Terra Incognita 28 Wife beating, reform judaism, the journey and black holes

Terra Incognita
Issue 28
“Written to enlighten, guaranteed to offend”

A Publication of Seth J. Frantzman
Jerusalem, Israel

Website: http://journalterraincognita.blogspot.com/

March 29th, 2008

1) Terrorism and wife beating: A terrorist who supposedly seeks revenge is gunning down students when he is shot at by a police officer. Instead of confronting the police officer, the way the protagonist in Scarface confronts his enemies, he proceeds to kill more unarmed teenagers. Terrorism and wife-beating occur together in societies because both are products of a cowardly male culture where the men enjoy beating those who are defenseless rather than fighting those who can fight back.

2) The Journey: The life story of Adam Pearlman and Joseph Cohen, now known as Adam Yehiye Gadahn and Yousef al-Khattab tells of two men, one raised a hippie, the other in a religious school, both of whome converted to Islam and became Islamists. But their journey is no surprise in a western world in which secular-leftism has few values and offers an empty shell in which Islam hands out Korans at peace rallies to leftists seeking ‘the answer’. It is a dangerous journey as are all journeys to extremism, and it is becoming more common.

3) Strange Religion: A report on the underbelly of Reform Judaism Why do Reform-Rabbis-to-be define their religion primarily in opposition to Orthodox Judaism. Why do they debate the existence of God on Channukah and brag about eating pork on Purim? Most important of all, why do they name their schools after Leo Beack, a rabbi who collaborated with Nazis? Is reform Judaism, in its worst sense, just the creation of a ‘religion’ where scholarship represents the new religious laws, professors represent the new priests and social justice (Tikkun Olam) the new value system?

4) The Black hole: How many women vanish each year into Islam and the brothels of the west? Islam represents a black hole of women. In the universe of humans the only place where women do not exist is Islam, hidden behind black sheets and their heads covered, they cease to exist in society. They are murdered at will for ‘transgressions of family honor’. But is Islam the only black hole in the universe of man? The western treatment of women is not surprisingly different when one considers the stories about the treatment of trafficked sex workers in Europe. There are a million of them and they too have fallen into a black hole from which nothing emerges.




Terrorism and wife beating
Seth J. Frantzman
March 21, 2008

In the recent terror attack on the Merkaz haRav Yeshiva a police officer approached the building and was shot at by the terrorist. But the terrorist did not try to kill the policeman. Instead he went farther into the Yeshiva and proceeded to search for more teenagers to shoot. In the last scene of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid the two protagonists are stuck in a church surrounded by the Bolivian army. They come out with guns blazing and are subsequently shot down. Think of the difference between Butch Cassidy, or for that matter Billy the Kid, and the Muslim Arab terrorist.

When a Muslim woman is raped Islamic law calls for her to be stoned to death for ‘adultery’ unless she can bring four male witnesses to testify that she was raped and not sleeping around.

Muslim men are specifically commanded in the Koran to beat their wives. Wife beating is common across the Muslim world and leading Imams give treatises on the ‘proper’ way to beat one’s wife.

Is there a connection between terrorism and wife beating? Is there a connection between those who like to kill civilians, rather than fighting as equals, and those who beat their wives? The kind of people who like to beat women, the kind of people who like to bully people are the same kind of people who will choose to kill civilians rather than kill armed police. The scene in Unforgiven is perhaps instructive of the American cultural attitude to shooting civilians. In the final scene Clint Eastwood shoots down the owner of Greeley’s tavern. The Sheriff says to Clint “You just shot an unarmed man.” In order to excuse his behavior Clint says “Well he should have armed himself, if he’s gonna decorate his saloon with my friends body”, alluding to the fact that Clint’s friend, played by Morgan Freeman, had been whipped to death by the Sheriff and left in a casket at the door of the tavern. There are further allusions to the unacceptability of killing the defenseless in that timeless classic. In one scene a prostitute says to Clint “He said you were William Money out of Missouri. He told how to dynamited the railroad in sixty-five killing women and children.” In another scene we see Clint trying to get on his horse, which refuses to let him, and Clint tells his son “This horse is getting back at me for what I did in the old days. I used to beat a horse like this for no reason. Your mother, bless her soul, cured me of those ways.” The movie is, in short, a lesson in the American attitude towards harming the weak whether they be horses, women, children or unarmed civilians. There is nothing more American than the cowboy and there is nothing more honorable and manly than the idea of the American West. The fact that the cowboy and all the gangs of the old west, such as Billy the Kid and his Regulators in the Lincoln County war, or the James gang or Wyatt Earb, were only honorable so long as they didn’t kill civilians is clear from the genre and the old penny novels that told of their exploits. Even modern American gangsters as depicted in Godfather and Scarface refrain from murdering women and children and civilians if they are to remain acceptable to the audience.

The Muslims always speak of revenge, it is a favorite pastime of the Islamic genre. Muslim theologians always tell enraptured westerners that war is illegal in Islam and then mention the caveat that actually only defensive war is permissible in Islam. Thus for the Muslim to gun down a room full of civilians or fly a plane into a building first requires that he claim he is either acting in self-defense or that he has been wronged, however tangentially, by those he is killing. For the Muslim terrorism is the typical way of fighting war, murdering civilians is part of the bread and butter of Islamic history and collective punishment is the only type of warfare the Muslim knows. There simply is no concept of the idea of the civilian in Islamic theology or Islamic history. Every Islamic army, from the Mughals to the Ottomans, slaughtered civilians and took slaves. That was how Islam has always fought wars against ‘infidels’ and ‘kaffirs’.

The irony that wife beating and honor killings are common to Islam but uncommon in the West, particularly in America, is merely a corollary to the Islamic method of war. Let us return to Unforgiven. In the film the story surrounds the old gunman William Money who is tagging along on a mission of revenge. A prostitute has been cut up by one of her clients and now the other prostitutes have pooled their money to pay for the man that cut her to be killed. Thus Clint Eastwood is on a mission to defend a woman. Think of the difference in the Islamic view of he women. Prostitution in Islam is punishable by death. Thus for a man to beat and cut a prostitute is no offence since she ‘deserves it’. But in the American genre a man who beats a prostitute is a coward and his punishment should be death. That is a pretty strong punishment but as one of the protagonists in Unforgiven duly notes before he shoots down one of the offenders “You shouldn’t of cut up no woman.” That is the essence of the American view. It is encapsulated in the Godfather when Sonny’s sister is beaten by her husband and Sonny beats his brother-in-law within an inch of his life for having beat his sister. It happens again and Sonny rushes off once again to kill his brother-in-law, only to be killed in an ambush on the way, thus leaving the audience wondering if revenge will ever come. But revenge does come when Vito Corleone, Sonny’s brother, becomes head of the family and shoots down his own sister’s husband, Carlo. Carlo’s death, so long in coming, is relished by the audience, not merely because Carlo has been implicated in the death of Sonny, but primarily because Carlo is a cowardly wife-beater who deserves to be killed by a man of honor like Vito. This is the epic moral lesson. It is an American lesson. A man who beats his wife is not a man, he is a coward and every American genre is replete with stories of wife-beaters getting what they deserve.

Terrorism and wife-beating are like cousins. A culture which produces terrorists also produces cowardly men who beat their wives. What is more cowardly than terrorism. Bill Maher, the American liberal and previously host of Politically Incorrect (now host of Real Time) was fired from his show after Sept. 11th when he said “in comparison [to the 9/11 hijackers], the U.S. government has acted like cowards because it has previously launched missiles at targets thousands of miles away in contrast to those who flew airplanes into buildings.” Maher is confused about what is ‘cowardly’ because Maher’s dialectic of liberalism is not American, it is mostly an Islamic viewpoint of what is ‘heroic’ because American culture has never praised as heroes those who murder civilians. The fact that the 9/11 hijackers objectified women by being regulars at strip clubs only shows the truly cowardly nature of their endeavor.

Those who write about terrorism usually fail to distinguish this central characteristic. They lump together terrorists who fought against the military with terrorists who kill mostly civilians. People pretend they are the same. Thus the Jewish Zealots of 70 A.D are usually credited with being the first “terrorists”. But the Zealots killed Roman soldiers. This is what always marks the difference between the cowardly culture, the culture of the wife beater, the culture of the terrorist, and a culture of honor. An honorable culture defends a raped woman, an honorable culture does not beat women, an honorable culture produces men who prefer to fight people of equal or greater strength. An honorable culture has outlaws who are more honorable than the soldiers in a cowardly culture. This Butch Cassidy was more honorable in his life than any leaders of any Muslim country or any Muslim soldier or any Palestinian ‘militant’. That is the degree to which America is more honorable. When the criminals have more honor and decency, when even the criminal prefers to fight man to man rather than killing the weak, then you know a culture has honor. One cannot find that honor in the Muslim world. One finds terrorists who even use women to murder, knowing that the woman has been brainwashed and the woman has been abused her whole life she is then strapped with a bomb and told to kill herself. The cowardly Muslim culture uses mentally disabled people to carry out attacks. This is why Bin Laden will never die fighting, he won’t die like Butch Cassidy.


The Journey
Seth J. Frantzman
March 26th, 2008

They make the journey. It starts slowly. It begins with their first protest. Their first peace rally. It begins with the first time they say “I hate” and put some group such as ‘republicans’ or ‘conservatives’ or ‘Christians’ or ‘Jerry Fallwell’ after those words. Then it leads them to religion. It leads them to ‘the answer’. That leads them to a sense of belonging. That leads them to wishing death upon those who hate their new found group. That is the journey. Radicalism and hate are journeys. They are journeys many people make.

Some journeys are short. A man grows up with some heritage, such as being Irish-Catholic and later he puts a bumper sticker on his car that says ‘FBI-Full Blooded Irish’ and he celebrates St. Patrick’s day. He doesn’t run guns for the IRA. He doesn’t attack random Englishmen. He is merely in touch with himself.

The most dangerous radical is the person who is the empty hole. A person born with no identity whose parents give them no sense of heritage. He is an empty vessel waiting to be filled. But he is not the only dangerous person. The other dangerous person is someone who grows up with too much heritage, too much patriotism, too many rules and inside too small a box. His radicalism can increase quickly, and it can switch from whatever his original birth-heritage was to some other heritage without the bat of an eye.

Many people are increasingly making the journey. It is like the journey Henry David Thoreau made or the one made by Edward Abbey. But the journey today increasingly takes the most disturbing turns, it turns away from decency, from a pure interest in a genuine attachment to something, a love for something, and transforms itself into a massive and terrible hate for so many things.

Joseph Cohen and Adam Pearlman made the journey. Now they are known as Yousef al-Khattab and Adam Yahiye Gadahn. Both Jews. One raised in the Yeshiva in New York and the other with his hippie parents in California. Both exemplary figures of the new world. One a conservative with a heritage, the other the typical liberal bourgouise with the blank slate. But were they so different than Josef Stalin and Vladimir Lenin? One the seminary boy, the other the nerdy intellectual. They took the journey too. Joseph (Cohen, not Stalin) now runs RevolutionMuslim.com an Islamist hate site, and Adam is Osama Bin Laden’s Communications director.

They are not the only ones who make the journey. Many lesser people make it. There is the Belgium woman who became a suicide bomber in Iraq. There is the German woman who traveled to Bosnia with her Egyptian Husband to join the Jihad against Serbia. She watched him behead Serbs. They made the journey. They covered their hair and adopted new Muslim names.


One sees today that the journey is being aided and abetted by Islamic recruiting at peace rallies. At every anti-war rally there are ‘welcome to Islam’ booths where free Korans are handed out. The secular liberal hippie women who abhor marriage, defend abortion, hate the death penalty and sunbathe nude will pick up the ‘glorious’ Koran and suddenly be quoting the ‘tales of the Prophet’. The journey begins.

Liberalistic-secularism or Post-Humanism has always been part of a religion that spawns hatred, fascism, social engineering, social chaos, the destruction of society, the undermining of decency and the spreading of racism, guile and deception. The religion of the extreme-left has a most potent brand of hatred. Again and again one will see the same liberals who denounce ‘Christian fundamentalism’ at home embrace Islam abroad. They embrace all the values abroad that they hate at home. They embrace the death penalty and the headscarf, the family, values, modesty. They embrace Kings and militarism.

The only thing that can be said about leftism for sure is that it has none of the values it once did but that it lives on the fumes of its heritage. Leftists repeat the same old stories about being ‘freedom riders’ and fighting for ‘gay rights’ and ‘women’s rights’ and against ‘racism’. They speak of social justice and equality and a color-blind society. They speak out on censorship and the media. But this is hollow rhetoric. There is no left. It is dead. The left, the secular-progressive movement, liberalism, it is all dead. It is a hollow shell that offers its adherents only conversion to Islam and the journey to hatred. It is but a conduit. It exists merely as a dialectic that helps people gravitate to radicalism. People enter the dialectic the way one enters a giant empty building. They enter it but they never leave. The only exit is to Islam. It is like the closet in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe except this closet of liberalism takes in gays and feminists and transports them to another world where only holy warriors of Islam come out, marching in lockstep. The journey is the most dangerous thing.

Strange Religion: a report on up and coming reform Rabbis
March 22nd, 2008
Seth J. Frantzman


Imagine a religion where the chief priests don’t believe in god, don’t believe in customs or tradition, forsake the land of their forefathers, don’t adhere by the dietary laws of their own faith, spend most of their time complaining about other people in their religion and tell people the main message of their faith is ‘social justice’ and ‘community’. Such a religion would simply be the outward manifestation of a community of secular-progressives. Except in this case its not. In this case it called ‘reform Judaism.’

According to the bylaws of the reform movement, since it is governed more by a modern legalized secularized system than by the traditions and rulings of elders, the Reform Rabbi does not have to believe in god. He may marry people who are not Jewish. He doesn’t have to wear a Yarmulke. He brags about his contempt for kashrut, the Jewish dietary law. But what is most fascinating about the reform movement is that is spend so much time insulting Orthodox Judaism, as if it very existence is predicated upon the hatred for the ‘other’, the Orthodox.

The up and coming reform Rabbi says things like: “they [the Orthodox Chabad] call the Rebbe the messiah, is that Judaism, they are not Jewish…Chabad has gone to all the realms of the earth, to the most obscure places to mission to Jews, the major failing of the reform movement is that it doesn’t do that, we are behind in not going to these communities and Chabad has gotten the drop on us…When a woman is beaten by her husband and she goes to an Orthodox Rabbi the rabbi will say ‘that’s no big deal’. Is that Judaism?”

It is extraordinary the degree to which ‘what is Judaism’ for a reform Jew is predicated simply on what Orthodox Jews do. The Orthodox put on Tefillin and Kippahs and only eat Kosher food so the reform person doesn’t. That’s an odd way to organize a religion, to base it simply on doing the opposite of what those you hate do. The hatred for Orthodox Jews is deep among Reform Jews. They ascribe all sorts of devilish behavior to them. They accuse them of denying the Holocaust and wife beating. What is most fascinating is that when the Reform Jew is questioned about his evidence for the fact that wife-beating is wide-spread in the Orthodox community he cites the fact that “I volunteered in an Orthodox battered women’s shelter.” This is the evidence. But in secular society there are battered women’s shelter. That doesn’t lead us to conclude that secular society believes wife beating is acceptable, in fact it is the evidence that the society abhors wife beating and thus establishes a shelter for the victims. It is odd how the reform rabbi-in-training takes every instance of a crime committed by an Orthodox Jew and ascribes the action to every Jew, stereotyping and judging the entire community by the actions of one person. Thus if an Orthodox Jew throws a rock at a car on Shabbat the reform rabbi says “they are all intolerant.” If an Orthodox Jew protests against a gay pride rally then the reform rabbi-to-be says “they are all hateful”. We can see in the labeling of the Orthodox as “racist” and “hateful” and “intolerant” that these words are the new words ascribed to those things that are to be hated. This is an irony. The irony is that in today’s progressive world the way in which to castigate a group and make it evil in the eyes of people is to say that the group is ‘hateful’ or ‘racist’. In a sense the reform movement is at the forefront of always condemning people as ‘hateful’ merely so that people can feel good about hating those people for being hateful. The reform-rabbi-to-be has no qualms about his depth of hatred and intolerance and mythmaking and stereotyping of Orthodox Jews, because the only way to hate someone if you are a liberal is to call those people ‘racist’ and ‘hateful’, thus making their very existence abhorrent to society (one can see this in the labeling of Serbs as “racist”, thus excusing the Nato bombing of Serb civilians, since those deemed to be ‘racist’ deserve extermination at the hands of the liberal-secular society.)

The reform movement of Judaism seems to exist on three pillars. The first pillar is identifying itself in opposition to Orthodox Judaism. The second pillar is assimilation and the third pillar is ‘social justice’ or what they call ‘Tikun Olam’. If one asks a reform-rabbi-to-be whether he has read the Bible or studied Kabbalah he will reply that he is only interested in studying it “in a scholarly manner”. Thus reform rabbis who graduate from rabbinical school are not really spiritual leaders or priests as exist in other religions, but actually scholars. So one might say that the fourth pillar of Reform Judaism is that of academia. It is not so much a religion as a gathering of academics. It is, in this sense, the highest form of the pragmatic scientific revolution in western civilization. Its high priest is not a priest but a scholar. Thus it has raised scholarship to the height of religion, saying or admitting in essence, that today’s scholars are to society as the priests of old were. This is quite a revolution for it admits that religion in its traditional form can be replaced so long as the new fad of scholarship, the new fetish of secular people, can be said to be religious. Thus a scholarly journal can carry the weight that a religious scroll used to. One can replace Magillat Esther or the Book of Job with the Journal for the Study of Religion or the Journal of Greek Studies.

Such a staid society. A society that raises its dead scholars to the status of high priests and gods. But it is merely replacing the old structures with new ones.

In its hatred of Chabad, its condemnation of all the messiah craze and its anger that Chabad has ‘gotten the drop on them’ by having Rabbis who are willing to go to hardship postings while reform rabbis prefer the comfort of the U.S and the nearby college campus and the BMW. The reform movement frames the competition between it and Chabad as an epic struggle for the heart and soul of Judaism. It reminds one of the opening back-story for the film Gods and Generals in which the narrator says, of the U.S Civil War, that ‘One side fought for heaven here on hearth and one side fought for heaven up above’. It is a timeless tale. Prince Lazar of the Serbs also choose heaven up above. Reform Judaism appeals to the creation of heaven on earth, the social justice and ‘Tikkun Olam’ it always speaks of. But is that an appeal to a forlorn Jew in a far off place in Siberia? Is it appealing to have a wealthy Jew from New York who owns a BMW but does not wear a Kippah come up and say “listen Mr. Jew, you should join the Reform movement because then you can give charity to your Russian neighbors and you can bring social justice to them.” When the Jew asks “what does the reform movement stand for and believe in?” The ‘Rabbi’ says “we don’t ask you to believe in god or wear a Yarmulke, we think you should not be like those Orthodox Jews who beat their wives and worship a false messiah. You as a Jew need to fight for the rights of minorities and for social justice.” The forlorn Jew must surely think to himself “I am the minority, what about my social justice? Why do these people want me to join their movement just to help others? Their movement asks me to condemn Orthodox Jews who I have never met. It thus asks me to join a movement that is based on helping non-Jews and opposing Jews, so why does it call itself Jewish?” Imagine the day he is confronted by a humble religious Orthodox Rabbi from Brooklyn and the Rabbi says “I want to re-connect you to your tradition, to your forefathers and the laws they followed, I want to teach you about our religion and how it makes us special, I want to offer you charity in the form of community and a love for your people and teach you about our holy books and our thousands of years of tradition.” Now this, the forlorn Jew must say is something that offers him fulfillment and passion and emotion, love and spirituality and tradition and heritage. Is it a wonder that given the two arguments that the majority of these Jews in far off places have chosen the path of Chabad and not the path of Reform? They see the secular Jews who come to visit them from the west and they see that all the secular Jews do is preach hatred for other Jews and compassion for non-Jews. They see wealthy secular Jewish women who are full of self hate and who speak only about ‘Palestinian Rights’ but don’t seem to care about the local Jews, unless it is to take pictures of them as one takes pictures in a museum. It is no surprise that Jews in the former Soviet Union who were crushed by an atheist country and forced to assimilate would embrace a Judaism that offers them a reconnection to a lost and brutalized past rather than a Judaism that offers them self-hate and more assimilation. In short, Reform Judaism offers them what the Soviet State offered them, which is not Judaism, but secularism. They already have the empty promise of secularism and they are already unfulfilled in life. People naturally desire passion and emotion from their religious leaders. They don’t need a ‘rabbi’ to play the academic to them, the already have professors to do that.

To watch the reform-rabbi-to-be studying in Israel and saying “I would never move to Israel and I don’t think there is anything special about Israel and Jerusalem for the Jewish people.” Then why does he study here? To watch him say “I would never want to serve in the Israeli army because I might be called on to do things that are immoral.” But isn’t that a truly moral choice, to do something where one might be morally challenged and one must exercise character and say ‘I will not do this’ rather than to slink away and say ‘I don’t ever want to have to stand up for my morality’. The reform-rabbi-to-be has a Chanukah dinner where she makes fun of the blessings as she recites them. Why recite blessings if one can’t take them seriously, why do religious things if one has no reverence for them? The reform rabbis to be then have a dinner, on Chanukah of all holidays, where they debate the existence of god and whether a ‘rabbi’ should have to believe in god. Then on Purim the reform-rabbi-to-be comes to dinner on Shabbat and spends his time proudly telling people how he hates Kashrut, how he eats non-Kosher food, how he hates religious Jews and how they all beat their wives and how he would never come to Israel (although he is in Israel while he says this) and how he would never wear a headcovering. It is as if for a Reform Rabbi every Jewish holiday is an excuse to bash on Judaism and preach hate against religious Jews (always with the excuse that “I hate those religious Jews because they are so intolerant”-a funny way to justify intolerance).

The tragedies of the Reform movement are so many. It names its schools, institutes and colleges after Leo Baeck, a collaborationist Rabbi who denied the Nazi genocide at the height of the Holocaust and worked for the Nazi Judenrat at Theresienstadt concentration camp. The crimes of Leo Baeck are massive. An assimilationist he argued that Jews should give up their ways while all the while he shunned the OstJuden refugees who arrived in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s. He was the head of the German Jewish community before the rise of the Nazis and then became head of a puppet Jewish organization set up by the Nazis called the Reichsvereinigung. Baeck made sure not to protest the Nazi crimes of Kristelnacht for fears of offending the Nazi government and he claimed that to protest would make the Jews seem ‘disloyal’ to the German Nazi state. When he was deported to Theresienstadt he worked in the camp’s Jewish administration and he made sure not to pass on reports of the Holocaust to other Jews or help alert the world’s attention. This was collaboration of the highest order, the Nazis could not have been more blessed with a malleable Jewish leader such as Baeck who was willing to help that at their every turn in order to make the Jews go quietly to their deaths. After the war the collaborator was a hero of ‘progressive’ Judaism. This shows the degree to which modern day Reform Judaism is actually enthused with the idea and worship of collaboration. It is no surprise that the Leo Baeck Institute is the world’s leading place of study on German Jewry and praises the German Jewry as a model of civilization, a model that encourages quiet and collaboration in the face of genocide. It is the Baeck legacy that has Holocaust scholars blaming the ‘function’ of the Nazi state rather than the Nazi leadership for the Holocaust. As one Reform-Rabbi-to-be said “Hitler never encouraged the Holocaust and nor was it something he planned…it was Never part of Hitler’s plan until the war had broken out.” Only reform Judaism could whitewash Nazism and make the Holocaust merely ‘function’ of the state. Only reform Judaism could produce the likes of Martin Buber who opposed the execution of the Nazi Adolph Eichmann and Dr. Judah Magnes who opposed the creation of the State of Israel. It is ironic that Reform Jews condemn Orthodox Jews for not showing enough attention to the Holocaust when it is Reform Jewish scholarship that has downplayed the uniqueness of the Holocaust and it was Reform Judaism that produced the greatest Jewish collaboration with the Nazis.

Reform Judaism is a failure as movement and as an ideology. Its only legacy is that it is tied deeply to the ideology of post-humanism. Its obsession with scholarship, its rejection of any idea of faith, its hatred for others, its rejection of the idea of land and nation, its obsession with creating a religion whose sole reason to exist is to help others is a hallmark of the left. Reform Judaism is not so much a religion as an ideology, the ultimate expression of modernism, a religion based on the new sciences of multi-culturalism and the ‘other’. It thus proves, ipso facto, that man desires religion. He can replace god with ‘social justice’ but always man seeks some overarching system of belief. Reform Judaism is a system of belief, a very strange one indeed.

The Black hole: Women in the west and east
March 25th, 2008
Seth J. Frantzman

Originally I wanted to write this about the way in which Islam is a black hole of women, a thing that swallows them up, uses them to create as many children as possible, enslaves them behind burkas and then disposes of them like dogs. I wanted to write about the way in which the western woman, the woman born in a 'free' country was enticed into this slavery. But then I began reading about all the human trafficking in Europe, the more than a million prostitutes who work across Europe, half of whome are trafficked. Then I realized that the black hole is not merely Islam. The black hole is in Europe as well. Previously this newsletter has shown that Islam and liberalism treat women in precisely the same manner: both ideologies create a male-centered world in which the entire life of the women exists to please the man, but now we can see that it is not merely in the realm of male-centeredness that Islam and liberalism are primarily the same thing, Islam and liberalism are also responsible for the virtual enslavement and disappearance of women because both see women primarily as a beast, an object, to be exploited and raped by society and then disposed of.

The stories speak for themselves. Two Bulgarian girls, one 16 and the other 19, brought to Italy to work in a Circus, forced to lay nude with snakes and swim with piranhas. Enslaved by the circus and not allowed to leave the premises of it. A 16 year old girl from "Eastern Europe" in Italy forced to be a prostitute, denied an abortion by her European slavers and forced to prostitute herself into sixth months of pregnancy. 800 people arrested in a human trafficking ring in Italy, forty-five female slaves freed by the police. Dr Viorel Gorceag, who works at a shelter for victims of trafficking in Chisinau, says more than 90% of these women need medical and psychological treatment. "There was a case, a girl coming from Italy where she was used to make porno movies." There is Elena, from Moldova, forced to work as a whore in Bologna. "A lot of the victims are lured into it by deceptive advertisements that promise them work. Typically, once they answer these ads, they are fooled, they go off with the traffickers and once they get into a foreign country their papers are taken away and essentially they become slaves." Europeans use words like 'supplier' to describe countries from where the women come. "On 4 October 2002 a man brought me from Romania to Italy," says Helena, a slight 17-year-old, with an empty expression and bruises on her arms and chest which she tries to cover as she talks to me. "He told me I had a job as a cleaner but he shut me in a house and took my passport. "Then he and others beat me and raped me until I agreed to work on the streets. They said if I didn't do it they would kill my family." A woman in Moldova named Ana's daughter was forced to spend three years working as a prostitute in Bosnia - a virtual prisoner of a man known as Rocky. She was repeatedly beaten and raped. Now back in Moldova, she is frightened to leave her parents' house. It is no surprise this took place in Bosnia, the 'model state' that Nato and the EU created as its latest colonial experiment. Who were the clients to rape this girl? Like the clients in Prague and in Macedonia and the people who book themselves on the sex-tours of Asia and Africa it was Europeans. Those readers of Voltaire and Goethe, they were the clients. Those coffee house intellectuals. This is the European 'civilization'. Such a 'civilization' it is.

But what about in the exotic east? There the stories are surprisingly similar. We read in Haaretz on March 27th that Bedouin men who live in tin shacks have a surfeit of women. Its not that their society is the gift of a lucky gender imbalance. Siah Altori, a Bedouin man of 57 explains "we have more women than men, especially because many are marrying Russian women." Who else would it be? Russian women, who wear G-strings and tight shorts and halter tops in Russia are happy to trade them in for the all encompassing Muslim female outfit, they are happy to trade them in to share their 57 year old husband with three other women. But these Russian women are traveling the same road that millions of Russian women have traveled before. If Russian women slave-prostitutes were given the vote in the Arab world one might find that there are as many Russian women in the Arab world between 13 and 25 as there are in Russia. They have taken over Turkey in order to pleasure the men there who had hitherto been forced to make due with one women per man. They have swamped the UAE and Israel. There are many in Dubai that the one's with AIDS are taken out to the desert and shot (a mass grave of a hundred of them was recently found) in the head, lest the poor Arab and European men who live in Dubai get Aids from them. They work as slaves in bondage 'dungeons' where men pay to torture them within an inch of their lives. In the Gaza strip after the Hamas take over the Russian embassy evacuated a few hundred Russian women whose prostitution business had suddenly become untenable. Then there is the case of Ms. Dombayev a Russian women who married a friendly Arab man from Ramla who subsequently tried to kill her. In Rahat the Bedouin town has been swamped with Russian women, so much so that the Bedouin women protested that their Arab men no longer wanted them. Tens of thousands have been brought though the Negev by Bedouin who try out the goods before delivering them. The women are raped in the desert before being turned over to slavers in Israel where they are then sold at public auction. But it doesn't dull their senses. One Russian prostitute interviewed in Tel Aviv said she "felt sorry" for her Arab clients because "they can't find girl in their home village." It must be terrible for the Arab man, he puts his women in a headscarf and don't let he rout of the house after 8pm and then complains he can't find any women so he is 'forced' to go to prostitutes. In the end its all a black hole. The millions of western and Hindu women who marry into Islam every year and convert and on the headscarf disappear from society. They no longer exist. They become baby-making machines whose sole job in life is to be on their backs, giving their husbands pleasure and producing his Muslim children. Non-Muslim women go into the black hole but only Muslim men come out.
The Europeans speak of the 'supply' and demand that Moldova do more to keep its 13 year olds at home. In Turkey they 'hate' Russian women because the women have brought immorality to their country. But these Muslims and Europeans seem to be missing the other-side of the economic curve. When there is supply there is also demand. One does not exist without the other. There would be no prostitution if there was no one going to prostitutes. The truth is that the demand in Europe and the Muslim world necessitates the supply. In the old days the Muslim world settled for a supply of western women kidnapped in Muslim slave raids on Italy, Tartar raids on Ukraine and Georgia and Arab slavers in Zanzibar. In the 'good old days' before the British navy dismantled the East African slave trade, many of the sex-slaves in the Islamic world were Black women from Ethiopia, Sudan and Tanzania. What would a society look like where the men were not all panting for prostitutes. Imagine a society without moralistic Muslim men and coffee house liberals, all of whome need the very whores they condemn so vehemently. Demand. That is what Europe and the Muslim world have in common. A demand for flesh for sale. In Europe they boast of their legalized prostitution in Amsterdam, Germany and Italy. The are proud of their liberal policies towards it. Only the German men are displeased because underage prostitution is still not allowed and they must cross the border to Czech republic to get their teenage girls. Demand. They demand it. They thirst for it. Such is the thing that Europeans and Muslims can agree on: we need women as commodities. We cannot survive without it. The western liberal speaks of his 'women's rights' and the Muslim speaks of his 'morality' and the Muslim condemns the west for its 'decadence' and the Westerner condemns Islam for its 'oppression of women'. But the two are sides of the same coin. They condemn what they are. Muslim society is the most immoral society on the face of the earth. It is also the most decadent. Western society oppresses women to the same degree that the Islamic society does, except in the west that suppression takes varied forms.
Samuel P. Huntington spoke of a 'clash of civilization' but when the clash is between Islam and Europe there isn't much to fight about. Both civilizations live on the backs of women or rather they keep women on their backs so that the men may enjoy themselves. There is no clash. There is a collaboration. Europe serves as the conduit to bring the women to the Islamic countries so that Muslims can enjoy European flesh and Muslim men (such as Sheikh Hamza of Finsbury Mosque in London) work as pimps and bouncers in brothels throughout Europe. The two Muslim states created by the EU/Nato/UN colonization force in Bosnia and Kosovo are the central dispatches in the flesh slave trade of women. These two fleshpots are the central black holes of women. There is no comparable black hole in China or India or the United States.