Austria: Grandmother raped by Muslim migrant has “lost the will to live”, a post from JihadWatch.org, with comments

The Qur’an teaches that Infidel women can be lawfully taken for sexual use (cf. its allowance for a man to take “captives of the right hand,” 4:3, 4:24, 23:1-6, 33:50, 70:30). The Qur’an says: “O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (33:59) The implication there is that if women do not cover themselves adequately with their outer garments, they may be abused, and that such abuse would be justified.

muslim-migrant-rapist-pixelated

“Grandmother, 72, who was raped by a 17-year-old asylum seeker after helping him out of a canal has ‘lost the will to live,’” by Sarah Dean, Mailonline, November 11, 2016:

A 72-year-old woman who was raped by a teenage migrant has the ‘lost the will to live’ a few months before her attacker is due to be released from jail in Austria.

The woman is reportedly fighting for her life in the intensive care ward at her local hospital after she stopped eating and is now only being kept alive by machines.

Her daughter, who until the tragedy was a refugee aid worker, said: ‘I knew it would eventually end like this.’

The pensioner was attacked on 1 September 2015 by a 17-year-old asylum seeker from Afghanistan when she offered him her hand to pull him out of a canal where he was swimming.

When the case went to court in January this year, the teen, identified as Wahab M., was given a 20-month jail sentence.

He will not be deported when he is released because the punishment is not more than three years.

The woman was attacked in autumn last year while walking her dog alongside the canal in Traiskirchen, where Austria’s largest refugee centre is located.

She told the court at the time: ‘It was a really hot day and I decided to take my dog for a walk along the Schwechat River, and saw two young men swimming there.’

She said that one of the young men had offered her his hand, asking her to help him onto the bank, which she had given.

She said: ‘Suddenly, I felt a blow from behind.’

She was grabbed then pushed to the ground, and the attacker put his hand over her mouth and used his other hand to tear off her clothing and rape her….

Germany: Muslim migrant plotted to bomb Brandenburg Gate for Islamic State
Six of the jihadis involved in Paris jihad massacres entered Europe as “refugees”
Quantcast

Comments

    • Charli Main says

      November 11, 2016 at 2:48 pm

      Better to castrate these Muslim bast**ds. Then they can spend the rest of their lives knowing that when they get to Allah´s La La land they will have to spend eternity looking at all those virgins, sexy boys and goats and not be able to enjoy them.

    • mortimer says

      November 12, 2016 at 1:59 am

      Koran 4.23-24 are commands to rape married captives. Since a true God would not command crimes against humanity, Islam is disproved by K.4.24 all on its own. There are, however, many other verses in the Koran that on their own demolish faith in Islam. A reasonably intelligent and moral deity could not have written much of the amorality and absurdity in the Koran.

  1. Kenneth T Tellis says

    November 11, 2016 at 2:39 pm

    And Christian Law says that the Muslims who rape Christian women must be castrated by removal of their sexual organs

    • Mo says

      November 11, 2016 at 6:21 pm

      @ Kenneth T Tellis

      “And Christian Law says that the Muslims who rape Christian women must be castrated by removal of their sexual organs”

      Oh, please. The Bible says no such thing. Of course this rape of an old lady is a despicable act. But let’s not make things up.

  2. Burt says

    November 11, 2016 at 2:50 pm

    Before all these animals are forcibly deported Frau Merkel should be dumped among them in a ‘migrant’ camp for them to do with what the hell they will. After that Cattle trucks containing every male muzloid who must be dispatched to Turkey or their country of origin whatever islamic hell hole they want to clain they come from.

  3. Shmooviyet says

    November 11, 2016 at 3:56 pm

    He won’t be deported after serving because the punishment isn’t more than three years.
    If THREE years is too long to give a beast who would beat and rape an elderly woman, what must one do to receive that sentence with subsequent deportation?? And YES he is a BEAST. A ‘son’ who steals from and abuses his aged mother could get longer than that in this country.
    Seems the laws are all sewn up to favor salvaging worthless “refugees”.

  4. DHazard says

    November 11, 2016 at 3:57 pm

    He wouldn’t have been convicted at all under Shariah, which has nothing to do with Islam. He only raped her because he was traumatized by not getting enough welfare from Austrian taxpayers. At least now he will soon be released and able to follow his false version of Islam by assaulting, raping and killing, which is part of his psychological recovery process from going to jail. He may also be helped by having more like minded immigrants to form Muslim social organizations, which will help occupy his free, time as an unemployed, ungrateful, inhumane follower of the most peaceful human to ever exist, Muhammad. But that will be the fault of Westerners, Zionists and the CIA.

  5. Crusades Were Right! says

    November 11, 2016 at 4:23 pm

    One of the goals of feminism, we are told, is to protect women from “rape culture”. A consequence of feminist propaganda is that the natural maternal instincts of European women have been diverted away from child-raising, and been redirected to Mohammedan migrants instead. (“Refugees Welcome,” say European women.)

    The result? A rape epidemic in Europe.

    Irony, or what?

    • emma says

      November 12, 2016 at 12:47 am

      Very good point! I never saw it that way, that even if the woman repudiates her maternal instinct for children, and if this instinct remains buried, then it will come out in a perverted way. Defending and encouraging rapists to come to one’s homeland is a sure perversion.

  6. Dom107 says

    November 11, 2016 at 4:44 pm

    Roll on the 2017 elections France first in April when the people can have their say.
    I heard the popsinger Sting in an interview say emigration is okay and we have always done it since humans came out of Africa. What he doesn’t seem to realise is the entire human population then was measured in thousands in Africa with the rest of the World totally empty. Today Africa has 1.16 billion people most of which would like a better life in Europe or North America plus maybe another billion or so from Islamic countries.
    An idiot like Merkel giving an open door to all these people would condemn us all to poverty and with their primitive cultures ,incessant war, like the countries they are escaping from. We would all benefit from a period of silence from lefty/liberal luvvies, and pop celebrities who should stick to their ignoble profession and give more of their vast wealth to help educate the poor and the ignorant to obviate the need of these people to escape from their tribalistic and Islamic hellholes

    • davej says

      November 11, 2016 at 6:15 pm

      Correct. The “refugees welcome” people fail to realize that there are literally billions of people around the world who would like to move in, collect benefits and then take over. You are outnumbered a thousand to one. It’s like wanting a glass of water and opening a spigot to the Pacific Ocean. (Even a few are undrinkable, using that metaphor).

  7. David says

    November 11, 2016 at 5:19 pm

    This is a horrible tragedy.
    BUT! The “animal-Maggot” that did this to her MUST BE PUT TO DEATH.
    DO NOT RELEASE the perpetrator. It will just encourage more to act the same.
    Public execution is in order.

  8. Angemon says

    November 11, 2016 at 5:29 pm

    A 72-year-old woman who was raped by a teenage migrant has the ‘lost the will to live’ a few months before her attacker is due to be released from jail in Austria.

    The woman is reportedly fighting for her life in the intensive care ward at her local hospital after she stopped eating and is now only being kept alive by machines.

    Poor woman… 🙁

    He will not be deported when he is released because the punishment is not more than three years.

    So f***ing what? A criminal is a criminal, and if you can get rid of a criminal by sending him back to where he came from why are you setting a “minimum required punishment”? Who chose that arbitrarily 3 years line? So if he was sentenced to 3 years and one day for a crime he could be deported but not if he’s sentenced to 3 years for the same crime?

  9. Mirren10 says

    November 11, 2016 at 7:38 pm

    ”When the case went to court in January this year, the teen, identified as Wahab M., was given a 20-month jail sentence.”

    So, let’s see; this piece of excrement was 1) given **asylum** in Austria. 2) That asylum will have included money, a roof, food, clothing, and medical care. All **free**. 3) He asks an **old lady** to give him a hand out of the river he’s swimming in. 4) She trustingly, and kindly does so. 5) He hits her, strips her, then *rapes* her.

    And the Austrian court sentenced him to **20 months** in jail. And *they* won’t deport him, because *they* chose to sentence him less than three years.

    God, I feel sick to my stomach. And ‘liberals’ can’t figure out why. I’d laugh, if I wasn’t so busy being enraged.

    Yeah, they’re not dangerous, they’re in danger. It is to laugh. (sourly)..

    • gravenimage says

      November 11, 2016 at 11:26 pm

      So true. Suicidal madness. They should ship him and his accomplice out after they serve a lengthy prison sentence. How can he just get twenty months for such a heinous crime?

      • RichardL says

        November 12, 2016 at 1:34 am

        I agree with you on almost everything: he should not be imprisoned in Austria, but extradited immediately by whatever means. If that POS is in a prison he harms civilised society by being fed (halal), clothed and housed. Castrate and extradite.

  10. abad says

    November 11, 2016 at 7:59 pm

    The monster who committed this crime deserves the death penalty but I suspect Austria did away with that.

    That poor woman.

  11. davej says

    November 11, 2016 at 8:06 pm

    Lots of stories about Muslim refugees raping and stabbing, none about them helping old ladies across the street, picking up litter, helping the homeless or adopting a kitten. Must be the biased media.

    • RichardL says

      November 12, 2016 at 1:37 am

      you are lucky: you don’t speak German. The German media invent and push stories of wonderfully talented invaders who also find money and bring it to the police, report nasty jihadis, etc.

      Trust me guys: people in Austria and Germany are exactly like you. They are enraged. So the government is dishing out propaganda and when people stop listening all hell will break loose. The AfD will be the strongest party by a wide margin next September.

  12. eduardo odraude says

    November 11, 2016 at 8:08 pm

    Impossible to believe that this rapist will not at least be deported. The people ruling Austria at present must be very corrupt or very stupid or both.

  13. ploome says

    November 11, 2016 at 8:18 pm

    those whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad

    Europe is dead..built it’s own concentration camp….they now have muslim overlords and guards who are taking their property, wealth and lives

    they brought it on themselves

  14. berserker says

    November 11, 2016 at 9:36 pm

    Her daughter, who until the tragedy was a refugee aid worker, said: ‘I knew it would eventually end like this.’

    – What does that mean?

    • gravenimage says

      November 11, 2016 at 11:30 pm

      Berserker and Shmooviyet, there have been a large number of stories about idealistic aid workers eager to work with “refugees” becoming utterly disillusioned and even terrified by the experience.

      I’m sure this is just what the daughter meant–that she was not surprised that Muslims would attack and rape her poor mom.

  15. gravenimage says

    November 11, 2016 at 11:12 pm

    Austria: Grandmother raped by Muslim migrant has “lost the will to live”
    ………………….

    This *poor woman*.

    Notice that the assailants solicited her help, then attacked her. Notice, also, that even with an elderly woman that it two of them to attack her.

    Notice, also, that her daughter used to work with “refugees”, and is not surprised by this savagery.

    Instead of losing the will to live, I wish this woman and her family would become infused with the will to *fight back*.

    • Davegreybeard says

      November 12, 2016 at 2:43 am

      Aye graven, where in hell is the OUTRAGE!

      A very good friend of mine, who grew up on a farm, told me a story about sheep.

      He said that sometimes at night, coyotes would attack the herd and that they would specifically attack ewes with kids. This was because the coyotes knew that the mothers would not leave their offspring. The coyotes would eat the flesh off the faces of the ewes.

      It was his job, as a farm boy, to shoot the ewes to put them out of their misery. The other sheep would do nothing to help the one under attack. He said after that, he had absolutely no respect for sheep.

      It would seem, that Europe has become a land of sheep.

  16. mortimer says

    November 12, 2016 at 2:02 am

    Austrian writer and speaker Elisabeth Sabbaditsch-Wolfe proved from the Islamic scriptures that Mohammed was a pedophile and rapist and was convicted by an Austrian judge for being intolerant.

    NOW a Muslim migrant shows Austrians that Muslims BELIEVE IN THE VIRTUE OF MUSLIM MALES RAPING MARRIED WOMEN and the Austrians must be sorry to admit that Elisabeth WAS RIGHT!!!

  17. Jas says

    November 12, 2016 at 2:34 am

    what sickness do these Islamic migrants bring with them? – are they nothing more than animals? – raping a 70- year old?! – unbelievable, but true…only the Western leaders are looking the other way, and painting rosy pictures…poor, weak leaders…too corrupt, and inept…

    • tgusa says

      November 12, 2016 at 2:54 am

      “Western leaders” at this moment that is a laughable and non-existent profession.
      Western leaders”, are pushing the rest of us into a corner and i don’t think they understand what that really means.

      Sexual assault even among their own seems to go hand in hand within islam. Wth?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to Austria: Grandmother raped by Muslim migrant has “lost the will to live”, a post from JihadWatch.org, with comments

  1. θ says:

    Generalisation is radicalisation. What if perhaps a migrant rapeist presumed he is a victim of all Westerners who commit the evilness with impunity like what currently the Russians and the Israelis do by persecuting the Arabs in Middle East?
    What if perhaps a migrant rapeist presumed he is obliged to avenge the Westerners inside the West itself rather than at his homeland Syria?

  2. θ says:

    Qur’an Q.3, v.110 says as the better generation the Moslem world doesn’t use a “generalisation” on Non-Mslems, not even on the people of Scriptures. If one even can’t avoid to curse the bad Jews and evil Christians (Nahi Munkar) due to their sins, at the same time he is still dutifully bound to invite the good ones among them to Islam (Amar Ma’ruf).

    Generalisation judgment is not our Islamic character.
    Jesus chooses an extreme path of generalising the love to all, even to devils and enemies; whereas Prophet Muhammad chooses a more better path: rational, balanced and practical by having a two-edged sword: inviting all to the goodness and fighting against the evilness.

    Resort and prepare always to use the “but” clause, goodwill gestures and open-mindedness toward the Non-Moslems, even in a battle field. The “but” clause is a token that differentiates Qur’an from Gospel.

  3. madmanna says:

    Jesus never disallowed the use of the sword in self-defence. He did not contradict the law of Moses. He commanded to buy a sword for self defence. Paul cites the sword of the state enforcing justice.

    Commanding love to all sometimes involves the use of violence to help those who are the victims of violence or unlawful force. The teaching of Jesus commands this.

    Muslims are selective and this is against the law of Moses.

    In the light of the bible sharia law is either superfluous or false.

  4. madmanna says:

    “What if perhaps a migrant rapeist presumed he is obliged to avenge the Westerners inside the West itself rather than at his homeland Syria?”

    The law of Moses only allows the perpetrator to be punished for the crime.

    Sharia law allows any member of the population of the “offending” government to be punished. This is wrong.

  5. madmanna says:

    “What if perhaps a migrant rapeist presumed he is obliged to avenge the Westerners inside the West itself rather than at his homeland Syria?”

    Which westerners are you talking about?

  6. madmanna says:

    Mohammed had Jews killed who had never done him any harm. Do you find that to be a good moral example for mankind?

  7. madmanna says:

    Kill the Jews wherever you find them? Just because they are Jews and some of their forefathers did bad things and they didn’t believe in Allah’s spoilt child.

  8. madmanna says:

    “a two-edged sword: inviting all to the goodness ”

    Yes, the two-edged sword has a special way of inviting, a very bloody way.

  9. θ says:

    “madmanna says: Mohammed had Jews killed who had never done him any harm. Do you find that to be a good moral example for mankind?”

    Under Prophet Muhammad’s Sunnah and Qur’an (Q.5, v.33), Jews of Qanuqa and Nader were spared alive with the banishment, there’s nobody of Jews that gets killed.
    Afterward, perhaps he intentionally declines to judge Jews of Qurayza on purpose to make a great lesson to the world of the comparison between his merciful Sunnah and the deadly Law of Deuteronomy, hence Jews of Quraiza were killed under the Law of Deuteronomy.

    “madmanna says: Kill the Jews wherever you find them? ”

    Jews of Qanuqa and Nader were spared with the banishment, per Q.5, v.33.

    “madmanna says: Yes, the two-edged sword has a special way of inviting, a very bloody way.”

    The bloody way is available indeed, but the Sunnah shows it is more preferable to just spare the Jews with the banishment in the wartime, and with taxation in the peacetime.

  10. madmanna says:

    Deuteronomy could not be applied to this situation.

    Mohammed should have applied the law of Moses: thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not covet.

  11. θ says:

    “madmanna says: Deuteronomy could not be applied to this situation. Mohammed should have applied the law of Moses: thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not covet.”

    You make a strawman argument. Using the Law of Deuteronomy is not the decision of Prophet Muhammad. The Sunnah just spares the Jews with the banishment. That’s it. There’s no “thou shalt not banish” in the Bible.

  12. madmanna says:

    The Jews committed no crime to be banished and all their belongings taken.

  13. θ says:

    //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Qaynuqa
    Muhammad then approached the Banu Qaynuqa, gathering them in the market place and addressing them as follows: O Jews, beware lest God bring on you the like of the retribution which he brought on Quraysh. Accept Islam, for you know that I am a prophet sent by God. You will find this in your scriptures and in God’s covenant with you.[13] To which the tribe replied: Muhammad, do you think that we are like your people? Do not be deluded by the fact that you met a people with no knowledge of war and that you made good use of your opportunity. By God, if you fight us you will know that we are real men![13]
    Shibli Nomani and Safi al-Mubarakpuri view this response as a declaration of war.[14]
    According to the Muslim tradition, the verses 3:10-13 of the Qur’an were revealed to Muhammad following the exchange.[2]
    [2] Guillaume 363, Stillman 122, ibn Kathir 2
    [13] Guillaume 363
    [14] Nomani 90-91, al-Mubarakpuri 239

  14. madmanna says:

    This is wrong of Mohammed. Under the law of Moses the Jews can only be attacked in self defence. To attack them because they declare their right to defend themselves is wrong.

    Of course for Mohammed to speak as if he has the right to wage war against those who deny his message is also wrong and a sign of self delusion.

  15. θ says:

    “madmanna says: This is wrong of Mohammed. Under the law of Moses the Jews can only be attacked in self defence. To attack them because they declare their right to defend themselves is wrong.”

    The Jews violate the Madinah Charter (22, 23, 42, 45) by refusing to reconfirm again the covenant (per Q.8, v.58) when Hamzah as the spokesperson of Prophet Muhammad came to Jews of Qaynuqa with a white flag. They show hostility by refusing to accept Hamza, they are neither extending its terms nor ending it officially.
    Q.8, v,58. If thou fearest treachery from peoples, reconfirm back to them on the same terms: for Allah loveth not the treacherous ones.
    Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah.
    The Prophet then wrote a contract between the muhajirun and the ansar with which he concluded a covenant and a truce with the Jews, confirmed them in their religion and their property, and imposed obligations on them and guaranteed them certain rights.
    22 No believer who understands what is said in this document and who believes in Allah and the last day shall give assistance to a wrongdoer or to give him shelter. If anyone helps him or shelters such a person, upon him be the curse and wrath of Allah on the day of resurrection. No price or substitute shall be accepted from him.
    23. Whenever you differ about anything it is to be referred to Allah and Muhammad.
    42. Whenever there is disagreement among the people of this document and trouble to be anticipated, the matter is to be referred to Allah and Muhammad. Allah is the most scrupulous and truest of this document.
    45. Whenever they are summoned to conclude and to accept a peace treaty, then they shall conclude and accept it. And whenever they summon to the like of that, then they have the right for this vis-à-vis the believers except whoever makes war on account of religion. Everyone has his share from their side which is directed towards him.

    From the Law of the Torah, the Jews were guilty of offending both Prophet Muhammad and his emissary of truce Hamza whom they refuse to meet.
    Exo 22:28
    Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people.
    Acts 23:5
    Then said Paul, I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people.
    Acts 25:11
    For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die: but if there be none of these things whereof these accuse me, no man may deliver me unto them. I appeal unto Caesar.

  16. madmanna says:

    Mohammed wasn’t their ruler and had no right to impose any conditions upon them.

    They perceived him as a threat to their livelihood and wellbeing. They formed the judgement that his real intention was to plunder and banish them or worse because they did not believe his claims.
    Mohammed knew that the Jews could not recognize him as a prophet without compromising their religious beliefs. He used this knowledge to create a conflict of claims with them.

    In this context they had the right to break their alliance with him and ally themselves with others who they thought could protect them against him.

    Under the law of Moses this negative view of the Jews towards Mohammed does not give him the right to attack them. None of the biblical prophets was given the right to attack those who did not believe his message. Under the law of Moses only an actual violent physical attack gives the victim the right to defend himself using the same means.

  17. θ says:

    “madmanna says: Mohammed wasn’t their ruler and had no right to impose any conditions upon them.”

    Do you have any evidence to provide this baseless accusation on Prophet Muhammad? What is your proof that he forced or threatened the Jews to accept the Madinah Charter? Is there any word or deed of him that imposed the compulsion on the Jews so that they somewhat signed the treaty under duress? Where do you get the idea that the Jews were forced – by whom, when, where, how? – to accept him as the Arbiter of the tribal disputes between the Jews and the Arabs?
    If he really wanted to attack the Jews, he would not have sent Hamza to come to the Qaynuqa with the white flag on purpose to reconfirm again the covenant. In fact it is the Jews who don’t give an answer whether they continue the Madinah’s covenant or officially choose to terminate it with good manner.
    Moreover, why do 2 other tribes of the Jews, Nader and Qurayza choose to remain with him and Moslems?
    I think you just projected the oldest vile Anti-Ishmael hatred of the Bible on him, which predated Antisemitism. The Jews just can’t believe that three angels whom they know very well, i.e. Gabriel, Michael, and Raphael answered such a “broken arrow” request (all out assistance of offensives) of Prophet Muhammad to defeat the Quraysh in the battlefield.

    “They perceived him as a threat to their livelihood and wellbeing. They formed the judgement that his real intention was to plunder and banish them or worse because they did not believe his claims.”

    What’s the proof? Is it because Ishmael was given the lots of land of Arabia along with a larger region from the Nile to the Euphrates by God?
    Why do the Non-Moslems lie and make a defamation of character on Prophet Muhammad? Because of Arab race? or what? Defamation of character is an attack on the reputation of someone by publishing falsely and maliciously things that slander and injure.

    “Mohammed knew that the Jews could not recognize him as a prophet without compromising their religious beliefs. He used this knowledge to create a conflict of claims with them.”

    If so, why do 2 other tribes of the Jews, Nader and Qurayza choose to remain with him and Moslems?

    “In this context they had the right to break their alliance with him and ally themselves with others who they thought could protect them against him.”

    If so, why do those Qaynuqas not ally themselves Nader and Qurayza instead?

    “Under the law of Moses this negative view of the Jews towards Mohammed does not give him the right to attack them. None of the biblical prophets was given the right to attack those who did not believe his message. Under the law of Moses only an actual violent physical attack gives the victim the right to defend himself using the same means.”

    What attack? Prophet Muhammad just sent Hamza with a white flag, and besieged the Jewish fortresses in purpose to prevent the Jews from waging an unnecessary war. It is the Jews themselves who got terrorised by their own prejudices that Moslems may slaughter them. Based on Deut 18:18, the Jews were supposed to be judged with a similar prejudice they accused Moslems of doing, i.e. slaughtering, but Prophet Muhammad just chooses to spare and banish them alive.
    Dt 19
    18 And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother;19 Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you.

    Moreover, Paul says the verbal offense is worthy of death. Did he get a false Spirit now?
    Acts 25:11
    For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die: but if there be none of these things whereof these accuse me, no man may deliver me unto them. I appeal unto Caesar.
    Exo 23
    1 Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness.2 Thou shalt not follow a multitude to [do] evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment:

    Moreover, David “indirectly” orders the punishment of an insulter Shimer thru his son Solomon. David asked Solomon to kill Shimei who had once insulted David’s in the public place – even though David himself had forgiven Shimei – by mocking David’s violent life, which actually he did in the name of God, because of God, and for God and other Monotheists primarily.
    Shimei’s fate is far worse than what was happened on the poets Afak, Asma, Ashraf. Prophet Muhammad
    2Sam.16
    7 And thus said Shimei when he cursed, Come out, come out, thou bloody man, and thou man of Belial:
    1Kgs.2
    8 And, behold, thou hast with thee Shimei the son of Gera, a Benjamite of Bahurim, which cursed me with a grievous curse in the day when I went to Mahanaim: but he came down to meet me at Jordan, and I sware to him by the LORD, saying, I will not put thee to death with the sword.9 Now therefore hold him not guiltless: for thou art a wise man, and knowest what thou oughtest to do unto him; but his hoar head bring thou down to the grave with blood.46 So the king commanded Benaiah the son of Jehoiada; which went out, and fell upon him, that he died. And the kingdom was established in the hand of Solomon.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s