Sorry ladies, this time its your turn:

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:

The women asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?” He said, “Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?” They replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?” The women replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her religion.”

Heh, perhaps the profit Muhammad had a point:

By Debbie Schlussel

Today’s Chicago Tribune highlights the problem with chick reporters.  A story written by three female reporters–Mary Wisniewski, Natasha Korecki, and Nancy Stuenkel–tells us this “important detail” about one of the Islamic terrorists indicted for using their Chicago-area halal slaughterhouse as a base for terror attacks in Denmark:

Denmark terrorism suspect a heroin smuggler with striking eyes: court records

Chicago Trib Reporters In Love w/ Islamic Terrorist’s “Striking” Eyes

Um, does anyone really believe that any court records anywhere in America said a terrorism suspect has “striking eyes”? And why the heck would we care what his eyes look like? How does that have anything to do with the guy’s involvement in international Islamic terrorism? So, if he’s got nice eyes, he couldn’t possibly be a terrorist? Hilarious. Guess what, Chicago Tribune?–They don’t all look as Halloween-scary as Mohammed Atta.

“Striking eyes…” Atta

Meanwhile, chicks downunder still fantasize about Shattering the glass ceiling

Read the rest of this entry » and read the 12 Comments: people do get it!