More news coverage of the horror of sexual violence Hamas inflicted on October 7

Here's another report (via Front Page), repulsive as can be, about the sexual violence the Hamas committed along with graphic gore on October 7 this year:

Israeli investigators probing the fallout of the brutal October 7 attacks have found evidence that men as well as women suffered sexual violence and rape at the hands of Hamas and Islamic Jihad attackers, activists have claimed.

Yael Sherer, a spokeswoman for Israel's Survivors of Sexual Violence advocacy group, said there was physical evidence as well as eyewitness accounts of sexual violence perpetrated against both sexes amid the attacks.

'There was sexual violence and rape in these communities in the south of Israel... we have a few living survivors - not a lot - of both genders. It didn't only happen to women, it happened to men as well,' she told BBC Radio 4.

'Aside from finding bodies of people who were murdered, a lot of the bodies were mutilated... terrorists made sure to disgrace these people and dishonor them,' she added.

It comes as Israeli police opened up the biggest investigation into sexual violence and crimes against women ever in the nation.

The leader of the investigation, Shelly Harush, said: 'It's clear now that sexual crimes were part of the planning and the purpose was to terrify and humiliate people.'

Police have collected thousands of statements, photographs and video clips that have been called unbearable to watch from a mother's perspective and include 'girls whose pelvises were broken they had been raped so much'.

The irony in this is that those Hamas jihadists who raped men were bound to be homosexual. In which case, there's definitely a contradiction when it comes to homosexuality and Islam. Is that why some of the most antisemitic LGBT ideologues aren't against the Religion of Peace?

Pro-LGBT judge actually rules against Muslim-sponsored suit against indoctrination in Maryland school

This may be a coincidence, but what we have here is a most interesting case wherein Muslims lose - certainly this time - against the forcing of LGBT indoctrination in Maryland's school system:

A U.S. District Court judge denied Maryland parents’ request Thursday for an order allowing them to opt their children out of instruction using LGBTQ “Pride Storybooks.”

Atheist, Christian, Jewish, Muslim, and other parents demanded the right to opt out of an LGBTQ book curriculum for pre-K through fifth grades in Montgomery County Public Schools, a Maryland school district just outside the nation’s capital.

Although Maryland law requires schools to allow parents to opt their children out of “all sexuality instruction” and to provide advance notice for such lessons, the new policy, adopted in March, excluded any opt-out right.

The parents sued, requesting a preliminary injunction to force the Montgomery County school system to restore the opt-out provision until the court fully resolves the case. Classes resume next Monday, so parents had hoped to secure the injunction before that date.

District Judge Deborah Boardman rejected the parents’ motion Thursday, ruling that they “have not shown that [the school district’s] use of the storybooks crosses the line from permissible influence to potentially impermissible indoctrination.”

Boardman, an appointee of President Joe Biden, ruled that Montgomery County Public Schools had not violated parents’ right to free exercise of religion under the First Amendment because, under the policy, “teachers will occasionally read one of the handful of books, lead discussions and ask questions about the characters, and respond to questions and comments in ways that encourage tolerance for different views and lifestyles.”

No doubt, this was unexpected for some. But again, while it may be a form of coincidence, a Democrat-appointed judge actually ruled against the Muslims, if anyone, even though there were Judeo-Christians and atheists involved in the lawsuit.

I do feel sorry for the Judeo-Christians that they have to cope with this awful indoctrination. Also the atheists. But when it comes to the Religion of Peace, seriously, it's hard to feel sorry for them when one considers what their belief system is built upon, which is little different - and easily worse - than LGBT ideology. Some could say the Mohammedans and LGBT ideologues deserve each other.

The Muslims might vote Republican in response to this. But that still doesn't mean we should approve of their ideology any more than LGBT ideology, and Judeo-Christians/athiests shouldn't associate or work in cooperation with them to battle against this current 5th column tyranny.

More reasons westerners shouldn't be fooled by Muslim opposition to LGBTQ ideology

Christine Williams and Frank Gaffney spoke about how there's Christians who've partnered with Muslims to oppose LGBTQ indoctrination in USA public schools, and why it's ill-advised to believe the Religion of Peace actually respects values other than its own alleged ones:

As the alliance between opponents of the aggressive LGBTQ++ agenda and Muslims grows, Westerners have been quick to see that Muslim groups get the results that Christians have been unable to gain so effectively on their own. Christians are generally not confrontational and are easy targets, as we saw in Alberta, Canada, when Pastor Derek Reimer was thrown in jail for “hate” after protesting a drag show for kids at a local library. Greater awareness about the alliance with Muslim groups is prudent. While Christians and Muslims can agree about the abhorrent imposition of the trans agenda, as well as the open nudity and vulgarity of some members of the LGBTQ++ community, there are other points of divergence that should be considered.

To start with, in the coverage by mainstream media — which is notorious for its lack of knowledge about Islamic tenets and laws — some have been describing Muslims who oppose the LGBTQ++ agenda as “conservative Muslims.” The term “conservative Muslims” has nothing to do with Western notions of conservatism and/or partisanship; it has everything to do with a Muslims’ level of dedication to Islamic law (the Sharia), and is a term usually reserved for describing the likes of Iranian mullahs, the Taliban and Salafists in general. The misuse of the term “conservative Muslims” in the mainstream media creates the deceptive impression that these Muslims are supporters of Western conservatism or parties that support conservatism. Most of these activist Muslims against the LGBTQ++ agenda are more likely still Democrats or Liberals, given the long established Islamic/Left alliance. There are indeed some Muslims who are aligned with Western conservatism. [...]

But the focus of this Preamble and of the interview below is not the Muslims who stand in unity with non-Muslims for religious freedom and equal rights for all. The focus is on those Muslims who are aligned with Sharia tenets, held by those ranging in beliefs from that of the Iranian regime and the Taliban, to the Muslim Brotherhood in the West. Westerners need to be aware that the LGBTQ++ woke aggression will be used and is being used as a launching pad for the expansion of the scope of the Sharia.

Read the whole item. This is exactly what I'd thought about myself after seeing some of these cases which, to be sure, aren't limited to just the USA-Canada, where Islamists are getting the results Judeo-Christians aren't getting at ease themselves. Those who blindly align with Islam no matter the exact beliefs of specific movements of the Religion of Peace's adherents are running the gauntlet of granting legitimacy to Islam it doesn't deserve, and that's exactly why Judeo-Christian adherents who're realists would do better not to align with Islamists on the LGBTQ issue at all. Glad to see Williams and Gaffney both recognize what's troubling about the situation here.

Why is Ben Shapiro adding Islam to the mix here?

While discussing how LGBTQ ideology has replaced Judeo-Christian values as a "religion" in the USA, Ben Shapiro also brought something very problematic into the mix:

The Daily Wire co-founder added that people of faith, particularly Christians, Jews, and Muslims, all held some traditional values that starkly contrasted with the new values being pushed at schools and by corporations across the country.

“There is a common set of values shared by Jews and Christians and Muslims, actually,” Shapiro said. “And that set of values actually makes a difference in American public life. It’s why the notion that we should be posting ‘Pride’ progress flags in classrooms, but not the Ten Commandments is so absurd on its face.”

[...] “We have supplanted one religion for another religion, and the new religion is bad. It is a bad religion. It is a cultish religion that requires not just acceptance and tolerance, but destruction of the traditional forms of morality that used to undergird all of Western civilization,” Shapiro explained.

What he's telling here could easily describe the very religion that nearly resulted in the murder of Salman Rushdie. Yes, LGBTQ ideology is bad, but how isn't Islam just as bad an influence? Including Koranic verses calling for violence? Does Shapiro realize he's running the gauntlet of whitewashing the Religion of Peace? This is very irresponsible of him. How did we get to a point where all of a sudden, Islam's not considered a concern? Realists have known for a long time Islam was ostensibly against homosexual practice between adults, but knew that didn't make it acceptable, based on what the Koran contains about Jews and Christians, in example.

Shapiro might also want to consider the following report from Alberta, Canada, where it would appear LGBTQ ideologues have no opposition to Muslims protesting against their indoctrination:

Hundreds of parents, most of them Muslim, held a protest in front of city hall in Calgary, Alberta on Friday.

The protesters held signs reading “let kids be kids” and “school is not a place for political activism.”

According to The Counter Signal, chants of, “Leave our kids alone,” garnered responses from dozens of passing cars who honked in support.

According to the report on The Counter Signal, LGBT activists decided to refrain from creating a counter protest because, "It would be disrespectful to Muslims to show opposition to the protest."

“Any counter protest to the action at city hall will likely be used as ammunition for this hate group to paint queer folks as racist,” a source told The Counter Signal, who explained that the activists consulted with “queer Muslims.”

Whether or not they really consulted with homosexual Muslims, this is a strong clue that even in Canada, where horror stories have occurred as a result of all this awful garbage, LGBT movements have no serious interest in pushing their beliefs upon the Religion of Peace, and for all we know, it could've all been planned and choreographed for the sake of making Islam look good, right down how they carried picket signs like "let kids be kids". Interesting how the activists may have actually referred to Muslims as a "hate group", yet simultaneously didn't want to be called "racist" by the Islamists. Don't be shocked if the Canadian LGBT activists retract the "hate group" part soon, much like the Maryland Democrat who retracted her statement.

It's really too bad Shapiro's glossing over the badness of the Religion of Peace, and not recognizing how its "values" are incompatible with western values, or even those of far eastern countries like Japan and India, for example. Nobody should have to make a choice when it comes to LGBT ideology and Islam, yet Shapiro suggests he's actually willing to run the gauntlet of that, even if he ends up jeopardizing Jews' safety as a result.

Unlike Judeo-Christian city councils, Muslim-led councils in USA are allowed to clamp down on LGBTQ propaganda without serious complaints

The all-Islamic city council of Hamtramck, Michigan, which is in the area around Detroit, voted to ban LGBTQ flags from city property, which a Judeo-Christian council would be unlikely to do without opposition, nor a Buddhist-led one:

The all-Muslim city council of Hamtramck, Michigan, voted unanimously on Tuesday to approve a resolution that would ban the LGBTQ+ Pride flag from being flown on the city’s public property.

The resolution, proposed by Mayor Pro-Tem Muhammad Hassan, also bars any religious, ethnic, racial, political, or sexual orientation group flags from being flown on city property and only allows the American flag to be flown, along with state and city flags, other national flags, and the Prisoner of War flag, according to Click on Detroit.

The resolution passed “after three hours of public comments and months of intense debate,” the Detroit Free Press reported.

“Hassan and other members of the council said the LGBTQ+ community and others are welcome in Hamtramck but that they need to respect religious freedom,” according to the report. “Some proponents of the resolution said the Pride flag clashes with their faith. Several speakers from Dearborn who were leaders in protests last year against LGBTQ books spoke at the Hamtramck meeting, saying American soldiers sacrificed for the U.S. flag, not the Pride flag.”

City Councilman Nayeem Choudhury said LGBTQ+ people will not be discriminated against in the city but should also respect the religious liberty of the city’s Muslim community.

“We want to respect the religious rights of our citizens,” Choudhury said. “You guys are welcome. … (but) why do you have to have the flag shown on government property to be represented? You’re already represented. We already know who you are. … By making this (about) bigotry … it’s making it like you want to hate us.”

City council members also commented that the code was not about targeting a specific group, stating: “If you let one flag in, you’ll have to let all of the flags in.”

An immigrant from Yemen spoke in favor of the resolution, stating that while the city “respect[s] all nations, cultures, and their flags…we only salute the American flag.”

Here's some more on this subject. This is another telling example of how Muslims are made to look like they're literally patriotic and truly respect anything considered pro-American, in classic taqqiya (deception) style. And, don't be shocked if no genuine backlash ensues from LGBTQ activists. After all, if they're not forcing this garbage on Muslim-led countries, then they wont be forcing it on Muslim societies in the USA either by any stretch. That's not saying it doesn't happen in the USA, if we consider this example Abigail Shrier spoke about 2 years ago. But anybody who believes leftist-run state governments in the long run will target Muslims for this propaganda is mistaken, and what's happened in Michigan can certainly confirm as much. As noted before, this could all be part of propaganda efforts intended to soften people's views of Islam itself, which is very risky.

And despite what's been reported, Islam does have double-standards on homosexuality when it comes to children, and this even occurred in Afghanistan while USA military forces were working there. As a result, it seems pretty bizarre as you could expect that Islamists anywhere would seemingly oppose LGBTQ ideology even as there's Islamofascists who do practice it, even if only in a selective way. Some could wonder if LGBTQ apologists for child abuse borrowed a page from the Religion of Peace, and for all we know, that just might be the case. Bad ideologies can always borrow from each other.

Israel's LGBT activists have no issues with Islam's hostility to their ideology

As explained by Ruthie Blum, following a whole questionable controversy where the left assailed Avi Maoz for wanting to put a stop to LGBT propaganda being pushed in Israeli schools. First, here's what Orit Strook said on Twitter to clarify:

"You can calm down over the much ado about nothing," she tweeted on Sunday. "No one intends to discriminate against LGBT people because of their identity or identification – not in medical care or any other service. LGBTs are human beings who deserve respect and love just like everyone else … It's not at all about the identity of the patient, but about the essence of the treatment."

The idea, she added, is that "a religiously observant doctor will not be forced to provide a medical treatment contrary to halacha [Jewish law], regardless of the identity of the patient. Because in the State of Israel, which was established after 2,000 years of exile, thanks to Jews who gave their lives (who were literally slaughtered, hanged, burned at the stake and tortured to death) for observing the Torah, a believing Jew should not be forced to violate [its laws]."

She went on, "I'm sure a huge majority of the nation agrees with this simple truth and identifies with it, certainly on Hanukkah, the holiday that began with a rebellion against anti-religious coercion."

In conclusion, she suggested wryly that "those who still find it difficult [to accept] do a simple visualization exercise: apply this principle to your [coalition] partners from the Shura Council [the Islamist Ra'am Party]. You'll find that, suddenly, religious and faith principles become somehow easier to swallow."

Her dig at the double standard brings us to the second element of the distortion-hypocrisy couplet that characterizes Lapid's shaky, disparate bloc: the "do as I say, not as I do" practice at which Lahav Hertzanu has demonstrated exemplary skill.

Indeed, the gay parliamentarian denouncing the RZP for "homophobia" is more than tolerant of Ra'am, which labels LGBTQs as "perverts" with an "unnatural lifestyle."

When asked in July 2021 about Ra'am MK Walid Taha's statements to this effect, he replied, "Walid Taha is a member of Knesset who represents a sector. He's legitimate. He's a member of [our] coalition."

Pressed further on Taha's stance, he answered, "I understand it; I can't accept it."

Mere weeks later, he abandoned even that pretense of disapproval. Upon Taha's appointment to the chairmanship of the Knesset Internal Affairs and Environment Committee, the Yesh Atid "progressive" was positively effusive about and toward his Ra'am colleague, lauding him as a "sensitive, caring, committed elected official," and saying, "I'm very happy for your election and very much looking forward to working with you."

A few months after that, Taha attacked Labor MK Ibtisam Marana – also a coalition partner – for her efforts to establish a shelter for Israel's LGBTQ Arab citizens. His method of putting her down was to question whether she was really an Arab, after all.

He proceeded to point out to her that Ra'am follows Islamic law, "which considers same-sex relations to be [among] the most serious crimes in the eyes of Allah, because it is a violation of man's nature and a blatant defiance of Allah himself."

The Koran, he added, "recounts the case of Lot and the heavy punishment that Allah inflicted on the sinners, through their complete destruction with fire and brimstone. [And] the consensus among Muslim scholars [of Sharia] is that the punishment for those who have homosexual relations is execution."

Nary a peep from Lahav Hertzanu, Lapid or the rest of their liberal fellow travelers now carrying on about Strock. If they think that their behavior and bigotry of low expectations do the rainbow flag – or democracy – proud, they've got another thing coming.

So Yesh Atid's openly homosexual MK apparently has no genuine opposition to what Ra'am goes by. Which proves he's only following his lifestyle for the sake of harming the values of a civil society. This should be pointed out repeatedly to all the public who're being constantly told only Maoz and Strook are a problem.

Now, when it comes to healthcare exams, of course LGBT practitioners should be able to see doctors to check if they're suffering from illnesses, and also go to the dentist. But if it's businesses like bakers, they shouldn't be forced to do services for homosexual ideology any more than this Christian baker who was persecuted for years. If LGBT practitioners want services for their ideology, they must prove they can establish their own. If there's one part of being a doctor that religious or otherwise shouldn't have to adhere to, it's the horrific gender reassignment surgeries that're ruining children's lives, along with adults, in the USA and elsewhere now. That's something that should practically be barred from practice, because it risks hurting many people with the awful elements involved. Maybe that's what Strook was referring to? In which case, she'd be making an important case in defense of women and girls. That's something to think about.

Saudi Arabia Fueling Religious Persecution And Extremism

If yesterday we were speaking about Saudi private donors being one of the main sources of Islamic terrorism, today we know more about textbooks inciting hate against non-believers produced by Saudis and exported throughout the world.

America's top financial counter-terrorism official, Treasury Undersecretary Stuart Levey, believes there's a strong link between education and support for terror. As he wrote in the Washington Post last June, to end support for such terror, among other steps,

"we must focus on educational reform in key locations to ensure that intolerance has no place in curricula and textbooks. . . . [U]nless the next generation of children is taught to reject violent extremism, we will forever be faced with the challenge of disrupting the next group of terrorist facilitators and supporters."

Saudi Arabia is one such "key location." The kingdom is not just any country with problematic textbooks. As the controlling authority of the two holiest shrines of Islam, Saudi Arabia is able to disseminate its religious materials among the millions of Muslims making the hajj to Mecca each year. Such teachings can, in this context, make a great impression.

In addition, Saudi textbooks are also posted on the Saudi Education Ministry's website and are shipped and distributed free by a vast Sunni infrastructure established with Saudi oil wealth to many Muslim schools, mosques and libraries throughout the world. In his book The Looming Tower, Lawrence Wright asserts that while Saudis constitute only 1 percent of the world's Muslims, they pay "90 per cent of the expenses of the entire faith, overriding other traditions of Islam." Others estimate that, on an annual basis, Saudi Arabia spends three times as much in exporting its Wahhabi ideology as did the Soviets in propagating Communism during the height of the Cold War. From the Netherlands and Bosnia, to Algeria and Tunisia, to Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to Somalia and Nigeria, nationals of these countries have reported that over the past twenty to thirty years local Islamic traditions are being transformed and radicalized under intensifying Saudi influence. The late President of Indonesia Abdurrahman Wahid wrote that Wahhabism was making inroads even in his famously tolerant nation of Indonesia.

To understand why Jim Woolsey and other terrorism experts call Wahhabism as it spreads through the Islamic diaspora "kindling for Usama Bin Laden's match," it is important to know the content of Saudi textbooks. They teach, along with many other noxious lessons, that Jews and Christians are "enemies," and they dogmatically instruct that that it is permissible, even obligatory, to kill various groups of "unbelievers" -- apostates (which includes Muslim moderates who reject Saudi Wahhabi doctrine), polytheists (which can include Shias and Sufis, as well as Christians, Hindus, and Buddhists.), Jews, and adulterers. The texts also teach that the "punishment for homosexuality is death" and discusses that this can be done by immolation by fire, stoning or throwing the accused from a high place.

Four years ago, the Saudis gave a solemn and specific promise to the United States. Its terms were described in a letter from the U.S. assistant secretary of state for legislative affairs to Sen. Jon Kyl, then chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security: "In July of 2006, the Saudi Government confirmed to us its policy to undertake a program of textbook reform to eliminate all passages that disparage or promote hatred toward any religion or religious groups." Furthermore, the State Department letter reported that this pledge would be fulfilled "in time for the start of the 2008 school year."

Saudi Arabia has failed to keep its promise to the United States. One Wikileak cable from the US embassy reports that Saudi education reform seems "glacial." In its newly released 2010 annual report on religious freedom, the State Department itself asserted, albeit with diplomatic understatement, with respect to Saudi Ministry of Education textbooks: "Despite government revisions to elementary and secondary education textbooks, they retained language intolerant of other religious traditions, especially Jewish, Christian, and Shi'a beliefs, including commands to hate infidels and kill apostates."

via Saudi Arabia Fueling Religious Persecution And Extremism.

Cross-posted from T&P.

London Islamists Rail Against 'Fags' - Advocate Death Penalty

The fruits of "multiculturalism"...

“Values of Moderation and Tolerance”- Harry's Place

They said “what is the Islamic position [on homosexuality]?” And I told them. Put my name in the paper. The punishment is death. And I’m not going to change this religion.

Meanwhile, Bay Area (San Francisco) Muslims Attempt To Kill Fags:

San Francisco: Muslims who shot gay man in the face admit they came to city to target gay people

But remember: Pat Robertson is the one who really threatens gays. An update on this story. Sharia Alert from San Francisco: "Hayward Men Out On Bail After Admitting They Came To SF To Shoot Gay Folks," from SF Appeal, March 5 (thanks to David):

Three Hayward men are scheduled to be arraigned on assault and hate crime charges in San Francisco next week for allegedly shooting a man they thought was gay with a BB gun.

The Feb. 26 incident took place at about 10 p.m. outside a Mission District bar at 16th and Guerrero streets, according to police.

The 27-year-old San Francisco man had just come out of the bar when he was shot once in the cheek by suspects in a nearby car, which then drove off, police spokesman Officer Samson Chan said.

The man was not seriously injured and called police, and while officers were interviewing him outside the bar, he spotted the same vehicle again driving by, Chan said.

Police pulled the car over and found three men inside with a "rifle-style" BB gun and a video camera, which investigators later discovered had recorded the shooting, according to Chan.

The three men, Shafiq Hashemi, 21, Sayed Bassam, 21, and Mohammad Habibzada, 24, the driver, were arrested.

According to Chan, they allegedly admitted to the crime.

"The suspects did make a confession, basically stating that they came to San Francisco to target gay people," he said....