These are social crimes that do need to be confronted and those who commit it be held accountable, whatever the culture or the religion.

Go and get the education before you copy and paste Arafat! In a nut shell, you need to grow up!

Here is one more current article on how well women are treated under Sharia Law. Allah Akbar!

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/03/afghanistan-women-beaten-by-husbands-then-flogged-for-running-away.html

It’s awfully nice of you to worry about my institutional situation. Most decent of you.

That said, just a little history for your dimwitted mind. Hitler did not do what he did for religious purposes. He was not a religious man at all.

Devout Muslims do force this dress on women. There is no choice other than torutre or death for the women other than to dress according to the religious men’s demands.

Religion, do you hear? Religion.

Islm and Nazism Do share a common bond thought. It is supremacism. Like Nazism, Islam is a doctrine that forces people to act, behave, dress, speak, pray in certain ways. Take Saudi Arabia for example. It is an Islamic country ruled by Sharia law. In it all women are forced to wear burkas or face punishment. All citizens are forced to be Muslims or they are kicked out. All Christians are forced not to carry bibles or to wear crosses, or selse. All Jews are forced not to step a foot in Saudi Arabia, or else. It is like Nazism. My way or the highway.

Here is another relevant article for you and our good friend Lyman illustrating once again how intrusive Islam in everything women are allowed to do. It has nothing to do with “modesty” and everything to do with repression and brute masculine force. Islam like Nazism is all about supremacism at the cost of any and all freedoms.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/03/bangladesh-women-detained-for-not-wearing-veil.html

Peace, not pieces @@ … eh? :-)

What you see in the picture you provided mare some men behaving badly! Convincing women to be subsevient in that way to suit their own ends! .. Then YOU might argue that those are Muslim men, aren’t they? … Much like Hitler can be discribed as a Christian , if you ask me!

.. and you do need to find other interests in your life Arafat, such discontentment with life brings real bad diseases that best be avoided .. love does wonders to the soul, you know :-)

Peace be upon you

I think we all need to do work on this topic to “really” understand what is going on here. Your supposition as to why Muslim women wear what they do rings hollow to me. If I were a Muslim woman and I saw a picture like I have linked below I would strip down to my undies in defiance of a religion that condones behavior like that shown in the picture. For me wearing a hajib would be nothing more than tacit approval of a religion that treats women like “the walking dead”.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/03/some-1500-years-ago-it-was-decided-for-an-individuals-personal-reasons-that-women-should-have-purdah.html

I found this article on the web today and I think it’s interesting in light of some of Ms. Suleiman’s comments about how women on campus dress.

http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2010/02/24/101355.html

I found this article on the web today and I think it’s interesting in light of some of Ms. Suleiman’s comments about how women on campus dress. http://www2.tricities.com/tri/news/local/article/blame_the_victim_religious_leaflet_claims_ungodly_dressed_women_provoke_rap/42253/

Start learning with this piece of important history:

The Crusades

The Muslim Game:

Muslims love talking about the Crusades… and Christians love apologizing for them. To hear both parties tell the story, one would believe that Muslims were just peacefully minding their own business in lands that were legitimately Muslim when Christian armies decided to wage holy war and “kill millions.”

The Truth:

Every part of this myth is a lie. By the rules that Muslims claim for themselves, the Crusades were perfectly justified, and the excesses (though beneath Christian standards) pale in comparison with the historical treatment of conquered populations at the hands of Muslims.

Here are some quick facts…

The first Crusade began in 1095… 460 years after the first Christian city was overrun by Muslim armies, 457 years after Jerusalem was conquered by Muslim armies, 453 years after Egypt was taken by Muslim armies, 443 after Muslims first plundered Italy, 427 years after Muslim armies first laid siege to the Christian capital of Constantinople, 380 years after Spain was conquered by Muslim armies, 363 years after France was first attacked by Muslim armies, 249 years after Rome itself was sacked by a Muslim army, and only after centuries of church burnings, killings, enslavement and forced conversions of Christians.

By the time the Crusades finally began, Muslim armies had conquered two-thirds of the Christian world.

Europe had been harassed by Muslims since the first few years following Muhammad’s death. As early as 652, Muhammad’s followers launched raids on the island of Sicily, waging a full-scale occupation 200 years later that lasted almost a century and was punctuated by massacres, such as that at the town of Castrogiovanni, in which 8,000 Christians were put to death. In 1084, ten years before the first crusade, Muslims staged another devastating Sicilian raid, burning churches in Reggio, enslaving monks and raping an abbey of nuns before carrying them into captivity.

In 1095, Byzantine Emperor, Alexius I Comneus began begging the pope in Rome for help in turning back the Muslim armies which were overrunning what is now Turkey, grabbing property as they went and turning churches into mosques.

Not only were Christians losing their lives in their own lands to the Muslim advance but pilgrims to the Holy Land from other parts of Europe were being harassed, kidnapped, molested, forcibly converted to Islam and occasionally murdered. (Compare this to Islam’s justification for slaughter on the basis of Muslims being denied access to the Meccan pilgrimage in Muhammad’s time).

The Crusaders only invaded lands that were Christian. They did not attack Saudi Arabia (other than a half-hearted expedition by a minor figure) or sack Mecca as the Muslims had done (and continued doing) to Italy and Constantinople. Their primary goal was the recapture of Jerusalem and the security of safe passage for pilgrims. The toppling of the Muslim empire was not on the agenda.

The period of Crusader “occupation” (of its own former land) was stretched over less than two centuries. (The Arab occupation is in its 1,378th year).

Despite popular depiction, the Crusades were not a titanic battle between Christianity and Islam. Although originally dispatched by papal decree, the “occupiers” quickly became part of the political and economic fabric of the Middle East without much regard for religious differences. Their arrival was largely accepted by the local population as simply another change in authority. Muslim radicals even lamented the fact that many of their co-religionists preferred to live under Frankish (Christian) rule than migrate to Muslim lands.

The Islamic world was split into warring factions, many of which allied themselves with the Frankish princes against each other at one time or another. For its part, the Byzantine (Eastern Christian) Empire preferred to have little to do with the Crusaders and went so far as to sign treaties with their rivals. Even the Muslim armies that eventually pushed out the Christian rulers spent far more energy fighting each other, both before and after the various re-takings of Jerusalem.

Another misconception is that the Crusader era was a time of constant war. In fact, very little of this overall period included significant hostilities. In response to Muslim expansion or aggression, there were only about 20 years of actual military campaigning, much of which was spent on organization and travel. (They were from 1098-1099, 1146-1148, 1188-1192, 1201-1204, 1218-1221, 1228-1229, and 1248-1250). By comparison, the Muslim Jihad against the island of Sicily alone lasted 75 grinding years.

Unlike Jihad, the Crusades were never justified on the basis of New Testament teachings. This is why they are an anomaly, the brief interruption of centuries of relentless Jihad against Christianity that began long before the Crusades and continued well after they were over.

The greatest crime of the Crusaders was the sacking of Jerusalem, in which 30,000 people were said to have been massacred. This number is dwarfed by the number of Jihad victims, from India to Constantinople, Africa and Narbonne, but Muslims have never apologized for their crimes and never will.

What is called ‘sin and excess’ by other religions, is what Islam refers to as the will of Allah.