Pakistani jihadists massacre innocents in Mumbai, and in response Pakistani protesters burn in effigy...India's Prime Minister

Here again we see Muslims getting much angrier over anti-jihad efforts by non-Muslims than they ever seem to get about jihad violence itself. "Pakistan protesters burn Indian PM effigy," from AFP, December 19 (thanks to JihadWatch):

Singh: Feeling the heat

Hundreds of Pakistani protesters have burnt an Indian flag and an effigy of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, underscoring mounting tensions in the wake of the Mumbai attacks.

Tribal elders, politicians and residents attended the anti-India rally in the south-western town of Chaman, in Baluchistan province on the border with Afghanistan.

"India wants to steal our water in Kashmir, and that is why it is piling pressure on Pakistan following the attacks in Mumbai," local politician Naseer Ahmed Bacha Khan told the protesters in Chaman....

Egyptian Cleric Wagdi Ghneim Demonstrates Proper Spitting in Fending Off Khunzub, the Devil Responsible for Spoiling Muslim Prayers

Arab Muslims and their trained collaborateurs (trained at Egypts Al-azhar, Medina University-actually madharusaa) are teaching Maldivians a lot of disgusting nonsense.
I have seen a lot of spitting going during Ramazan. Was that fending off Khunzub or just trying not to ingest anything?
I hope that Maldivian Muslim bloggers will enlighten me on this........

You have to sign up for free and log in...click here to learn how to spit correctly to fend off Khunzub!!!!

Rights experts attack Islam defamation drive at UN

The United Nations should stop passing resolutions, largely promoted by Islamic countries, calling for laws against "defamation of religion", according to international experts on freedom of expression.

The four experts -- from Africa, Europe, Latin America and the United Nations itself -- said such laws were often used to shield religious leaders from criticism and to suppress religious minorities and non-believers.

"International organisations, including the United Nations General Assembly and Human Rights Council, should desist from the further adoption of statements supporting the idea of 'defamation of religion'," they declared.

The statement was issued on the website of the pan-European security organisation, the OSCE, as clear signs emerged in Geneva that Islamic states and their backers aim to get a call for a defamation ban into a key U.N. document on racism.

The experts were Frank La Rue, a Guatemalan who is the Human Rights Council's investigator for freedom of expression, Hungarian writer Miklos Haraszti of the OSCE, South African jurist Faith Pansy Tlakula of the African Union, and Catalina Botero of the Organisation of American States.

"The concept of 'defamation of religions' does not accord with international standards regarding defamation, which refer to the protection of reputation of individuals," they said.

"Religions, like all beliefs, cannot be said to have a reputation of their own," they added. Limits on freedom of expression should only be used to bar advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred amounting to inciting violence.

Countries which had such limits to protect religion, they said, had often used them "to prevent legitimate criticism of powerful religious leaders and to suppress the views of religious minorities, dissenting believers and non-believers."

The 47-member U.N. Human Rights Council -- where Islamic countries backed usually by most African states, Russia, China and Cuba have a built-in majority -- passes resolutions annually calling governments to act against religious defamation.

The U.N.'s General Assembly, where the same informal alliance operates on the issue, has adopted similar non-enforceable resolutions each year since 2005, although this year support for them has waned.

Islamic states say the resolutions are not aimed at imposing drastic limitations on free speech but at stopping publications like those of Danish cartoons showing the Prophet Mohammed that sparked bloody protests by Muslims in some countries.

But a discussion paper from Algeria's envoy to the U.N. in Geneva setting out ideas to be included in a U.N. declaration on racism suggests "seriously or gratuitously offensive attacks on matters regarded as sacred by the followers of any religion" ought to be banned by any state.
The declaration is to be issued at a U.N. conference in Geneva in April to update an earlier anti-racism document issued by a conference on racism in Durban, South Africa, which some countries and rights bodies said was marred by anti-Semitism. (Editing by Jonathan Lynn and Jon Boyle)

From Reuters

EGYPT: 97% of Married women undergo Genital Mutilation

The Arab missionaries and their trained local collaborateurs (I mean the Adhaalath beardos and other assorted wannabe-sheiks) have been very successful. How far will copying the arabs go?

Islamic missionaries from Egypt have been coming every year to give "Waul" to Maldivians.

Genital mutilation is on the rise in Maldives. Will we attain 100% mutilation in our effort to make Maldives a 100% Islamic nation?

(ANSAmed) - CAIRO, JUNE 27 - A total 97% of the married Egyptian women has suffered genital mutilation, and the area where this practice is most frequent (99%) is in the governorship of Qena, in the south of the country. In Matrouh, on the Mediterranean coast towards Libya, the lowest percentage (25%) is registered. According to the study 'National Project Against Female Circumcision', held by the Minister of Health in cooperation with the United Nations DAG Programme, the percentage is lower in the urban centres (94.6%), higher in the country (98.8%), while in the Sinai it decreases to 37%, Egyptian independent daily 'Al Masri el Yom' reports. Among uneducated women, 99.1% have suffered the circumcision; among educated women (secondary school or university), the percentage gets down to 94%. The percentage of women in favour of the circumcision is 85% in Upper Egypt compared to 50% in the North; 50% of the educated women and 87.5% of the uneducated women are also in favour. Two days ago the Chief Mufti of Egypt said that the "harmful tradition of the female circumcision is prohibited by Islam", after the death of an 11-year old girl following an excessive dose of anesthetic given during the operation. The wife of the Egiptian president, Suzanne Mubarak, who is in charge of the government's consulting commission for Maternity and Childhood, launched today a "national campaign against female circumcision". (ANSAmed).

The Qur'an's Sex-Slave Problem: Are slave-girls in Islam equivalent to animals?

Either concubines are on the same level with dogs and donkeys, or Allah's "perfect" book has a serious flaw.

Many are now aware that the Koran—that is, Allah’s word—permits, not just polygamy, but forced concubinage (sex with captive women), according to Koran 4:3: “Marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice, then only one, or what your right hands possess [captive women taken in war].” There is, however, an interesting, and very telling, linguistic aspect to this verse that is often overlooked—or intentionally obscured. The Arabic states: “Ankahu [marry]…ma [what] malakat [possess] aymankum [your right hands].”

Oddly enough, the Arabic relative pronoun used to indicate these captive women is "ma": ma malakat aymankum, literally, “what your right hands possess” (see Shakir’s acclaimed English translation which most literally translates this). In Arabic, when one refers to a rational being (i.e., a human), the word used is min, which means “who(ever)”; ma, on the other hand, refers only to things or animals—trees, rocks, dogs and cats—very much similar to the English “it.” Thus, in proper Arabic the phrase might have been min malakat aymankum: “who(ever) your rights hands possess.”

For long I assumed this was but a stylistic matter. However, the highly revered Islamic scholar al-Qurtubi (d.1273) also makes this observation in vol. 5, p.12 of his authoritative 20-volume Tafsir Al Koran (Exegesis of the Koran). He points out that members of the human race should be referred to with min (who), whereas only “inanimate objects” or “brute beasts” should be referred to with ma (what).

Does this suggest that the Koran’s Arabic—touted as the most perfect Arabic—is flawed? Of course, no Muslim would allow for that. Nor need they, as this phenomenon (portraying concubines as non-human) accords well with a number of hadiths that place females and animals in the same category. Musnad Ibn Hanbal (vol. 2, p. 2992), for example, records Muhammad saying “Women, dogs, and donkeys annul a man’s prayer.” Indeed, in Qurtubi’s same Tafsir (vol.15, p.172), after examining such hadiths, he writes, "A Woman may be likened to a sheep—even a cow or a camel—for all are ridden.”

From Jihad Watch

'Gender-Equality' Declared UnIslamic Term...

The Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) has declared the term ‘gender equality’, used in Section 7(a) of the National Commission for Status of Women Ordinance of 2000, ‘vague and un-Islamic’ and called for its repeal.

In its review of laws report for 2008, which is yet to be presented to the government, the CII said that instead of using ‘ambiguous’ terms, Islamic principles of equity and justice should be implemented in letter and spirit in gender-related matters.

The council, which had opposed the constitution of the NCSW, further recommended that the commission’s recommendations in Section 7(b) of the ordinance should be “in consonance with established Islamic laws”.

The council declared that the repeated use of term ‘gender equality’ as an ultimate target by the commission was ‘impractical thinking’.

It explained that the concept of ‘gender equality’ was impracticable because of ‘distinct differences’ in anatomy and physical and mental capabilities. The CII described the term as ‘absurd and un-Islamic’.
...
ISLAMABAD, Dec 16:

Source

Arab Education System is Archaic and Medieval

Unless the Arab states drastically change their education systems, they will stay backward, weak, and a breeding machine of parrots and fanatics. In a program on the current Arab education system on the German-French TV, Arte, 1 December, 2007, Sheikh Saleh Al Fozan, a leading member of the Saudi Council of Senior Ulema (religious leaders), said, “Some of our own people want us to become like the infidels, like the Jews and Christians, Allah condemn them. They want us to renounce our Godly religious beliefs and follow in their footsteps by changing our educational curriculum that is base on the Koran and the teachings of the Prophet, peace be upon him. A parrot is one who repeats the demands of the enemies of Islam that we should stop teaching the Koran so that we abandon our faith.” This came in the wake of publishing the UN Arab Human Development Report 2006 authored by a group of distinguished Arab intellectuals.

Commenting on pressure form the United States on Saudi Arabia since Sept. 11 to reform its educational system, Sultan Al Saud, the Saudi Crown Prince told the Saudi TV on 16 Sept. 2005, “America and the rest of the infidel world should go to hell. We are not going to change our education system which is based on the best religion of the world. We are proud of being Muslims and having an Islamic education system.”

Both the Al Saudi clan which has ruled over Saudi Arabia since its foundation in the 1940s and the religious establishment dominated by Wahabbism (a kind of radical, fanatic, simplistic interpretation of Islam) have used dogmatic Islam to enforce their regime and run the country.

At Saudi schools and universities, words like “alcohol, pigs, and prostitutes” are none existent in English language books. The “evolution theory” is not mentioned or taught at all. “Jewish people” in all books and levels are condemned as “enemies of Allah”. The Western world is presented as “decadent”, “corrupt”, and “atheist”.

In addition to an archaic education system which lacks critical thinking and research, more than 60 million Arab adults remain illiterate, including 55% of all Arab women.

In almost all Arab schools and universities, students are not allowed to question what they are taught. They are expected to accept everything they read and hear from their teachers and memorize to a great extent what they are taught. Critical thinking is penalized and students are patronized. In fact, the Arab regimes have rejected Western methods of education such as critical thinking and liberal thought. They fear that these methods could spawn critics who would question the existence of the ruling regimes.

Students face other constraints. There are little, if any, extra-curricular activities, nothing to exercise their fine motor skills or hand and eye coordination. Classrooms are poorly-equipped and dull.

Private schools and universities are by and large not much better off. Graham Collins who used to work as course coordinator at the Gulf University for Science and Education (GUST) in Kuwait told me, “GUST is supposed to follow the curriculum of Missouri University. But it does not. The owners of this university replicate the same curricula and teaching methods used by traditional Arab universities. The whole thing is a farce. The façade is American but the content is very Arab. GUST and other local universities are degraded to diploma mills.”

Parroting what they were taught in Arab schools? And they have their own Ministry now!

A despotic education system coupled with dogmatic religious teaching in all Arab countries have produced passive learners, simply parrots. The majority of university graduates are appointed as teachers who follow in the steps of their former teachers. The Arab education system is moving in a vicious circle.

Continue reading here

Blind Man Turned Away from Restaurant as Guide Dog Offends Muslim Staff...

Alun Elder-Brown, a recruitment executive, said he was left feeling "like a piece of dirt" after being barred from bringing the animal into Kirthon Restaurant in Tunbridge Wells, Kent, on religious grounds.
The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association said the decision was illegal under the Disability Discrimination Act and Mr Elder-Brown, 51, is now considering suing the establishment in The Pantiles.
It follows a series of successful prosecutions of Muslim taxi drivers who refused to carry guide dogs in their cars because they considered them unclean on religious grounds.
Mr Elder-Brown was taking his girlfriend out to celebrate her birthday with her five year-old daughter last week when he was told he would have to leave his dog, Finn, tied up outside.
He showed a card issued by the Institute of Environmental Health Officers certifying he and his dog were allowed into any premises but an argument ensued and the owners threatened to call the police if he did not leave.
"It was humiliating and degrading, especially as there were a lot of people around me," he said.
"I was made to feel like a piece of dirt. They told me I couldn't come in because it was against their religious beliefs to have a dog in the restaurant.
"They then said I could leave Finn tied up outside. I stayed calm but when they threatened to call police I left."
He added: "It was horrible. It put a dampener on the whole celebration."
Under the Disability Discrimination Act it is illegal to refuse to serve a disabled person of give them a diminished level of service because of their disability.
Chris Dyson of Guide Dogs for the Blind said: "We are extremely concerned and disappointed that Alun was refused access to this restaurant.
"We very much hope that this restaurant will reconsider its decision and get in touch with the charity so that we can give them a better understanding of their requirements under the law and explain the important role that the guide dog plays for Alun."
The restaurant's owner, Amenur Abdussamad, was not immediately available for comment.

From The Telegraph

A blind man with his guide dog

Australian Muslims want Apartheid!

The Islamic community plans to build a Muslim-only housing development and recreation centre as part of a $10 million complex in Rivervale.

Islamic Council of WA spokesman Rahim Ghauri said the group had an architect-designed concept plan for a six-storey housing development, an underground carpark and a hall for weddings, conferences and religious and recreational activities.

Mr Ghauri rejected claims the housing would further isolate sectors of the Muslim community from mainstream society, claiming the venue would be used to teach Islamic youth how to become good Australian citizens.

And the council’s religious adviser, Abdul Jalil Ahmad, said it was useful for different religious or ethnic groups to have separate residential enclaves so their customs and exotic cooking smells did not offend neighbours.

“It’s ideal for any ethnic group because you can deal with each other in an easier way,” Mr Ahmad said.

“In South Africa, because of apartheid, all different communities were set up and it worked well. It kept people separate. We can be together in terms of our contribution to the wider community.”

Maybe many Maldivian students in WA will move there!!!

Continue reading here at The West Australian.

Real Men Do it Standing Up !?!!

If only devout Muslims were as interested in stopping terrorism as they are in figuring out how Allah wants them to urinate. . . What a wonderful world this may be...

.....

In most mixed sex households, the toilet seat up or down dilemma is often a subject of controversy.

Most often a male urinates while standing. Frequently, the male is expected by the female member to ensure the seat is always lowered after use, and criticize him if he forgets. There are generally two justifications:
1. The seat is used in the lowered position ¾ of the time anyway

2. The female will fall into the bowl while trying to sit down There is debate over whether each justification is fair or reasonable. (source)

Anand Venkataraman even conducted an academic study of the subject:

...

No such problems in Muslim households: the toilet seat is always down. Lucky Islamic women, who don’t have such aggravations in their lives. OK, so they are beaten, raped and often kept prisoner in their own home, but hey, what’s that compared with the toilet dilemma!

Come to think of it, Muslim men also wear long flowing robes. Again, just like a woman!

Could it be that Muslim men really want to be women, but can’t admit to it, so compensate by growing long beards and being overly aggressive?

We hear a lot about penis envy.

.....

Could it be that Muslim men suffer from vagina envy?
Is that why they insist on cutting out all of a woman’s external genitalia?

........

Read the complete article here at Australian Islamist Monitor

Muslim Preacher: Christmas 'The Pathway to Hellfire'...

The lawyer, who recently praised the Mumbai terror attacks, urged all Muslims to reject traditional Christmas celebrations, claiming that they are forbidden by Allah.

The 41-year-old shocked Christians and even those of his own faith by branding yuletide festivities as "the pathway to hellfire".

Choudary, who is chairman of the Society of Muslim Lawyers, ruled out all celebrations, including having a Christmas tree, decorating the house or eating turkey.

In the sermon posted on an Islamic website, he said: "In the world today many Muslims, especially those residing in western countries, are exposed to the evil celebration Christmas.

"Many take part in the festival celebrations by having Christmas turkey dinners.
"Decorating the house, purchasing Christmas trees or having Christmas turkey meals are completely prohibited by Allah.

"Many still practise this corrupt celebration as a remembrance of the birth of Jesus.
"How can a Muslim possibly approve or participate in such a practice that bases itself on the notion Allah has an offspring?

"The very concept of Christmas contradicts and conflicts with the foundation of Islam.

"Every Muslim has a responsibility to protect his family from the misguidance of Christmas, because its observance will lead to hellfire. Protect your Paradise from being taken away – protect yourself and your family from Christmas."

Choudary is Principal Lecturer at the London School of Shari'ah and a follower of the Islamist militant leader Omar Bakri Mohammed.

Earlier this year, he led a meeting at the heart of the area where the liquid bombers lived, which warned of a British September 11.

From The Telegraph

Exposed Nipple Leaves Islamists Hot and Bothered (London)...

The image shows a woman in a full-length burkha – but instead of having a cut-out for the eyes, the cut-out exposes one of her nipples.

The artwork has already been condemned by the Union of Muslim Organisations of the UK and Ireland (UMO) as "blasphemous, cheap porn".

A spokesman said: "At a time when tensions are already heightened, gallery owners shouldn't be exhibiting artwork like this - it's offensive, inflammatory. and degrading to Muslim women.

"Photographer Yeon Lee, defended her image, titled Seeing is Believing, claiming it "highlights the ways women are categorised in male-dominated societies".

But the UMO said the image could spark similar angry scenes to those in Denmark in September 2005 when a newspaper printed cartoons of the Prophet Muhammed portraying him as a terrorist.

He said: "People will protest. It's blasphemous – the artist just wants to make some money – and it's not helpful in this current climate."Gallery owner James Freeman, who is exhibiting the image as part of a wider collection, called Five Years, from emerging international artists in North London", agreed the image had "shock value".

But he denied it was blasphemous.He said: "It's not ridiculing, or ironic, or degrading or perjorative. I don't think you could perceive any blasphemy in this.

To see photo of exposed nipple that has Islamists hot and bothered click here

The Racist, Arab-Supremacist Nature of Islam and non-Arab Muslims

There are many interesting ironies associated with Islam; the one that used to catch my eye most was that women, who are disdained in Islam, tend to be more devout Muslims than men. However, the irony that I now find even more interesting is that the non-Arabs in general tend to be more devout Muslims than the Arabs.

The Arabs commonly say: Aazana Allahu bil Islam, which means that 'Allah has made us (the Arabs) valued because of Islam'. The Arabs point of view is straight forward; they were insignificant Arab tribes in the desert of Arabia who later ruled a vast Islamic empire. I don’t think there are many Arabs who question the accuracy of the above statement; even some Arab atheists tend to agree with it despite their belief that Mohammed was a liar and brutal gang leader. However, the subject that the Arabs are far better off without Islam is beyond the scope of this article. But the question that springs to my mind whenever I hear the above Arabic adage is: can any other Muslim nation claim that Allah made them valued because of Islam? Can the Indians or the Iranians, who had a formidable empire in the seventh century, make such a claim?

Islam, a language-based religion

Islam is the only religion in the world that is completely based on a language. Islam can only survive in an Arabic language environment, if the Arabic language disappears, so does Islam. Learning the Arabic language is mandatory to all Muslims in order to read the Quran and perform the Islamic rituals.

Nowadays, almost all Muslims claim that their devotion to Islam is because they are convinced of its authenticity and dismiss the fact that they inherited it from their parents as a sheer coincidence. The Muslims’ claims suggest that they researched and studied their religion and found it to be flawless. Studying Islam entails reading the Quran carefully, in Arabic, and concluding that it is too good to be authored by humans, therefore, must be divine. Oddly enough, if you ask those ‘convinced’ Muslims for an explanation of any of the Quran’s contradictions or blunders they would refer you to Muslim scholars.

I explained in previous articles that when the Arabs had a free choice they did not like the Quran. After fourteen centuries, we still do not have convincing explanations to any of the hundreds of errors that litter the Quran. In addition to the errors, the Quran also contains some serious weaknesses in style that would not be acceptable by any decent author. It does not matter how good some verses are because the unprejudiced reader would never be convinced of the Quran in the presence of any error.

It is perfectly possible for an ordinary person who speaks little Arabic or no Arabic at all, to read the Quran and identify its contradictions or mistakes. That kind of critical assessment is within the reach of any impartial person who reads the Quran with judicious objectivity. However, it is not possible for the same person to read a few verses and claims they are so nicely composed and must be divine. Such an assertive conclusion depends on personal taste and requires thorough knowledge of the Arabic language and its literature, which most of the non-Arabs do not have. I am afraid that the claims of the non-Arab Muslims to be convinced of Islam are false claims that hide the uncomfortable reality that they believe in Islam because they take the Arabs’ word for it.

The language issue and the Quran

The Quran was revealed, or rather released, in the Quraysh language, which was the Arabic language as spoken by the Arabs of Mecca including Mohammed. Throughout Mohammed’s stay in Mecca there were no language issues at all because Mohammed had only to deal with his own clan who spoke his own language and in his own dialect. The dialect issue only surfaced after Mohammed assumed power in Yathrib and started to deal with the Arab tribes in distant regions of Arabia. Even though Arabic was spoken throughout Arabia, but different regions had different dialects, as would be expected in a country as vast as Arabia. It didn’t fit the Arabs’ tribal pride to be asked to speak another tribe’s dialect when it comes to reading the Quran. Mohammed didn’t want this issue to stop the Arabs from joining him so he allowed each tribe to read the Quran as they please in their own dialects. As with everything else, it was Allah who whispered to Mohammed to demonstrate that flexibility and give his permission to the tribes. The divine gesture worked well and preserved the national identity of each Arab tribe.

However, the above gesture and divine flexibility didn’t extend to other nations, it was a privilege only to the Arabs. All other nations must learn Arabic to read the Quran and practice Islam. At this point, it is remarkable to note that while the early Arabs felt offended by just being asked to speak a dialect other than own, today’s Muslims are happy to read the Quran, not in a different dialect, but in a completely foreign language, without feeling offended! The non-Arab Muslims accept this obvious bias towards the Arabs as a natural part of life.

This association between the Arabic language and Islam was a kind of divine windfall to the Arabs; they automatically became leaders in the world of Islam just because they can speak their own language! Even though other Muslim nations may produce some very good scholars, but unless those scholars learn the Arabic language perfectly well they won’t be highly credited in the Islamic world.

Signs of selfishness, tribalism and racism in Mohammed’s behaviour

Judged by the number of personal privileges that Mohammed granted himself, he was probably the most selfish leader in history. The following is only a small sample of those privileges:

• Mohammed, through the Quran, granted himself the right to marry as many women as he wished but restricted the other Muslims to marry only four women. In addition Mohammed granted himself the right to have sex with women who offer themselves to him.

• Mohammed granted himself the right to marry other Muslims’ widows but declared, through the Quran, that it is a sin for other Muslims to marry his own wives (after his death).

• Mohammed declared that his shares from any war booty were 20%, the remaining 80% to be shared by the rest of the Muslims.

• Mohammed considered himself to be the first among all human beings including the previous prophets. According to him, he was second only to Allah. As a matter of fact there was no difference between Islam and the other religions already practiced in Arabia except that in Islam Mohammed added his name next to Allah’s name.

• Mohammed’s egocentricity extended to his immediate family, called aal Mohammed, for whom Muslims are required to pray in every Islamic prayer.
  
  

Mohammed’s Tribalism

Even though Mohammed’s own tribe, Quraysh, despised him and fought wars against him and did nothing to promote Islam, the evidence is that Mohammed preferred them to the rest of the Arabs. In fact, Mohammed preferred the tribe of Quraysh to the tribes of Yathrib who supported him, converted to Islam and fought on his side. Mohammed used the Arabs of Yarhrib, known as the Aws and Khazraj tribes, for his purposes but neither he nor any of his companions respected them. The Muslims frequently claim that there were social or political motives behind some of Mohammed’s marriages, which he used as a tool to strengthen his ties with the various tribes. From this perspective, it is noteworthy that Mohammed did not bother to marry from the Aws or Khazraj tribes. Mohammed preferred Quraysh, so did his influential companions, who all came from Quraysh. It is striking that while the Aws and Khazraj completely disappeared from history, the Quraysh Arabs ruled the Islamic empire (khilafa) until 1258 AD and they continue to rule some states up to our time. Mohammed believed that the Aws and Khazraj were politically too naive and too weak to be trusted to govern. Mohammed’s attitude towards the Aws and Khazraj reminds me with an interview I watched about ten years ago on Aljazeera in which the Islamic cleric AbuHamza was asked: why do you live in the west if you disrespect it that much? His answer was: “we Muslims consider the west like a toilet, we visit it because we need to, but once we finish we leave.”

Continue reading here at Islam Watch

Inferiority of Women Established by Science, Says Muslim Cleric...

Yemenite Cleric Abd Al-Majid Al-Zindani Presents "Scientific" Proof that Women Cannot Talk and Remember Simultaneously.

Following are excerpts from an interview with Yemenite cleric Abd Al-Majid Al-Zindani, which aired on Iqra TV on October 23, 2008:

Abd Al-Majid Al-Zindani: Allah said, with regard to women bearing witness: "If two men are not available, then a man and two women, such as you choose as witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her." Some heretics – communists and other atheists – ridiculed [this verse], saying: How come a man's testimony equals that of two women? They used this to mock [the Muslims]. The Muslims used to respond that women are subject to menstruation, when their endurance and mental capacity for concentration are diminished. When a woman witnesses a killing or an accident, she becomes frightened, moves away, and sometimes even faints, and she cannot even watch the incident.

[...]

The American Time magazine, in its July 31, 1995 issue, published this picture from research about the brain functioning of men and women. This is the ma... This is the female brain, and this is an image of the male brain. What do we see? We find that in the case of women, this area... And there is another here... Two areas in a woman's brain are activated when she talks. As we can see, there are many centers of speech in a woman's brain. There is a center in each lobe, while in the case of a man, there is only one center, here. The opposite center does not operate during speech, because it is busy remembering. Both men and women have centers for speech and for memory. In the case of men, the center for speech is here, while the center for memory is here. When a man talks, his center for speech is active, and when he remembers something, his center for memory is active. On the other hand, when a woman wants to talk, she puts both centers into action. This may give us an explanation why women are more talkative.

What is the outcome of this? When a woman talks, she uses the part of the brain that contains the memory, because in the case of women, both centers function for speech and memory. So when a woman talks, she might use the part of the brain containing the memory for talking – and that's it, the data is lost. Therefore, if we need the testimony of women in cases pertaining to human lives, property, honor, or the stability of justice, we must take into consideration this fact of life in the nature of women.

source

What really happened in Yathrib?

Some Maldivians have no clue about what really happened in Yathrib ( renamed Medina). - "the Prophet Mohamed that I’ve read about and come to know of did co-exist with Jews in 7th century Yathrib."



But the Mumbai terrorists took Muhammad's words to heart: "The Hour not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say " O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him." - Bukhari 52:177