Indian born flight attendant (woman) demands castration (and cutting off of hands and feet) of Saudi Arabian officials.

Indian born flight attendant (woman) demands castration (and cutting off of hands and feet) of Saudi Arabian officials for sexual harassment:

Note: This woman should definitely be immediatly executed via three bullets to the stomach for her beliefs (which are that men should be mutilated for sexual harrasment). Men have the absolute right to say whatever they want to anyone (Freedom Of Speech). This woman should definitely be killed because of the way she thinks and for what she wishes to be done to Men.

Here are some choice quotes:

She has sought for Bahrani to be castrated for sexually harassing her. Bahraniâ\u20ac\u2122s shameful acts have stood proved in the Trial Courts and have been confirmed by the Bombay High Court.

Shehnaz has also demanded that the right hands be cut off at the wrists and the left feet at the ankles, as well as 80 lashes be given to the six persons named in her complaint, who are all Muslims, citizens of KSA and executives of the Saudi Arabian Airlines.

Since, Bahrani admitted to being intoxicated when he made sexual overtures to Shehnaz, which four of his own persons produced in the Court as witnesses also confirmed, Shehnaz has sought 40 additional stripes to be given to him for having committed this hudud offence as well. â\u20ac\u0153The evidence is irrefutable and largely documentary. The charges leveled have stood proved."

Here is the full article:

http://www.asiantribune.com/index.php?q=node/26

Indian born flight attendant demands castration of Saudia officials for sexual harassment
Wed, 2006-05-10 22:07

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury - Reporting from Dhaka

Dhaka, 10 May, (Asiantribune.com):Since the last nearly two decades, Shehnaz Sani (53) has been fighting a running battle against Saudi Arabian Airlines (SAA) for justice and her rights. Shehnaz, who was earlier an air-hostess with the Indian Airlines, joined SAA on November 16, 1978. She was awarded merit certificates for her job performance. Shehnaz is married and has two daughters.

According to Shehnaz, Abdul Ellah Bahrani, Saudi national, took charge as Station Manager, SAA, Bombay (India), in January 1983. Although, he was a family man, he sexually harassed her and made lewd remarks and other such totally disgusting and provocative gestures and advances, â\u20ac\u0153which are frowned upon by the strict Islamic code of conduct and, for which, the Shariah has provided for stern action by way of hudood and also Taâ\u20ac\u2122azirâ\u20ac\u2122. Shehnaz was 29 years old, and Bahrani around 35, at that time.

Bahrani, according to her, made a habit of making indecent, vulgar, and personal remarks against her and her sex i.e. female. In one instance, for example, according to Shehnaz, around the end of 1983, Bahrani asked her point-blank as to what was the method used by her husband and her, for family planning! Bahrani â\u20ac\u0153began harassing and traumatizing her in her day-to-day working by assigning difficult tasks and issuing unjust memos so that she would submit to his dictates and immoral desires and requests. Although, Shehnaz had made it very clear to Bahrani that his indecent proposals, that she have a sexual relationship with him, even though she was a married woman with two daughters and he too was a married man with children and a family, thoroughly disgusted her and â\u20ac\u0153was sinfully immoralâ\u20ac, he had the audacity to telephone Sani at her residence at around midnight and asked her to come to his residence right away â\u20ac\u02dcto discuss her promotion issue.

More poignantly, he said he was alone!â\u20ac When Shehnaz complained to her superiors about Bahraniâ\u20ac\u2122s sexual overtures, her services were promptly terminated! Shehnaz lodged a petition in the Labor Courts at Mumbai (India) against SAA, who, after a lengthy Trial, directed SAA to reinstate her and pay her, her back-wages. Instead of doing so, SAA petitioned the Bombay High Court - which passed strictures by its order of February 1999 against them and even saddled them with INR 10,000 (US$ 250) as costs to be paid to Shehnaz! That Shehnaz has been sexually harassed by Bahrani and traumatized by Executives of SAA stood proved in the Courts beyond a shadow of doubt.

The Bombay High Court was of the firm view that â\u20ac\u0153the employers cannot be asked to go in for a golden hand-shake and deny her the relief of reinstatementâ\u20ac. But instead of honoring the Courtâ\u20ac\u2122s Orders, Mr. Saud J. Al-Jalak, the then Manager of SAA, Bombay, (India) by his Memo dated March 3, 1999 immediately transferred Shehnaz to Chennai (Madras) with immediate effect though there was no â\u20ac\u0153transfer policyâ\u20ac for local appointments - knowing fully well that it would not be possible for her to adhere to such an unjust direction which reeked of vendetta, vengeance and was absolutely unwholesome in whichever way one could look at, in terms of equity.â\u20ac

Shehnaz has scored many times against the powerful SAA, in a truly David versus Goliath manner, in battles fought out in the Bombay High Court, which has, time and again, given directions to them not to continue with their pogrom against her. These orders have been flaunted with disdain and contempt by the SAA and its executives concerned, â\u20ac\u0153who have no respect whatsoever for the judiciary of their host country (India)â\u20ac.

Shehnaz has made history taking on the might of the SAA â\u20ac\u201c by and securing a reinstatement order. But hers is a Pyrrhic victory! According to Shehnaz, the SAA and its executives have traumatized and harassed her and since her reinstatement they have not even paid her dues or wages for most periods â\u20ac\u0153which amounts to snatching the bread from her mouth and committing larceny.â\u20ac

â\u20ac\u0153But my beliefs in the hadiths of Prophet Mohammed (PUBH), and the Holy Quran, not only brought me some solace but also strengthened my voice against such tyranny, which is the focal point of the Muslim religion and beliefsâ\u20ac, emoted Shehnaz.

At her tetherâ\u20ac\u2122s end, Shehnaz has lodged a complaint recently on April 21, with Dr. Saleh Bin-Humaid, President & Chief Judge of the Shariah Council at Jeddah (KSA), against Abdul Ellah Bahrani, Saud H. Al-Jalak, Moshin M Algarni, Saad A. Moogaddam, Maher A Shukri, Fahaad A. Baghdadi and others, of the Saudi Arabian Airlines, which has its Head Quarters at Jeddah (KSA).

In her detailed Petition, with documents annexed to it as evidence supporting her contentions, she has extensively quoted from the Holy Quran as well as Sunnah andhadith (traditions) of Prophet Mohammed. She has also reflected at considerable length on the Shariah, hudud and taâ\u20ac\u2122azi crimes, as well as Major Sins which are taboo in Islam, committed with impunity, by her oppressors. Shehnaz has charged Bahrani and others named in her complaint, with having committed hudud and â\u20ac\u02dctaâ\u20ac\u2122azirâ\u20ac\u2122 crimes against her, including theft, slander, oppression and betrayal of trust.

She has sought for Bahrani to be castrated for sexually harassing her. Bahraniâ\u20ac\u2122s shameful acts have stood proved in the Trial Courts and have been confirmed by the Bombay High Court.

Shehnaz has also demanded that the right hands be cut off at the wrists and the left feet at the ankles, as well as 80 lashes be given to the six persons named in her complaint, who are all Muslims, citizens of KSA and executives of the Saudi Arabian Airlines.

Since, Bahrani admitted to being intoxicated when he made sexual overtures to Shehnaz, which four of his own persons produced in the Court as witnesses also confirmed, Shehnaz has sought 40 additional stripes to be given to him for having committed this hudud offence as well. â\u20ac\u0153The evidence is irrefutable and largely documentary. The charges leveled have stood proved. Although, the Courts which have passed their orders against the Saudi Arabian Airlines, Bahrani and others, are not from Dar-al-Islam (abode of Islam i.e. an Islamic Country) the evidence, cannot be one in one Court and another in some other Courtâ\u20ac, said Shehnaz, who has sent a copy of her complaint to His Majesty King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud. Instead of chastising the main offender, Mr. Abdul Ellah Bahrani, the SAA Executives have protected him and they must all be severally held guilty of that same offence as having colluded with him.

Advocate Amit Kumar Bhowmik, has also forwarded copy of her complaint to H.E. Dr. Khaled A. Ben Bakr, Director General of Saudi Arabian Airlines under Shehnazâ\u20ac\u2122 instructions. Bhowmik has made a deep study (of translation to English) of the Shariah, which he contends â\u20ac\u0153is the only truly justice-oriented legal system, which practices what it preaches, without fear or favourâ\u20ac

In his covering letter to Dr. Khaled Ben Bakr, Bhowmik said â\u20ac\u0153I am inspired by the Holy Quran and the Sunnah, which have been a guide to me all through my life. Taking a cue from Prophet Mohammedâ\u20ac\u2122s hadith: â\u20ac\u02dcAcquire knowledge. It enables its possessor to distinguish right from wrong; it lights the way to Heaven; it is our friend in the desert, our Society in solitude, our companion when friendless; it guides us to happiness; it sustains us in misery; it is an ornament among friends and an armor against enemiesâ\u20ac\u2122, as well as the directive : â\u20ac\u02dcThe best â\u20ac\u02dcjihadâ\u20ac\u2122 is to say a just word in the face of injustice and before a tyrannical authorityâ\u20ac\u2122. I have taken up the cause of Ms. Shehnaz Sani, as her champion in her quest for justiceâ\u20ac

Muslims the world over largely prefer settling their disputes through their personal law, which is the civil jurisdiction of the Shariah. The Shariah (or Shoura) is an Arabic word meaning â\u20ac\u0153the Path to be followedâ\u20ac. Literally, it means, the way to a watering place. It is the Path not only leading to Allah, the Most High, but the Path believed by all Muslims to be the Path shown by Allah, the Creator Himself through his Messenger, Prophet Mohammed. Allah alone is the Sovereign and it is He who has the right to ordain a Path for the guidance of mankind, all Muslims believe. Its sources are the Holy Quran and the Sunnah which are the hadiths (traditions) of Prophet Mohammed. The Chapters dealing with the Criminal Laws in the Shariah are invoked by only some Islamic countries like the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), Afghanistan and Iran. The penalties often are very severe. This is because Islam is fully focused on maintaining the fabric of Society and individual rights. Whoredom, larceny (theft), slander of chaste women and such acts invite deterrent, retributive and exemplary punishments. Unless effectively checked, such offences committed will, like a cancer, eat into the very core of Society and destroy it completely. Morality, brotherhood, charity and faith are the four corner stones of Islam.

Hudud and taâ\u20ac\u2122aziâ\u20ac\u2122 crimes are concerns of the Shariah. Hudud punishments are ordained by Allah (God) and must mandatorily be carried out against those committing the seven listed crimes i.e. The crimes affecting social existence comprise offences liable to Hudud (punishment ordained by Allah). They are :

Adultery or Fornication, imputation of adultery, larceny, drinking of alcohol, shading of blood, apostasy and rebellion.

Hadd punishments are awarded in the following seven cases:

Penalties exacted for committing murder, manslaughter or bodily harm,

Punishment for theft by amputation of a hand; a foot also for a second offence,

Punishment for fornication or adulterer; stoning to death for a married person, one Hundred lashes for an unmarried person,

Punishment for slander and defamation, by 80 lashes,

Punishment for Apostasy, by death,

Punishment for inebriation by 80 lashes,

Punishment for highway robbery, by death; is cutting off of a leg and an arm from opposite direction or an exile according to the seriousness of the crime.

Taâ\u20ac\u2122azir literally means disgracing the criminal for his shameful act. In taâ\u20ac\u2122azir punishment has not been fixed by law and the Qadi (Judge) is allowed discretion both as to the form in which such punishment is to be inflicted and its measure. This kind of punishment by discretion has been provided in special consideration of the various factors afflicting social change in human civilization and which vary on the places of variation in the methods of commission or the kind of criminal conduct indictable under the law.

Offences punishable under this method are those against human live, property, public peace and tranquility. The general structure of the Al-Siyasat al-Sharaâ\u20ac\u2122i i.e. the Criminal Law of the Muslims today is based on the principles of taâ\u20ac\u2122azir. In other word taâ\u20ac\u2122azir form discretional penalties inflicted by the Judge himself, either for an offence whose punishment is not determined or for prejudice done to oneâ\u20ac\u2122s neighbour. The punishment can take the form of lashes, imprisonment, fine, warning etc.

Seventy â\u20ac\u02dcmajor sinsâ\u20ac\u2122 (Al-Kabaâ\u20ac\u2122r) including, deceiving and plotting evil, showing-off, carrying tales, lying about Allah, slandering chaste women, stealing, treating others unjustly, drinking wine, oppression and taking false oath, has been listed by Prophet Mohammed which his followers have been directed not to indulge in. Punishments range from reprimands, lashings, imprisonment to imposition of fines, at the discretion of the Qadi.

Islamic thought - and militancy â\u20ac\u201c has gained momentum in recent years. There are many professing Islam, which means â\u20ac\u0153Peaceâ\u20ac, who have criminally abused the hospitality of their host countries by committing serious offences like theft, murder, rape and acts of brutal terror, with aplomb and utter disdain for the local laws, which would never have been tolerated in their mother-land. They would be flogged publicly or even beheaded !

The criminal justice system in non-Islamic countries is so insipid, temperate, colorless and lax that such natives of Islamic States, take them casually â\u20ac\u201c with a pinch of salt â\u20ac\u201c and a fistful of petro-dollars! Besides, they can always rely upon watch-dogs from the Human Rights brigades to escape with a light sentence served in a comfortable prison with free accommodation, good food and even entertainment thrown in, for committing the most heinous crimes.

In this scenario, Shehnaz Sani, an Indian womans complaint against her oppressors, who are all Muslims, from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and executives of its National carrier, the Saudi Arabian Airlines (Saudia- SAA) to the Shariah Council at Jeddah, seeking invoking of its criminal edicts against them is certain to have an international impact, since the culprits are subjected to double jeopardy, as others will surely follow suit!

- Asian Tribune -

Decorum

From: Robin
Date: Nov 13, 2007 2:19 PM


MikeeUSA:

Your last email implied that you are just playing around with a created persona... Using the hate, etc. just to get a rise out of people... or at least exaggerating your views. In case that's true, Let's take a timeout from the game. I'm going to give you some very important advice and I hope you'll take it seriously. If you choose instead to disregard it or share it with the brain dead Bob, MM and other dregs, I at least warned you and my conscience is clear.

There is no anonymity on the Internet. I am only a moderately powerful attorney with moderately powerful connections, and I could have you located, arrested and charged with making terroristic threats with a single phone call. I'm not saying this as a threat and have no intention of doing so. My point is that there are many more who could - and would - do much worse if it benefitted them.

I've seen people sent to prison because politicians want to look like they're responding to threats. Look at the HS kid from PA who was emailing the shooter in Finland. That kid faces a possible 6 years in prison. The headlines read that law enforcement foiled the next Columbine. This was a week before voters decided whether the district attorney should be a judge. Do you think they give a rat's ass if fat boy has to go to prison instead of college so they can get their judgeship? Fat boy made himself an easy target.

The real world has real consequences.

MikeeUSA, I know you think you're smart, but I want you to think about this. You've made yourself the easiest target possible for anyone who needs some tough-on-crime PR. All anyone needs to do is seize your computer and lead you away in handcuffs to get themselves on the front page as the one who prevented the next Columbine.

If you think the truth matters more than appearance, you could be in for a serious education. Do you think the FBI screws around if they perceive even the possibility of a threat? They might. But they won't if they perceive that they could get blamed for NOT responding if and when something happened. CYA is Rule #1.

If you're getting scared, good. That means you have a clue. I don't give a shit what you do. I just blew $450 in billable time writing this warning to you. But if I were you, I would not only tame or kill the psycho-hater persona, but I would have him neutralize the threat asap. Have MikeeUSA see the light. Say it was a joke. Find religion. Write an apology to the prosecutor you threatened (your most idiotic move). Whatever. But as long as your well-crafted "persona" is out there spreading hate and advocating violence, are a sacrificial lamb serving yourself and your future up on a silver platter.

If you are a psycho or just plain stupid, you'll disregard and carry on. That's better for me, as I won't have to find a new psycho. But I share this with you for your own good. Good luck no matter what.

Now back to our regularly scheduled conflict.

Robin Steele, Esq.

I'm not exaggerating my views, I do enjoy the fighting on the internet and wished to share with you some information on how to make your blog seem more believable as many people think that it is a fabrication (I get accused of this aswell). I truly am opposed to women's rights.

I have found religion in the Bible (long ago) and it is opposed to women's rights and in favor of Men's liberty. You will notice that much of my writing deals with the Bible and its spurned status today.

You don't have to tell me that there's no anonymity on the internet :). Do you prefer the little 1x1 gifs or aquiring the weblogs off the actual server? I'm a fan of the gifs but... you may well have a diffrent opinion.

As for computer, there is nothing on here that is not on the internet. All my work is opensource and all of it is released.

As for terroristic threats: that law is in violation of the first ammendment (not that it matters to anyone).

Do as you wish. I have said many times that I know that I will never get what I want and thus, in the end, I do not care what happens to myself. I wonder if the world the Bible envisions ever existed in reality or if it is the written work of dreamers...

The Fundamental Diffrence

In the 'Men's movement', and perhapse among all Men, there are two different groups who share not a notion of what is good nor the belief in the same end. In one group dwells Men who enjoy having sex with a girl or woman for a brief or, in some cases, an extended period of time and then severing ties with her (or allowing her to sever ties with him). These Men are happy with a transient life of moving from one woman to another. The other group of Men are those who, once they have aquired a female wish to keep that female for all eternity.

The Men who wish to have many successive girlfriends (the "fuckers and chuckers") do not get along with the Men who wish to keep girls that they have acquired (the "keepers"). Regardless of what feminists believe about the 'Men's Movement', it is not a cohesive unit. What most keepers want is to acquire a nice young virgin girl as an obedient and submissive wife for themselves once they themselves are financially stable (and thus older). Such Men may also wish to eventually have multiple concurrent wives (polygamy (yes, the Bible allows this, it does NOT allow women to have multiple concurrent husbands however)). "Keepers" also often believe that the first Man a virgin female has sexual contact with (no matter if it is by light coercion (seduction [Ezekiel]) or forced (rape [Deuteronomy])) is the man that girl should marry, or in the case of rape, the man and the girl MUST marry ([Deuteronomy 22]). The fuckers and chuckers hate these Men. The fuckers and chuckers see the marriage of young females of childbearing age to older Men as a THEFT from high-school age boys; they believe that girls should be first introduced to sex by themselves (the boys) in early high-school, and then the girls should receive some more 'sex ed' again by the same group of boys in latter high-school, and then by the time the young women are of college age they'll be "pro's" in the art of sex and will again service the same group of fuckers and chuckers. All throughout this education the girl and then young woman will have a myriad of boyfriends honing her skills at being a whore (as well as practicing for divorce; OOPS! An unintended consequence!). Once the female has been throughly used up by the age of 30 the fuckers and chuckers are happy to throw to them who they see as 'chumps' (the keepers) a bone that the keepers do not want: an infirtile, diseased, whore of a woman. If ever the keepers design to "steal" a nice young virgin girl from the boys-in-the-hall older fuckers and chuckers working in the police forces stop that action dead in it's tracks and send that Man to get raped to death (AIDS) in prison.

It was a certain group of Men who voted for women to have the right to vote way back in 1920. Said group is said to have sold out it's brothers but the fact is that they never considered Men who wish to keep their wives their own as allies in anything. The group of Men who obeyed feminist women in giving the females of this country political power were promised that once women had political power that women could make their own choices and could then choose to be whores. Women did choose to be whores and Men who prefer to marry young girls of childbearing age (12 to 14 years old is when girls gain the ability to have children) and keep those girls forever were outlawed ("pedophiles, domestic abusers, etc etc etc"). The Men who wish to hold on to girls rather then dumping them in the trash after a few wild rides have been sidelined for nearly a century. The Men who wish for what is best for their fellow Man (that he may marry whatever nice young unmarried girl he wishes to, may rule over her and keep her in his care and under his athority, and have as many children and as much enjoyment via his sweet female (or females if he has multiple wives) as He wishes) are raped to death in hell hole prisons. The faggot* fuckers and chuckers cheer. *They do not wish to have any children, nor enjoy the happiness of an obedient girl; they go through the motions of sex but it is of no consequence, produces no offspring and is sterility except in the realm of disease.

Decades later, now, the Fuckers and Chuckers are getting bitten by the feminist law machine they originally supported. Even today the FnC's support marital rape laws, domestic violence laws, divorce laws, etc etc etc. The only thing that the FnCs disagree with is that now THEY are being targeted by women's rights rather then the Keepers of Women exclusivly. These two groups of Men have diametrically opposite views of what is right, wrong, good, and bad. The first group had made a pact with feminism to destroy the second. Now the first group is being destroyed as well by the satan it had contracted with after the second has been completely crushed. That's what happens when you make a deal with the devil against your fellow Men: it kills you too.

When you see a Men's Rights Advocate (MRA) slander, attack, or banish a Man who is completely opposed to women's rights and wishes to keep females rather then allowing them the freedom that they have had for the past century you now can now know said MRA's original affiliation and previous allies.

Russian Jewish Feminist tries to bend the Bible.

Here a Russian Jewish Feminist attempts to portray the first 5 books of the Old Testament as a pro-women's rights publication. Here is her vision-through-red-colored-glasses:

http://socon.wordpress.com/2007/09/30/these-lunatics-do-not-speak-for-real-men/#comment-158

# Андрей in SK Says:
November 8th, 2007 at 8:46 am

Mikee to your post #4. I too am very much in favour of the restitutional justice of Torah. I happen to interpret the passage as a Feminist wet dream. Note the part “He can never divorce her as long as he lives”. So you go rape a girl, marry her, she makes your life a living hell backed by her father, brothers, uncles…..all after you pay 50 shekels/25 troy or about $250-300k equivalent by my current estimation. You think this is a desirable life? I’d bet if Feminists got wind of what Torah really stood for, they’d enforce it as law and pray all their darling virgin daughters would have the “misfortune” of getting raped. And people think I’m crazy, demonic and a bad spiritual influence for advocating…ah sh**…well I’m not opening THAT can of worms.
# Андрей in SK Says:
November 8th, 2007 at 8:48 am

Oh and I mean monetized value not spot price of silver.

First: I'm not Jewish, I would include the New Testament aswell in whatever law regime I support (The NT has many pro-men's liberty, anti-women's rights passages that further clarify the Bible's pro-men / husband position.) I know that many, if not the majority, of Jewish people are heavy supporters of feminism and will inject their own fantasies of opressing men and glorifying women parrellel to the actual words and demands of the Bible (as you did with your fantasy of making the husband's life a living hell... when the Bible says nothing of that and demands instead that females ___OBEY___ their husband in all things, just as it demands that they obey God himself. Such power is not hell, it is God trying to mandate a little piece of heaven for his Men. You see, God does not hate Men (though YOU DO hate Men, along with your Jewish Feminists, and your allies in other religions (Christian Feminists, Muslim Feminists, Wiccan Feminists, Flying Spaghetti Monster Feminists)))

The price quoted in Deuteronomy has been estimated to be about 600 dollars (as of a few years ago) by Biblical scholars. Say so long to your "and I mean monetized value" crap (and seriously... what do you think the spot price is? It is the price of silver. The present monetized value of the metal (which is, right now, inflated due to speculation)).
Even if a shekel of silver in the past was worth 25 troy ounces, 50 25troy ounce pieces of silver would come to, at today's silver spot price of about 15.50 US Dollars, 19,375 US Dollars. That is the price of a new low end car with few of the options. Assuming that in today's world the Man has to pay the woman a $10,000 diamond engagement ring in _HOPES_ of marraige, a woman who has been around a few times at the least, paying about double that to the _Father_ for a nice young virgin girl (12 to 14 years old one would assume, past that they are not so often virgins and (if not virgins) don't even qualify for this automatic marraige... I guess the Bible would just consider those women as whores... and what is the penalty for being a lady prostitute...). The Man would pay the girl NOTHING. The money goes to the father. It is a payment for a product (the girl in this case). There is nothing pro-women's rights about selling girls into the service of Men. There is certainly nothing feminist about forcing the girls into service of a Man due to the decision of the Man to rape that girl.

The money is payed to the father (the girl is being bought). All the restrictions placed upon women in the Bible are still apply to the raped young girl (including the NT ones). The girl must obey her husband in all things etc. The man can still take multiple wives and still enforce his will on the female.

The brothers, father, etc would have nothing to do with the Man afterwards if the Man didn't wish them to be in his life. If he has known them for awhile he may wish to stay intouch. If he is some random stranger who was entranced by the beauty and the sweetness of his aquisition then he probably would go live in whatever area of the country that was most beautiful and economic to him, bringing his new little wife with him.

If the girl made his life a "living hell" she'd be beaten. Do you think a Man who is happy to use force to aquire the girl in the first place would suddenly turn into a puddle of mush afterwards? No, he would continue to use force if nessassary and the girl would comply with his every wish. Why do you think the USA is number one in the world. It has something to do with our use of coersion (sometimes physical, sometimes of another type) upon the rest of the world for sure (and I agree with doing what is needed to keep our position, any sane country would do the same), and alot to do with the technological and economic superiority that has allowed us such power. In relation to girls and women, Men have such coercive power and can only be restrained by other men.

Death To women's Rights.
Viva Men's Liberties.
--MikeeUSA--

Radicalism Breeds Radicalism

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=11580877&postID=9087819710850965097
TO BOB:

I am a dedicated Masculist and MRA that you know from the forums. I agree with many of the things you say on your blog. However, these kinds of statements are irresponsible and reprehensible. Do you think the shock value outweighs the damage you do to the MRM? Many of us are fathers. You are doing more damage to men's rights than the feminazis could ever do.

Bob is not doing damage to Men's rights. Radicalism breeds radicalism. Meekness and submission brings forth more meekness and submission.

We have had 150 years of increasing meekness and submission feeding of of itself. How have we benifited from that?

The more radical some men are in their speech the more the baseline standard of acceptable speech will be lowered until the most forceful speech is the norm; at this point real action starts to occur rather then mere talk and there is either success, failure, or long-running war.

A case in point: Tiffany (Of "I Think We're Alone Now" Fame).

A case in point: Tiffany (Of "I Think We're Alone Now" Fame).

code: C O D E Name: Tiffany Birth Date: October 2, 1971 Time of First Record Signing: 1984 Age at Time of First Record Signing: 13

Remeber the old pop hit from the 80s "I Think We're Alone Now" which was sung by Tiffany, a 16 year old girl in the year 1987.

quote: Q U O T E I Think We're Alone Now (Alone Now) (ClapClap) There doesn't seem to be anyone around I Think We're Alone Now (Alone Now) (ClapClap) The beating of our hearts is the only sound.

Ever wonder what happened to her?
Well she got married in 1992 at the age of 21, had a child, posed nude in playboy at the age of 30, divorced her husband in the year 2004 (at the age of 33), and then married another man.

Basically what happened is that she has lived the normal whorish life that most of our women live today.
What once was a promising young girl of value has become a debauchered hussie.

Why?

Because of two things:
Her mother.
Herself.

Tiffany was allowed to start her musical career at age 13 (or encouraged to by a parent with dollar signs in her eyes). She gained fame, fortune, and ultimately emancipation that comes from fortune and a society and country that supports women having and holding power.

The problem is that Tiffany and Tiffany's mother were allowed to make their own decisions and, as usual, made terrible decisions lathered in whorish immorality, avarice, and greed with NO regard for what they were stealing from the domain Men.

What they stole is yet another good wife who would serve and bring happiness to one of our fellow Men.

Instead of being signed to a record contract at 13, the girl should have been married off to a Man and be allowed to serve him and make him happy as a girl will naturally do at that age if unmolested by a mandatory pro-women's rights anti-man brainwashing regime. Tiffany could have used her voice to sing to her husband who would have loved her more by himself then the entirity of the world combined will love her now or at anytime.

Instead of being able to follow the path that God has put forth for girls of marrying a Man (for Life) once she is able to have children (which usually is somewhere between the ages of 12 years old to 14 years old), this girl was instead put on the path of making money for her mother and then released to the whoredom that almost always inevitibly follows in the case of a completely emancipated female.

A girl 'on her own' is a theft committed against all Men of this world.
It is both against God's law of the Bible and against all that is benificial for Men.

Unfortunatly we can yet do nothing to stop the further use of girls for the enjoyment of the mother rather then for bestowing Happiness upon a Man as God intended.

If you listen to her popular song it's about love. It's a pitty that while she was singing of it was kept from it. It is even more of a crime that countless numbers of Men have been denyed the true love that stems from marrying young females of childbearing age because our Feminist System denys Men all that is good, and brainwashes girls to believe in all that is Bad.

"I think we're alone now"
Yes Tiffany, we are alone. Those who would be our compainions have been robbed from us from a young age by the schools and the media: both who support women's rights and deny Men's Liberty.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiffany_%28singer%29