Hillary Clinton’s Saudi Sponsors Support Terrorism, Islamist Extremism

Amid the tossing and turning of media hit pieces and partisan mud slinging in advance of the US presidential vote in November, very little focus is given on the actual record and policies of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State.

With this week’s damning revelations regarding Gulf Arab monarchs buying access into the US State Dept via the Clinton Foundation, a clearer picture is now emerging about how the sponsorship of religious extremism, as well as geopolitical instability in the Middle East and beyond – links directly back to the Clinton global network of international oligarchs.
Watch this week’s ABC News segment:

.
Make no mistake, the financial connections between the Gulf monarch states and the Clinton network are vast.

Based on this line of inquiry, what will four years of a Clinton presidency bring in terms of US foreign policy? A few answers to this question from Global Research…

Andre Vltchek
Global Research

If the West in general and the United States in particular, left the Arab and Muslim world alone and in peace, we would most likely never see all those terrorist attacks, which are rocking the world from Indonesia to France. There would be no Mujahedeen and its mutation into al-Qaeda; in Afghanistan or elsewhere. There would be no traces of the ISIS (or ISIL or I.S. or Daesh or however you choose to call it), in Syria, Iraq, Libya or anywhere else.

And the super-conservative Wahhabi Islam, that outdated, freak Saudi mutant, would remain in the religious schools of the ultra-regressive Kingdom, instead of gaining ground all over Southeast Asia, the Middle East and Africa.

Secular Islam

But the West embarked on a brutal, Machiavellian path: it decided to destroy socialist Islam – that (historically) moderate, compassionate and progressive religion. It smashed once secular Egypt; it overthrew the government in socialist Iran and then in near-Communist Indonesia, implanting in all these places horrifically degenerate and fully outdated religious concepts. It used extremists to destroy healthy patriotism and socialism. Like the Brits in the 19^th Century (“You can control people’s brains, while we will control your natural resources”), the West embraced Wahhabi teaching, because it was able to guarantee full obedience, dictatorial (pro-Western) governance and oppressive feudalism.

Islam has been used and abused, manipulated and virtually stripped of its essence. The process has gone so far that two leading Iranian scholars, during my visit last-year to Tehran, declared to me: “In so many parts of the world, the West created an absolutely new religion. We don’t recognize it, anymore. It has nothing to do with Islam.”

“If the West in general and the United States in particular, left the Arab and Muslim world alone and in peace, we would most likely never see all those terrorist attacks, which are rocking the world from Indonesia to France…”

Correct. Like a naughty, spoiled and heartless child, the West, after destroying the Soviet Union, painstakingly constructed its new enemy – “militant Islam” – so it could continue indulging in its favorite activity, which is perpetual conflict, endless wars and plunder.

It is as simple as that.

The greatest oppressors of the Muslim people, those in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Indonesia have all been closely allied to the West. The most terrible terrorist “Muslim” organizations, from Al-Qaida to ISIS, have been created, armed and supported by the West and its cronies.

In Europe and in the United States, the “fear of terrorists” is fully exploited by the Western regime — a global class alliance of plutocrats, in actuality, with headquarters in Washington, where the main military and media muscle reside. It still clings to power mainly thanks to such fear implanted in the brains of ‘ordinary people’.And what about the “War on Terror”? Yes, there really is such war, but the West is not the one who fights it. As this goes to print, the war against terrorism is being fought by Russia, Iran, China, Syria, Hezbollah and their allies!

The West is still closely collaborating with the terrorists. It miraculously ‘avoids targeting them’ when ‘fighting wars against them’; it financially supports some and trains others. It criticizes and antagonizes those who are actually fighting the extremist militant groups.

Extremists have been unleashed, like Rottweiler fighting dogs, against almost all progressive governments in the Middle East, but also against China and Russia. Extremist Muslims, extremist Christians, even extremist Buddhists!

In turn, the politicians in the United States are regularly supported, financially, by the regimes (including those of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, etc.) that are spreading, relentlessly, throughout the world, the most intolerant and grotesquely violent religious concepts.

Despite their essential servility and cowardice, even some North American mainstream media outlets are now actively discussing various schemes involving the financing of the Clinton Foundation by Saudi Arabia (alongside several leading transnational corporations and Wall Street’s largest banks).

On its “Breaking News”, as far back as in 2008, CNN reported:

The donations to the William J. Clinton Foundation include amounts of $10 million to $25 million from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and real estate mogul Stephen Bing, a personal friend of the Clintons.

The Clintons came under intense pressure during Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination to release the names of donors to both the Foundation and to the Clinton presidential library in Arkansas.

Bill Clinton agreed to the release of the list after President-elect Barack Obama nominated Hillary Clinton to become Secretary of State.

The governments of Kuwait and Qatar are also on the list, as is Saudi businessman Nasser Al-Rashid, who has close ties to the Saudi royal family. Saudi Sheikh Mohammed H. Al-Amoudi, reputed to be one of the richest men in the world, is among the donors as well. Both Saudis contributed in the $1 million to $5 million range. A group called Friends of Saudi Arabia and the Dubai Foundation appear in the same category.  

As recently as on August 20^th, 2016, The New York Times wrote something similar, essentially reconfirming the validity of the earlier reports, while adding many more details and adjusting the figures:

“The kingdom of Saudi Arabia donated more than $10 million. Through a foundation, so did the son-in-law of a former Ukrainian president whose government was widely criticized for corruption and the murder of journalists. A Lebanese-Nigerian developer with vast business interests contributed as much as $5 million.

For years the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation thrived largely on the generosity of foreign donors and individuals who gave hundreds of millions of dollars to the global charity. But now, as Mrs. Clinton seeks the White House, the funding of the sprawling philanthropy has become an Achilles’ heel for her campaign and, if she is victorious, potentially her administration as well.”

Long time Clinton’s top aide, Huma Abedin (who spent part of her childhood in Saudi Arabia) has been an intermediary between the former Secretary of State and pro-Saudi interests. She also negotiated financial support for Ms. Clinton from Mr. Chagouri and other individuals, organizations and businesses originating from the Middle East.

The accusations and evidence keep coming in, from different media outlets, both left wing and right wing. On August 1^st, 2016, the conservative Breitbart News stated:

“Khizr Khan, the Muslim Gold Star father that the mainstream media and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have been using to criticize Donald J. Trump, has deep ties to the government of Saudi Arabia—and to international Islamist investors through his own law firm. In addition to those ties to the wealthy Islamist nation, Khan also has ties to controversial immigration programs that wealthy foreigners can use to essentially buy their way into the United States—and has deep ties to the “Clinton Cash” narrative through the Clinton Foundation.”

Hillary’s Saudi Sponsors

Hillary Clinton’s dependence on Saudi sponsors has been strongly influencing her decision to maintain a foreign policy in the service of Riyadh and support for various terrorist groups controlled by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, in and beyond the Middle East region [including those currently active in Syria and Iraq].

In reality, she is simply representing ‘continuity’ of an already existing, deadly trend. The regime has been ‘evolving’ for decades, but especially since the Ronald Reagan years. Republicans or Democrats: it truly matters very little. Both parties spread terror all over the world. True, George W. Bush invaded Iraq, but people like Bill Clinton are close friends and supporters of Paul Kagame, the Rwandese ‘butcher of Congo’, with the blood of some 10 million people on his hands. Democrat and ‘moderate’, Bill Clinton, was also responsible for the criminal bombing and destruction of socialist Yugoslavia. And so it goes…

But under Barack Obama’s rule, the last hope for an independent Middle East and the Arab world has virtually evaporated. Libya has been destroyed; the Syrian civil war was launched from Washington, London and Paris. Saudis bathed rebellious Yemen in blood using UK and US produced weapons. Virtually all ‘Arab Spring revolutions’ were infiltrated and diverted. And in Bahrain, the Shi’a majority was literally raped by Saudi Arabia and its own ruthless rulers, with British advisors standing-by.

The US and Europe have kept selling arms to the Gulf, building new military bases while supporting the most appalling and bloodthirsty regimes.

The ‘Obama/ (Hilary) Clinton Era’ has greatly ‘improved’ the symbioses of Western imperialism, big business, and pro-Western fascist regimes worldwide, but particularly in the Middle East and Africa.

This toxic embrace has proved fatal to millions of people in these two parts of the world. Hopes for self-governance have been ruined. Corpses keep piling up in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, South Sudan, Somalia, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and elsewhere.

The West does not care, as long as it stays in charge of the ‘show’, and for as long as hundreds of billions of dollars are made by weapons’ producers. Even if millions are dying, there is still an uninterrupted flow of raw materials to the West and Japan. Therefore, it is ‘business as usual’. ‘Un-people’ and their lives are worth nothing.

At one point, Russia, Iran, China and others have said “enough is enough; let’s fight against the true terrorists! Let’s fight ISIS and other bigots! Let’s give a hand to the independence-minded, socially-oriented patriots”.

Predictably,. this led to total outrage in Washington, London, and Paris (and Tokyo). Disobedience and rebellion against the global (Western) order could not be tolerated! It had to be crushed, even at the cost of new and deadly world war.

NATO, Washington, Europe, Japan, and South Korea –all started a direct confrontation policy against Russia, China, Iran, North Korea (DPRK) and other members of the ‘Coalition of Daring’. Brazil, an important member of BRICS, was recently destroyed by the extreme-right coup supported by the West.

Even the Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump, in his rare moments of sanity, is clearly aware of the danger. He does not wish to confront Russia. He is obviously not willing to sacrifice tens of millions of human lives for some grotesque dreams of total world domination by a market fundamentalism backed by the white (or Western) supremacist dogmas.

But Trump’s moments of sanity are defined as ‘madness’ by the mainstream propaganda. Not surprisingly! As was correctly stated by the great Indian thinker, Arundhati Roy, some several years ago: “now war is called peace and black is called white”. Orwellian indeed, with a vengeance.

The Clinton Campaign

The Clinton campaign has gone into overdrive. It attempts to distract attention from its own funding scandals, by accusing Donald Trump’s aides of receiving financing from abroad. Trump is now described as ‘Russia’s agent’.

This game – it is all self-serving: nothing to do with the interests of the world, or even the interests of the common ‘American people’.

For as long as the general political trend of the West does not radically change, or for as long as the West is not stopped by outside forces, perpetual wars will continue. Monstrous genocides in Africa, the destruction of entire states and regions in the Middle East, all this could easily spread to other parts of the Planet.

It is clear now that if provoked and confronted, countries like China, Russia and Iran would not hesitate to fight back. They also may fight for others – for their tortured allies.

The Western implants and their buddies, Mujahedeen/Al-Qaida, have already destroyed Afghanistan and the Soviet Union. ISIS, another mutant unleashed by the West and its allies, have been devastating Iraq, Syria, Libya and now what is left of Afghanistan.

These ‘movements’ have really nothing to do with Islam. They were manufactured in Washington, Riyadh, London, and Doha (and most likely even in Tel Aviv), for several concrete purposes, all of them thoroughly foul.

They are making sure to ruin the socialist nature of Islam, insisting exclusively on the implementation of outdated, medieval fundamentalist interpretations.

Huma Abedin’s mother, Dr. Saleha Mahmood Abedin, is one of the founding members of the Muslim Sisterhood, and chairperson of the “International Islamic Committee for Woman and Child” (IICWC). She is also a well known writer and editor based in Saudi Arabia. Her organization (IICWC) had repeatedly argued that laws banning female circumcision should be revoked, as well as laws prohibiting child marriage and marital rape. During her visit to KSA, Hillary Clinton spoke at the Islamic college of Dar El-Hekma (where Dr. Saleha Abedin was a vice-dean) shoulder-to-shoulder with her favorite aide – Huma.

Was this just an insignificant episode? Like those millions of dollars in Saudi Arabian funding for Clinton’s foundation? Like the US ‘foreign policy’ in the Gulf and in the Middle East, like spreading Muslim extremist groups to all corners of the world, from Africa, the Middle East, to Southeast Asia and even China? Like unleashing conservative Islam against socialist Muslim countries?

Too many ‘episodes’! Too much blood… It is time to say what is by now obvious: “The US establishment is not fighting ‘Muslim terrorism’ or even ‘extremism’; it is manufacturing it, and injecting it everywhere.”

Read More

There is No God and Karl Marx is His Prophet’: The Links Between Communism, Islam, and Slavery

by ANDREW G. BOSTOM 29 Jan 2016

The following is the text of a speech delivered Friday, January 29, 2016 at The Education Policy Conference, St. Louis, MO.

Sociologist Jules Monnerot’s 1949 book,Sociology of Communism, made very explicit connections between Islamic and 20th-century Communist totalitarianism. The title of his first chapter, dubbed Communism as “The Twentieth-Century Islam.” Monnerotelucidates these two primary shared characteristics of Islam and Communism: “conversion”—followed by subversion—from within, and the fusion of “religion” and state. He argued, “Communism takes the field both as a secular religion and as a universal State; it is therefore… comparable to Islam…,” while each also “…work[s] outside the[ir] imperial frontiers to undermine the social structure of neighboring States.”

Indeed, a humorist contemporary of Monnerot had cogently highlighted the striking similarities between Islam and Communism, referring to the Communist creed with this aphorism: “There is no G-d, and Karl Marx is his prophet.”

Sadly, in our present stultifying era, which increasingly demands only a hagiographic view of Islam, even such witty, illuminating aphorisms may become verboten. Witness President Obama’s stern warning during his Tuesday, September 25, 2012, speech to the UN General Assembly, when he proclaimed: “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

The late Islamologist Maxime Rodinsonwarned in 1974 of a broad academic campaign—which has clearly infected policymakers across the politico-ideological spectrum—“to sanctify Islam and the contemporary ideologies of the Muslim world.” A pervasive phenomenon, Rodinson ruefully described the profundity of its deleterious consequences:  “Understanding [of Islam] has given way to apologetics pure and simple.”

An ex-Communist himself, Maxime Rodinson (d. 2004), reaffirmed the essential validity of Monnerot’s 1949 comparison between Islam and Communism. During a September 28, 2001, interview with Le Figaro, Rodinson acknowledged that, while still a Communist, he had taken umbrage with Monnerot’s assessment. But having long since renounced the Communist Party, Rodinson (circa September, 2001) concededthat there were “striking similarities” between Communism and Islam, noting that like Communism, traditional Islam promulgated “an ideology that claims to explain everything, drawing on a vision of the world that is fiercely paranoid [and] conspiratorial.”

Well, the only Marxist intellectual of any ilk that I fully appreciate—Groucho—once observed, “Beside a dog, a book is man’s best friend. Inside a dog, it is too dark to read.”

Today I will penetrate the fog of Islamic apologetics and cast light on subject matter relegated to silent darkness.

**

Our host Donna Hearne made a plaintive appeal that I redress the bowdlerization of Islamic slavery in secondary school textbooks, juxtaposed to their unsparing discussions of slavery as practiced by Western Europeans, and Americans. For example I discovered this thoroughly uninformative, mere 28 words dedicated to an alleged characterization of slavery, across space and time, in Islamdom, from the textbook, “World History – Patterns of Interaction,” 2007, Chapter 10, “The Muslim World, 600-1250 A.D.”:

The lowest class was composed of slaves. Many slaves were prisoners of war, and all were non-Muslims. Slaves most frequently performed household work or fought in the military.

Is it any wonder such indoctrination begets disorientation, if not outright disbelief, when nearly 8 centuries after 1250 A.D., these students are confronted by present day ugly manifestations of the uninterrupted historical continuum of Islamic slavery—vividly illustrated by the Islamic State’s practice of jihad sexual slavery in Iraq and Syria, or, in far removed Mauritania, mass, ongoing chattel slavery of blacks by the ruling Arabo-Berber Muslim minority?

A Reuters story about an ISIS “fatwa”, a religious edict, regarding female sex slaves was published online December 29, 2015. The fatwa in question is part of a cache of documents captured during a May, 2015 raid on a leading ISIS official in Syria. These materials are now being made public, rather piecemeal. Dated January 29, 2015, the ruling first presents a straightforward rationale for jihad enslavement, entirely consistent with the classical Islamic jurisprudence of jihad war: “one of the inevitable consequences of the jihad of establishment [of the Caliphate] is that women and children will become captives of Muslims.” 

A Muslim “owner” (8 mentions), non-Muslim female “captive” (13 mentions) master-slave relationship is made unabashedly clear in the fatwa. The fatwa’shollow invocation to “show compassion towards her,” i.e. the female sex slave and serial rape victim, such as refraining from anal intercourse, is itself consistent with a prohibition in Koran 2:223, which otherwise states that women are “tilth” to be “plowed” as men please. Regardless, testimonies of freed Yazidi and Christian ISIS sex slaves reveal the horrific reality of such captivity.

The horrors of jihad sexual slavery inflicted by ISIS have been deservedly well-publicized. But the barely known, staggering scope of continued Islamic chattel slavery in Mauritania merits equal attention. The Islamic Republic of Mauritania only abolished slavery in 1980, although the practice was still not criminalized till 2007. Nevertheless, at present, because slaveholders routinely avoid prosecution, at least 5% of Mauritania’s 3.4 million people are enslaved— a reported 155,600 souls are “real” chattel slaves— according to the Walk Free Foundation’s November, 2014 global slavery index. Other estimates put the total number of Mauritanian chattel slaves at up to 680,000, or some 20% of the population. Intrepid Mauritanian anti-slavery activist Biram Abeid has openly condemned what he terms the majority of his country’s ulama—religious scholars—whose fatwas perpetuate the practice of Islamic slavery. At a protest rally in 2012, Abeid burned texts of Malik b. Anas, 8^th century founder of the Maliki school of jurisprudence—the predominant school of Sunni Muslim Islamic law in Mauritania—that upheld slavery and the brutal treatment of slaves. Perhaps Abeid destroyed Malik’s commentwhich decried a Muslim for breaking his “binding oath that he will beat his young slave and then not beat[ing] him.” Other examples of Maliki doctrine include the writings of the 14^th century North African Maliki jurist, and renowned Muslim historian-sociologist, Ibn Khaldun, or the eminent 15^th century Maliki legist al-Wansharisi, who compiled legal opinions for both North Africa, and mythically “tolerant” Muslim Spain. Illustrating Islam’s doctrinal hatred of “infidelity,” and conjoined racist attitudes toward black African animist populations, specifically, Ibn Khaldun opined, “the Negro nations are, as a rule, submissive to slavery, because (Negroes) have little that is (essentially) human and possess attributes that are quite similar to those of dumb animals,” while al-Wansharisi averred slavery was a justified affliction for those who did not abide Islam’s prophet or law, and thus warrant “humiliation.” Abeid’s dramatic 2012 act of protest led to his arrest, amid a storm of demonstrations against him, with even Mauritania’s president, Mohamed Abdel Aziz, calling for Abeid to be judged per the Sharia, and killed as an apostate. Only after international pressure was Abeid sparedexecution, and released. However Abeid was arrested again for protesting the continued practice of Islamic slavery in Mauritania during November 2014, and he has remained incarcerated since then.

Mainstream, authoritative contemporary sanction for the persistence of chattel slavery in Mauritania, and ISIS’s jihad sex slavery, has been provided, respectively, by a leading Saudi government cleric, and author of the Kingdom’s Islamic religious education curriculum, and a female professor at Egypt’s Al-Azhar University, the de facto Vatican of Sunni Islam. Saudi Sheik Al-Fawzan proclaimed in 2003, “Slavery is part of jihad and jihad will remain as long as there is Islam.” Consistent with the call to put Mauritanian anti-slavery activist Abeid to death as an “apostate,” Al-Fawzan addedthose Muslims who contend Islam is against slavery should be declared apostates, citingKoran 4:89, which states, “But if they turn from Islam, take (hold) of them and kill them wherever you find them”—a verse whose classical and modern glosses sanction killing those Muslims who forsake Islam. During a September 12, 2014 television appearance discussing “fatwas,” Suad Saleh, a woman Professor of Theology at Al-Azhar, outlined the Islamic law concept of “those whom you own.” She maintained that Muslims who capture women in jihad wars may enslave them as property, and sexual objects, “In order to humiliate them.”

Muhammad, Islam’s beloved prophet, as Muslims are told in the Koran’s 33^rd sura (chapter) “is closer to the believers than their selves and his wives are their mothers.”[Koran 33:6]. Moreover, Muhammad was Islam’s proto-type jihadist whose idealized example Muslims are exhorted “to follow for him who hopes in (the Meeting with) Allah and the Last Day and remembers Allah much.” [Koran 33:21]

What was Muhammad’s “perfect” role model, vis-à-vis jihad slavery? Also, what do Islam’s canonical texts, especially the Koran and the hadith (Muhammad’s “guiding” words and deeds as recorded by his pious Muslim companions), opine on these matters?

Muhammad, using the Koranic “revelation” as justification, insisted that he was entitled to not only his own wives, but those captured in battle, per Allah’s allowance in Koran 33:50. The “privilege” of having sexual intercourse with captured slave women is extended to all Muslim men repeatedly in the Koran [verses 4:3; 4:24;4:25, 23:6, 70:30]: “those captives and slaves whom your right hands possess.”

Muhammad and his minions, for example, attacked and devastated the prosperous Jewish tribe Banu-Mustaliq in a surprise raid [during 626 A.D.; see the hadith Sahih Al-Bukhari 2541]. The Banu al-Mustaliq males were slaughtered and the “booty” taken by the Muslims included the victims’ women, and children, who were enslaved.Juwayriya, the most alluring captive, and daughter of the Banu al-Mustaliq leader, was taken as a “bride” for Muhammad himself. Sanctioned by Islam’s prophet, a mass rape of the captured women ensued, which was characterized in a canonical hadith [Sunan Abu Dawud 2167)], including the detail that Muhammad dismissed the Muslim rapists’ need to practice “coitus interruptus” to avoid impregnating those female slaves who might later be sold.

During Islam’s early conquests, the great historian of Muslim, non-Muslim relations, Shlomo Dov Goitein, observed:

…an abundant supply of captives was available in the wake of the incessant [jihad] wars of conquest, so that free labor could be replaced by the cheaper work of slaves…[T]he ninth century witnessed a tremendous revolt of masses of negro slaves in southern Iraq, which shook the very foundations of the caliphate of Baghdad…[S]omewhat later, the council of a comparatively small…community in Eastern Arabia owned a labor force of tens of thousands of negroes doing agricultural work.

The specific subject of Goitein’s analysis was female slavery, and he also noted this stark contrast regarding how Islam, relative to Judaism and Christianity—seen through the prism of the subjected Jewish and Christian minorities in the Middle East during the Middle Ages—viewed sexual relations with enslaved women:

…there was, of course, a deep cleavage between the Christian and Jewish minorities on the one hand and the Muslim majority on the other. While Christianity and Judaism disapproved of any sexual relations outside wedlock, in Islam a female slave was at the disposal of her master, and he could possess as many of them as he liked and his purse allowed.

From the advent of Islam, through the present era, Muhammad’s sacralized behaviors have engendered jihad chattel and sexual slavery on a massive scale.

Indeed, the enduring scale and scope of Islamic slavery in Africa exceeded the far better known Western trans-Atlantic slave trade to the Americas. Quantitativeestimates of 10.5 million have been calculated for the trans-Atlantic slave trade during the 16^th through the end of the 19^thcentury. Professor Ralph Austen’s working figure for the composite of the trans-Saharan, Red Sea, and Indian Ocean traffic generated by the Islamic slave trade out of Africa, from 650 through 1905, is 17 million. In addition, the horrific plight of those enslaved animist peoples drawn from the savannah and northern forest belts of western and central Africa for the trans-Saharan trade, equaled the sufferings experienced by the tragic victims of the trans-Atlantic slave trade.

This illuminating comparison, important as it is, ignores other vast domains of jihad slavery: throughout Europe (Mediterranean and Western Europe), as well as Central and Eastern Europe, involving the Arabs, and later the Ottoman Turks and Tatars; Muscovite Russia (subjected to Tatar depredations); Asia Minor (under Seljuk and Ottoman domination); Persia, Armenia, and Georgia (subjected to the systematized jihad slavery campaigns waged by the Shi’ite Safavids, in particular); and the Indian subcontinent (jihad raids and campaigns by the Arabs in the 7th and 8th centuries, and later depredations by the Afghan Ghaznavids, by the Delhi Sultanate rulers, the Timurid [Tamerlane’s] jihad, and under the Mughals).

As a cursory introduction to the extent of jihad slavery beyond the African continent, and Indian subcontinent, in my compendium The Legacy of Jihad, I adduced examples of the Ottoman practices in the Balkans during the 14^th through early 18^thcenturies, and the Tatars in southern Poland and Muscovite Russia, from the mid-15^th till the end of the 18^th centuries.

The Ottomans employed coercive, often brutal methods to impose the infamousdevshirme child levy, enslaving and forcibly converting to Islam an estimated total of as many as 1 million Balkan Christian children, resulting in significant attrition of these native Christian populations, from both expropriation, and flight, to avoid capture. Tatar historian Alan Fisher’s conservative tabulations indicate that at least 3 million persons—men, women, and children—were captured and enslaved during the slave raids conducted by the Muslim Crimean Tatars against the Christian populations of southern Poland and Muscovite Russia from1463 to 1794, the so-called “harvesting of the steppe.” Encapsulated in a Polish proverb, “Oh how much better to lie on one’s bier, than to be a captive on the way to Tatary,” Fisher described the plight of those enslaved, and their “first ordeal”—transportation:

…the first ordeal was the long march to the Crimea. Often in chains and always on foot, many of the captives died en route. Since on many occasions the Tatar raiding party feared reprisals or, in the seventeenth century, attempts by Cossack bands to free the captives, the marches were hurried. Ill or wounded captives were usually killed rather than be allowed to slow the procession. [German Ambassador to Russia] Herberstein [in 1521] wrote… ‘the old and infirm men who will not fetch much as a sale, are given up to the Tatar youths either to be stoned, or thrown into the sea, or to be killed by any sort of death they might please.’ An Ottoman traveler in the mid—sixteenth century who witnessed one such march of captives from Galicia marveled that any would reach their destination—the slave markets of Kaffa [a Crimean port on the Black Sea]. He complained that their treatment was so bad that the mortality rate would unnecessarily drive their price up beyond the reach of potential buyers such as himself.

Moreover, across a continuum of nearly 14 centuries, jihad enslavement included the enormous, iconic harems of purportedly “enlightened” Muslim Spain (especially during the 9^th and 10^th centuries), through their Ottoman Empire 13^th to early 20^thcentury counterparts. These harems, in turn, begot the aptly named hideous tradeof Islamic eunuch slavery, which necessitated a barbaric and deadly human gelding procedure that killed at least 90% of the non-Muslim children and adolescents—numbering in the millions—subjected to it.

The 10^th century Arab geographer Al-Muqaddasi’s account of the main source for the manufacture of white eunuchs in southeastern Muslim Spain—captured Slavic non-Muslims—provides gruesome details of the human gelding procedure itself. A surviving eunuch, whom Al-Muqaddasi interviewed, and referred to as a “learned and truthful man,” apparently experienced the “two-stage” gelding procedure:

According to some of [my informants], the penis and scrotum are cut off at the same time. Others asserted that the scrotum is cut and the testicles removed, after which a stick is inserted under the penis which is then cut off at the base…When the castration is done, a little pencil of lead is placed in the urinary opening; this is removed during urination, and [is replaced] until the wound heals, so that the hole will not close.

Modern historian Jan Hogendorn’s analysisof eunuch slavery notes that Islamdom, uniquely, captured these slaves via predatory raids on non-Muslim populations, alone—and then gelded them—whereas eunuch slaves in China were almost exclusively Chinese procured locally. Extending his assessment into the early 20^thcentury, Hogendorn adds that when sub-Saharan African blacks became the major source of eunuchs, undergoing simultaneous total removal of both testicles and the penis, death rates due to hemorrhage, sepsis, and renal failure, per French physician Richard Millant’s 1908 study, remained 90%.

Finally, sexual slavery and rape alsopunctuated the Ottoman jihad genocide of the Armenian Christians during World War I, as well as the late 20^th century genocidal jihad waged against southern Sudan’s black Christians and animists, and even Darfur’s syncretic animist-Muslims, by the Arab Muslim Khartoum regime, which lasted for some three decades, into the early 21^stcentury.

CONCLUSION

 ISIS’s practice of jihad sex slavery, persistent large scale chattel slavery in Mauritania, and even the mass acts of sexual assault just committed New Year’s Eve by Muslim males in Cologne, Germany, and elsewhere across Western Europe, all fit squarely within a normative doctrinal, and historical Islamic context, patterned after the behaviors of Muhammad, and the nascent Muslim community. Thus defiant Cologne imam Sami Abu-Yusuf insisted “the events of New Year’s Eve were the girls own fault, because they were half naked and wearing perfume.” Ominously, the good imam Yusuf’s words mirror attitudes captured by 2008 polling data from 9000 Western European Muslims, 65% of whom acknowledged, “The rules of the Koran are more important to me than the laws of [my country].”

Those who aspire to our political leadership, in particular, must be compelled to shed their cultural relativist blinders and consider Islam as the conquering,totalitarian political ideology, with religious trappings, it has remained for almost 14 centuries.

Read More