All That is Necessary for Evil to Triumph is for an Evil Woman to Do Nothing: IMI Systems Quote of the Day

Noor Salman and Pulse nightclub shooter Omar Mateen (courtesy

“In the statement, Noor Salman described driving slowly by several destinations, including Disney World and the Pulse nightclub, before the shooting. When driving by Pulse, Omar Mateen asked his wife ‘How upset are people going to be when it gets attacked?'” – Pulse gunman’s wife: I knew he was going to Orlando to attack [via]

Win IMI Ammo


  1. avatar Remmi300blk says:

    I wish we’d stop naming the killers. Research shows the fame they get is motivation. We can tell the antis(and anyone who finds mass shootings appalling) that if they don’t want to be complicit, don’t name them. Anyways f*ck the Pulse killer, and molon labe

    1. avatar maynard says:

      What’s in a name? The actor will get labeled anyway, because it is the act that matters, not the actor. That is how the human mind works.
      Which is more important?
      A) Some dude went to a book depository a shot some other dude in a moving car, or
      B) the other dude in the moving car was the President.

      The fame has to do with importance or the scale of the target. So unless you obliterate the details of who/what got shot, you won’t reduce the appeal of shooting.

      Example: How many people know that World War I was started over an assassination, and how many people know the name of the shooter?

      1. avatar Sian says:

        How many names of Pulse Nightclub victims do you know?

        Referring to the killer solely as ‘Some Asshole’ at least takes away their fame.

        1. avatar Joe R. says:

          ‘Some Asshole’ is just further cover-up the other way.

          ‘Another muslim Asshole’ would cover many more of the incidents, and we can demand a waiver and benefit of the doubt for any overreach because we’re not a religion of peace.

        2. avatar Felix says:

          It’s hard for me to put myself in a spree killer’s place and fathom what made them do it, but I think if fame were part of it, the brand name “Pulse nightclub killer” would stick around far longer than my birth name. Lizzie Borden was famous by her name, and John Wilkes Booth, and Lee Harvey Oswald. But who knows the Lindbergh baby kidnapper, or President McKinley’s assassin? In fact, who knows the Pulse nightclub killer’s name? How many people know the July 20, 1944 would-be Hitler assassin’s name, or who strung up Mussolini or assassinated Trotsky?

        3. avatar JJ48 says:

          I think Felix is right. It’s just as easy as someone to become infamous by nickname as by real name. Jack the Ripper, the Zodiac Killer, the Unabomber; true, for the first two we don’t even know their true identity, but even in the last one, I’d bet more people would recognize the nickname than would recognize Ted Kaczynski.

          People can discuss if they like whether or not they think damnatio memoriae is valid censorship, but I strongly doubt it would have any impact one way or another on whether or not we get repeat events.

      2. avatar Remmi300blk says:

        I’m only talking about mass shootings. And by that I mean real mass shootings like Vegas or Sandy Hook, not the “300 mass shootings a year” tripe. There’s some serious research from behavior specialists showing that killers are copycats and seek fame. Denying them that fame reduces their incentive to attack. All without gun control.

        1. avatar Wzrd says:

          I agree with you to an extent. But less so about the name in particular, & more with the amount of media coverage of a given attack. Running the scenes of victims, photos of perpetrator, & constant speculation on motive nearly 24 hrs a day for weeks after the attack is more of the “fame motivation” IMO. If we didn’t saturate TV & internet news with these attacks I think less people would be inclined to commit such acts. I know that’d be hard because people want to know what’s happened & news channels/sites want viewers. But I honestly think it would make a difference if we didn’t pay so much attention to it. I mean no disrespect to victims & don’t intend to detract from the seriousness of such cases.

      3. avatar uncommon_sense says:


        What is in a name? A LOT to a demented psychopath.

        When a demented psychopath considers how video, audio, and print media will refer to him/her several thousand times, which reference do you think would arouse him/her more:
        (1) “Orlando nightclub attacker who wounded and killed dozens of people”?
        — or —
        (2) “John H. Doe, age 29, who killed 49 and wounded 58 at the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando Florida”?

        I don’t need a Ph.D. in Psychology or an M.D. in psychiatry to know that stating the attacker’s name, age, and exact body count will be a far greater incentive for a demented psychopath or similar.

        Sure, covering his/her attack in any sense provides some sadistic satisfaction. Why sweeten the deal?

        1. avatar Garrison Hall says:

          “When a demented psychopath considers how video, audio, and print media will refer to him/her several thousand times, which reference do you think would arouse him/her more . .:

          Only he wasn’t demented or a psychopath. He was instead a Muslim radical hell bent on carrying out Jihad. While it may not seem that way to us, what he was doing made perfect sense—to him. I think labeling these killers as “psychopathic” diminishes the kind of threat we face.

        2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Garrison Hall,

          I agree with you 100%

          F.Y.I. I wasn’t event thinking that the Pulse Nightclub attacker was a Muslim jihadist — rather I was thinking about spree killers such as the scumbag who attacked people in the theater in Aurora, Colorado and I was directing my comment at those types.

        3. avatar Big Bill says:

          Let’s try:
          (1) Mentally unbalanced sociopath killer
          Simply describing the killer as someone who killed people might indeed be somehow preferred, but describing him in unflattering terms just might not encourage other unbalanced sociopaths to imitate him.
          Most people do not like to be insulted. Most people do not do things that are likely to get them insulted on a large scale.

      4. avatar neiowa says:

        What’s in a name? Why do you think these useless “entertainment” types rebrand themselves by a single name? As Oprah.

        Oprah for President my ass. ODM (Oprah for Downstairs Maid).

        1. avatar Not Your Average House Honky says:

          “Oprah for President my ass. ODM (Oprah for Downstairs Maid).”

          Other than making yourself FEEL bigger, did this do anything for you, or for the conversation, for that matter?
          The only thing positive from it is that it confirmed what most people already know or suspect about you.
          You definitely are a racist, sexist, jealous, irrational, illogical, bitter son* of something not human or female. (*Or daughter – your transgender name isn’t any indication of your lack of sexual identity).
          Your mind is darker than your rectum, and according to your insignificant other, not nearly as enjoyable.
          Sleep well, A-hole.

        2. avatar Joe R. says:

          Ok, but still “Oprah for President my ass.”, right? Or are you a mutilated-turd brain?

    2. avatar little horn says:

      yep, thats exactly why quite a few of them have done it, fame.

    3. avatar Chris Mallory says:

      Hiding the names is a real good way to let the government get away with even more crap. It reeks of Stalin airbrushing out people he didn’t like any more.

      1. avatar Big Bill says:

        How often do you see the government naming assholes as opposed to the news/entertainment media naming assholes?

    4. avatar Foghat's Beret says:

      I agree, in the future if they were going to picture any mass shooter, they should just show a giant pile of shit (literally). That might help the association.

      1. avatar Roymond says:

        No, it has to be something related to the story.


        a pile of spent brass, and the other crap that got swept up with it.

        Just imagine how exciting it would be to be remembered as just another pile of spent brass.

  2. avatar YARB0892 says:

    Accessory to terrorism, accessory to pre-meditated murder, conspiracy to commit terror/murder, amongst others. Too bad we don’t hang murderers or their accomplices in public any more.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “Too bad we don’t hang murderers or their accomplices in public any more.”

      Islamic ‘justice’ is very much aligned with an ‘eye for an eye’ mentality. So, to me, since her husband’s attack was made in the name of Islam, it seems an apt sentence for her would be for her to be buried up to her neck and the stoned to death by the family members her husband murdered.

      When will people wake the fuck up that devout Islam is incompatible with western values, particularly United States values?

      1. avatar Curtis in IL says:

        Killing Muslim criminals has no deterrent value if said criminal fanatically believes that his heinous deed is his ticket to paradise and a lifetime supply of virgin goats.

        We need to come up with a punishment that speaks to the perverted Muslim moral belief system if we are going to deter them.

        1. avatar Ironhead says:

          How about this for a punishment… shove a burning koran up their @$$ using hot bacon grease for lube. Then shove a freshly used tampon in their mouth.
          Then no paradise and no 72 virgins.

        2. avatar California Richard says:

          I don’t get the feeling these people were “devout” Muslim types. If that were the case, she would be rocking the full bee keeper costume and he would have a bunch of facial hair. Instead he looks like he works for Google and she looks like a So Cal valley girl social media whore. Everything I see points to a bunch of low self esteem nut jobs. This guy seems like he was trying to escape his crappy life and make it mean something, even if that “something” was horrifying.

  3. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    Eject any relatives from the country and bulldoze their houses.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “…and bulldoze their houses.”

      The Israeli solution… 🙂

      1. avatar Tony says:

        If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

      2. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

        My understanding of a solution is that its application solves the problem. Has Israel eradicated terrorism?

        1. avatar Joe R. says:

          Your understanding fails to grasp a long-term solution.

    2. avatar Alec Johnson says:

      Mom goes to jail for an extended stay.

      His son, should be adopted by a Christian family and brought up accordingly. It’s the best way to stop the cycle..

      1. avatar Mack Bolan says:

        So he can grow up and slaughter his adoptive Christian family?

        Deportation is the only answer. Islam has no place in the West.

        They all must go back.

        1. avatar jwtaylor says:

          To deport someone they have to be a foreigner. You can’t “deport” an American from America. You can exile them.
          The thing stopping you from exiling Americans who have committed no crime, especially American children, is that Americans, like me, simply wont’ let you.
          But I have little concern with un-American trash thinking you can destroy the basic building blocks of our Constitutional Republic with crap like that. You are no threat.

        2. avatar Mack Bolan says:

          Sorry, the term I should have used was repatriate. Immigration is invasion after all.

          That said, as the resident Islamic apologist I wouldn’t expect much else from you. All your virtue signaling and belief in Americas magic dirt wont save you from the realities of culture and history.

        3. avatar cmac890 says:

          “Immigration is invasion after all”

          Well, I guess that box is open, now isn’t it. Remind me again how all different races, religions, and cultures got here in the first place? Pretty sure they didn’t grow on trees.

        4. avatar Chris Mallory says:

          JWtaylor, they are not Americans, no matter where they are born. There is no such thing as magic dirt. If you are not descended from someone who was here 1787 then you and your kids are immigrants.

        5. avatar 3/4 OF ME GETS TO STAY. says:

          “JWtaylor, they are not Americans, no matter where they are born. There is no such thing as magic dirt. If you are not descended from someone who was here 1787 then you and your kids are immigrants.”

          So if I understand you correctly, ALL Native Americans are Americans, despite “True” Americans efforts to wipe them out. Only one-tenth Caucasians are Americans, one-half Blacks are Americans, no Hawaiians, Native Alaskans, or Puerto Ricans.
          According to your arbitrary and capricious logic, a much higher percentage of Blacks are “Tru” Americans, as opposed to Caucasians.
          This, I might add, despite the roughly 146,500,000 immigrant that have come here since 1787?

          Ship ALL these damn “Untrue” Americans back. NOW!

    3. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

      As long as we’re doing the guilt by association and suspension of due process thing, I move that we confiscate from the general public all firearms similar to the ones the killer used.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Yeah… because clearly playing footsies with these terrorist assholes pretending they have rights is working out GREAT.

        1. avatar jwtaylor says:

          “Yeah… because clearly playing footsies with these gun toting assholes pretending they have rights is working out GREAT.”
          See how stupid you sound?

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          Clearly JW, equating uninvolved civilians with close associates of illegal combatants makes total sense…

        3. avatar jwtaylor says:

          “Close associates” are not co-conspirators. His child is a close associate. People he worked with are close associates. None of that matters unless they knew of or actively supported the crime.
          His wife did, and deserves the multiple life sentences I hope she serves. Random people he knows, or are related to, do not.
          You still don’t understand the basics of the Constitutional Republic, and what it means to be an American.

        4. avatar pwrserge says:

          You keep conflating a crime with an act of war. What he did was an act of war, that makes him an illegal combatant. It also makes anyone who aided him an illegal combatants. Illegal combatants don’t have rights under the laws and customs of war.

        5. avatar cmac890 says:

          This guy wasnt a state or a state actor, so I don’t know how he could declare war on anybody. Unless you know something about him that we all don’t.

          In any event, he lost.

        6. avatar jwtaylor says:

          ” It also makes anyone who aided him an illegal combatants. ”
          It makes anyone who aided him guilty, not necessarily illegal combatants. But the key phrase there is “who aided him.” Just knowing him is not aiding him. His child did not aide him. Just being related to him doesn’t equal aiding him in a crime.
          It also doesn’t help to stop these people, when the people who actually might know something about it are too scared of people like you to come forward.
          Remember, in the San Bernadino case, it was the shooter’s own Imam that alerted the FBI and threw him out of the mosque. Once those people are too scared to talk, we will have even more of these attacks.
          Stop helping the terrorists.

        7. avatar pwrserge says:

          Um… Islamic State ring any bells?

          As for Imams coming forward… Funny how we never hear about anybody turning these scumbags in BEFORE they carry out their attacks. I can tell you second hand stories about how Imams would swear that there are no Taliban anywhere near their villages while said Taliban were busy planting new IEDs every week on the roads outside their villages.

        8. avatar cmac890 says:

          Really pwrserge? ISIS? Come on, stop pulling my leg, show me his Daesh passport. I’m sure thats some photoshop GOLD right there.

          Mateen declared his loyalty to an ideology, a concept of an islamic ruled world. Not to an actual country, or principality, or any other sort of governmental jurisdiction. His violence, while in support of a bunch on punks with a fancy name that has the word “State” in it, is not an act of war. It was simply meant to scare us. Thats terrorism. Thats a crime. Learn the difference.

        9. avatar jwtaylor says:

          “Funny how we never hear about anybody turning these scumbags in BEFORE they carry out their attacks. ”
          If you aren’t hearing that then you aren’t paying attention, probably willfully. Willful ignorance is deadly.
          Because in the case of the San Bernardino shooter, that is literally exactly what happened. His Imam kicked him out of the Mosque and turned him in to the FBI. They FBI interviewed the Imam and the male shooter’s coworkers and excused his behavior based on a lack of evidence. All they had was the Imam’s words, and they didn’t take him seriously. That was in the public briefs made by the FBI. It was mainstream news.
          Why would any Muslim come forward now, when they will be ignored by law enforcement and blamed by people like you?

          As far as Afghanistan, I had Imams lie to my face as well, and I also had some warn me many times, and even recruited locals to help us. It was a complex relationship, since most military units were not willing to act immediately on their intel. We were.

      2. avatar Setnakhte says:

        I fear that too many will miss your sarcasm; there’s nothing like a heinous crime committed by an Other for bringing out the kooks who want to destroy the liberties that Americans bled to secure.

  4. avatar BLoving says:

    Omar Mateen asked his wife ‘How upset are people going to be when it gets attacked?’”

    Almost a pity you’re not around anymore so you could find out.*

    *oh, who am I kidding? He’d hardly be handed over to the mob for justice. No, he’d be treated with kid gloves and idolized by the rest of the prison population.

    1. avatar Rusty Chains says:

      Actually if he was in general population someone would kill him for the fame. Lots of folks know who Jack Ruby was because of who he shot.

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        Yes because US prisons aren’t a huge recruiting ground for radical islam.

      2. avatar California Richard says:

        He’d go to Supermax in Colorado and be in solitary for 23 hours a day with 1 hour of solitary outside time.

  5. avatar former water walker says:

    Life in prison for the moose-lim spouse…in Guantanamo.

  6. avatar Frank says:


    1. avatar YARB0892 says:


    2. avatar YARB0892 says:


  7. avatar pwrserge says:

    Gee… Imagine my shock… What’s it going to take for Americans to wake up and realize that Islam is not a religion and is thus not entitled to 1st amendment protections?

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      “Islam is not a religion”
      That one is going to win “stupidest thing on the internet” for the day, and I imagine hold the title for quite some time.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        So if a criminal street gang decides that their group is a new form of religion, they get 1st amendment protections too? Really?

        1. avatar jwtaylor says:

          A street gang is a street gang. They may be religious. Many are, and most that are in this country identify as Catholic.
          The gang is criminal, the religion is not.
          And none of that has anything to do with the simple fact that Islam is a religion. If you don’t even understand that, or won’t admit it, then you are either too ignorant or too stupid to be a part of the solution.

        2. avatar jwtaylor says:

          PwrSerge, let me be clear, I don’t think you are stupid. I don’t think you are ignorant. I appreciate your passion.
          It frustrates me to no end that someone who could be a powerful aide to liberty will be justly ridiculed and sidelined because of your stubbornness and irrational hatred.

        3. avatar Geoff PR says:

          JWT, I *suspect* a large dose of his stubbornness is rooted in his family history of their treatment by a truly repressive and brutal system…

        4. avatar pwrserge says:

          Geoff, you might also add the fact that my family has been fighting Islamists since the late 1970s and that’s just the last three generations… The Kuban cossacks were fighting the Turk and his lackeys for literally centuries before that. Nothing gives you a better understanding of Islam than growing up on war stories from your uncle and grandfather about these very same nutjobs.

        5. avatar Casey says:

          You mean like the Mormons did?

          Or scientologists?

          Or protestants?

        6. avatar DesertDave says:

          Jesús Malverde III
          Since then, he has become the non-approved patron saint of drug dealers, bandits and outlaws. A Mexican rapper performs under his name, and he has spawned a trilogy of drug-drenched action adventures with names like Jesús Malverde II: La Mafia de Sinaloa and Jesús Malverde III: Infierno en Los Angeles.

          They even have their own Saint, so yes.

  8. avatar cmac890 says:

    I’m gonna play devil’s advocate here and say that all that is neccesary for evil to triumph is for scared, abused, oppressed women to do nothing. If he carelessly murdered a bunch of people he didn’t know, imagine what he did to her. How scared did she have to be to know what was going to happen, know the right thing to do to stop it, and still decide that saving the lives of others wasn’t worth what she would endure for turning him in?

    Selfish? Cowardice? Thats for the monday morning quarterbacks and keyboard commandos here to decide. But I think she was a battered woman doing what battered women do: surviving.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Won’t somebody think of the wamyn… It’s not like she lived in America or anything…

      She’s an accomplice, plain and simple. Thus, she’s criminally liable for everything her fellow accomplice did.

      1. avatar cmac890 says:

        She obviously did what she did for a reason. I just think it’s worth looking beyond what you want that reason to be. Maybe even today America isn’t really the authority on treating women properly, so maybe she didn’t have the opportunity you wish she did to not be an accomplice.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Oh please, nowhere in the world are women treated better than America. Using “battered woman’s syndrome” is just an excuse that flies in the face of everything feminazis have been pushing for the past five decades. You can’t have it both ways ladies, either you’re strong independent individuals and are thus responsible for your own actions, or you’re not. Would anybody even be humoring this bullshit if the genders were reversed?

        2. avatar cmac890 says:

          I’m just saying that maybe they’re not all strong and independent. Maybe thats an ideal, or a burden. Maybe, if you haven’t had to live her life, you should probably shut the f*ck up about why she did what she did and let her tell it when she gets her day in court.

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          Again… Would you even humor that bullshit if the genders were reversed? If not, then I refuse to humor it in this case.

          I’m not going to go easy on terrorist accomplices just to placate the wamyn.

        4. avatar cmac890 says:

          First of all, it’s w-o-m-e-n. Learn some respect.

          And if I had any reason to think ANYONE was a less-than-willing participant in a crime, then that is absolutely something I’d look into. Maybe it’s right, maybe it’s not, but critical thinking is how we get to those answers.

        5. avatar pwrserge says:

          It’s wamyn for a reason. Every time you use gender as a shield to excuse bad behavior the wamyning intensifies.

        6. avatar cmac890 says:

          The reason is you’re a bigot. She’s guilty because she’s a Muslim, and she can’t possibly be innocent because then the bogey-women win.

          I’m not saying I’m right. I’m just saying you MIGHT be wrong, and exposing your remarkably narrow world view in the process. The windows in your mom’s basement are small, aren’t they?

        7. avatar pwrserge says:

          No, she’s guilty because she publicly admits to helping him scope out his targets. Everything else is irrelevant. Oh, and yes, being muslim equates to being a part of a criminal conspiracy. Taqiyya ring any bells?

          As for “my mom’s basement”… Yeah… Nice comeback there kiddo… How are your cats doing?

        8. avatar cmac890 says:

          No cats. Thinking about getting a Corgi though. Just don’t know if I can handle them shedding.

    2. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

      yeah, ok.
      i’m goin’ with mutual ideology.

    3. avatar neiowa says:

      Bull. She is a “Palestinian”. Born in the US to “Palestinian” parents/ who should have not even been allowed into the US. If we controlled our borders the SOB, his wife and their parents/families would not BE in the US. Thank you to the dem parties voter recruitment program

    4. avatar BLoving says:

      Hmm. Maybe… it’s not like we’ve never heard or read accounts of other women who were at least complicit with some pretty heinous acts from their husbands because they didn’t want to have to wonder where their next meal/meth fix would come from.
      So the question becomes: what did she know and would she have stopped it if she could? That is going to be harder to prove.
      But yes, I’d agree that proper vetting of immigrants didn’t happen here – different subject.

    5. avatar Ing says:

      If she was a battered woman doing what she thought necessary to survive, then that’s sad, but let’s still be clear about what she did.

      She knew she was helping someone plan mass murder. Dozens of innocent people died horribly because of her and the disgusting excuse for a human she married. I can’t summon any sympathy.

      1. avatar cmac890 says:

        I don’t think she’s going to get much. I simply meant to counter the idea that she was inherently evil, as the headline suggests. I don’t think it was that simple. Although maybe it was and she is, I don’t know. I certainly hope that anyone in her position, or with the knowledge that a crime is about to be committed, would have the courage to ask for help. It’s hard but it’s got to be better than going to jail for some nobody who’s too dead to do it himself.

        1. avatar Ing says:

          Fair point. She may not have an evil nature, but she did something evil, and for that she forfeits her “good person” card.

  9. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

    paraponera clavata.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      paraponera clavata.”


      That would be an *ugly* way to go, indeed :


  10. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    Homosexuals are carrying signs saying “Muslims are welcome here”. I would say that the gays got what was coming to them even though they didn’t expect it. Homosexuals hate Christians and they think the Muslims might be their allies because Muslims also hate Christians. I would say the homosexuals don’t understand the realities of the world.

    It’s sad when any innocent American is a victim of terrorism or any ordinary Street crime. But I have wondered why it is that gay people support bringing Muslims here. I think that shows just how really sick in the head gays really are.

    Libertarians, Liberals, and the Left totally support bringing murderers and rapists to America.

  11. avatar Ralph says:

    It’s almost as if we didn’t have enough home-grown scvmbags so we had to import that one.

    There’s not much we can do about native-born lowlifes except to put them in prison or elect them to national office. OTOH, there’s a lot we can do about imported fiends — like keeping them out of our country and forcing them do their killing in England or France.

  12. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    I wonder … how many of these “known-ish wolfe” attacks could be stopped if we’d put people on a “known-ish wolfe watch list”, and, you know, warch them? I mean in stead of outting non-terrorists on a “terrorist watch list”, then harassing, but not watching, them? The Pulse shooter was another kinda, sorta, kniwn-ish guy that they didn’t stop.

    What would happen if we rewarded the list keepers for getting it right? Stop some whack job, good. Harass someone who’s done nothing, bad.

    Every pocket knife the T S A took from not a terrorist is a failure. Every mass shooting they let happen, likewise. Maybe there’d be less shootings if they weren’t fiddling with pocket knives all the time.

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      I recently taught a Trauma Combat Casualty Course to my local law enforcement. They asked me if I could come up with a list of all of the veterans in the community. You know, so that they could be extra careful and bring a lot of back up and equipment in case they went all PTSD on the officers. Yes, they actually said that. They were clearly fearful of returning veterans and felt they needed to be monitored.
      Is this the kind of list you are referring to? Because it’s exactly the list some in law enforcement want. And it is certainly the list you will end up with.

      1. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

        Yet law enforcement agencies continue to wonder why people don’t hold them in high regard…

  13. avatar GS650G says:

    This is why the relatives and girlfriend of the Vegas shooter player extra dumb. I think they know way more than they admit.

  14. avatar zebra dun says:

    Islam does not raise or produce women who care about infidels, pagans and Christians. Nor does it foster standing up to a man or reporting his plans. It makes docile and servile females.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email