There appears to be a “war on women” (and little girls) that goes well beyond depriving them of free or subsidized birth control and abortion services. The article deals with a “Muslim Rape Epidemic.”

John Malcolm

Finally! Veil Lifted on Muslim Rape Epidemic

By Bob Unruh | July 21, 2012 | WND

‘They are simply living by the 7th century rules of a desert warrior’

Quran32For years there have been reports on blogs, personal testimonials and the like, about what looked like a literal epidemic of rape by Muslim men of both women and children, especially in northern European nations where the Muslim immigrant population is high.

But the disturbing reports rarely rose to the level that would make the general population aware of the dangers that were becoming evident. After all, such a report would be blasted for attacking Islam and discriminating against Muslims.

Until now, when a case from the United Kingdom has proven so egregious it could not be ignored.

View original post 1,610 more words

About danmillerinpanama

I was graduated from Yale University in 1963 with a B.A. in economics and from the University of Virginia School of law, where I was the notes editor of the Virginia Law Review in 1966. Following four years of active duty with the Army JAG Corps, with two tours in Korea, I entered private practice in Washington, D.C. specializing in communications law. I retired in 1996 to sail with my wife, Jeanie, on our sailboat Namaste to and in the Caribbean. In 2002, we settled in the Republic of Panama and live in a very rural area up in the mountains. I have contributed to Pajamas Media and Pajamas Tatler. In addition to my own blog, Dan Miller in Panama, I an an editor of Warsclerotic and contribute to China Daily Mail when I have something to write about North Korea.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to

  1. Boeke says:

    Don’t you think that Townsends comment was reprehensible, or threatening, or vile, or something? Just “over the top”? A little strong?

    “As to the acid Facebook rhetoric of Mr. Townsend, I agree that it was over the top.”

    “The rapes and other disgusting physical violations of children and women seem quite different to me from over the top rhetoric;”

    Do you mean those rapes that are being “quite literally” enabled by the hated libruls? Isn’t that all just a myth you’re creating? A flamboyant image intended to inflame people against ‘libruls’?

    And yet no one has shown that ‘libruls’ are actually, quite literally, holding down women and children so muslims can rape them. But Townsend DID advocate horrible violence against a woman!

    • The modifier “literally” is commonly used for emphasis rather than according to its dictionary meaning.

      Since the early 20th century, literally has been widely used as an intensifier meaning “in effect, virtually,” a sense that contradicts the earlier meaning “actually, without exaggeration”: The senator was literally buried alive in the Iowa primaries. The parties were literally trading horses in an effort to reach a compromise. The use is often criticized; nevertheless, it appears in all but the most carefully edited writing.

      When I re-blog a post, I am not at liberty, nor do I have the power, to change the title or otherwise to edit the rest of the re-blog.

      With or with out the modifier to which you persistently, and I think unreasonably and perhaps gratuitously, object, Libruls are enabling those who physically harm those unable effectively to resist — women because of their sex and the conditions under which they are required to live, children because of their youth and adherents to reviled religions because of their religions by not expressing displeasure of their activities and often by giving their active support, as in the case of the “Palestinians.”

  2. Boeke says:

    I didn’t even suggest: “However, if it pleases you to consider yourself insulted, please enjoy it.”

    I was just pointing out that you seem to be preparing an (invalid) ad hominem attack instead of dealing with real issues with real facts.

    Frankly, I don’t think you’re capable of insulting me.

  3. Boeke says:

    OK, let’s insert the term you favor, so we do have:

    “I do blame the libruls for quite literally enabling the brutal rape and violation of our children.”?

    Do you believe that those nasty libruls are holding down American children so that Muslims can rape them? Quite literally?

  4. Boeke says:

    Here’s another REPUBLICAN WOMAN SENATOR who’s alarmed at the anti-female policies of her party:

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22342.html

    Republican women: A minority in a minority

    By ERIKA LOVLEY | 5/10/09 7:01 PM EDT

    Women make up almost 51 percent of the U.S. population but less than 10 percent of the House and Senate GOP — a gender disconnect that could make the Republicans’ climb back to power even steeper than it would be otherwise.

    Republican women in the House say they feel the problem — literally — when their male colleagues nudge them to the front of GOP press conferences to break up the solid lines of middle-aged white men in neckties.

    Out of 435 members of the House, just 17 are Republican women. Of 99 sitting senators, just four are Republican women.

    …Twenty-two percent of House Democrats are women, but only 9.5 percent of House Republicans are. In the Senate, nearly 23 percent of the Democrats are women, but only 10 percent of the Republicans are.

    The problem isn’t new; former Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colo.) remembers being struck that no Republican women were on stage while President George W. Bush signed a ban on partial-birth abortions in 2003. “I looked at the stage and said, ‘You’ve got to be kidding me,’” said Musgrave, who was sitting in the audience.

    …in 2008, Democratic women far outnumbered Republican women as general-election candidates for the House in November. There were 96 Democratic women on the ballot — but only 37 Republican women.

    In 2006, 70 percent of the women competing in major party primaries were Democrats, … only five Republican women have chaired congressional committees since 1995. Democratic women currently hold four chairmanships in the Senate and three more in the House — plus the speaker’s gavel, in the hands of Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). In addition, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) chairs the Joint Economic Committee.

    “Republican women are more reluctant to throw their hat in the ring because they don’t see a lot of women like themselves in leadership or on the news,” she said. “This idea that the GOP is just going to treat everyone fairly hasn’t worked. If the GOP wants more women, they’re going to have to do more than just recruit women. They need to urge them to run.”

  5. Boeke says:

    I ask you once again, do you support the statement “I do blame the liberal/left for quite literally enabling the brutal rape and violation of our children.”?

    Do you really mean it when you say “…quite literally …”?

    What are those horrid liberals and leftists doing? Holding down little American children while muslims rape them?

    And if you’re trying to mount an ad hominem attack against me by suggesting I’m a leftist or liberal or whatever, you’re wasting your breath because I’m NOT a liberal.

    • Boeke, I responded to the question in your first paragraph in my earlier reply.

      You state,

      And if you’re trying to mount an ad hominem attack against me by suggesting I’m a leftist or liberal or whatever, you’re wasting your breath because I’m NOT a liberal.

      After explaining the distinctions I draw between liberals (you say you are not one) and Libruls as I use the terms, I said,

      I cannot understand why Libruls take the side of Islamists. Perhaps you can explain why they do or persuade me that they don’t, but I think you will have difficulty in finding suitable evidence as to the latter.(Emphasis added.)

      I am quite able to call people unpleasant things, but don’t so refer to commenters at my blog. I view them as temporary guests in my home and assume (sometimes but rarely erroneously) that they will return the courtesy. However, if it pleases you to consider yourself insulted, please enjoy it.

  6. Pingback: Cleansing the palate of an unpleasant Islamist flavor - Tea Party Tribune

  7. Boeke says:

    Dan,

    You can call me Ray or you can call me Jay, just don’t call me late for lunch! I purposely do not use my real name or anything like it because I was once hounded by political extremists from a popular yahoo group whose unwarranted personal comments bordered on actionable threats. And that was just on a very non-political hobby site! Imagine, if you will, being hounded off a fishing site or model airpIane BBS because you posted a demurer to an extreme political statement that was totally unrelated to fishing or model airplanes. That’s just bullying. Also, I think it is reasonable to change handles from time-to-time to avoid shadows.

    My original comment was in response to the headline “I do blame the liberal/left for quite literally enabling the brutal rape and violation of our children.” How can anyone justify THAT? Really? “Literally”? Are you nuts, or just possessed by Political Hyperbole spirits?

    • Boeke, as to your first paragraph, I find it difficult to imagine that happening here. Thus far, most of the comments have been relatively temperate and I have seen no threats, express or implied. Anything is possible, however, so use any handle that pleases you.

      As to the second paragraph, the headline was from a post I re-blogged. However, I agree with it except that instead of “the liberal/left” I would have preferred to use “Librul,” a word I think I may have coined a year or more ago. A liberal, in the classical sense, has an open mind but not an empty head. Libruls, on the other hand, fail to exhibit an open mind; empty heads (except to the extent crammed with puerile talking points) seem to be common.

      Libruls rarely seem to accept that Israel faces an existential threat from “Palestinians,” Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and others who have vowed repeatedly to remove her and her people from the earth. To the extent that Libruls acknowledge it, there is a tendency to claim that it is the sole fault of the Israelis. Anti-Jewish sentiment is rife and appears to be increasing. Please see my related article here. Islamist conduct is condoned — despite rampant honor killings, child rape, stoning of adulteress, giving enhanced credence to the word of a man over that of a woman in court proceedings and the like. One might hope that sort of thing would offend feminists in free countries; instead, they seem to ignore it. Religious freedom in Islamist countries? Apostates are free to be apostates, but forfeit their heads if discovered.

      I cannot understand why Libruls take the side of Islamists. Perhaps you can explain why they do or persuade me that they don’t, but I think you will have difficulty in finding suitable evidence as to the latter.

  8. Boeke says:

    It’s the radical right that rules the republican party that’s waging a War On Women.

    There’s less than half as many republican women reps and senators as democrats. And it’s not very comfortable according to this female congresswoman:

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/26/ex-republican-congresswoman-blasts-current-gop-and-its-women-reps/

    “Ex Republican congresswoman blasts current GOP and its women Reps

    Former Representative Claudine Schneider (R-RI) believes that the Republican Party is heading in the wrong direction. According to Think Progress, the moderate Republican believes that today’s Republican Party has no place for centrists like herself, and that the current crop of Republican women in Congress are “not voting in the interest of all women,” particularly with regards to the question of pay equity.

    Schneider joins other disaffected Republicans like former George W. Bush adviser David Frum and The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS author Michael Fumento in decrying a Republican Party that they believe has moved too far to the right. She said that former President Ronald Reagan “would be embarrassed” by today’s Republicans, who have driven out all but the most extreme candidates in primary elections all over the country.

    She is particularly disappointed in women Republicans, who she says are so frightened of losing their primaries, that “They have drunk the Kool-Aid that makes them think it is more important to win, than to do what is right by ending discrimination. The conservatives have co-opted the primaries and in order to win, they appear to do whatever it will take. Clearly, based on [the voting records of the 24 current Republican Congresswomen], they are NOT voting in the best interest of all women and men, because when women lose, families lose!”

    Republican women legislators have formed a caucus called the Women’s Policy Committee, a tack that Schneider dismissed as window-dressing. “This is merely posturing so that the Republican party might stop hemorrhaging the women’s vote,” she said.

    Schneider was instrumental in passing laws protecting the environment, health legislation and gender equity laws like the Economic Equity and the Pension Equity Acts. She served five terms in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1981 to 1991.

    Only 24 republican women in congress? Out of how many?

    And how is this important republican different from the crazy muslims?

    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/hayworth-spokesman-townsend-female-democratic-senators-acid-hurl.php

    “Jay Townsend, a campaign spokesman for Republican Rep. Nan Hayworth (NY-19), weighed in on a local Facebook discussion with a violent comment about Democratic women in Congress, and his suggestion is now earning the congresswoman condemnation from one of her Democratic challengers.

    The comment:

    Listen to Tom. What a little bee he has in his bonnet. Buzz Buzz. My question today … when is Tommy boy going to weigh in on all the Lilly Ledbetter hypocrites who claim to be fighting the War on Women? Let’s hurl some acid at those female democratic Senators who won’t abide the mandates they want to impose on the private sector.

    Need more?

    • Boeke, Igor, or whatever handle you prefer, and whatever may be your concerns (with which I do not agree) about Republicans waging what you call a “war on women,” I am moderately surprised by your equating that “war” with enabling the brutal rape and violation of children as well as women. Those acts of violence seem to be common in Islamist countries and in countries heading in that direction.

      As to the acid Facebook rhetoric of Mr. Townsend, I agree that it was over the top. However, he seems not to have acted on his own advice, any more than President Obama has brought a gun to a knife fight. The rapes and other disgusting physical violations of children and women seem quite different to me from over the top rhetoric; equating them is not even a talking point likely to appeal to people with decency and common sense. If they seem the same to you, so be it.

  9. Pingback: Opinion Forum » Cleansing the Palate of an Unpleasant Islamist Flavor

  10. Pingback: Cleansing the palate of an unpleasant Islamist flavor | danmillerinpanama

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s