If you take uncovered meat and put it on the street, on the pavement, in a garden, in a park, or in the backyard, without a cover and the cats eat it, then whose fault will it be, the cat’s, or the uncovered meat’s ?
The uncovered meat is the disaster. If the meat was covered the cats wouldn’t roam around it. If the meat is inside the fridge, they won’t get it. If the woman is in her boudoir, in her house and if she’s wearing the veil and if she shows modesty, disasters don’t happen.
Satan sees women as half his soldiers. You’re my messenger in necessity, Satan tells women you‘re my weapon to bring down any stubborn man. There are men that I fail with. But you’re the best of my weapons.
To their credit, the BBC, who it would be fair to say are institutionally biased against rape, report the cleric's remarks.
They also report that "Australia's Muslims fear backlash"
The BBC have reported Muslim backlash fears after Moscow subway bombs, the 9/11 attacks (several reports), a French factory explosion, the Washington sniper attacks, the Iraq war, Madrid bombings, the Theo Van Gogh murder, the London bombings (several stories), the Mumbai train blasts and a plot to blow up airliners.
What's that gag, by Mark Steyn, I believe? "Muslims fear backlash after tomorrow's attack".
.... rather, "Muslims fear backlash after tomorrow's train bombing".
Its coming up to the first anniversary of the so-called "Sydney beach riots". I watched the news reports as these riots developed. After several days of violence perpetrated by Middle Eastern youths and ignored by the police, a load of white youths decided they had enough and retaliated.
The BBC, operating in typical white liberal guilt mode, has the story exactly 180 degrees wrong.
"The city is approaching the first anniversary of the ugly race riots on Cronulla beach last December, when white youths attacked people of Middle Eastern background - sparking a number of retaliatory attacks."
Strange, when Muslims do something crazy it is forbidden to retaliate against them. When old whitey does something (i.e. not wear a bin liner with a tiny slit to look out of) suddenly it is different, and they are fair game.
Australia should put this crazy b*stard's arse on a plane to the nearest Muslim hell-hole ASAP.
If you want to read the full speech by the Sheik its in The Australian 28th Oct.:
There is his enlightening comments upon Mohammadan courtship rituals:
"But in the event of adultery, the responsibility falls 90 per cent of the time with women. Why? Because the woman possesses the weapon of seduction. She is the one who takes her clothes off, cuts them short, acts flirtatious, puts on make-up and powder, and goes on the streets dallying. She is the one wearing a short dress, lifting it up, lowering it down, then a look, then a smile, then a word, then a greeting, then a chat, then a date, then a meeting, then a crime, then Long Bay Jail, then comes a merciless judge who gives you 65 years."
Then there was his less publicised remarks on Christianity:
"Also, in the same context, what we heard yesterday in the verse from Al-Ma'ida, in its end, what Jesus said. "And when God asked: Oh Jesus, son of Mary! Didn't you say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside God?" He said, "Be glorified." He did not even want to repeat the accusation. He didn't want to repeat the same word. He said "Be glorified. It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then you knew it. You know what is in my mind and I do not know what is in your mind? You alone know what is hidden."
We come to the end of the verse, "I only told them what You bade me. I said, 'Serve God, my Lord and your Lord. I watched over them while living in their midst, and ever You took me to Yourself, You have been watching them. You are the witness to all things'." We come to the closing of the verse, "If You punish them, they surely are Your servants. And if You forgive them, surely You are forgiving, merciful?" Not at all.
Why wasn't the verse ended with forgiveness and mercy? Because there is a crime of polytheism. God does not forgive polytheism, and forgives everything else. These people said that God took a son, these people said that divinity united with man, and the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and they will see mercy? They will never see it, not him or his father. Not dad or mum. No one will see mercy, of those who believe in polytheism. Our Master Jesus knows that the crime is big. And there is no appeal for it. No way the judgment can be appealed. And they will never have intercession on the Day of Judgment, because polytheism is a great injustice. If it was a simple matter, the verse would have ended with "For God is forgiving, merciful". But it ended with "If You punish them, they surely are Your servants. And if You forgive them." They'll never see it. You will be wise, You will rule, then they'll cop it.
Those who disbelieve amongst the people of the Book and the polytheists, where will they go? Surfers Paradise? Gold Coast? Where? To the fire of hell. And not part-time, they'll be in it for eternity. What are these people? The most evil of God's creation on the face of earth. The issue is clear. So, the verse should be ended with what? "For God is mighty, wise." Not "For God is forgiving, merciful". In regard to polytheism with our Master Jesus, and in regard to the judgment on those who steal, rob and mess everything, God is mighty, wise. "The man thief and woman thief." Why, my Lord. I am wondering, why didn't the Koran say "The woman thief and man thief, cut off their hands"? While there is "The adulteress and the adulterer, whip them". Why didn't He say, "The adulterer and the adulteress"? It's because they are wise words. The reason for putting the man ahead of the woman in the issue of stealing is because it is the wisdom. This is reality. This is the truth.
Post a Comment