinated juveniles infesting campuses.

Research, science and learning are being threatened as cornerstones of knowledge are being passed from rational thinkers to irrational totalitarians seeking power and control.

Reply->

barry • Mar 24, 2017 at 09:40

I see a need for calling attention to this story to a wider audience beyond Gatestone's inevitably somewhat limited reach especially including liberal and women's rights advocates who have either been duped or intimidated into accepting the Islamist line. It might help if the headline instead of referring to "criminals" more neutrally used a term like ".... with those suppressing women's rights"

Reply->

Pat Walker

barry • Mar 26, 2017 at 17:55

A term such as "with those suppressing women's rights" instead of "criminals" will get every feminist's attention in America, especially the very extreme liberals. They will not even care about the issue at hand. All that is needed is those words. Guaranteed.

Reply->

Elsie OSOSANYA • Mar 24, 2017 at 09:19

This is an interesting article coming from someone passionately advocating for change of perspective, attitude and behaviour from the establishment, women organisations and the public in general.
I just wonder how many of the above-mentioned really get to read this type of informative pieces Gatestone in noted for.
I pray and desire wider coverage for Gatestone type of honest journalism.

Reply->

jeb • Mar 24, 2017 at 08:27

There is something despicable about a society that exalts stronger people beating up the weak but it seems to be blessed by Muslims. Especially extremists.
If any one has ever had to stand between two arguing people not knowing any particulars and to prevent the argument from becoming physical and the man is 6 foot and over 200 lbs and the woman is just over 5 foot and under 130 lbs I don't care if she started it and is punching him, he can't hit her back. Its as simple as physics unless she's some sort of super black belt karate expert.
That is why we used to as a society teach young men it is never right to hit a woman. No it would seem too many sexually frustrated young men aspire to be pimps.

Reply->

Jeff Page • Mar 24, 2017 at 08:07

To be honest, this behaviour is the fault of the government. Every single one of these militant, Islamists, needs to be confronted by the wider community. But it never happens and the reason for this is simple, the Islamists rule their communities with fear as their weapon of choice. A great deal of blame can be directed at community leaders and Imams for the attitude of these awful people who just want division and hatred to exist between Muslims and other religions. These are the kind of fanatics that need to be rooted out and if possible deported. If they can't be deported then they have to be imprisoned for a very long term!

They really must be a miserable bunch of sad individuals. I'm sure that any god would never deprive anyone of the right to enjoy their life to the full, and to dance and listen to music is by no stretch of the imagination a serious crime. To shun a young girl for enjoying something she likes is beyond all reasoning and those persecuting her need some serious psychological counselling.

To want to practice your faith is fine, but to be so fanatical about it, that you deny any enjoyment of life is crazy and has to stop.

The community leaders and Imams need to conjure up the courage to stop the fanatics and drive them from their communities. If not hatred will win and division will rule supreme.

Reply->

jayell • Mar 24, 2017 at 07:32

1. I once had the great displeasure of bumping into an 'oppressed' Muslim woman (with all the headgear) at Whitechapel underground station in east London. The place was rather crowded, and she wasn't looking where she was going. She didn't apologise, so I found it rather annoying and gave her a little bit of a dirty look. The sheer malicious aggression in her reaction was not quite what one expects from a clearly negligent fellow-passenger at a civilised (sic) London Underground station, so I was not best impressed.

2. On more than one occasion I have had the enlightening experience of dealing with females of the Muslim persuasion in their capacity as parents within the context of an old established British educational institution, where an established practice of the school conflicted with their traditional islamic customs as regards their daughters who were pupils at the school. The customs in question involved an element of what might be described as freedom-limitation or repressive over-control compared with other female pupils in the school, and the mothers concerned were at best 'forthright' in their demands, at worst really rather rude.

Now, at no time have I dealt with Muslim males in any of these situations, and at no time did I get the impression that any of the females concerned were meek, down-trodden, repressed shrinking violets. Quite the reverse in fact, and the Muslim mothers were if anything educated and 'liberated'. The question of where the 'repression' is coming from therefore comes to mind. So, on reading this article by Khadija Khan, the picture of universal Islamic female victimhood doesn't quite match my experience, at least not in a Western environment.

Reply->

Dominic Stockford • Mar 24, 2017 at 07:01

I've watched the video on YouTube. That blatant display of the sexualisation of modern society is not something that I can agree with. But I wouldn't harass her publicly for it, rather try and discuss it privately to help her see such "dancing" for what it really is.

Reply->

robert davis • Mar 24, 2017 at 06:07

Western leftwing governments and their supporters are terrorized by Islam and the more they submit to it and cry for mercy the more terror they get and will get even more in future. They deserve it and none should deplore it. Totalitarian leftwing social/communism and Islam fit one another and lefters' submission should not surprise anyone. Only a civil war can fix this situation by getting rid physically of both of those totalitarian terrorists.

Reply->

Vivian Clayborn

robert davis • Mar 25, 2017 at 07:47

I'm not sorry for them, but let's hope they can learn something from it, if it isn't already too late!

Reply->