Here is my review of Sherry Jones's notorious -- and dreadful -- novel of Muhammad and Aisha, The Jewel of Medina, from Middle East Quarterly:
Jones, correspondent for the Bureau of National Affairs news agency, never expected her novel about Aisha, daughter of Abu Bakr, the first caliph, and favorite wife of the prophet of Islam, to become a battleground in the war over free speech between the West and the Muslim world. Rather, as she explained, "I have deliberately and consciously written respectfully about Islam and Mohammed … I envisioned that my book would be a bridge-builder."[1]The Jewel of Medina became a cause célèbre when Random House dropped it in August 2008 just before publication, citing fear of threats from Muslims—threats, it bears noting, that had not yet materialized. Subsequently, three Muslims were arrested in London for firebombing the offices of the book's new British publisher, Gibson Square, which also then dropped the book.[2] It has now been published in the United States by Beaufort Books, which, in a press release, said that it "knows how to look for trouble."
But whoever reads The Jewel of Medina, after suffering through stilted Hollywood historical epic dialogue larded with Arabic tidbits for authenticity's sake, will wonder what the fuss was all about. True to her word, Jones offers a portrait of Muhammad that is so flattering as to be worthy of British religion writer Karen Armstrong, who compared Muhammad to Gandhi.[3]
To be sure, abundant evidence in the Arabic literary sources backs up her portrayal of Muhammad. One of his companions described him as "neither rough nor harsh. He is neither noisy in the markets nor returns evil for evil, but he forgives and pardons."[4] Another said that Muhammad was "more bashful than a maiden in her seclusion."[5] He "was not a reviler or a curser nor obscene."[6] One of Muhammad's servants remembered that his master never scolded or rebuked him: "So I served the Prophet at home and on journeys; by Allah, he never said to me for anything which I did: Why have you done this like this or, for anything which I did not do: Why have you not done this like this?"[7]In line with this, Jones's Muhammad is a rock of gentle stability. When Aisha is accused of adultery and roughly treated by the crowd, Aisha rests in the arms of Muhammad, sighs with relief and declares: "Trying to forge my own destiny had nearly destroyed me, but his love held the power to heal." Or, when Aisha lashes out jealously against his other wives, Muhammad's rebuke is mild, and he quickly tries to cheer her up. Muhammad does fight battles in the book, but they appear always to be defensive. There is little to indicate that he would ever have uttered such words as those attributed to him in a famous hadith (sayings and actions of Muhammad): "I have been ordered to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but God and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God."[8]
Indeed, the novel contains no hint of the Muhammad who, according to another hadith, even struck Aisha herself. One night, thinking she was asleep, he went out with Aisha surreptitiously following him. When he found out what she had done, he hit her: "He struck me on the chest, which caused me pain, and then said: ‘Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?'"[9] The Muhammad whom Islamic tradition records as saying that "a man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife" is not in this book.[10] Nor would we get any hint from Jones's sugary account of Muhammad's interactions with his many wives of what might have moved Aisha to say, "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women."[11]
In keeping with this approach, Jones paints Muhammad's enemies with lurid comic-book strokes as evil, treacherous, and repulsive. The Jews of the Qaynuqa tribe, whom Muhammad eventually exiled, lurk sinisterly in doorways and play evil pranks upon Muhammad's wives. Abu Sufyan, the Quraysh leader who fought Muhammad and the Muslims in the battles of Badr, Uhud, and the Trench, abducts and murders a friend of Aisha; Jones describes his sweat glistening "like beads of grease in every fold and crease of fat" while his accomplice's "pocked face seemed to writhe with hatred."
Jones depicts her heroine as a plucky seventh-century Nancy Drew, aching to take part in swordplay with the men and actually doing so on a few occasions. A feisty Aisha, tart of tongue and ready for a scrap, is plausible enough in light of many Islamic traditions recording her trenchant remarks. Jones faithfully records Aisha's acid comment to Muhammad after he received a divine revelation commanding him to marry his former daughter-in-law Zaynab: "I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires."[12] Her combative spirit is plausible enough given Aisha's later role in the Battle of the Camel in 656, during which she directed the incipient Sunni forces against Ali's nascent Shi‘ites while sitting inside a howdah on a camel's back—thus giving the battle its name.
Given its hagiographical presentation of a surpassingly gentle and wise Muhammad and a combative Aisha, why should Muslims object?—because, The Jewel of Medina is, after all, a novel, and Jones's treatment of Aisha herself has the breathless romantic tone of a Harlequin romance.
Jones embroiders on Islamic tradition in ways that reflect poorly upon Aisha and might, therefore, draw the ire of Muslims who revere her under the traditional title of "Mother of the Believers." In her account, the great love of Aisha's life is not Muhammad, at least initially, but none other than Safwan ibn al-Muattal. In Islamic tradition, only those who slander Aisha's name with accusations of adultery say that she and Safwan had any romantic connection. Safwan was the Muslim warrior who happened upon Aisha in the desert by chance when a caravan had inadvertently left her behind as she searched for a lost necklace. When they caught up with the caravan, Aisha was accused of adultery for being alone with Safwan and was not exonerated until Muhammad received a divine revelation requiring four witnesses to prove such crimes: "Why did they not produce four witnesses? Since they produce not witnesses, they verily are liars in the sight of God."[13]
In the standard Muslim account, Aisha is innocent but has no way to prove her innocence short of divine intervention; in Jones's account, Aisha is innocent—but not completely. She has loved Safwan all her life and is bitterly disappointed when she is married off to Muhammad; she even plots to lose her necklace and miss the caravan while searching for it so as to meet Safwan in the desert, and though they share a few fervent kisses, ultimately she repels his advances and remains loyal to Muhammad. Nevertheless, pious Muslims may question whether it is seemly to portray the Mother of the Believers as being even that susceptible to temptation. Does such a portrayal qualify as blasphemy and, thereby, justify violence according to the most virulent interpreters of Islamic law? That is doubtful in the extreme. But feathers will be ruffled.
It is primarily in this episode that the book most deviates from standard Muslim pieties. Otherwise Jones seems positively determined not to portray Muhammad in a negative light, no matter how well attested negative elements of his biography may be in Islamic tradition. The most notorious example of this is her placement of the consummation of Muhammad's marriage with Aisha when she is fourteen. Jones even makes the extended delay of this consummation, out of Muhammad's tender concern for the maturity of his child bride, a major element of the dramatic movement of her story.
Yet the Islamic sources are not so circumspect. According to a hadith that appears multiple times in Bukhari, the hadith collection considered most reliable by Muslims, Aisha was six when she married Muhammad and nine when the marriage was consummated.[14] In light of Muhammad's status as an "excellent example of conduct,"[15] this has given a sanction to child marriage that has enabled the practice to be perpetuated and reform of it made difficult in certain areas of the Islamic world.
Jones, however, follows the lead of some Islamic apologists in the West who point to some traditions recorded by the Islamic historian Tabari that suggest that Aisha was older at the time of her marriage to Muhammad. Tabari's witness is inconsistent as he records at one point that Aisha was indeed nine at the time of the consummation and, elsewhere, that all of Abu Bakr's children "were born in Al-Jahiliyyah"—that is, in the pre-Islamic period of ignorance that ended in 610 with the first revelation of the Qur'an to Muhammad. That would make Aisha at least twelve at the time of her betrothal and several years older at the consummation.
Unfortunately, however, for Muslims in general, the testimonies of the compilers of the two sahih (sound) hadith collections, the imams Bukhari and Muslim, weigh far more than that of Tabari. In her delaying of Aisha's deflowering, Jones appears to have been excessively concerned not to offend her Western Muslim, as well as non-Muslim, readers.
But in that she has, in ways she surely never foresaw, singularly failed.
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and author of eight books, including The Truth About Muhammad and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades).
[1] Sky News (Isleworth, U.K.), Oct. 2, 2008.
[2] The Daily Mail (London), Oct. 2, 2008.
[3] Harvard University Gazette Online, Nov. 8, 2007.
[4] Ibn Sa‘d, Kitab at-Tabaqat al-Kabir, S. Moinul Haq and H K. Ghazanfar, trans. (New Delhi: Kitab Bhavan, n.d.), vol. 1, p. 422.
[5] Ibid., vol. 1, p. 432.
[6] Ibid., vol.1, p. 433.
[7] Muhammed Ibn Ismaiel al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari: The Translation of the Meanings, Muhammad M. Khan, trans. (Houston: Darussalam, 1997), vol. 9, book 87, no. 6911.
[8] Ibid., vol. 1, book 2, no. 25, book 8, no. 392; vol. 4, book 56, no. 2946; vol. 9, book 88, no. 6924, book 96, nos. 7284-5; also in other hadith collections.
[9] Imam Muslim, Sahih Muslim, rev. ed., Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, trans. (New Delhi: Kitab Bhavan, 2000), book 4, no. 2127.
[10] Abu-Dawud Sulaiman bin al-Aash'ath al-Azdi as-Sijistani, Sunan abu-Dawud, Ahmad Hasan, trans. (New Delhi: Kitab Bhavan, 1990), book 11, no. 2142.
[11] Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 7, book 77, no. 5825.
[12] Ibid., vol. 6, book 65, no. 4788.
[13] Qur., 24:13.
[14] Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 5, book 63, nos. 3894, 3896; vol. 7, book 67, nos. 5133-4, 5158; Muslim, Sahih Muslim, book 4, no. 1623; Abu Dawud, Sunan abu-Dawud, book 5, no. 1341, book 41, no. 4915.
[15] Qur., 33:21.
Why let a little pedophilia get in the way of a good love story...(cough, cough).
I'm fairly certain Barney Frank, his house buddies and those who think like them shrug and say, 'What's the big deal?'
So sorry that trees died to publish this crud and that you had to waste your valuable time reading it.
I can envision the cover of this book: Fabio dressed as Mo with a scratchy beard. Priceless.
Mohammad the greatest pedophile ... gets a boner and lusting after young prepubescent girls. The ones who are playing with dolls. Even the Islamic heaven is full of prepubescent girls and boys. Sick. But this the religion of peace. Moreover, grown women are the forced into burqas and many have their genitals mutilated and are beaten or even killed. Perversion, genital mutilation, misogyny and pedophilia are the dictates of Islam.
Muhammad and Aisha, a Lewd Story
good one Champ.
I actually bought the book and barfed not too far into it. It was the line, 'The love in my husband's eyes made me blush.' I put it down and won't pick it up again. Oh, and it was about 2-3 pages into it when I read that. I don't have time for that nonsense - a brainwashed, sexually abused child who by the time she was at that point in her life mohammed was well over 60 and Aisha was a young teenager.
gag
What a waste of my money. I only bought it because I figured that if the muslims were all hot and bothered about it - it must really be good. Boy, was I wrong.
Isn't this technically Kiddie Porn?
And Mohammad, the child molestor of the Desert?
Gag and barf eh...I think I will pass.
Besides I have to save my aluminum can money up for 'Stealth Jihad'...
As I recall, some Western academicians (Pardon the term!) were the ones who criticized Jewel of Medina. Dhimmis! The Moslems didn't have to whine because the West does the whining for them.
Arguably the route to destroying any power that Islam has over the mind of man is to decimate its founder. Destroy his reputation, possessed as he was of malevolencies and fraudulencies aplenty, and you're two-thirds of the way there in assuring that Islam will eventually be assigned to the trash heap of history. In my way of thinking, Mohammed is the key to prevailing over Islam. It's both paradoxical and ironic, but what is more important is that it is in accord with the truth of things.
So, Robert, I shouldn't opt for this novel over the "Stealth Jihad"?
Is that what you are telling me?
Didn't we just read in a recent posting that some professor in Germany claims that it's very possible that Muhammed never even existed, or at least that there is no hard evidence that he did?
So here we have a love story based on a possibly mythical character romancing a pre-pubescent girl of disputable age, in Arabia, centuries ago. And some people want to kill the author for not getting her facts straight.
It's been said that nothing is more firmly believed that that which can never be proven. I just wish those objecting demanded as much respect for truth as they do for belief.
These May-December marriages seldom work out. Yes, I know about Charlie Chaplin and Oona O'Neill, but that's just the exception that proves the rule.
Am I the only one that notices the conspicuous absence of all of the usual apologists on threads like this (AM, JF, DOI, etc.) I mean, what up?? Come defend your champion here, for goodness sake!
"Trying to forge my own destiny had nearly destroyed me, but his love held the power to heal."
Oh Brother...this is really painful.
It appears Irshad Manji thinks it is good!
http://jewelofmedinabook.com/index.html
"Sherry Jones does an extraordinary service to Islam in popularizing -- and humanizing -- a Muslim heroine. It's the kind of history that I never learned in my mosque or madressa. As a faithful, feminist Muslim, I say 'mashallah' for this riveting novel." -- Irshad Manji, Director, Moral Courage Project, New York University
God this says so much about Irshard Manji, and her supposed knowledge about her own faith. "History"! "History"!
Does she realize this comes from the "Historical Fiction" section for a reason, right? Sort of like her version of Islam....
Concerned Citizen,
There is no need to "apologize" for the drivel that substitutes for "scholarship" here. You are only tweety birds singing the only tweety song you know, learned from your tone deaf hack pseudo-"scholar", Mr. Spencer. By the way, did you notice he still has that counter at the bottom of the page to remind us of how much money he shamelessly makes maligning the faith of 7.8 billion faithful and harmless Muslims? What is the site's value up to now, Robert, $125 million? Why not retire instead of poisoning simpleton, uneducated minds all day long, with your dishonest lies? You know the truth, but still you persist in your out of context fabrications, because you know nothing of the truth. What is it, Robert, can you shoot someone with a gun in the United States, or not? Answer! And you don't even know the proper prohibitions against alcohol. Darura! That plus my goat's behind won't even by you a cup of coffee at my mosque.
Truth,
Abdullah Mikail
Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at November 19, 2008 12:17 AM
-------------------------------------------------
Test
"maligning the faith of 7.8 billion faithful and harmless Muslims..."
-- from a posting above by a Muslim Defender of the Faith
There are now apparently more "faithful" and "harmless" (!) Muslims in the world than there are people. Possibly those rocks and trees, the ones that appear in certain unsavory Hadith, that are now being counted in the total. Anything to raise the total, to make it as scarily impressive as possible.
7.8 billion Muslims? Hmmm. But there are only some 6 billion people in the world total. Hmmm again. Must be some kind of million-man math calculation which kuffaars just can't grasp because they're not in possession of the true faith. Yeah, that's gotta' be it.
Hugh,
Your rhetorical bangles are cheap and noisy, and shouldn’t be worn by someone so used to showing off their feet tapping and jingling…in other words, don’t intend to allure others with what you wear.
Your condescension to persons who show modesty is only an expression of your own worth as a human being. You get what you ask for, and I am sure it will serve as a deterrent to others of like mind, murderous stealing thugs such as yourself, that is.
You mock "7.8 billion". Have you not in your calculus included 14 centuries of the fruitful begetting your betters by the billions? :)
What you may, in your shallow way, see as “supremacist", is simply what we believe, and we have the most up to date and complete version of the message. Heed the stern warning not to “plumb the depths” as it were in an attempt to increase one’s knowledge of the one true religion…Islam.
Unsavory, indeed! Scary? Boo!
Truth,
Abdullah Mikail
Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at November 19, 2008 1:18 AM
-------------------------------------------------
WTF??? Couldn't be more than 1.3 billion if you counted the goats. Get a grip, Abdullah.
He is no doubt talking about the Space Aliens who might or might not have converted to Islam.
Here is a riveting discussion at Islamica some time ago...
http://www.islamicaweb.com/forums/religion-spirituality/4012-would-space-aliens-need-muslims.html
He said Muslims, not people...this explains so much.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42553000/jpg/_42553621_mashaalap416.jpg
Abdullan, Slave of Allan—
RE: “...my goat's behind won't even by you a cup of coffee at my mosque.”
“MY GOAT’S BEHIND”??
What a revealing topic for you, a muslim, to reference, fer sure.
Perhaps YOUR goat’s behind would be worth more and you COULD by (sic) a cup of coffee at your mosque if you also offered the following new product that’s been widely reported to be gaining in popularity in many, repressive, backwards, violent, uneducated, 6th century countries-–you know, all the sharia-controlled, islamic ones (those you hypocritically don’t choose to live in)--
http://www.thenoseonyourface.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/now.jpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1pHR1rM2tw
Abdullan, have you been drinking again? You always get more belligerent and make more personal verbal attacks after the alcohol loosens your anger. And what up with your talk about shooting someone with gun? What up with a MUSLIM talking about shooting someone in America with a gun?
I thought muslims mostly just bomb, stab, or strangle anyone who “offends” them when they merely point out, directly from the koran and ahadith, all the violence and soul-numbing slavery that is in the core teachings of islam?
AM:
With billions of bottoms raised to the roof in millions of mosques, is it any wonder that so much hot air emanates from them!
Hugh, you really must stop being a 'murderous stealing thug'!
Actually, that entire sentence sounds like a threat to me!
"You get what you ask for, and I'm sure it will act as a deterrent to others of like mind"
What is the "deterrent"? Please enlighten the "simple and uneducated"!
Abdullah Mikail wrote:
By the way, did you notice he still has that counter at the bottom of the page to remind us of how much money he shamelessly makes maligning the faith of 7.8 billion faithful and harmless Muslims?
.....................
I suppose you have to include the three Muslims who firebombed the offices of Gibson Square in London among those "harmless" 7.8 billion faithful.
An observation.
For over a year I have been steadily reading my way through *everything* in the archives here. Preserved in those archives are many exchanges, some of them very lengthy, between professing Mohammedan apologists - some of them aggressive from the get-go, some of them initially attempting a tone of sweet reasonableness - and other, non-Muslim posters.
And one thing that all the Mohammedans have in common is that, if the exchange is carried on for long enough, and the non-Muslims prove both persistent and resistant, and refuse to be either frightened or bamboozled, the Mohammedan completely 'loses it' and either spews forth the ugliest sort of verbal violence (since, of course, in a forum such as this, they cannot progress to physical violence against their interlocutor), or a bizarre and chaotic discourse that is even more disturbing than mere insults. Their speech becomes Unlanguage or Antilanguage; like the nonsense babbled by certain of the monsters that Dante encounters in the Inferno.
Here is M Scott Peck's tentative attempt, in his book 'People of the Lie', to delineate what he calls the personality of the genuinely evil human being. Note particularly 'point d'.
"the time is right, I believe, for psychiatry to recognise a distinct new type of personality disorder to encompass those I have named evil.
'In addition to the abrogation of responsibility that characterizes all personality disorders, this one would specifically be distinguished by:
'a. consistent destructive, scape-goating behaviour, which may often be quite subtle
'b. excessive, albeit usually covert, intolerance to criticism and other forms of narcissistic injury
'c. pronounced concern with a public image and self-image of respectability, contributing to a stability of life-style, but also to pretentiousness and denial of hateful feelings or vengeful motives
'd. intellectual deviousness with an increased likelihood of a mild schizophreniclike disturbance of thinking at times of stress."
By 'intellectual deviousness' in point d., Peck is referring to the persistent telling of lies, which in many other places in the book, People of the Lie, he pegs as a distinguishing mark of the truly evil person or group.
But it's that 'schizophreniclike disturbance of thinking' that I want to focus on here. Elsewhere in the book he gives examples of what he means...and those examples reminded me forcibly of what I have seen, many times, on this comments floor, whenever Mohammedans were sufficiently cornered.
They simply stop making any kind of sense.
Dear Abdullah,
Please, think about Islam and what the deepest in you could feel to be correct:
1. What would you think if this year (2008) you meet someone pretending to be a prophet and having sex with a nine year old girl?
Would you consider him as a real prophet or a dangerous sexual maniac?
2. What would you think if this year (2008) that pretending prophet said to you that you should kill a person that has insulted him?
Would you consider him as a real prophet or as a dangerous psychopath?
3. What would you think if this year (2008) that pretending prophet said to you that you should drink the urine of a camel in order to be cured from an illness?
Would you consider that person as a real prophet or as an idiot?
And I could add many other questions in this kind, but I do not get the time to do so.
Please, do not think about Islam and the past. Think about what you would think now if you met such a guy.
Thereafter, think about Islam, and Mohammad and the Sunna (Hadiths).
Really, I believe that you will come to the conclusion that believing that Mohammad is a prophet of the real God is insulting God. It is a blaspheme to think that God could promote a pedophile, murderer, ... as his prophet.
So, stop to be blasphemous to God, leave islamic sickness!
I pray so that you could be saved and happy. You could never be happy with such a bunch of lies as Islam is.
You would think that Mohammedans would try to play down their numbers, since the more of them there have been throughout history the more pathetic that history becomes. 7.8 billion Muslims over 1350 years. Now, let's put aside the fact that Mohammedans invariably exaggerate their numbers and say things like "we vastly outnumber Jews in America" (2.3 million max. compared with 10 million Jews in America: Islamic mathematics, along the lines of 1/3 + 2/3 + 1/8 = 1). Compare Islamic history with the history of Israel over the last 60 years. Think of how little Muhammedans have accomplished, and how the vast majority those who did accomplish anything were more than likely to have not been Muslim, and how much of other people's history Muslims have tried to appropriate. How many Israelis? 25 million max, and that's not counting the millions of Arabs in Israel, who have never been worth the ground they stand on? Yeah, a pretty bleak Islamic history indeed.
Thank you for the Scott Peck reference, Dumbledoresarmy. It's true that they invariably scapegoat, never take responsibility for their own actions, and ultimately fail to make sense, since they can never rely on logic to prove anything. Logic always fails Muslims, just like history, themselves, and their "faith." It really is a disease, both a mental and a psychological one at that.
Islam is a religion of peace, that's why they're always angry about something or other.
we have the most up to date and complete version of the message.
Yes this message was recounted and scratched on some camel skin by from a caravan robber,child molester, rapist and murderer prophet. islam the cult that keeps on killing.
Robert, thank you for reading this book.
I purchased it, and managed to wade through 5 chapters of unmitigated tosh that would embarrass a Mills & Boon author.
In general, I'm against the burning of books, but this one should be considered on grounds of taste alone.
It's appalling!
L.Drummond.
Why not retire instead of poisoning simpleton, uneducated minds all day long, with your dishonest lies?
You talkin' 'bout me?
I said, are you talking about me, chump?
Where is Robert De Niro (Taxi Driver) when you need him?
ABDULLAH: "Heed the stern warning not to “plumb the depths” as it were in an attempt to increase one’s knowledge of the one true religion…Islam."
RESPONSE: This could easily be construed as a threat. It is most certainly an expression of religious supremacism and is an affront to all who don't share the "one true religion."
ABDULLAH: "By the way, did you notice he still has that counter at the bottom of the page to remind us of how much money he shamelessly makes maligning the faith of 7.8 billion faithful and harmless Muslims? What is the site's value up to now, Robert, $125 million?"
RESPONSE: Jihadwatch is quite obviously a non-profit organization (hence, no dot."com"), does not accept advertising, and the counter at the bottom registers visitors, not dollars and cents.
Anyone who could possibly believe that this web-site's value is "125 million" has no real understanding of the relative value of the internet or money.
Abdullah (unhinged) wrote:
You know the truth, but still you persist in your out of context fabrications, because you know nothing of the truth.
Once again, another brilliant display of Islamic logic. So which is it Abby? Please respond when you sober up.
I'll wait for it to be sold as a used paperback. Even then, I doubt there will be enough Pepto-Bismol in the world... The excerpts are so sweet they make my teeth hurt.
I have to wonder who Sherry Jones's target audience is. Women, yes, that's obvious. But what group or groups of women? Feminist Muslims, who are desperate to overlook the scandal of Mohammed's behaviour in marrying and raping a little girl? Perhaps that's the (more expensive) hardcover audience.
No doubt, the paperback will be available to teenaged girls, in their school libraries, and probably passed from hand to hand among adult women (who might want to read it, but wouldn't want to be seen, buying it).
A certain poster to this thread has, so far, said nothing relative to the topic. He/she should be ignored.
Lets see, I forgot how old Aisha was when the Prophet Mohammed consumated his forced marriage to her. Was she 8 or was it 9 years old?
Abdullah Mikail,
Why attack a great scholar of Islam/jihad? Robert Spencer has authored a number of sucessful books. Just a thought.
It's Wednesday morning and time for the Abdullah the Quasi Apostate Show. Another grab at bandwidth theft.
7.8 billion? I though it was more like 7/8 trillion, seeing as how fast Mohammadans multiply.
It was a Mohammadan who invented the zipper, a boon to the industry of fast multiplication.
Want to slow down the growth of Islam?? Ban the zipper...
BTW thanks dumbledoresarmy, your right on it once again...
L. Drummond,
Burning the book won't be a total loss, if you use it for kindling, page by page.
'...we have the most up to date and complete version of the message.'
But, but, but....the Qur'an's immutable, isn't it? Can't be updated, and all that. Who's "new version" would that be? Inquiring Shari'a courts would like to know.
And Cornelius, it's good that someone helped Abdullah to understand those numbers at the bottom of the page. He thought they meant $$$ raked in? Ah....that explains the jealous rage.
And I see I'm not alone in thinking Abby'd been drinking.
I have to give Abdullah M a little credit...very little...Most Islamobombers drop one bomb and run...Abdullah keeps coming back to drop more bombs. Most of his bombs fizzle out from lack of potency, but at least he keeps trying.
He must have somewhere to go today, but like a bad penny, he will keep returning...
AM states: "....and I am sure it will serve as a deterrent to others of like mind, murderous stealing thugs such as yourself, that is."
Sounds like he's talking to a fellow Muslim, finally some Truth from AM for a change.
Rejoice, we conquer!
Seems that the minions of Legion are out in force in recent days, throwing themselves upon up in frenzied, desperate rear-guard actions to stem the inexorable advance of invincible TRUTH, in near panic presaging a rout of their dervish host.
Should read, "throwing themselves upon us in frenzied . . ."
Hey, I can try my hand at purple prose too, can't I?
Wellington said:
"Arguably the route to destroying any power that Islam has over the mind of man is to decimate its founder. Destroy his reputation, possessed as he was of malevolencies and fraudulencies aplenty, and you're two-thirds of the way there in assuring that Islam will eventually be assigned to the trash heap of history. In my way of thinking, Mohammed is the key to prevailing over Islam. It's both paradoxical and ironic, but what is more important is that it is in accord with the truth of things."
Here's the problem: Muslims seem to honor the Prophet of Lust because this enables them to gratify their base passions in the most vile and excessive ways with legitimacy. The only way to get away with that in a civilized world is to mock up this honorable "Prophet" who in reality, among other atrocities, stole the innocence of a little girl for his own selfish desires, and did it in such a way that no one could possibly oppose him. Then he told his followers that if they fought for him and supported his wishes they could do the same things. They then invoke victimhood as do true perpetrators, who whine and cry when caught red handed and point the finger at others and then enlist useful idiots who have their own secrets to protect to champion their cause.
Malevolencies and fraudulencies aplenty...
Wellington, you couldn't have said it better.
As for our friend Abdullah/Mike, his insistence on coming here and attacking Robert and then snarling at the rest of us shows more than he would like it too.
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
Lies & deceit,
Isabella
I would agree that neutralizing the negative effects of Islam, require neutralizing the negative effects that Mohammad has on believers.
They are absolutely stuck on Mohammad which is why I decided to refer to believers as Mohammadans.
Allah is just a convenience, Mohammad is the real god.
So if you strike down Allah, there is just Mohammad, the little wizard behind the curtain.
He had the people of Ozlam fooled for a long time, but he could not fool a little girl, a dog, a scarecrow, a tin man, and a lion with 'courage'.
We already have some 'lions with courage' rending the curtain, but we could always use a few more...
Back to Abdullah the Quasi apostate who's abuses are escalating.
Referring to Hugh as a 'murderous thieving thug', is way over the edge, and his tenure as insulter and bandwidth stealer should be terminated...
I can't help but take this one item away from your report, Mr. Spencer: You seem to think that an old perverted man having sex with a child is wrong!
Ok, I'll give you that one. Touche.
She was probably 'taken' out of context.
Okay, let's start adding up all Infidels killed in Jihads since 600AD, and see what we get? I'll wager 10 billion, using Abdullah's math!
P.S. Why don't Abdullah's original posts seem to appear, as opposed to citations from Concerned Citizen?
duh_swami,
That seems a little harsh. Maybe you should look at the posts again.
On a different note, the clash between Sherry Jones who wrote this apology of a story vs. Dhimmis who want to punish her seems to be the Infidel equivalent of internecine Mohammedan wars. Too good - we anti-Mohammedans just need enough popcorn
Infidel Pride,
:>)
Abdullah...
Hugh,
Your rhetorical bangles are cheap and noisy, and shouldn’t be worn by someone so used to showing off their feet tapping and jingling…in other words, don’t intend to allure others with what you wear.
Your condescension to persons who show modesty is only an expression of your own worth as a human being. You get what you ask for, and I am sure it will serve as a deterrent to others of like mind, murderous stealing thugs such as yourself, that is.
duh_swami,
That seems a little harsh. Maybe you should look at the posts again.
Posted by: Concerned Citizen
Did I miss something?
duh_swami,
The posts were spoofs. The "murderous stealing thugs" line was a caricature of this post:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/023455.php#c598180
I understand that -- someone in the statistical know back me up on this -- that there are presently more people living on this planet than the sum of people in past generations combined. No, I heard this from a credible source, and I don't believe this to be a spurious factoid. (But consider that human population through the bulk of time was limited by environmental limitations and subsistence economies, and that world population didn't reach the milestone of a billion souls until after 1800 -- in 1 A.D., the world's population was just 150 million!)
As for his ludicrous assertion that Muslims down through the ages total a sum of 7.8 BILLION, I can only wonder, "What is the man trippin' out ON?"
So Abdullah was only spoofing?.
What did he mean 'murderous stealing thugs 'such as yourself', that is'. Why was 'such as your self' added?
The post was directed at Hugh...I guess I'm missing the joke...
AM should have been excused long ago for being a thread hijacker and a bandwidth bandit.
". . . Limited by environmental limitations"--pardon, a careless redundancy.
Since when was pedophilia/child abuse love?
Posted by: Capitalist
1. When you are a Mohammadan...
2. Or when you are a member of NAMBLA. (Or similar group).
North American Man Boy Love Association.
The SF chapter...yes they have chapters, used to meet in the SF public library, with all those studying school kids, until someone put a stop to it.
Boys pure as pearls, a specialty of both groups...
"Since when was pedophilia/child abuse love?"
Since Mohammad, and NAMBLA, said it was.
Yo.
There is no love in Islamic societies. How could there be? Really. How could a woman love her own children if they were not her choice to have, having been pimped into incestuous Sharia sex slavery as a child, after having been properly mutilated, of course, into a lifetime of rape and beatings? She couldn't. Then, of course, all the children get molested and beaten too. There is no familial love in purdah/under gender apartheid, wherein the midset is one of ownership and submission. There is no love in marriage for sure, as it in no way implies consent, any relationship at all besides that of sex slave to owner, fidelity, monogamy, trust, or respect. Of course pedophilia falls right in line with the Islamic concept of "love." "Love" means "lust" in Islamic-speak, just as "marriage" means sex, sex slavery, rape, incest, and child molestation; just as "woman" menas "vagina" in Arabic. People who divide the world up the way Muslims necessarily do are incapable of love. Islam is the epitome of hatred. Or is hatred the epitome of Islam?
You know, jdamn, what got me when I read Ayaan Hirsi Ali's 'Infidel' was the 'deep programming' that still smoulders away inside young women, even when they're descended from generations of women enslaved within Islam, even when they've been hit with Muslim brainwashing from birth.
Ayaan describes the girls at her high school in Kenya - not just the Hindu or animist or Christian girls, but the Muslim girls too - surreptitiously devouring the finest products of Mills & Boon and Harlequin presses; passing them from hand to hand, discussing all the sizzling erotic passages, *longing* to have husbands who would treat them like that, with both kindness and desire. And to be brutally frank - the Muslim girls' dreams were the least likely to be fulfilled - certainly this proved to be so, for those of Ayaan's schoolmates who were married off, to men not of their choosing, in their early teens; their dreams of joy in the marriage bed were rapidly destroyed and replaced by pain and fear.
Elsewhere in 'Infidel' she describes young girls in Saudi Arabia practising erotic dance moves...
"While their fathers were out and their lethargic, almost inert mothers slept away the afternoons, the girls who lived next door [in Riyadh] used to congregate together and play music. There were five or six of them - I suppose from several mothers - from about ten to fifteen years old.
'they tied cloths around their hips and swayed at each other, rotating their hips and shoulders and wrists with meaningful glances.
'I was eight years old, and to me these girls, even the ten year olds, exuded a torrid, and completely unfamiliar, eroticism.
'I had never seen this kind of dancing, only the ritual ceremonies that rainmakers sometimes staged in their neighbourhood in Mogadishu...When Haweya and I play-acted this new kind of dancing at home, my mother went red with rage.
'She had brought us to Saudi Arabia to become pure, and live the narrow path of Islam alongside the Saudis, and now Saudi women were leading us astray." (!!!)
Here is evidence, from deepest darkest Saudi Arabia, of the survival, among women, of a pre-Islamic art form (it's called 'belly dancing' but it's the ancient and complex women's dance of the Middle East, LOOOONG predating Islam; some Mizrachi Jewish women knew how to do it, too) - an art form that surely requires, for its full flowering, that the woman be dancing not for a cruel and capricious slavemaster who will use her in merciless lust, but for a loving partner whose desires she wishes to awaken and who will in turn take simple human delight in her mastery of her body.
I felt so sad, reading Ayaan's description of those Saudi girls, and knowing that because of Islam they would most likely never know the joy of dancing of their own free will, for the joy of a tender lover whom they could trust never to hit or hurt them.
(The very next paragraph in Ayaan's book describes the fact that while her family lived in Riyadh, almost every night they heard the screams of women being beaten by their husbands).
. . . And another one, and another one -- another one bites the dust!