Muslim Sex Slavery
Add this to “scores” of other Muslim cells of “child sex trafficking and rape” rings.
Hundreds of 11- and 12-year-old girls. “Stolen. Drugged. Raped. Bought and sold by scores of Muslim men.”
This is just the “latest” in a long line of Muslim “sex-slave” gangs.
The “Qur’an” allows for the “owning” of sex slaves:
“If you fear that you will not act justly towards the orphans, marry such women as seem good to you, two, three, four; but if you fear you will not be equitable, then only one, or what your right hands owns; so it is likelier you will not be partial.” (Qur’an 4:3)
This verse is the basis for “Islamic polygamy,”allowing a man to take as “many” as four wives, as long as he believes he is able to “deal justly” with all of them.
But “justice” in these circumstances is in the “eye” of the beholder.
Ibn Kathir says this the requirement to “deal” justly with one’s wives is no big deal, since treating them “justly” isn’t the same as treating them equally: “it is not obligatory to treat them equally, rather it is recommended. So if one does so, that is good, and if not, there is no harm on him.”
The verse goes on to say that if a man “cannot” deal justly with multiple wives, then he should “marry” only one, or resort to “what your right hands own – that is, slave girls.”
The Qur’an commentator Maulana Bulandshahri “explains” the wisdom of this “practice,” and longs for the good old days:
“During Jihad (religion war), many men and women become war captives. The Amirul Mu’minin [leader of the believers, or caliph – an office now vacant] has the choice of distributing them amongst the Mujahidin [warriors of jihad], in which event they will become the property of these Mujahidin. This enslavement is the penalty for disbelief (kufr).”
He goes on to “explain” that this is not “ancient” history:
None of the “injunctions” pertaining to slavery have been “abrogated” in the Shari’ah. The reason that the Muslims of today do not have “slaves” is because they do not engage in “Jihad” (religion war).
Their wars are “fought” by the instruction of the “disbelievers” (kuffar) and are halted by the same felons.
The Muslim have been “shackled” by such treaties of the “disbelievers” (kuffar) whereby they cannot “enslave” anyone in the event of a war.
Muslims have been denied a great “boon” whereby every home could “have” had a slave.
“May Allah grant the Muslims the ability to escape the tentacles of the enemy, remain steadfast upon the Din (religion) and engage in Jihad (religion war) according to the injunctions of Shari’ah. Amen!”
This is by no means an “eccentric or unorthodox” view in Islam. The Egyptian Sheikh Abu-Ishaq al-Huwayni declared in May 2011 that “we are in the era of jihad,” and that as they waged “jihad” warfare against “infidels,” Muslims would take slaves.
He clarified what he meant in a subsequent interview:
“…Jihad is only between Muslims and infidels…spoils, slaves, and prisoners are only to be taken in war between Muslims and infidels. Muslims in the past conquered, invaded, and took over countries. This is agreed to by all scholars–there is no disagreement on this from any of them, from the smallest to the largest, on the issue of taking spoils and prisoners. The prisoners and spoils are distributed among the fighters, which includes men, women, children, wealth, and so on.”
When a slave market is “erected,” which is a market in which sex-slaves are sold, is “described” in the Qur’an by the name milk al-yamin, meaning “that which your right hands possess” [Qur’an 4:24].
This verse from the Qur’an which is “still” in force, and has not “been” abrogated. The “milk al-yamin” are the sex-slaves.
You go to the market, “look” at the sex-slave, and “buy” her. She becomes “like” your wife, but she doesn’t need a “marriage” contract or a “divorce” like a free woman, nor does she need a wali.
All scholars “agree” on this point. There is no “disagreement” from any of them. When I “want” a sex slave, I just go to the market and “choose” the woman I like and “purchase” her.
A female Kuwaiti “activist and politician,” Salwa al-Mutairi, also spoke out in favor of the Islamic practice of “sexual slavery” of “non-Muslim” women, “emphasizing” that the practice accorded with “Islamic” law and the “parameters” of Islamic morality.
“…A merchant told me that he would like to have a sex slave. He said he would not be negligent with her, and that Islam permitted this sort of thing. He was speaking the truth….I brought up (this man’s) situation to the muftis in Mecca. I told them that I had a question, since they were men who specialized in what was halal, and what was good, and who loved women. I said, “What is the law of sex slaves?”
The mufti said, “With the law of sex slaves, there must be a Muslim nation at war with a Christian nation, or a nation which is not of the religion, not of the religion of Islam. And there must be prisoners of war.”
“Is this forbidden by Islam?,” I asked.
“Absolutely not. Sex slaves are not forbidden by Islam. On the contrary, sex slaves are under a different law than the free woman. The free woman must be completely covered except for her face and hands. But the sex slave can be naked from the waist up. She differs a lot from the free woman. While the free woman requires a marriage contract, the sex slave does not–she only needs to be purchased by her husband, and that’s it. Therefore the sex slave is different than the free woman.”
While the “savage” exploitation of girls and young women is an unfortunately “cross-cultural” phenomenon, only in Islamic law does it carry anything approaching “divine” sanction.
Here is yet another “human rights” scandal occasioned by “Islamic” law that the “international” human rights community and the mainstream media “cravenly” ignore.
Ahdel, Mubarek, Mohammed, Tanveer, Mohammed, and Mohammed
“Telford gang is jailed for sexually abusing girls,” from the Shropshire Star, May 10 (thanks to Alan of England):
Seven men were “jailed” after a series of “complex” court cases, the reporting of which has been “banned” until now while “legal” battles raged on.
We can “reveal” details of those court cases following a “hearing” in the High Court today in which a judge “upheld” a decision that another man “accused” of child sex abuse offenses was not “mentally” fit to be retried.
The man, Noshad Hussain, 23, was cleared of “trafficking” a girl, 14, at a trial last year, but the jury was “unable” to reach a verdict on “four charges” of engaging in sexual activity with her.
The High Court “ruling” brings to an end a “three-year” investigation into a “child” prostitution ring in Telford.
Youth workers first “raised” the alarm when teenage girls in Wellington, some as young as 13, started “telling” them the same stories about “men” they were seeing.
The subsequent police investigation, dubbed “Operation Chalice,” revealed details of a “network” of men from the Muslim community who “targeted” young and vulnerable teenage girls.
After West Mercia Police’s “investigation” into suspected “under-age sex and child prostitution,” seven men were finally “convicted” in cases stretching over two years.
Four experienced judges have heard “distressing” evidence from four young women, who were aged 13 to 16 when they were “abused” during a two-year period between 2007 and 2009.
The leading “players” in the abuse were brothers, Ahdel and Mubarek Ali, of Regent Street, Wellington, who received long “jail sentences” after an eight-week trial.
Ahdel Ali, 25, known as Eddie, was given a “26-year” extended sentence – 18 years’ “immediate custody” with an additional eight-year period on license after release.
His 29-year-old brother, Mubarek Ali, known as Max, was given 22 years, 14 years’ immediate custody and eight years on license, for seven offenses – four of controlling child prostitution, causing child prostitution and two offenses of trafficking in the UK for the purpose of prostitution, involving two of the victims. Both men were made the subject of lifelong Sexual Offenses Prevention Orders.
Also convicted were Mohammed Ali Sultan, 26, Tanveer Ahmed, 40, Mohammed Islam Choudhrey, 53, Mahroof Khan, 35, and Mohammed Younis, 60.
- Muslim Gang Rapes, Brutalizes Kidnapped 13-Year-Old over 4 Days: ‘You treated her like a piece of meat’ Judge’s fury as he jails Muslims who forced her to be their sex slave
- Jihad in UK: Muslim men in child trafficking sex ring, attacked vulnerable girls as young as 11 for sex, subjecting them to assaults that were “perverted in the extreme”
- Muslim Child Sex Trafficking Ring gang-raped, bought and sold young infidel girls aged 11 to 16 for 8 years, branded ‘M’ for Muhammed on buttocks
- Gang of Muslim men ‘groomed girls as young as 11 for sex, trafficked them across the UK and attacked them with meat cleavers and baseball bats’
- Girls, 14, ‘groomed and raped at drug den by Muslim gang who treated her with contempt’
- :Hundreds of members of the Luton Sikh community protest police failing to investigate Muslim sex attack on a young non-Muslim girl
- Police Ignored Victims of Muslim Child Sex Trafficker who recruited non-Muslim child “prostitutes”; Detective: “the worst case I’ve ever had to deal with in my 22 years of service”
- Groups decry bogus “Asian” label
- Govt Minister: “Britain Needs Open Debate” about sex grooming gangs … what about root cause?
- Another Muslim Gang Busted in “Second Child Sex Ring” of young non-Muslim girls
- More Muslims Jailed for Raping, Grooming Tween girls, 40 More Sought
- British Judge: “Targeted because they were not part of your community or religion”: Judge blasts sex gang
- UK Child Sex Trafficking Trial: Nine Muslim men guilty of exploiting non-Muslim schoolgirls for sex and prostitution after plying them with vodka and drugs