Mohammedan Mama Kills Daughter With Keffieh; in "Self Defense!"

keffieh_modeKiller scarf: the keffieh, symbol of Mohammedan terror

Musel-Mama Claims “Self Defense” in Honor (Sharia) Murder: Strangles Westernized  Daughter with her headscarf

Atlas Shrugs:

Mother strangled daughter in self-defence”, says lawyer

Mark Tyndale, who represents Aset Magomadova, pointed to a statement of agreed facts entered in the second-degree murder trial. He said 14-year-old Aminat Magomadova, who died Feb. 26, 2007, had been “habitually running away from home, boasting that she was using drugs, being sexually active and stealing” –-behaviour that caused stress for the rest of the Muslim family.

Stress for the Muslim family? Kill her. Imagine all those liberals’ daughters – living under sharia. Lots of funeral limos.


Another Islamic (Sharia) Honor Killing in Italy: Father Stabs 18 year old daughter to death

Quick, Solker: please explain to the Italian authorities that honor killings are completely un-Islamic and that it comes with the cult(-ure) of the tribes of 7th century Arabia…

Sep 15. – An 18 year old Muslim girl died this evening after being repeatedly stabbed with a knife in a grove of Montereale Valcellina, in the province of Pordenone. From information collected from witnesses who were there the girl, who lived to Azzano Decimo (Pordenone), was found dead with numerous stab wounds. Atlas has more..

Accomodating Mohammedanism:

UK Toughens Stand on Islamic Honor Killings: Doubles Number of Prosecutors, Forced Marriage Unit Handles 2,000 Calls First Half of this Year

Honor killings are at record levels and increasing in the UK as the continued islamisation of the once great Britain continues apace. Late last year legislation was enacted to counter the rise in honor killings

UK: New Push in Honor Killings

Ramadan Terror:

Ramadan drummer terrorizes non-Muslims  at 4AM by banging the drums: “Everywhere they complain. People go, like, ‘What the hell? What you doing, man?’ They never know it’s Ramadan”

Dirty rotten scoundrels:

UN committee equals Israel and Hamas, validates the use of human shields

Nazi Bastard (Yuman Rites Imposter) Garlasco sacked:

11 thoughts on “Mohammedan Mama Kills Daughter With Keffieh; in "Self Defense!"”

  1. * “Mother strangled daughter in self-defence”, says lawyer

    “I didn’t know the scarf was loaded!”

  2. Very difficult to see how a lawyer could give that excuse as grounds for a defence case. Nevertheless, it appears to have been given, which begs the question: Why was the lawyer allowed to gain his qualifications?

    If you disagree with an article written here then point out the grounds upon which you find the article unreasonable, As far as I am concerned the abuse of the blog owner has gone far enough to now become annoying. If you disagree with what any person writes then state your grounds for disagreement. Even if you are insulted there is NO call to behave likewise. As far as I am concerned, and to all involved in this idiotic game, it stops now. I do not particularly care which one of you can piss the furthest.

  3. kaw,

    I am very careful and purposefully dish-out as much as I get.

    Simply put, I have much better things to do than play games of abuse with what I think are agenda-based radicals on this blog. I chose to do so for a project and this is not the only blog but one of six that I am chatting on during this summer-Ramadan period. Only this blog though falls down constantly with vulgar language, rediculous arguments and pathetic logic of pushing hate. The rest remain civil and we discuss many things and give each other examples of how bad and dangerous say these radical pro-jihad people are. Though they are anti-Jihad and make serious accussations, they are not agenda-driven to directly attack Islam and also the blog-owners are mature and they do not allow vulgar language, personal attacks and throw out the prostheletizers as well.

    So I remain here and as I said, dishing out as they give. In fact I find it rather a laugh in comparison to the others and the fact that I work in a serious business with knowledge of the real dangers of terrorism.

    As for this thread, I made no comment except that the blog-owner in his opening argument made a comment directed at me – so you will notice that is evidence of why he makes things personal and insulting and thus the same each time is carefully dished out in like.

    I except him to block my postings and declare me as unwelcome and you will note that when he does the language, innuendos and twisted phrases will be laughable.

    I make comments about Spencer, Fitzgerald and Wilders and I state them with strength and experience and you will see how quickly the blog-owner is defencive when I mention the first two.

    Spencer is an untouchable in academic quaters, he has chosen to go the “almost non-fiction” with each time careful references that are just beyong the law or acceptable language to not have his books pulled. These are facts that are public record and logical if you read there work, you will notice weak references that are only partial quotes and never does he once does he acknowledge that many of his references do not agree with him and that he has cut the quote down. I therefore simply put him in the “expedient hate-monger for profit” catergory. His association now with other radical groups that will ensure a greater potential reading list and more sources of hate is proving that futher. Fitzgerald is exactly the same and they both, along with others such as Gellar and Horowitz have all fallen also under the requirement to villify the main stream media as being in “cahoots with left wing appeasists” is nothing less than more proof of how off-target and questionable they are.

    I have nothing here to be either ashamed of, and be certain that the “stoopid” language game is only my way of identifing the undefensible, because to be honest I find this form of communication rather insulting both professionally and intellectually.

    1. Solker, what a waste of time you are!

      “I except him to block my postings and declare me as unwelcome”- you have been told multiple times that you are unwelcome and yet you keep lurking, lying, smearing, detracting, obfuscating, and taqiyya-ing… what for? Only to put lipstick on a pig?

      “Spencer is an untouchable in academic quaters”- you may as well state “does the moon care when a dog barks”.

      These smears are just dumb and show you and mohammedanism for what it is. Spencer is not corrupt like Johnny Esposito, Yvonne (ridiculous) Ridley or Koran Armstrong, miserable whores on the Arab payroll. Spencer’s knowledge is impeccable and irrefutable, logically undeniable, historically correct and reflects exactly what Mohammedan clerics from Al Azahr to the most authorative mosques in Sowdi Arabia are saying (and also what mohammedans the world over are doing) Moreover, Spencer relies entirely on Islamic scriptures, writers, rulers and history.

      Therefore, you have no leg to stand on and no base for discussion, Solker. You keep copping it here on WoJ and if Spencer, Fitzgerald, Wilders, Pipes or Horowitz could be bothered with your drivel you would end up soaked like a sewer rat every time because you just lack every thing it takes to be taken seriously. You have no integrity, you are totally dishonest, (not only intellectually) you have no knowledge and you don’t answer questions, therefore, what’s the point in bothering with you?

  4. Imagine a young muslima, just 14 years old, “habitually running away from home, boasting that she was using drugs, being sexually active and stealing” .

    As if. And even if – she didn’t deserve to be STRANGLED by her mother!!!!!

  5. Let us see, in this one paragraph you can come up with the following:

    dumb, (ridiculous), miserable whores, drivel, “soaked like a sewer rat”, no integrity, dishonest.

    But no it is me who does smears.

    I think the blog-owner really shows complete anger when the word Spencer comes up and has to come up with words that normally come down to idolization when he can say: “impeccable and irrefutable, logically undeniable, historically correct”.

    Actually, I would turn it around and say completely refutable, illogical and historically questionable considering that he gives no real facts. I stand by what I said to “kaw”, Spencer says many things, but saying many things without substance – quantity does not make quality.

    The basics are there, all of you agenda-based groups do the same there, you quote the Qur’an saying “kill them all” and you are correct, it is there. But you do not put it into context, you avoid the quoting the entire surah and thus you have a phrase that you say is representative and it is not. It is akin to financial fraud by dropping or adding a zero.

    This is the point I make and the abuse was started by yourself and others on the blog and you have admitted (though now contradict) that I was generally polite compared to others.

    I will object to agenda-based BS and I find your defenciveness to be frankly the coward’s way out considering that you can abuse my faith and myself and yet not tolerate even the slightest rebuke. I noticed also that you constantly avoid ‘real debate’ and yet accuse me of avoding answering questions when I have almost every time. Your simply waving away the important with “I do not care” or like above with Spencer being an academic outcaste (which is very important and reflects credibility) you simply say “does the moon care when a dog barks”. ” which basically says, yes the academic world considers Spencer worthless but “we do not care”.

    I think that is the reality of you blog-owner, you want to spout your hatred and regardless that it is proven to be BS, “you do not care”.

  6. Solker,

    ” the wacademic world considers Spencer worthless “- is one of your oft repeated, dirty little smears which have already been repeatedly refuted. The fact that these very same whores, the Esposito’s, Armstrongs, Ridleys et al have sold their souls for Arab Muslim money in order to promote Mohammedanism in Western universities is absolutely unimpressive: its disgusting and revulsive.

    What I personally hold against you is that you really seem to believe that we infidels are somehow “ignorant, deficient, dumb deaf and blind” as per your filthy book, and that is worse than any abuse you cop here. Because if you were not such a lying weasel, you would at least respect our integrity, but I guess you simply don’t know what that is.

    Integrity is obviously very un-Islamic.

    A debate is not happening, you lie and deny everything and concede nothing. You call Wilders “Hitler” and us “Nazis”, you are tying yourself in knots you are working for the government of Morocco as an agent for political Islam, you even brag about the fact that you’re a snitch, which is the lowest of the low.

    And then this: Submitted on 2009/09/14 at 10:47pm

    Q: What is penalty for deciding to leave Islam?

    Solkars answer: “depends on what country you live in”-
    what kind of answer is that? Then again, you deny it here, when I taunted you:

    Quick, Solker: please explain to the Italian authorities that honor killings are completely un-Islamic and that it comes with the cult(-ure) of the tribes of 7th century Arabia…

    Solkhar September 16, 2009 at 1:23 pm
    blog-owner, I do not have to quickly explain what you have correctly admitted to.

    Submitted on 2009/09/16 at 1:17pm

    “The Qur’an and Sunnah mandate that Muslims must wage war against unbelievers simply because they are unbelievers.”

    The central command in the Koran, Solker. You admit it first only to deny it in the same sentence:

    Incorrect, no facts given, no references but only historical examples of events of then…. typical agenda based BS

    I asked you, Solker:

    Submitted on 2009/09/16 at 3:36am

    Is Obama his fathers son or is he not, Solker?

    Since when is the son of a Muslim and a Muslim ‘revert’ not a Muslim? Did his mother, that Gramscian whore, not marry a second (Indonesian) Muslim named Soetoro who named little Obama “Barry Soetoro?” Do you want to see his Indonesian school enrolment where he was signed in as “Muslim?”

    Look how you tried to obfuscate it:

    ” No Muslim of course makes the mistake of thinking that or hoping that Obama is a Muslim, his church-going, obvious enjoyment of beer and inability to pronounce “Hijab” (he said hajib) confirms it. ”

    What’s this BS denial all about? Jeremiah Wright converted to Islam in his student years and runs a black church which is a branch of the Nation of Islam, which preaches race hatred and Black Liberation Theology in the guise of a “Christian” church. Nothing christian about it. You really think we’re not onto it?

    No Muslims drink beer? LOL! Moslems are the worst hypocrites the world has ever known. “Obama’s “inability to pronounce “Hijab” (he said hajib) confirms…” what? That his mother didn’t wear a hijab?

    Why would that be Solker? Because Indonesia is becoming increasingly islamized, much more now then it was 30-40 years ago?

    What does it tell you when Indonesian women have their daughters clit cut out? Do you really wanna make believe that these people, (former Buddhists and Hindus) kept such a barbaric custom from the pre-Islamic era, the jahilya?

  7. Further to what the Sheik already told you Sulker the Obamanation was not only registered as a Mohammedan in school in Indonesia but he ADMITS himself in his Ghost Written book that he took KORANIC STUDIES something ONLY Mohammedan children are allowed to do in Indonesian schools. He also took ‘mengagi’ the study of correctly pronounced primitive ambiguous Krap Kranic arabic something only studied by DEVOUT Mohammedans . So is the Obamination a Mohammedan you bet your life he is.

Comments are closed.