| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Caption: "You can't stop them. But you can protect yourself. Your creator has your best interests at heart."
France 24 has posted this image, which is circulating via e-mail in Egypt to promote the use of the hijab and niqab by Egyptian women. The message is the same as that of Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali, who in 2006 outraged Australians by comparing un-veiled women to uncovered meat.
As usual, the notion of men having the responsibility to control themselves, or even being able to do so, is completely absent.
Posted by Marisol at June 29, 2008 10:59 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
I've tried dozens of times, in several forums, to steer conversations about masking of women in public to the real issues: concealment of identity, the implied license to rape unmasked women.
But the MSM and other Islamic apologists still treat masking as some kind of fundamental right. Every day is Halloween in Islam.
Posted by: Beagle![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at June 29, 2008 11:06 AM
Yes the uncontrollable Islamic men. They just have that barbaric and violent urge to rape women and blow up infidels. To which the blame always lies on the women and the infidels, after which we are led to believe that the Koran and Islamic doctrine have nothing to do with it.
Posted by: savsiv at June 29, 2008 11:15 AM
I love the way the advert compares Muslim men to flies which spread disease! LOL
Posted by: Jerusalem Posts at June 29, 2008 11:24 AM
So according to Muslims, we should be warned that Muslim males are just like flies.
Sounds about right. Do they mean morally, intellectually or spiritually, I wonder. Do insects have morals? How does this help to fight islamophobia? Have to think about that.
Ladies, don't go out without your flyspray!
Posted by: StephenA55 at June 29, 2008 11:28 AM
the flies probably forceably removed the wrapper...
Posted by: pulsar182 at June 29, 2008 11:33 AM
Or how men are compared to wild beasts around uncovered meat. Women are to be devoured, or plowed, or hidden. Women are nothing but toilets and punching bags in dar ul islam.
Posted by: Jewel Atkins at June 29, 2008 11:37 AM
"Slaves of Allah" ideally, the men are absolved of responsibility to hold themselves in check, and after all, it is those diabolically seductive women who, merely by existing, create all the problems in the first place. It is up to men to make sure, therefore, that they, those men, are not subject to the seduction of women by making sure they are covered up. If those Muslimahs see the point, recognize how dangerous they are to Muslim men, fine. And if they fail to see the point, well, then, Muslim men, doing the bidding of Allah, have ways.
As for non-Muslim women, they are Infidels and therefore, of course, permanently inferior. And their refusal to veil is par for the Infidel course, and therefore they get, from Muslim men, exactly what they, deserve. See the statistics on rape in European states that have made a fetish of tolerance, a diseased tolerance, a tolerance for the greatest threat to real tolerance, but still, a "tolerance" of which so many continue to be so stupidly enthusiastic. Start with Sweden, start with Norway. Why do Muslims, who make up, at this point, less than 3-4% of the population, make up 70% of the rapists? Could it be the Belief-System of Islam, and the permanent primitiveness that it encourages, whether the Muslim is a poor villager in Waziristan or a fabulously rich daggers-and-dishdasha Arab financier, with his house in Belgravia, his estate in Surrey, his yacht off Marbella?
It could. It is.
Posted by: Hugh at June 29, 2008 11:47 AM
Oh no no . They ( women in such mo. countries )are like foot wear which they wear as and when they like . Lolly pops at least taste sweet.
Posted by: Kash225 at June 29, 2008 11:57 AM
.....after which we are led to believe that the Koran and Islamic doctrine have nothing to do with it.
Posted by: savsiv at June 29, 2008 11:15 AM
And that "Islam is Peace": http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010917-11.html
.. right after 9/11. Go figure!
at June 29, 2008 12:21 PM
thank you for this. i hope you don't mind that i re-posted the find on my site. the only thing i did a bit differently is stated that it is an Egyptian "Islamist" email campaign... We DO have some non-muslim Christian/Secular friends in Egypt (and throughout the world) who hate this stuff as much as we do.
Posted by: David Appletree at June 29, 2008 1:35 PM
http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=mny2t3jmyix&thumb=4
Posted by: spudly at June 29, 2008 1:39 PM
Sad really. You can look on LiveLeak and see video of Muslim men in Islamic countries sexually harrassing Muslim women who are veiled and trying to get away from the men.
WHATS THEIR EXCUSE?!
Posted by: TS at June 29, 2008 1:48 PM
Oh and also, does this mean if little Aisha would have had her veil on at 6 when she was playing with her dolls, that 50 year-old Muhammed would have not been attracted to her?
Just wondering!!!
Posted by: TS at June 29, 2008 1:54 PM
You know, something just came to mind. Doesn't this imply that Muslim men have no sexual self control? Doesn't anyone have a problem with this? If I was a Muslim man I would be offended.
Posted by: Mo at June 29, 2008 1:56 PM
Elizabeth Smart's polygamist pedophile kidnapper kept her clothed in full body robes and a face veil.
Who was he protecting?
Posted by: CapitalistGig at June 29, 2008 1:56 PM
does anyone know where this lollypop has been?
Posted by: pulsar182 at June 29, 2008 2:52 PM
Isn't this an insult to flies?
Posted by: Stephen Gash SIOE England at June 29, 2008 2:54 PM
TS
Great point!!!
Full body coverings and face veils should be part of Islamic layettes for infant girls. After Ayatollah Khomaniac's advice, even babies aren't safe from muslim men.
Posted by: CapitalistGig at June 29, 2008 3:49 PM
I would insist that any such suggestion/command be gender neutral. No man, or men's organization, should demand anything of women that they themselves would not do, or accept.
These men should also cover all but their face and hands, to demonstrate that it is a gender neutral idea. (Where the women's adherence to the dress code would be wholly optional?)
These men should embrace polygamy too, where one woman may have multiple men friend's, domestic partners. (While denying the same for men?)
If my understanding of the reasoning behind female genital mutilation is correct then females are equally unable to control their sexual urges toward men, absent such mutilation. The male equivalent to such mutilation might be castration, to try to remedy men's uncontrollable urges.
Any man-only right should be matched with equal vigor by demanding the same for women, of whatever faith someone espouses. Isolate out the word Islam or Muslim, or any faith/non-faith, and just hoist it up as in the secular best interest of society. Equality. Then let the cognitive dissonance remain as the only alternative to equality.
Posted by: ronled at June 29, 2008 4:21 PM
And therefore the flies are Muslim men. So much for Islam producing real holiness. A very ironic ad.
Posted by: James Martel at June 29, 2008 6:34 PM
Male Mohammedans - the biggest female-haters in the world. It's unbelievable how much they hate the female gender. What in the heck is wrong with them???? Feel inferior, do you, Mohammedan men?
It shows. You Haters. You Misogynists. Revolting. Absolutely revolting Mohammedan males.
Posted by: darcy at June 29, 2008 7:35 PM
Last I heard, the flies are getting a lawyer.
Posted by: tanstaafl at June 29, 2008 8:22 PM
"Isn't this an insult to flies?"
Undoubtedly. One can only wonder what CAFR (Council for American Fly Relations) has to say about that.
Posted by: PorkFatRules at June 29, 2008 8:24 PM
StephenA55 - I like your line about flyspray.
Can't someone photoshop this thing and add a third panel in which - pschhhht! - the flyspray zaps the flies, and we play the 'Mortein!' theme on the soundtrack?
In the world of Islam every man - a woman's husband, her father, her brothers, her uncles, her imam, her own son or grandson, EVERY man she may ever encounter throughout her life- is authorised to be a woman's judge, jury and executioner, and is also programmed to be super-controlling, obsessively, psychopathically hyper-vigilant, hyper-sensitive to any perceived or barely suspected or even wholly imaginary feminine insubordination or infraction of the myriad draconian Rules for Women. Every woman essentially lives as only severely abused spouses or children do, in the worst dysfunctional families, here.
Muslim women live, like the dhimmis, under the Sword of Damocles. The 'protection' they are accorded is not worth spit and can evaporate at any moment, without their actually having done ANYTHING.
It is as if from the moment of their birth they live under a sentence of death - or a sentence of 'to-be-raped' (and then murdered) - that may be randomly activated at any moment.
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at June 29, 2008 11:02 PM
Let us not look upon unvieled Muslim women as candy attracting flies. Let us look upon Muslim men as flies that must be swated.
Posted by: DeadRecknoning at June 29, 2008 11:07 PM
I love the way the advert compares Muslim men to flies which spread disease! LOLPrecisely. This commercial is half right - Mohammedan men are vermin, but I wouldn't exactly equate Mohammedanettes to candy. There's a different insect magnet that I have in mind,but that one would need to be flushed, not covered. Posted by: Infidel PridePosted by: Jerusalem Posts at June 29, 2008 11:24 AM
at June 30, 2008 3:01 AM
If their creator was any sort of creator he would have made it so that women were born with full cover.......biggest load of bullsh*t imaginable except the bit where the muslim men are likened to flies
Posted by: marilyn at June 30, 2008 3:42 AM
So if muslim men are flies, who is their master to whom they are praying five times a day ?
The Lord of the Flies, a pig's head on a stick.
aka
Satan.
Posted by: Kristian at June 30, 2008 8:18 AM
Darn! I was saving the "Lord of the Flies" reference for later.......
Posted by: tanstaafl at June 30, 2008 8:33 AM
How many know that ol' Mo saw his daughter-in-law (actually his step-son Zaid's wife) PARTLY uncovered. His libido blew a gasket and he simply had to have her. Seems he tried to persuade Zaid to divorce her. There was some disquiet. Allah, a couple of days' time obliged with a revelation to say It's OK.
The divorce came through pronto - it may have been either that or a widow-remarriage - who knows? The husband wouldn't have liked to push his luck.
Wonder if there were lollipop candies in Mo's time.
Posted by: Hedgehog at June 30, 2008 8:47 AM
Last I heard, the flies are getting a lawyer.
Posted by: tanstaafl at June 29, 2008 8:22 PM
LOL, and rightfully so!
Posted by: darcy at June 30, 2008 9:26 AM
So if muslim men are flies, who is their master to whom they are praying five times a day ?
The Lord of the Flies, a pig's head on a stick.
aka
Satan.
Posted by: Kristian at June 30, 2008 8:18 AM
==========
Darn! I was saving the "Lord of the Flies" reference for later.......
Posted by: tanstaafl
===================
You beat me to it.
the Hebrew name Beelzebub (בעל זבוב, Ba'al-zvuv, "god of the fly", "host of the fly" or literally "Lord of Flies"), a name sometimes used as a synonym for Satan.
Yes, 'the lord of the flies' is most apropos. It's funny, but sometimes the lord of the flies seems to let it slip. A wise man once said: 'Those who have ears ought to hear'
at June 30, 2008 11:55 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)