SF Bay Area Indymedia indymedia
About Contact Subscribe Calendar Publish Print Donate

Iraq | International

:::Iraqi Women Raped on Film:::Sold to Porn Sites:::
by al-masakin
Friday May 14th, 2004 4:19 PM
Controversy Continues Over GI Rape Photos; “Iraq Babes” Shut Down
May 14, 2004
By Bruce Kennedy, JUS

The American website, "Iraq Babes," has been shut down as the controversy over pictures depicting US GI’s gang-raping Iraqi woman continues.

Linda MacNew, the site’s registrant, told World Net Daily that she was not able to verify conclusively that the photos, which she said were produced by the Hungarian "Sex in War" site, were legal or illegal – meaning whether the women involved were without question porn actresses or were actually raped on camera.
Controversy Continues Over GI Rape Photos; “Iraq Babes” Shut Down
May 14, 2004
By Bruce Kennedy, JUS

http://www.jihadunspun.com/intheatre_internal.php?article=820&list=/home.php&

The American website, "Iraq Babes," has been shut down as the controversy over pictures depicting US GI’s gang-raping Iraqi woman continues.

Linda MacNew, the site’s registrant, told World Net Daily that she was not able to verify conclusively that the photos, which she said were produced by the Hungarian "Sex in War" site, were legal or illegal – meaning whether the women involved were without question porn actresses or were actually raped on camera.

The photos were picked up by the Boston Globe on May 12th causing embarrassment to the paper for the photos have largely been dismissed as “fake”. How do we know that?
After JUS published a censored version of the photos last week, we received a deluge of mail from both Muslims and non-Muslims alike. While the entire point of our article Violating Arab Honor was missed by most of the male population, it wasn’t by many Muslim sisters wrote to show there support for our report. Because SOME of the photographs appear on porn sites in no way legitimizes them nor does it mean they are fake. The real questions are, who are these women and how did the photos come to reside on these sites? Are these women our Muslim sisters and were they forced to participate as our information indicates?

In January 2004, we received information that tipped us off to what was really going on. We were told by an anonymous source that the wife’s, sisters and daughters of those arrested by US forces, British forces and the hired mercenaries (that are so often overlooked) were being used to “soften up” detainees in Iraq. Either the male relatives cooperated with interrogators they were threatened with their female family members ended up on porn sites. If the detainee was not forthcoming, this is what occurred and the photographs were then presented to him. Six weeks later we received another claim of the same abuse.

This isn’t rocket science. It is a well known fact that incidents of real rape and even child rape turn up on “legitimate” porn sites on the internet every day. While “”Sex in War” claims “We do not condone non-Consensual sex. This site is about role playing fantasy only and performed by professional actors and models”, law enforcement largely turns a blind eye to these “adult entertainers” who generate 70 % of internet revenue.

Are sites like Iraq Babes and Sex in War in bad taste when thousands are dying and prisoner abuse is rampant? Most definitely, however this in of itself is not surprising in a demoralized world. Are they promoting hate and racisim? Most assuredly, considering these photos were picked up in many daily newspapers through out the Arab world as examples of US brutality. Are crimes being committed here? Very likely - if not the greater crime of rape itself, profiteering is certainly at play.

Veteran police detective and novelist Michael Tremoglie, commenting on the four websites involved and statements made by some of the persons connected to them who could not verify if the individuals appearing in these shots were actors, "If there was any question in their mind about whether real rape was going on in these photos, why didn't they contact the responsible authorities, instead of trying to cash in on it?"

We call for an immediate full scale investigation into the Sex in War, the alleged creators of these pictures. In fact, considering the controversy surrounding these photos, it is amazing that this “legitimate” business has not come forward with details of the photos in question. We also call on the women who appear in these shots to come forward. If they are paid actresses, they would vindicate a host of mainstream press including the Boston Globe and others and would help to heal an already alienated Arab world. If they are rape victims, the truth will be known and remedies can be sought. Regardless, if these photos are the work of pornographers, this is a clear act of inciting violence and the criminal act of profiteering and the sites should be brought down and individuals responsible should be brought to justice.

JUS continues its investigation. With “Iraq Babes” now down, there is still three more to go. If you have any information, concerning these photographs, please contact bkennedy [at] jihadunspun.com

Comments  (Hide Comments)

Kennedy makes up out of whole cloth the premise that the pictures are actual rape pictures sent to a porno site.

He probably also believes the moon is made of green cheese. People from BC believe such things.
by Juliet
Friday May 21st, 2004 5:23 PM
What the hell does "makes up out of whole cloth" mean? He reminds us of the possibility that these were pictures of real rapes that were sold to porn sites, which every other news source has failed to do.
by K.H.
Tuesday May 25th, 2004 3:04 AM
If you look at the pictures in question, look carefully at the way the 'soldiers' are dressed. Remeber that the uniform that 99.9% of our people over there is of the desert camouflage, that is the light brown/green motif, and cerainly NOT the traditional dark green/brown uniforms you see in those fake rape pictures, only an idiot would be caught in clothes like that in a desert climate. They would make you stick out like a sore thumb.
by al-masakin
Tuesday Jun 8th, 2004 12:20 PM
Pattern Emerges Of Sexual Assault Against Women Held By US. Forces
Jun 08, 2004
Source: The NewStandard

http://www.jihadunspun.com/intheatre_internal.php?article=5251&list=/home.php&

Well publicized images of US soldiers torturing and humiliating male Iraqi prisoners may be overshadowing evidence gathered by several human rights groups and Pentagon investigators indicating US military personnel have raped and sexually abused Iraqi women held at Abu Ghraib prison and other detention facilities.

Amal Kadham Swadi, an Iraqi attorney representing women detainees, told The Guardian she believes that sexualized violence and abuse committed by US soldiers against female prisoners goes far beyond a few isolated cases. It's "happening all across Iraq," she said.

Women make up a small minority of the total number of Iraqis held by Coalition forces. The US military says 78 women are currently detained by occupation militaries throughout Iraq.

It is not clear, however, exactly how many women the US and its allies have detained since the invasion last year. According to the International Committee of the Red Cross, 30 Iraqi women were housed in Abu Ghraib last October. That number was reduced to five last month, and finally to zero as of May 29, according to the military.

Like the majority of male prisoners, many of the women detained by Coalition forces have not been charged with any crime. Iraqi human rights groups say they are likely being used as "bargaining chips" against family members wanted by Coalition forces, Newsday reports.

Swadi and six other female Iraqi lawyers began investigating claims of sexual assault late last year after a note reportedly written by a prisoner named Noor was smuggled out of Abu Ghraib. The note claimed that US soldiers were raping female detainees, and in some cases, such as that of Noor herself, getting them pregnant. Swadi then began interviewing detainees who said they too had been assaulted or had witnessed assaults, The Guardian reports.

During a visit to Abu Ghraib in March, Swadi said, one of the prisoners told her US soldiers had forced her to undress in front of them, an act that would be seen as particularly demeaning in conservative Muslim culture. At another detention facility in Baghdad, Swadi encountered a woman who said soldiers raped her. "She was the only woman who would talk about her case," Swadi told The Guardian. "She was crying. She told us she had been raped," Swadi said. "Several American soldiers had raped her. She had tried to fight them off and they had hurt her arm. She showed us the stitches."

Iman Khamas, head of the International Occupation Watch Center, an organization investigating human rights abuses under the US-led occupation, said a former detainee told her about the rape of a cellmate at Abu Ghraib, according to Middle East Online. On another occasion, a woman whispered cautiously to Khamas -- even though no one else was in the room -- intimating that soldiers had raped her at Abu Ghraib. A day later, Khamas said, the woman returned and asked her to tear up the statement.

According to Khamas, Swadi and others who are investigating assault cases, few women in Muslim cultures will come forward since they know rape survivors are often treated with shame and are sometimes killed as a means of preserving family honor.

Khamas and two other human rights workers have all said separately that three young rural women from the Sunni Muslim region of Al-Anbar, west of Baghdad, had been killed by their families after coming out of Abu Ghraib pregnant, Middle East Online reported.

The Pentagon has acknowledged, in an internal report by Army Major General Antonio Taguba, that US soldiers videotaped and photographed naked female detainees at Abu Ghraib. Photographs taken by US soldiers and shown to members of Congress, but not yet made public, reportedly depict at least one Iraqi woman being forced at gunpoint to show her breasts.

The Taguba report also cites a case of rape at Abu Ghraib, although Taguba described the incident as a male prison guard "having sex" with a female detainee.

Referring to rapes at that very prison, the military's chief spokesperson in Iraq, Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt, told Agence France Presse that the department running prisons was "unaware of any such reports at Abu Ghraib."

The military has not yet charged any soldiers for a specific case of assault or abuse involving a female detainee.

Another Pentagon report indicates that three soldiers from military intelligence were alleged to have sexually assaulted a female detainee at Abu Ghraib last October. Army investigators did not confirm the assault. The three soldiers were reportedly fined several hundred dollars each and demoted for having been in the prison's female wing without permission, according to the Washington Post.

by Pelican
Tuesday Jun 15th, 2004 11:59 AM
Read WorldNetDaily - http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38505

The article does a pretty good job of explaning what happened.

I dn't know if you guys truly hate the war because it is WAR .. or if you just hate George Bush and are looking for things to gripe about (I suspect te latter). Did you gripe about Kosovo too?

Do you believe that the Iraqi people were better off under Hussein? I know Iraqi families in this county. Based on their sories, I believe the people of Iraq will be better off after our departure. My fear is that the terrorists will come in and take over the country (Iraq) like they did in Afghanistan.

Keep your eyes open an pray for peace.
by Seeker of Truth
Tuesday Jun 15th, 2004 12:31 PM
I an not believe that news story that al-masakin published.

Am I to believe that a human rights group ever existed in Iraq before the US invasion? If they existed, I bet they didn;'t say anything.

And where was Iman Khamas (head of the International Occupation Watch Center, an organization investigating human rights abuses under the US-led occupation) when Saddam Hussein was running the country? Seems as though he only found his courage AFTER Hussein was ousted fom power.

Are we also to believe that ALL of the Iraqi women in prison are pure as the driven snow and are only held a pawns in a chess game?

And lastly, if raped women are killed by their families our of shame, then how many women were killed after being raped by Hussein's sons?

Let the prison women who claim they were raped point out the rapist andwe can do DNA testing (I'm sure they have close with seamen samples till intact). Or perform the tests after the baby is born (I don't Iraq has the modern miracle called abortion - yet).

Please ... denounce TRUE abuses, but don't make them up or be so quick to condemn America.
by Shirley Lynn Scott
Thursday Jun 17th, 2004 4:57 PM
Seeing, and Believing
NRO
6/17/04
Nick Schulz

EDITOR'S NOTE: Earlier this month, National Review Online obtained a four-minute video of Saddam-era torture at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. Many of us here who discussed the matter are ourselves unable to watch the whole video. Some could not get beyond the furious, ecstatic chanting of torturers as they raised swords, celebrating their own dementia in the depths of a man-made hell. What to do with the video was a matter of debate here. On principle this is newsworthy — and weighing heavily on our deliberations was the fact that a group of United States senators held a press conference on June 2 during which they showed the horrific video and near no one covered it — in fact, to this date, I am aware of no mainstream news organization other than the New York Post yesterday — in an opinion column — that has even mentioned that this new, Department of Defense-provided, video exists and has been shown on the Hill. We also considered this: Some Westerners, including some who did not support the war in Iraq, frankly may not understand the evil that was the Saddam Hussein regime. You watch — or try to — the four-minute video and you see the unbearable evil that was — and that is no more because of the sacrifice of American and Coalition blood.

It's too easy for Americans to forget what we are fighting against. The Daniel Pearl murder, the Nick Berg video, these visuals do remind us in ways mere wire stories, reporting pieces, and commentary can't. In the case of the Pearl and Berg videos, NRO itself never provided links to the videos or the videos themselves. In that same vein, we are not introducing this Abu Ghraib video to public access. Though I can't imagine more powerful images, they're also of the sort no civilized man wants another to have to see. We will not be the ones who show them to you. The decision we came to was to report this news — the existence of this horrid tape — graphically, but without showing the actual video. It's awful enough to read about.

It's my hope that Nick Schulz's piece will be a catalyst for more news stories on the nature of the regime that was in Iraq — the regime that American and Coalition blood have brought to an end.

You'll notice too, that Schulz would have preferred you have a link to the video with his piece — I understand why. I want every American to know it exists and what is on it — which is why we asked Schulz to describe it to you. But I, for one, cannot be the conduit for bringing the actual footage in front of your eyes.

I urge you to read Nick Schulz's piece, and write to your evening-news program or cable-news station of choice, your newspaper of record, or your favorite columnist: Ask them why this video hasn't warranted a mention.

— Kathryn Jean Lopez, Editor, National Review Online

“You don't appreciate what happened in that prison until you see it." — Aaron Brown, CNN News

Several weeks back, NRO's Jonah Goldberg suggested the press should have practiced self-censorship and refrained from showing the pictures and videos of Iraqi prisoner abuse by American soldiers at Abu Ghraib. CNN anchor Aaron Brown thought Goldberg's notion mistaken and argued that major media outlets were correct to show footage of the abuse: "You don't appreciate what happened in that prison," Brown said, "until you see it."

And whatever the merits of Goldberg's argument, who, at this point, can doubt the veracity of Brown's assertion? No mere rhetorical description of the humiliation that took place can match the emotional wallop of seeing what some demented U.S. soldiers did there.

But we're currently undergoing our first significant test of what might be called journalism's "Aaron Brown doctrine." Two weeks ago, a bipartisan group of U.S. senators held a press conference at which they played a video of ritual prisoner torture by Saddam Hussein's regime. As of this writing, the only mainstream media outlet that has mentioned it is the New York Post, in an opinion column by Deborah Orin. None of the 24-hour news networks, not America's paper of record, etc., has deemed it newsworthy to reveal the details (or existence) of this video, much less elected to show clips or stills.

"So what?" you might be saying, "Everyone already knew Saddam's goons tortured people. President Bush frequently talked about torture and rape rooms in his speeches both before and after the invasion. As such, seeing whatever actions there might be carried out by Baathists on video isn't 'news.'"

If you're like me, you couldn't begin to tally how many stories you've read or newscasts you've seen that at least made mention of the brutality of Saddam's regime. You've read about the mass graves. You know stories of Saddam's sons, Qusay and Uday, and their relish for barbarism. And you've heard allegations of murder, mutilation, savagery, and terror so often at this point that there's a 'been there, done that' quality that now envelops such stories. Saddam's torture chambers? Yawn.

I was not at the press conference, held by Sens. Santorum, Lieberman, and Sessions, but have since that time been able to see the video, a version of which is in NRO's possession. And CNN's Brown is on to something.

Under journalism's Brown doctrine, seeing is believing. Indeed, it's more than that. Seeing is "appreciating" and understanding. And, at least at some level, he's right. It is not possible to grasp the indescribably monstrous horror, the Satanic villainy, the unrivaled evil of Saddam's regime "until you see it."

WHAT'S ON THE TAPE [WARNING: THIS IS GRAPHIC] According to Senate sources, this four-minute video, comprised of several clips, came to be after several verbal and written inquires were made to the Defense Department at the start of 2004. It is an edited version of several different tapes, totaling between one and two hours, discovered after the regime's collapse. The translations of the words heard on the tape were provided by the Department of Defense.

"You don't appreciate what happened in that prison until you see it."

The first film clip opens with the camera showing a man standing in a bland, mostly empty room. The camera pans down to show his right hand. Folded rugs are visible in the background. The clip jumps to footage of scrub-clad "surgeons" with rubber surgical gloves severing the man's hand at the wrist. First the skin is peeled away with surgical knives and tweezers; ligaments, tendons, muscle, and bone underneath are exposed. Then the gloved hands wielding the knives begin to slice, shredding through the sinews, slashing muscle, breaking bone, until the hand is ultimately detached and plopped onto a green cloth, as yellow, pulpy tissue spills forth.

"You don't appreciate what happened in that prison until you see it."

The next clip opens amid Saddam Fedayeen — Fedayeen means "those willing to die for Saddam" — chanting loudly: "With blood and spirit we will redeem you Saddam." The Fedayeen stand barking and clapping in a courtyard. A blindfolded prisoner, forced to his knees and held in position has his arm outstretched before him along a low concrete wall. A masked member of the Fedayeen raises high a three-foot-long blade and ferociously slams down on the man's hand, slicing through his fingertips. The victim is wailing, howling, screaming in agony.

The swordsman-torturer, not sufficiently satisfied with his first effort, raises the sword again and drives down once more on the man's immobile hand. This time he severs the fingers closer to the knuckles as blood spurts cartoonishly from his hand spilling over and down the concrete slab. The victim emits a wail I have never heard — could never imagine hearing — from a grown man, this time louder, harder than the first.

The camera then turns to the assembled Fedayeen as they continue rhythmically chanting.

"You don't appreciate what happened in that prison until you see it."

In the third clip, a prisoner sits on the ground, his arm tied with white cloth, strips to a wooden board resting on a gray concrete slab. A man stands before him with a sword, this blade is wider than the last. He, too, strikes down on the man's hand, severing it from his right arm as the prisoner recoils in pain. The camera then quickly darts to the man's hand resting on the dusty ground several feet away as it was launched a considerable distance from the prisoner due to the force of the torturer's chop.

"You don't appreciate what happened in that prison until you see it."

When Mel Gibson's movie The Passion was released, several critics harped on the scenes where Jesus is flogged mercilessly by Roman soldiers. The brutality was so extreme, critics charged, the depiction bordered on parody — it was not a credible rendering of what could have happened to Jesus.

In the fourth clip in the Saddam torture film, it's clear Gibson's cinematic vision of just how depraved men can be was not divorced from reality.

A tall prisoner, stripped to the waist and blindfolded has his arms tied before him to a white pole, his bare back exposed. Black-clad Saddam Fedayeen surround him, jackal-like, as one begins to pound on his back with a black rubber whip. With the man screaming, his scourged back arching backward, shoulders and arms frantically struggling to block the blows, one of the Fedayeen torturers is heard to say "no situation more honorable than truth over falsehood." Thwack! Thwack! Thwack! The prisoner's knees buckle as he crumbles into a hump on the ground from the blows, crying out in pain. Another Fedayeen grabs his hands and pulls him up the pole to receive further lashes.

"You don't appreciate what happened in that prison until you see it."

"In the name of Allah the merciful," intones the beret-topped loyalist to Saddam's "secular" regime in the next segment. He introduces to the viewer and the assembled butcher squad to another prisoner. The loyalist-narrator reads from Koran, Sura 2:179: "And there is a saving of life for you in the Law of Equality in punishment. O men of understanding, that you may become the pious."

"The Fedayeen, Saddin Ezzedin al-Arousi," he goes on, "was charged with a special mission in which he betrayed his duty in the mission. The head of the Fedayeen has ordered the following: He is expelled from Fedayeen work and his arms are to be broken in front of his unit. Tarik Juman will personally undertake the breaking of his arms. Thank you."

The camera jumps to al-Arousi sitting with one arm tied behind him as his right arm is extended out to his side. His right elbow rests on a cinderblock and his right fist is supported by another cinderblock. Nothing supports his forearm in between. While a Fedayeen holds the prisoner's elbow in place, Tarik Juman crashes a three-inch-thick pipe down on his old compatriot's forearm, bending the forearm in a 'V' shape and shattering the bones within. This procedure is repeated for his left arm as well.

"You don't appreciate what happened in that prison until you see it."

In another clip a hooded and blindfolded prisoner is led to a room where he is forced to kneel, hands tied behind his back. Another man sits before the prisoner with thick metal tweezers and a scalpel. With his left hand he grabs the tip of the prisoner's tongue with the tweezers and pulls it forward from his head. With the scalpel in his other hand he slices through the prisoner's tongue, cutting it out of his mouth and then dropping it on the floor.

This ritual is repeated for more prisoners who are lined up, squatting in a row like parts on an assembly line waiting for processing, sitting ducks surrounded by dozens of men bearing witness to a Baathist tongue lashing.

"You don't appreciate what happened in that prison until you see it."

In the final clip we see a blindfolded prisoner being led to his fate as the assembled men around him sing "Happy Birthday, long live the leader, eternal gift to the people." Again with arms tied behind his back he is shoved to the ground, bent over stuffed burlap sacks. A black-clad Fedayeen loosens the prisoner's shirt exposing his back and neck, while another stands two feet from him holding a long silver blade at its curved handle. He raises his arms and strikes, hacking the prisoner's head from his body, tumbling it to the ground. He picks up the severed head by the hair and places it ceremoniously on the dead man's back as the camera pans in closer and closer and you can make out the victim's now lifeless and bloodied face.

Doubts No Longer I was unable to sit through these clips at first, having to turn away several times. And I am not a person who is, generally speaking, squeamish about these sorts of things, having seen the clips and stills of the beheading of journalist Daniel Pearl, and watched the video of the butchering of Nicholas Berg. But this was something for which I was manifestly unprepared. These film clips reveal — and help one to "appreciate" — the fullness of the inhuman, soulless horror of Saddam's regime. They reveal the character and moral constitution of the foe Coalition forces must reckon with on a daily basis. And, perhaps most importantly, they cast anew the question of the moral rightness of the effort to end this regime.

I must confess that in recent weeks I had begun to harbor some doubts about a war I had supported. And I was not the only war supporter to begin second-guessing recently. We doubting Thomases had been perhaps most perplexed at President Bush, steadfast in the wake of mounting Coalition deaths, the Abu Ghraib scandal, and other bad news. Did this man not see what we were seeing?

There is no doubt that he had. But President Bush — along with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who has also remained resolute despite withering and unfair criticism at home — had also seen things that we had not. Seeing this footage helps one better understand the mindset of President Bush and of his stalwart British ally and explains their resolve in the face of tremendous difficulties and setbacks. Seeing these films and ones like them out there, will, I believe, make any fence sitter shed his doubts about the appropriateness of destroying Saddam's regime. If anything, they make one wonder, almost shamefully, how and why it took the civilized world — or at least part of that world — as long as it did to rise up against it.

Should You See It? My own view is that every adult should demand to see these videos. Had the photos and videos of American abuse at Abu Ghraib not been released, I might feel differently. But a few things, reported by the major media, lead me to the conclusion that the press has an obligation to report on these tapes, and has a further obligation to release at least some portions of them, in some way.

The first was a report from the Associated Press picked up by several media outlets. The report says that a prisoner who had been at Abu Ghraib under both Saddam's regime and after CPA took control of Iraq "prefers Saddam's torture to U.S. abuse." I've no doubt the reporter found someone who claims this. But seeing actual footage of treatment of prisoners in Saddam's prison system puts such a report in a substantially different context.

The other story, also reported widely, was of Sen. Edward Kennedy's comments after the Abu Ghraib scandal erupted in which he said, "Who would prefer that Saddam's torture chambers still be open? Shamefully, we now learn that Saddam's torture chambers reopened under new management: U.S. management." Again, seeing these videos helps to better contextualize such an assertion.

Lastly, writing in Slate magazine, Christopher Hitchens tells us to "get ready. It is going to get much worse. The graphic [Abu Ghraib] videos and photographs that have so far been shown only to Congress are, I have been persuaded by someone who has seen them, not likely to remain secret for very long.... There will probably be a slight difficulty about showing these scenes in prime time, but they will emerge, never fear." I've no doubt the videos and stills of Americans torturing captives still unseen by the public are wretched and that the potential damage that can be done if they are broadcast would be immense. And now that the media have run with the first round of photos and videos, it will be difficult for them to justify not showing another, this time more horrid, round.

But if they do, it will be hard for the media to defend their decision to continue to ignore the Saddam torture video. My meager descriptive powers are insufficient to relay the miserable reality of what is captured on film. As CNN's Brown said of a different story, you don't appreciate it until you see it.
by IAN
Thursday Jan 13th, 2005 6:15 AM

Evidently alot of you have not been to Iraq. There are soldiers over here that are wearing the BDU's(battle dress uniform) which is traditional green here in the desert. Half of the military's vehicles are still painted green and not the desert sand color. Why? Yes they do stick out like a soar thumb. it doesnt look very tactical. Have the tents in these camps have neon colored tarps drapped over them to water proof them so our troops can stay dry in the rainy season. i have been over here for 16 months supporting our troops in Iraq and hope to be alot longer.
by "Read WorldNetDaily"!?!
Thursday Jan 13th, 2005 8:33 AM
Why is Indybay advertising WorldNetDaily?
by Michael Cohen
Sunday Jul 16th, 2006 6:02 AM
For many, the term “Muslim porn” is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms, and an assault against the senses. According to most Muslims, the mere fact of performing in an adult film would place a person outside the fold of Islam. In fact, according to Sunni jurisprudence, a Muslim woman who fornicates with a non-Muslim is guilty of irtidad or apostasy and would be subjected to the death penalty. According to Sunni scholars, a non-Muslim man who has sex with a Muslim girl has committed a capital offence which merits execution. According to Shi‘ite fiqh, however, a Muslim woman who has intercourse with a non-Muslim would merely be a fasiqah, an open sinner, rather than a murtadah or an apostate. In the event that she was single, she would be administered one hundred lashes. In the case of adultery, she would be condemned to death by stoning. As for the non-Muslim man who has sex with her, Sunni scholars would give him the death penalty. In the case of Shi‘ite scholars, some would advocate execution while others say the punishment depends on whether the perpetrator was subject to a treaty with the Islamic state. Any such punishment, of course, could only be applied by a Muslim judge in an Islamic state which as created conditions of socio-economic justice. Muslim jurists generally agree that Islamic punishments cannot be applied extra-jurisdictionally. While Islamic law may seem severe on the subject, mercy is meant to prevail in many instances. In Iran, for example, upon the establishment of the Islamic Republic, Imam Khomeini forgave all the sex workers in the country and found them husbands. The same merciful attitude must be taken towards women involved in prostitution and porn: they are victims of the worst type of exploitation. If any action should be taken, it should be legal in nature, and should be directed towards the pimps who produce such porn. Regardless of various legal stances on the subject, and as disturbing and distressing as it may be to some, “Muslim” porn has become a reality with more and more “Muslim” women appearing in pornographic movies produced in the United States, Europe, and even the Islamic world, fulfilling Muhammad’s prophecy that fornication and adultery would become rampant in the Islamic world.



The Western world has a long history of erotic art, prostitution, and pornography. While the Eastern world is not alien to these phenomena, they have traditionally been repressed and have remained underground. The very mention of “Muslim porn” is thus deeply offensive to Islamic sensibilities. For a Muslim, it comes as no surprise when Western women appear in adult films. Whether they are from Europe, the Americas, Australia or New Zealand, they are the products of promiscuous, liberal, and sexually liberated societies. In the public sphere, Muslim societies present an austere, conservative, appearance. While prostitution has never been eradicated in the lands of Islam, it is not openly available. It is found in dark dubious alleys and behind the scene brothels. With the advent of VCRs, DVDs, satellite television, and the internet, adult films became readily available throughout the Islamic world and are readily consumed as a matter of course. As Shaykh Muhammad al-Mujahid has acknowledged, “the consumption of porn is a major problem in the Muslim community.” In the Islamic world, what one does in one’s home, in private, in one’s closet, is nobody’s business and does not affect the structural integrity of society. It is what is done in public, in open, which must conform to Islamic cultural norms. It was one thing for sexually repressed Muslims to view non-Muslim women engaging in adult activities on film. It is altogether another issue when their own women start acting in them.


The Muslim woman has long been subject to manipulation. Since the dawn of Islam, Muslim women have been eroticized in the eyes of their enemies. In fact, during the life of the Prophet, a mischievous Jew was murdered for exposing the private parts of a Muslim woman. European authors and artists created an entire imaginary universe revolving around the sensuality of Muslim women, turning the veil, the Muslim woman’s symbol of chastity, into a sexual fetish. It goes without saying that the world of harems and orgies depicted in Western literature and art is more the product of European imagination than of Islamic reality. That Westerners wish to exploit Muslim women should come as no surprise to the Islamic world. From the Crusades to Colonialism and all the way to present day neo-imperialism, Muslim women have been booty in the eyes of the infidels: prizes to be taken, either willingly or forcibly. Whether it’s the gang-rapes committed by Zionists terrorists in Palestine, the sexual assaults committed by the Russians in Afghanistan or Chechnya, the mass rapes and murders committed by the Serbs in Bosnia, sex is the ultimate weapon of war. Of course, wars are not waged only on the battlefield; they are waged via the mass media, popular culture, and, of course, by the adult film industry.

In the past, Muslim women were generally impenetrable by infidels--and the pun is deliberate. The closest they could get to Muslim women was adorning prostitutes and porn stars with Islamic names, and dressing them like Arabian princesses. In fact, it was reported in Salon.com in June 7, 2000, that Israeli porn producers were hiring actors who looked like Egyptian stars, using them to shoot porn flicks in Israel. It was only in 2003 that SexStyle, the biggest pornography company in Israel, released a film featuring Arab performing, to the uproar of the Israeli Arab community. It has also been reported that the CIA operates Muslim porn sites as part of their “psychological warfare.” As Joshua Cohen explains in his article on Jewish porn, “The Chosen Peephole: Jews can do Porn just as badly as Everyone Else,” published in the New York Press in July of 2006, “angry-white-man-on-Muslim-woman material has proliferated since the first Gulf War.” According to him:



Anti-Muslim porn is less about religion than about than it is the embodiment of directionless hate in the form of sexual violence. It’s about ripping off that burka to see what’s underneath. It’s about the myth of the Manifest White Dick exploring and Christianizing the heathens in Holy scrotum-water.

It was only in the early 90s that pornographers were able to access women of Muslim backgrounds to act in the adult film industry. During the 90s, adult film producers were generally too afraid to identify the real origin of their actresses for fear of violent reprisal by Islamic activists. Tabatha Cash, the French starlet and extreme harlot, appeared in over 100 adult films during the 90s, cashing in on her exotic looks, appearing as an Arab in movies like the Erotic Adventures of Aladdin X and Marco Polo, produced by pornographer Joe d’Amato and Franco Lo Cascio. In this last film, she bears the title of Princess Zahra, a likely allusion to the Prophet Muhammad’s daughter, Fatimah al-Zahra. While the directors might claim that the name was chosen at random, it is not the most common of Muslim names. In fact, like Salman Rushdie who adorned prostitutes with the names of the Prophet’s wives in his book the Satanic Verses, the directors may very well have wanted to slight Islam in the same way. While she claimed to be half-Japanese and half-Italian, she is actually half-French and half-Libyan. For a time, she dated Serge Ayoub, a Lebanese immigrant, and neo-Nazi leader. Since 97% of Libyans are Muslims--the only non-Muslims being the 3% of the population which is comprised of foreign workers--it is safe to say that this little gang-bang girl had at least one Muslim parent. Her Arab origins are also evident in the fact that she named her son Mehdi, another insult to Islam as this is the title of the Awaited Imam, the Savior of Islam, whose arrival is expected by all Muslims, and which is particularly stressed by the Shi‘ites. Besides Tabatha Cash, there are many porn actresses who are rumored to be of Arab origin including Julia Chanel, who is marketed as half-Egyptian, Yasmine Fitzgerald, known as Lilla Fritz, who is allegedly Lebanese, and others who are supposedly Persian like Vanessa Chase, Stacy Carpenter, Mandy Lyn, Raven Lee, and Tanya Foxx, as well as many others who have remained more subtle about their origins.

It was only at the beginning of the second millennium that actresses in the adult film industry started to openly present themselves as Arabs and Persians. This is certainly an anomaly in the world of porn as most actresses change their names and, whenever possible, attempt to hide their ethnic origin to avoid being identified. Some of these actresses are Lebanese, like singer Nelly Maqdisi, who openly admitted to appearing in adult films in the U.S. under an alias. Many of these actresses are beurettes, typically second or third generation North African Arabs or Berbers from Morocco, Algeria or Tunisia, who live in France. Others, however, are bonafide North Africans who performs in pornographic films directed at home, in their very own countries. Some of these are made by French Moroccans when they visit the country, filming their sexual escapades for personal pleasure as well as for profit, posting them on adult websites upon their return to Europe. Other films and photos are produced by Moroccans themselves, sometimes by teenage girls, who post them on their personal web sites, as we learned from the Skyblog scandal. Besides this homemade porn, major pornographic pictures have been filmed in Morocco, one featuring Julia Channel, in which all the actors were dressed in traditional Islamic clothing. Since this was a feature film with a real budget, not some low-budget romp filmed with a camcorder, there is no doubt that its production involved the complicity of segments of the Moroccan government. The same also applies to some gay movies filmed in Moroccan bathhouses. In fact, Morocco has become a hotbed of prostitution and pornographic production, something brought to light by Abdelhak Najib and Youssef Chmirou in their article “L’industrie du film X au Maroc” published in La Gazette du Maroc on July 10th, 2006. They reveal that porn films have been produced in Marrakesh, Agadir, Tangiers, and Essaouira, in downtown areas, villas, the countryside, the desert and the mountains. They also expose the fact that these foreign film producers work with intermediaries in Morocco who set the stage, finding locations to film, apartments to rent, and Moroccan actresses, many of whom are minors, but then again, this is the Maghreb, where anything and everything is available on the flesh market. Regrettably, Morocco, as well as Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates are all featured on worldsexguide.com, a travel guide for sexual tourism. In the meanwhile, Western pornographers are taking are taking full advantage of the legendary beauty of Muslim women in general and Moroccan women in particular due to the desperate financial situation in the Maghreb with its 40% rate of employment. To a large extent, it was the notorious case of Belguel that brought light to such a somber subject.

Using the alias of “Belguel,” a combination of “Belge” and “Geule” or “Jaw,” meaning “Pretty Face,” he first appeared on an American website for international pornographers, describing himself as a “serial fucker.” He litters the website with pictures taken in Agadir, Morocco, featuring veiled Moroccan women being sodomized, their faces covered in semen and urine. A sado-masochist, Belguel often tied up his subjects, some with dog collars and leashes around their necks in sickening scenes reminiscent of the porn produced by American soldiers in Abu Ghraib. As an added bonus to the pictures, he provided personal information on each subject and gave advice to fellow pornographers on how to conquer these Muslim girls. The success of his pictures, which generally involved unattractive women, was startling. It was Belguel’s his focus on veiled women which guaranteed their success. He comments: “Another veiled woman. I picked her up when she was returning from the market. She is not really pretty but ejaculating on the face of a veiled woman…It’s better than hashish.” He was applauded by his fellow pornographers as “a real man” and he was requested to submit more pictures of veiled women. The “hero” of the pornographers continued to release his pictures with their stinging commentaries: “She was fat, innocent, 19 at most. I picked her up near the mosque and fucked her up the ass within one hour. She is a virgin and she still writes to me. I did not even have to pay her. A few nice words were sufficient.” His commentary is even more disturbing than the images themselves. In one case, he writes,

Look at this girl, her face is covered with two liquids (sperm and urine). She didn’t like it very much but she said that she was open to learning anything new from the West… She is still a virgin, but her face isn’t. She let me stuff her with my sausage (but not of pork evidently!). She said she only had an hour because she had to go home to prepare a meal for her father… She emptied my ink while she was wearing her jelaba… She didn’t even know that I had just fucked her sister three hours before… Her eyes were red because of my sperm (which must be highly corrosive…) and she panicked about how she would explain the sudden redness in her eyes to her father… Moroccan girls who have never been to Europe are convinced that fucking will be their ticket to Europe… They walk the streets with their veils and their jelabas. A few minutes later, they were fucking in front of me. Miracles are possible, even in a Muslim country!

Belguel boast that he had access to so many girls, on the street, next to the beach, coming back from the market, on the way to school, on the way to university, and even coming out of mosques. He asserts that he had sex with an average of forty girls each time he traveled to Agadir, an average of three to four per day. His secret? Hitting on girls in French. If you hit on about twenty Moroccan girls, he said, you are sure to land three. Although he slept with prostitutes in Agadir, he preferred “normal” girls, mom and pop girls, who never got home past seven o’clock at night. He provided so many details about the girls, their family names, their jobs, their family situation, and the schools they attended, that he earned the admiration of the porn community. One pornographer warned him saying “These girls are Muslims. They live in a Muslim country. You are exposing them to a grave danger by exposing them in such a way.” When the site’s moderator, the mysterious Jackson, suggested that he could veil the eyes of the Muslim girls to make their identification more difficult, other members of the web site responded that their faces did not need to be veiled because they were already veiled with semen. As a result of his exploits, some participants commented that “With what Belguel has accomplished, every Moroccan woman walking down the street is a candidate for sex.” Since Belguel was so callously indifferent to the safety of his subjects, they were all easy to track down. As a result, thirteen women are now in prison, and seventy one others are the subject of a criminal investigation. Belguel himself was eventually tracked down, thanks to Belgian police and not Moroccan authorities who had actually released him. He was publicly exposed as being the Belgian Jew, Philippe Servaty, one of the most brilliant reporters for Le Soir newspaper. He admitted:

I am a pervert, a sicko. I am presently undergoing medical treatment… I have nothing against Islam. It was just lust that led me to veiled women… I receive death threats on a daily basis by email and telephone…I am fully willing to cooperate with the authorities.



Evidently, many of these girls never expected their images to be made public, believing they would be kept for private use. Unfortunately, they are now all over the internet and traded on peer-to-peer networks. While many of Belguel’s victims were lured by promises of marriage and passage to Europe, many Muslim girls, motivated by poverty or profit, have become much bolder in both the Islamic and Western world. In Germany, the company Trimax produces Turkish-themed porn, recruiting talent directly from Turkey. In 2004 and 2005, Malaysia was shocked with a few exposures of budding wannabe pornographers who filmed couples having sex for the camera. In the U.K., Simon Egan recently directly a documentary titled Diary of a Porn Virgin which was featured on the Sundance Channel and deals with at a young Muslim woman from the U.K. who left the world of fashion to work in the porn industry. Her website, saharagetsdirty.com, as well as UK Indian Girls, Cream of India, UK Ethnic Models, and Ravishing Indians, actively attempt to recruit other Anglo-Indian girls to act in adult films. There is even the case of Amal Kashua, an Israeli Arab Muslim mother of eight who took part in a porn movie in Israel with her partner Yusuf. She was subsequently attacked by a mob of Israeli Arab Muslims from the village of Tira who attempted to lynch her.

Breaking with past industry practice, a new generation of North African porn stars have now appeared on the scene. The first of these was Dalila, born in Casablanca, Morocco, in 1968. She dominated the adult film industry in Europe during the 1990s and early 2000s, performing in 58 films, and receiving 18 nominations and 12 awards at the European X and Venus Awards in Brussels and Berlin. Rather than dissimulating her religion, she spoke about it openly in the course of an interview. Other North African Arab and Berber porn stars followed in her footsteps, including: Karima, Nadjia, Malika, Latifa, Salina, Safiya, Aziza, Ilhem, Myriam, Yasmine, and many others, all marketing their ethnicity through their very names. As Nadia states, “I’m a French Arab, I don’t deny nor do I hide my origins. If they turn you own, that’s all the better!” As she explains,

When I arrived in Europe, no man had ever touched me. At 25 years of age, I was still a virgin. As a frustrated virgin, I decided to take my revenge. Filled with fantasies, and motivated by a desire to catch up on lost time, I discovered sex, men, fucking, and gang-bangs.

According to her website, she tours France performing in public gang-bangs and actually invites viewers to sign up to have sex with her. Other websites featuring French Arabs include: Sexy Beurettes, Les Beurettes, Sexe Beurettes, Beurettes Insoumises, Video de Rebeu, Belles Maghrebines, Beurettes en Chaleur, Beurettes vicieuses, Arabe Sexy, Chaudasses du 93, Filles Arabes, Secretaire Beurette, Jolie Beurette, Photos Gratuites Beurettes, Beurettes Soumisses, Spécial Marocaine, among many others. Several of the sites stress on the words soumises and insoumises, “submissive” and “not submissive,” both of which are plays on the word Muslim, which means “one who submits.” The website Milukman includes a video of a French Arab girl who fellates five men while locked in a cage, each one coming to fruition on her face. In a video featured on Beurettes Rebelles, “Malika’s Gang-Bang in Morocco,” one of the three men who take advantage of her wears nothing but a necklace with the hand of Fatimah, a symbol which holds much significance for Muslims throughout the world.

Besides these websites, there is a huge market, particularly in Europe, for movies featuring French and North African Arabs, so much so that beurette movies have become a genre on their own, much like the Oriental, Black, and Latina-themed films produced in the United States. These films include Oriental Lover produced by Stan Lubrick, which features Arab porn stars wearing veils and turbans. Others include Beurette Academie produced by Jean-Claude Bauman and Jean-Pierre Charmontel and the series Beurettes sans tabous and A nous les petites beurettes produced by Lucy Video. The cover of the second volume this last series includes images of the crescent star, a sacred symbol of Islam, while the third volume contains images of mosques (http://www.xstarsdvdx.com/dvd-x-genre-Beurettes.html). Many of these movies openly mock the traditional morality of Muslims, such as, “They don’t care if they don’t make it to marriage as virgins. The men they will marry will not be good fuckers. They must take advantage of their freedom while they can. Of, course, their asses have not been virgin for a long time and it’s such a pleasure to see them ripped apart.” Another particularly disturbing tendency is the popularity of gang-rape films in France. Called tournantes, some of these films feature French Arab women. Considering the rampant problem of gang-rapes of Muslim girls in the slums of France, such movies can only encourage violence.

By far, the worst web site is Beurettes Rebelles where veiled women with names like Hafida, Nadia, Rachida, Lyam, Nedzma, Aicha, Karima, Djamila, and Fatima, among many others, are penetrated by all possible means. The front page of the web site includes an ad which states: “We are looking for young Arab girls to star in adult films. We pay up to 350 Euros per session” (http://www.beurettes-rebelles.com/index-beurette-sexe.html) At the current rate of exchange, that’s a maximum of 442.47 USD for the prettiest Arab girls to get violated by various men, orally, vaginally, and anally. This is only one example of pornographers who are actively recruiting young Arab women, the vast majority of which are Muslims, to act in porno films. The web site includes a disclaimer which states that:

This site is inspired by the Thousand and One Arabic Nights where veiled women are the very symbol of Oriental eroticism. Certain girls, wishing to remain anonymous until the end, simply wear to veil to remain masked. Others remove the veil during the course of filming, unveiling themselves entirely. A religious character must never be given to these veils. This site has no relation whatsoever with religion.

Evidently, none but an imbecile would believe these words. At no time is the hijab eroticized in the Thousand and One Arabian Nights, Shaykh Nefzawi’s Perfumed Garden or Harun al-Makhzumi’s Sources of Pleasure. The web site, with its Oriental imagery, Arabic writing, and superimposed images of naked Arab women masturbating next to mosques, minarets, and even oil wells, is focused exclusively with exploiting the veil fetish and the traditional taboo placed on Muslim women. The link to the web site Toutes les Beurettes is covered with Arabic writing, including the words Lillah or “For Allah” (see the links at the bottom of http://www.beurettes-rebelles.com/). Another site even included the photo of an Arab woman fingering her anus in front of the Dome of the Rock (http://www.milukman.com/beurettes/video-beurettes.html). While the woman remains, the image of al-Aqsa was removed in July of 2006. The very name of the website, Beurettes Rebelles, can be translated as “Rebellious Muslim Girls.” The producer of the site, a French pornographer known only as “Milukman,” claims that he has never had any complaints regarding his representation of porno stars with Islamic headdress. He says that he buys the scarves himself and that some of the girls come to shoot with their very own hijab on their heads. The website World Art Erotica also features veiled women stripping and prides itself at provoking Muslims (http://www.wae.org/islam/erotic_muslims.htm). The whole idea of porno stars wearing nothing but black headscarves, face-veils and burqas, is ludicrous. It is simply absurd that a woman would remove all her clothing to be gang-banged while refusing to unveil herself. As the hijab is one of the major symbols of the Muslim faith, representing virginity, chastity, and purity, allowing men to ravage young Arab women and ejaculate on their faces and veils is nothing less than a direct desecration of a sacred symbol. It is as offensive to Muslim sensibilities as it is to Christians when porn stars pose as nuns or wear crosses around their necks as they are subjected to serial sex. Since the adult film industry is dominated by “non-Jewish Jews,” as Luke Ford would call them, the intent can only be viewed as subversive, deliberately exploiting Arab and even Persian girls.



While the Persians have produced pop-singers, actresses, fashion and fitness models like Yasmine Le Bon, Catherine Bell, Elham and Ellie Ghasempour, El Samah (Elli Alibeik), Miriam Shenasi, Nazanin Azimi, Nazanin Afshin-Jam, Sara Racey Tabrizi, Sarah Shahi and Sepideh, all of whom caused scandals within their communities, within the last few years, a wave of Persian porn stars has surfaced in California. The most famous of these Iranian adult entertainers is fashion model Aylar Dianati Lie, the deposed Norwegian beauty queen, who appeared in eight titles using the alias Diana, the Persian Princess, including: 18 and Nasty Interracial 2 (Devil Films), Brand New! (Red Light District), Breakin’ ‘em in 3 (Red Light District), Cum Dumpsters 3 (Red Light District), Just over Eighteen 5 (Red Light District), Little White Chicks, Big Black Monster Dicks 17 (Jake Steed Productions), Pink Pussy Cats (West Coat Productions) and Throat Gaggers 3 (Red Light District) (http://aylardvd.com/). As a result of the scandal which ensued, she was disqualified from the Miss Norway 2004 Pageant, and returned to her work as a an aspiring singer and successful fashion model, including a scandalous nude photo shoot on the streets of Oslo. In subsequent interviews she has claimed that she was “drugged out and tricked” into doing porn. Her words have little credibility as she initially claimed that it was her non-existent twin sister had appeared in those movies. She even lied about having sex with singer Robbie Williams, thus living up to her last name: Lie. In several of the films she stars in, the directors make her reveal her Iranian origins and even get her to say “I love to make porn films” in Persian. While she claimed to be part-Persian and part-Norwegian, she is actually 100% Persian, having been born in Tehran, Iran, on February 12th, 1984. She arrived in Norway when she was 2 years old and was raised by Norwegian foster parents. Since she speaks Persian fluently, and cultivates her culture with care, one might assume that her foster parents were also Iranian. As a result of her activities, she claims to have received death threats from Islamic fundamentalists in Norway who insist that she has disgraced Islam and Muslims. Her lawyer, Hanne Gredal, confirms that threats have been made against Aylar. These were apparently reported to the police who provided her with a violence alarm. Despite this sobering experience, she spoke out in support of the rights and freedom of Muslim women and condemned the Islamic extremists who sought to take these away.

While Aylar’s sexual repertoire was limited to performing fellatio and vaginal intercourse with multiple partners, Melody Max, also known as Melody Sweet, Melanie, is particularly notorious for her hard-core antics, including lesbian scenes, anal intercourse, facials, and double penetrations. While she was born in San Jose, California, her parents are Persian and her legal name is possibly Taraneh, the Persian word for “Melody.” She has performed in over 100 adult films, working for such notorious studios as Anabolic Video Productions. Although she has appeared in Latina themed films, she is generally marketed as being Iranian. In fact, there are sufficient Persian porn stars in southern California to justify a film dedicated entirely to them: Kick Ass Chicks 24: Persian Girls, featuring Kiara Rose, Karina Kay, Porsha Blaze, Brooklyn, Stacy Carpenter, Luna, and Melody, most of which are certifiably of Iranian origin, just like Persia who appears in Anal Authority 2, Fresh Pink, Sex and Groping, and numerous other titles Karoline who appears in Real Sex Magazine 19 and Thief Girl and the Detective 2, Tanya Summers, who did Princess of Persia and many other movies in 1993, as well as Sunny, all of whom can be found by conducting advanced searches for “Persian,” “Persia” and “Iranian” on moviesbymail.com. The back cover of Persian Girls reads as follows:

The country Persia has not existed for hundreds of years. Nowadays, it's known as Iran. But who the hell wants to identify themselves as Iranian? Ever since the Ayatollah told America to go fuck itself and took our people hostage, Iranians have been out of fashion here. But let’s face it, Iranian--excuse us--Persian girls are fucking HOT! The dark eyes and hair, the Mediterranean nose, the dangerously curvy body, the humid pussy lips . . . God damn, these chicks are tastier than a plateful of hummus! Fuck the ethnic cleansing, buy this movie and enjoy the ethnic filth!
(http://moviesbymail.com/catalog/product_info.php/cPath/2_110/products_id/74403)

Whether they are viewed as nominal Muslims, cultural Muslims, bad Muslims or non-Muslims, the women who appear in these pornographic productions are presented as Arab and Persian Muslims. This is what makes them appealing. This is what makes them arousing. They are rarely ravished by Arab men, and never by Persian men. They are violated and desecrated by non-Muslim men, white and black, who are mainly nominal Jews or Christians. In adult films, black men and women never have sex together. While Jewish men and white men are free to have sex with whom they please, black men can only serve white women and black women can only be served by white men. Clearly, the purpose of porn is to divide the black man and the black woman. In the case of Muslims, the motivation is the same. The objective of Arab and Persian porn is to wage war against Muslim women, to defile them, degrade them, and discard them, to objectify them for political purposes and to assault the honor of Islam. It is thus the collective obligation of all Muslims to pressure the producers, ordering them to shut down their sites and stop producing such porn. If they fail to comply, they should be subjected to a class-action suit coordinated by Islamic associations throughout the world on charges of religious defamation.
by Jamal Graoui
Sunday Jul 16th, 2006 6:04 AM
Sexual tourism has become so widespread in Marrakesh that they are calling Morocco "the new Thailand."
by I FUCK KENNEDYS WIFE
Wednesday Dec 5th, 2007 5:51 PM
You state in your piece "...in addition to the fact that no one has been officially charged..." Sounds good, but isn't true. The following is a quote, at length, from the Washington Post article "Ex-Soldier Pleads Not Guilty to Raping Woman and Killing Family in Iraq", by Josh White, which appeared in print in this morning's issue:

"A former Army private who allegedly raped an Iraqi woman and killed her and three members of her family entered pleas of not guilty to the charges yesterday in a federal courtroom in Kentucky.

"U.S. marshals transferred Steven D. Green, 21, of Texas, from Charlotte to a courthouse in Louisville, where he made an initial appearance on one charge of rape and four charges of murder, federal prosecutors said. Patrick Bouldin, a federal public defender representing Green, said last night that Green entered not guilty pleas to all charges. Bouldin declined to comment further."

He has been arrested, charged, and arraigned, and entered a plea. He faces capital punishment or life imprisonment.

by kate harry
Sunday Mar 16th, 2008 6:26 AM
I think they should be killed. But they'l get whats coming to them if not here in this life then in the next life, Where will they run then?