left biblioblography: June 2014

Saturday, June 28, 2014

More On The Madness Of Muslims–To Compel, Or Not To Compel?

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis
militant_atheistThis should be no surprise for anyone:

Saudi Arabia Defines Atheists as Terrorists

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has shocked many by announcing in a royal proclamation that under new laws, being an atheist and spreading atheist ideas is now a terrorist action. The Interior Ministry of Saudi Arabia has issued new guide lines about what exactly defines an atheist, which includes, “calling for atheist thought in any form, or calling into question the fundamentals of the Islamic religion on which this country is based.”
The changes in law have come, the authorities in Saudi Arabia claim, to prevent dissidence and unrest within the country and to better protect their law-abiding citizens. They are specifically to prevent protests and other actions that could “harm public order.” However, it is perhaps more accurate to say that there is concern within Saudi Arabia that their citizens are traveling to Syria to aid in the fighting there, and then returning with new ideas about how a government should interact with its people. The re-definition of atheist is thought to be an easy way of tarring the names of those that the government of Saudi Arabia wishes to remove and criminalizing anyone that has thought or speech that contradicts the government’s official positions.

The effects of these changes in law, however, are not limited to new arrests that may occur in the future. They also apply to those that are currently in prison in Saudi Arabia. This could greatly alter the resolution of cases against inmates that are considered dissenters by the Saudi Arabian government. On the other hand, it has been argued that in many legal cases, these new definitions have been used for a while to convict people of slight offenses.

Saudi Arabia is understandably concerned about terrorism. After all, eighteen of the nineteen 9/11 bombers were from Saudi Arabia. This move, however, has caused outrage amongst human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch, which monitors actions taken to limit the rights of citizens. The laws will merely aid officials within Saudi Arabia that are currently carrying out systematic campaigns of fear, intimidation, panic, and investigation of their own population.

Oh, fuck that.

Saudi Arabia is a foremost exporter of Wahabbi terrorists, and is a main financial backer for Al-Qaida. And they’re ‘understandably concerned about terrorism’? The KSA has a horrific record of human rights violations – let’s never mind they treat their women like shit.

The ugly fact is…until petroleum is rendered worthless, these crazy asshats are going to do whatever they please, because in our world, it is all about paygrade.

Till the next post, then.


Sunday, June 22, 2014

More On The Madness Of Muslims: Globalizing Jihad

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis
islam-religion-of-peace-cartoonThis is so disturbing on multiple levels…

The terrifying rise of Isis: $2bn in loot, online killings and an army on the run

1. Who are they?

Isis is the (slightly confusing) English acronym for the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, a Sunni jihadist group whose sudden capture of Mosul, Tikrit and extensive swaths of Iraqi territory last week has triggered a new crisis, complete with atrocities targeting Iraqi army soldiers and volunteers. Known in Arabic as Da'ash, it grew out of the Islamic State in Iraq, an al-Qaida affiliate which, in turn, came into existence after the 2003 US-led invasion.

The leader or emir (prince) of Isis is a 43-year-old Sunni, known by his nom de guerre as Abu-Bakr al-Baghdadi, or Abu Dua. His real name is Awwad Ibrahim Ali al-Badri al-Samarrai. He was held prisoner by US forces from 2005 to 2009. US military sources have quoted him as saying when he was released from Camp Bucca in Iraq: "I'll see you guys in New York." According to some accounts he was radicalised by his experience of captivity. But others describe him as having been a firebrand preacher under Saddam Hussein's rule. He studied at the University of Baghdad, and was listed as a terrorist by the UN in 2011.

It is a measure of Baghdadi's success and charisma that Isis has become the group of choice for thousands of foreign would-be fighters who have flocked to his banner. Late last year, he announced the creation of a new group that would be merged with a rival al-Qaida affiliate active in Syria, Jabhat al-Nusra. That was disputed both by Nusra and Osama bin Laden's successor as the leader of al-Qaida "central", the Egyptian Ayman al-Zawahiri. Baghdadi, who has been described as more extreme than Bin Laden, refused an order from Zawahiri to focus the group's efforts in Iraq and leave Syria alone.

In the areas of Syria it controls, Isis has set up courts, schools and other services, flying its black jihadi flag everywhere. In Raqqa, it even started a consumer protection authority for food standards. It has established a reputation for extreme brutality, carrying out crucifixions, beheadings and amputations.

Estimates of Isis numbers range from 7,000 to 10,000. Its rank and file members are drawn from fighters who were previously with al-Qaida, some former Ba'athists and soldiers of the Saddam-era army. What is far harder to quantify – and a highly significant question – is how much support the group has from Iraq's wider Sunni community, the people who lost their power and influence when Saddam was overthrown.

"Isis now presents itself as an ideologically superior alternative to al-Qaida within the jihadi community," says Charles Lister, of the Brookings Doha Center. "As such, it has increasingly become a transnational movement with immediate objectives far beyond Iraq and Syria."

Worrisome? It gets worse:

2. What do they want and what's their link to al-Qaida?

Last February, al-Qaida disavowed Isis, saying it was "in no way connected to it", that it had not been informed of its creation, and was not responsible for its actions. Isis was deemed too extreme for al-Qaida.

The fallout between Isis and al-Qaida is not surprising. The ISI's methods and attitude – including indiscriminate bombings in civilian areas and the imposition of its harsh, ultraconservative interpretation of Islam – had long prompted debate within jihadi circles. Several of the letters found among the so-called Abbottabad papers (a stash of correspondence recovered from Bin Laden's Pakistani hideaway after his killing in 2011) question or criticise the group and warn that it might have a negative impact on al-Qaida's reputation.

In one 21-page letter, dated January 2011, the American jihadist Adam Gadahn advised the al-Qaida leadership to "declare its discontent with the behaviour … being carried out by the so-called Islamic State of Iraq, without an order from al-Qaida and without consultation". Al-Qaida didn't take Gadahn's advice. The rift only grew, spurred by the rise of Jabhat al-Nusra in Syria.

Although they are now open rivals, ironically all three groups – Jabhat al-Nusra and Zawahiri's al-Qaida on the one hand, and Isis on the other – share the same goals: the creation of an Islamic state in Syria (and Iraq) and the return of the borderless Islamic caliphate, which ended in 1924 after the fall of the Ottoman empire.

‘Too extreme for Al-Qaida?’ Can you say “Uh-oh”, boys and girls?

3. Where does Isis get its money from?

Since the end of 2011, Islamic charities and rich individuals in the gulf have been funding insurgent groups in Syria. As the role of Islamist groups within or linked to Jabhat al-Nusra and Isis has grown, many of these donors have directly or indirectly provided money that reaches jihadist organisations. According to a policy briefing by the Brookings Doha Center last month, much of the charity-based and private fundraising for the insurgency in Syria focuses on particular areas of the country, most of which involve jihadists.

Until late last year, it was possible to find the international depository banking details for donations. Now this has been replaced by mobile phone contact information and WhatsApp accounts used to coordinate donations and sometimes even physical street addresses from where the money is collected.

Isis has secured massive cashflows from the oilfields of eastern Syria, which it had commandeered in late 2012, some of which it sold back to the Syrian regime. It has also made money from smuggling raw materials pillaged in Syria as well as priceless antiquities from archeological digs. An intelligence official told the Guardian that Isis took $36m from al-Nabuk, an area in the Qalamoun mountains west of Damascus, including antiquities that are up to 8,000 years old.

Computer sticks taken from an Isis courier by Iraqi forces before the fall of the northern city of Mosul revealed that Isis – before the city's capture – had cash and assets worth $875m (£516m). After the fall of Mosul, Isis looted the banks and captured military supplies that have boosted the group's coffers to about $2bn, according to Iraqi officials.

Gulf donors support Isis out of solidarity with fellow Sunnis in Syria as President Bashir al-Assad has unleashed his military to crush opposition to his rule. The US has tried to put pressure on the governments in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar to crack down on funding for extremist groups, but these regimes say donors are justified in backing rebel forces in Syria because the US failed to act against Assad, especially when he crossed the "red line" laid down by President Barack Obama with the use of chemical weapons.

Two billion dollars is a lot of cabbage. Oil money combined with grand theft to spearhead religious fanatics. Always a bad recipe.

Now here’s the scarier part:

4. How do they use social media and how effective is their campaign?

Jihadists have always embraced technology. Ever since 9/11, the global jihad movement has used the internet to disseminate information, create its own narrative and incite supporters.

The traditional repository of this activity was password-protected forums where jihadists and their supporters could be connected in a safe environment to share information and discuss events. Most importantly, it allowed forum administrators to control the debate by deleting problematic posts and suspending troublesome users.

Web forums are less important these days, giving way to platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and Instagram. In this respect, Isis has harnessed the power of these platforms better than any other jihadist movement today. Online, it has created a brand, spread a seductive narrative and employed powerful iconography. This strategy has been responsible for inspiring thousands of men from all over the world to join the group.

But Isis also realises that it cannot control the narrative the way its predecessors once could. Social media, coupled with the ubiquity of smartphones, has meant that individual fighters can now film and upload events to the internet in an instant, often with little thought. Isis is not always happy about this. Just a few weeks ago, the group crucified two men in Manbij, Syria, for alleged apostasy (although supporters say the men were regime spies). A Spanish foreign fighter who had promised his followers a video of the spectacle had to make do with only providing pictures of the sadistic act. "Our leadership forbade anyone from filming it," he said.

This is not the first time Isis has warned its members about their online activity. Earlier this year, the group chopped off the hand of a man in Raqqa. It was a dark, torrid affair with the swordsman requiring several attempts before finally severing the man's hand. After understandable public outcry, the group has now prohibited anyone from filming similar events. It still goes on, of course, but anyone brandishing a smartphone will be censured.

In many senses, this represents the "pluralising" of the global jihad. Whereas we had one or two voices to analyse in the past, we now have hundreds. Individual fighters offer a stream of consciousness from their world, tweeting about their experiences, sharing pictures of daily life and bragging about their military accomplishments. These men are frequently unguarded and clumsy, offering an insight into parts of Isis that the group would no doubt rather keep hidden.

Putting these accounts into perspective is important. Although Isis maintains an institutional presence on social media, far more popular are the personal accounts of individual fighters or "disseminators" – sympathetic individuals (typically based in the west) who tweet in support of the group and its aims. These disseminators are among the most vociferous and zealous activists, compensating for their absence on the battlefield with their ferocious support online.

We often talk about the "social media strategy" of jihadist groups. At the official level, with institutional accounts, there is clearly a plan: to rebut criticism, promote the group's narrative, and spread its image as a benevolent vanguard. They recognise this as a necessity. But savvy organisations such as Isis are also acutely aware of the dangers of allowing individual fighters unfettered access to social media. The real challenge for these groups in future years will not be how they use the internet, but how well they can manage it.

Smart sociopaths. Oh joy.

Is this then the price we pay for accommodating these nutjobs? Driven crazy by too much sun, sand-drenched pores, little to no sex, and blindly following the teachings of a fraudulent, illiterate pedophiliac from the 5th century, do these hairy-eyed lunatics represent our future, one of a Sharia-driven government, a theocracy from the dankest dungeon of medieval times?

They will take my democracy when they pry it from my cold, dead fingers.

Ideological mad dogs are in the same slot as real ones: they need to get put down.

Till the next post, then.


Saturday, June 14, 2014

Republicans Gone Mental–The ‘Good News’ Ain’t Too Damn Good

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis

gohmertpyle“At that greatest of all spectacles, that last and eternal judgment how shall I admire, how laugh, how rejoice, how exult, when I behold so many proud monarchs groaning in the lowest abyss of darkness; so many magistrates liquefying in fiercer flames than they ever kindled against the Christians; so many sages philosophers blushing in red-hot fires with their deluded pupils; so many tragedians more tuneful in the expression of their own sufferings; so many dancers tripping more nimbly from anguish then ever before from applause." –Tertullian

As a rule, I usually have a bad attitude about my fellow citizenry. Let’s face it: they tend to be morons (hopefully, present company excluded). Between their numbness to how the rest of the world actually works, their capacity for narcissism (not exclusive to nationality, certainly), and the raging pride of anti-intellectualism, it is a monumental effort not to club some of them when they mouth outrageous stupidities.

Take Gohmert Pyle, for instance:

Louie Gohmert tells Congress the ‘good news’ that non-Christians are ‘going to Hell’

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) on Tuesday grilled a pastor who supports the separation of church and state, asking him why he did not share the “good news” that non-Christians were going to Hell.

At a House Judiciary Committee hearing about religious freedom on Tuesday, Gohmert told the Rev. Barry Lynn, who serves as the executive director for Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, that the Founders of the country — and Franklin Roosevelt — had often mentioned religion in their writings.

Lynn pointed out that he had received the Medal of Freedom from the Roosevelt Institute for his work supporting the freedom to worship.

“But that wasn’t awarded by Roosevelt himself?” Gohmert interrupted, before asking if the pastor understood that the “meaning” of being a Christian was to evangelize.

“Do you believe in sharing the good news that will keep people from going to Hell, consistent with Christian beliefs?” the Texas Republican wondered.

Lynn, however, disagreed with the congressman’s “construction of what Hell is like or why one gets there.”

“So, you do not believe somebody would go to Hell if they do not believe Jesus is the way, the truth, the life?” Gohmert pressed.

The pastor argued that people would not got to Hell for believing a “set of ideas.”

“No, not a set of ideas. Either you believe as a Christian that Jesus is the way, the truth, or life or you don’t,” Gohmert shot back. “And there’s nothing wrong in our country with that — there’s no crime, there’s no shame.”

“Congressman, what I believe is not necessarily what I think ought to justify the creation of public policy for everybody,” Lynn explained. “For the 2,000 different religions that exist in this country, the 25 million non-believers. I’ve never been offended, I’ve never been ashamed to share my belief. When I spoke recently at an American Atheists conference, it was clear from the very beginning, the first sentence that I was a Christian minister.”

“So, the Christian belief as you see it is whatever you choose to think about Christ, whether or not you believe those words he said that nobody basically ‘goes to heaven except through me,’” Gohmert concluded, ignoring the point about separation of church and state.

I’d really like to go down to Texas, find this guy, and slap the ever-livin’ crap out of him.

For one thing, maybe the Founders did spout off about religion a lot (being politicians, you have to pander to your constituency) – but they also meant for us to have slaves. Thomas Paine often quoted the bibble, but that didn’t stop him from writing one of the most scathing critiques of said tome, still a classic to this day.

Maybe Gohmert Pyle should’ve done some reading – but of course, being a Republican, Faux Noise isn’t just a TV show, it’s a repository of ‘facts’.

Pyle missed this little nugget, for instance:

“The traditional Jeffersonian principle of religious freedom was so broadly democratic that it included the right to have no religion at all – it gave to the individual the right to worship any God he chose or no god.” – FDR

And all of us could quote presidents as early as Washington, all the way up to Obama (oh, hey, I’ll be the Founding fathers never saw that one coming!) on the topic of SOCAS till we were collectively blue in the face, but Gohmert wouldn’t listen. It’s what Republicans do, after all. Pull facts out of their asses, and claim they’re covered in chocolate.

And really, this goes to something I’ve been saying for years: if anyone holding high office in this country holds allegiance to their religion above their oath to the constitution, they can’t be trusted to make objective decisions for the rest of us who do NOT adhere to their belief system.

And from what I’ve seen, that’s the bulk of the Republicans in office right now. Untrustworthy, narrow-minded bigots white good ole boys who cry ‘Limited government’ out one side of their mouths, while dictating what women can do with their bodies, defending 10 commandment statuary, insist that SOCAS is unidirectional, and other such affronts to the rational mind.

Obviously, evolution favors the idiot who shouts loudest, not the rational person who thinks.

Till the next post, then.


Saturday, June 07, 2014

Allegories Gone Wild–Baby Bodies

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis

godkilledeveryShall blow the horrid deed in every eye,. That tears shall drown the wind. – Shakespeare, Macbeth

This is so horrific, so revolting…

Tuam mother-and-baby home is a scandal of church and state

The revelations of the mass grave of babies in Tuam is horrifying and the Taoiseach must launch a full-scale national inquiry, writes Susan Lohan

Perhaps you recall the row in Leinster House in December 2012 between our Taoiseach Enda Kenny and Gerry Adams over the 1972 disappearance and murder by the IRA of widow and mother of 10, Jean McConville?

In that row, Enda Kenny said: “I would love to hear you speak the truth about some elements of your past. You might someday tell the truth about the tragedy and the remorse and about the compassion that should have been shown for Jean McConville. Maybe you might do that, Deputy Adams?”

Frankly, this is what the country now requires from our leader with regard to the disappearance, death, and dumping of 800 infants and children from the former mother-and-baby home in Tuam and for every other mass grave on or near the grounds of every other former mother-and-baby home throughout Ireland.

To that end, the Taoiseach should, without delay, declare the Government’s intentions on the scope, speed, and plan of analysis for a full-scale national inquiry into how (at best) several hundred infants and children died of entirely preventable ailments while in the so-called care of State-funded, Church-run homes, in which the Church and State co-operated in incarcerating pregnant women and girls simply because they were unmarried.

At worst, we may be viewing systemic instances of infanticide and/or neglect not just at one such home but repeated throughout others, because the people paid for and tasked with caring for these vulnerable but ultimately invisible children regarded them as sub-human because of their non-marital status.

The operators of these homes, were by and large congregations of female religious orders invited to Ireland by local archbishops (as was the case for the Bons Secours order of nuns who ran the home in Tuam), by the primate of Ireland, archbishop John Charles McQuaid, or by the Irish State itself to deal with the problem of unmarried mothers.

The main concern of the Catholic Church’s hierarchy was at all costs to prevent the emigration of these women and girls to England where their children might be adopted into protestant homes — so thus began the State-sanctioned and funded system for incarcerating unmarried, pregnant women and girls in walled institutions where their sexuality would not offend or contaminate Catholic morals.

The majority of the inmates of these wretched homes recall a harsh, cruel, punitive, dehumanizing regime where they were stripped of their clothes, names, identities, self-esteem and self-determination. A class system often prevailed so those from poorer backgrounds were given the worst jobs and remained the longest at these homes, potentially for up to four years, to work off their penance.

What most never realised was that the nuns tendered for the business of running these homes and received very generous government funding, equivalent to the average industrial wage, for each mother and child in their so-called care. In addition, they profited handsomely from the forced adoptions they transacted, which saw 97% of all non-marital children taken for adoption in 1967.

With that knowledge it is unconscionable that the youngest babies, who should at least have been breast-fed by their mothers, could have died of malnutrition as is revealed on some of the death certificates meticulously uncovered by local Galway historian Catherine Corless in relation to the Tuam grave pit.

A potential explanation can be found in the account given by the late June Goulding in her book The Light in the Window, on the Bessborough mother-and-baby home in Cork, where she worked as a midwife from 1951-52.

She recounted being shocked on discovering the nun in charge of the new mothers insisted on an ad hoc system of wet-nursing where children, rather than being fed by their own mothers, who may have been working elsewhere in the home, were instead assigned to a random lactating mother to be fed. June Goulding, a young midwife, found this practice repellent and quickly grasped that it was part of the dehumanising regime designed to break down the women so they were incapable of questioning the nuns’ supreme authority.

A closer examination of the death certificates to reveal the exact ages of the youngest babies who died and a correlation with their personal files, now in the hands of the HSE, is essential at this juncture to see if any congenital disability or frailty was noted for these children at birth and what, if any, specialist medical treatment the nuns obtained for them. If evidence exists that conditions remained deliberately untreated, we need to know.

Catherine Corless also found evidence of older children in the Tuam home dying from entirely preventable infections. Other newspapers have reproduced extracts of reports from local inspectors who noted that many of the children appeared to be showing the outward signs of malnutrition and neglect. Yet the home was allowed to continue operating. Such neglect is inexplicable as most of these homes had small holdings, growing their own produce and raising livestock.

Initial research suggests that this systemic neglect of non-marital children was not contained to just the home in Tuam and suspicions arise in relation to at least three other large mother-and-baby homes, where mortality rates topped 56%, when the national average for marital children only reached 15%.

Most astonishing among this carnage is that stories of care and nurture exist for the occasional marital child who grew up in the Tuam home. In particular, for the baby son of a widower who lived in the Tuam house for many years when his father worked at the home.

He recalls no brutality and can remember gifts brought to him by Santa Claus. Evidently, the nuns did not lack the training or knowledge of how to care for children; they deliberately chose to ignore the humanity of the “illegitimate” children in their care, which Irish society, Church and State collectively, despised.

Once again, the world watches on with incredulity to hear that several Irish government ministers, not least former children’s minister Frances Fitzgerald, have known of these mass graves, have known of the brutal circumstances of the deaths of those dumped in pits rather than interred in proper graves for some time, and yet once again the regime can find no words of horror, remorse, compassion, or explanation, and worse, seem intent on minimizing any investigation to the status of an “interdepartmental inquiry”, i.e. a superficial slew of imprecise reports.

The news that the gardaĆ­, without any exhumation of the bones, without any forensic analysis, have baldly declared that they do not intend to carry out any investigation suggests the old entrenchment of a government in fear of what might be revealed.

To our Taoiseach, I ask how long must these victims of our collective inhumanity and their families wait “to hear you speak the truth about some elements of our past”?

Or is justice to be denied the despised in death as it was in life?

Appalling. This so-called ‘religion of love’ is just as conditional as that of these people’s imaginary sky-daddy: outside the rules? Then fuck you and your baby too. All this systemic abuse, malnutrition, death? All part of their psycho god’s insane plan, no doubt.

The image of dead infants piled like cordwood is..shuddersome. Frightening. Gruesome.

Wrong. Barbaric.

Everyone responsible should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Obviously it’s a state-sanctioned church-run business, whose foundations are built on baby bones. It is almost enough to make a humanist a misanthropist.

Till the next post, then.


Sunday, June 01, 2014

More On The Madness Of Muslims: The Horrors Just Keep Piling Up…

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis
Sharia-Law-Is-Bad-For-WomenYet another fresh hell served up on sand and gravel:

Pregnant Pakistani woman stoned to death by family

A pregnant woman was stoned to death by her own family in front of a Pakistani high court on Tuesday for marrying the man she loved.

Nearly 20 members of the woman's family, including her father and brothers, attacked her and her husband with batons and bricks in broad daylight before a crowd of onlookers in front of the high court of Lahore, the police investigator Rana Mujahid said.

Hundreds of women are murdered every year in Muslim-majority Pakistan in so-called " honour killings" – carried out by husbands or relatives as a punishment for alleged adultery or other illicit sexual behaviour – but public stoning is extremely rare.

Mujahid said the woman's father has been arrested for murder and that police were working to apprehend all those who participated in the "heinous crime".

Another police officer, Naseem Butt, identified the slain woman as Farzana Parveen, 25, and said she had married Mohammad Iqbal against her family's wishes after being engaged to him for years.

Her father, Mohammad Azeem, had filed an abduction case against Iqbal, which the couple was contesting, her lawyer Mustafa Kharal said. He confirmed that she was three months pregnant.

Arranged marriages are the norm among conservative Pakistanis, who view marriage for love as a transgression.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, a private group, said in a report last month that some 869 women were murdered in "honour killings" in 2013.

But even Pakistanis who have tracked violence against women expressed shock at the brutal and public nature of Tuesday's killing.

"I have not heard of any such case in which a woman was stoned to death, and the most shameful and worrying thing is that this woman was killed in front of a court," said Zia Awan, a prominent lawyer and human rights activist.

He said Pakistanis who commit violence against women are often acquitted or handed light sentences because of poor police work and faulty prosecutions.

"Either the family does not pursue such cases or police don't properly investigate. As a result, the courts either award light sentences to the attackers, or they are acquitted," he said.

Parveen's relatives had waited outside the court, which is located on a main downtown thoroughfare. As the couple walked up to the main gate, the family members fired shots in the air and tried to snatch her from Iqbal, her lawyer said.

When she resisted, her father, brothers and other relatives started beating her, eventually pelting her with bricks from a nearby construction site, Iqbal said.

Iqbal, 45, said he started seeing Parveen after the death of his first wife, with whom he had five children.

"We were in love," he told the Associated Press. He alleged that the woman's family wanted to swindle money from him before marrying her off.

"I simply took her to court and registered a marriage," infuriating the family, he said.

Parveen's father surrendered after the incident and called the murder an "honour killing", Butt said.

"I killed my daughter as she had insulted all of our family by marrying a man without our consent, and I have no regret over it," Mujahid, the police investigator, quoted the father as saying.

Mujahid said the woman's body had been handed over to her husband for burial.

It is just horrifying to imagine that poor woman’s last moments of agony at the hands of the people who were supposed to love her.

I repeat: the barometer of a civilization is in how the women, the weak, and the children are treated.

These people are just savages. A patriarchal property system with humans as property is positively medieval. Islam is a rape and slavery culture.

And these fucks? They’re a pack of rabid dogs. They should be lined up out back and shot in the head. Unless of course, someone can prove they can be reasoned with. Which is very doubtful.

Till the next post, then.