Pages

Monday, December 05, 2011

How dumb and misled (?!) by Alwaleed & CO could a NATO top senior (S. Gass) possibly be about islamofascist Sharia and women's rights?!

These extremely intolerant  muslim scumbags are running around spreading islamofascist Sharia (i.e. violating Human Rights) under the title "tolerance" etc.!

The murdering and torturing islamofascist Saudi dictator family (don't let their oil wealth blind you) seems to be behind much of the distorted, misleading or suppressed "information" on islam that media people, politicians, educators etc vomit upon us on a daily basis. And two of its main scumbags are "king" Abdullah (who ordered the occupation, torture and killings in Bahrain as well as elsewhere incl. at home) of and his nephew Alwaleed bin Talal (the rape accused islamist Wall Street monster who has never made a single day of ccent work but tries to spread islamofascist Sharia by buying into media and education etc by the help of Western oil money).

Simon Lawrance Gass, a British diplomat and the current NATO Senior Civilian Representative in Afghanistan: "The Afgan government will esure women's rights"

Klevius comment: No, dude, it will not!Why not? Because in islam women have no real Human Rights. This is at the heart of OIC's notorious decision to abandon Universal Human Rights and replace them with islamofascist Sharia in UN (which, btw, was created to defend ALL of us against such fascisms).











Wikipedia's utter PC nonsense about women's rights in islam

Status of women under Islamic law prior to the 19th century

Islamic law grants women some legal rights they did not have under Western legal systems until the 19th and 20th centuries.[195] Noah Feldman, a Harvard University law professor, has noted:

Status of women under Islamic law since the 19th century

At this point in history the aforementioned exploration of freedom is no longer true — that is to say that whilst it is arguable that women had more extensive legal rights under Islamic law than they did under Western legal systems in the past, it is no longer true today.


Klevius correction: Would you believe this utter nonsense! This must be written by an islamofascist imam in desperation after having realized islam's miserable historical records (i.e. the, without a doubt, single worst ideological crime ever throughout 1400 years)!

An extremely childish and self-righteous tone is set by "islamic law grants women some legal rights they did not have under Western legal systems until the 19th and 20th centuries". This is of course utter nonsense and reflects
a will to whitewash evil islamofascism by trying to smear the development that stopped slavery and created the most powerful moral thought ever, i.e. what later on became the freedom part of the 1948 Universal Human Rights Declaration.

This tendentious and charlatan childish babble is then repeated as "whilst it is arguable that women had more extensive legal rights under islamic law than they did under Western legal systems in the past" under the title "Status of women under islamic law since the 19th century" is extremely polemic, not to say simply childish. Moreover, the statement doesn't contain even a trace of truth. There were never such things as "Western" or "islamic" legal "systems". And before Romans erred to Christianity their women were much freer than in any islamic society much later on. And whereas "Western" women, despite an oppressing Judaic-Christian tradition, easily managed to steer everthing from nations to armies, islam has always shown its impotency when it comes to women's rights.

Btw, the fictitious Khadija (the fictitious Mohammed's first wife who, at 40+, was a wealthy widow but already out of heterosexual attraction and child-bearing age) lost much of her power when obeying Mohammed's order to convert to islam!

So whatever you do, don't support Wikimedia before you're sure it's clean from evil islam propaganda!



No comments:

Post a Comment