"Conservative" Muslim Suhail Khan spreads falsehoods about Muhammad's marriage to 9-year-old Aisha

In the early 70s a Christian friend marooned in doubt confided that he had to discover for himself whether the religion of his ancestors was the one to follow, or if it should be Islam. I tried to dissuade him, being positive even then that once he viewed the true state of Islam he must reel back in revulsion. But it was his life, he would not be dissuaded, and he set off after college to travel into the accessible lands of Islam, to witness for himself the sanctity of Islamic morals.

Some years later he returned, convinced and converted, believing this had to be the path to enlightenment. As he said, only the true religion of God could sustain itself when its earthbound leaders and retainers are so overtly sunk in depravity and evil.

Western Civilization holds that child rape, child marriage, child divorce, slavery, sex slavery (possessions of the right hand), torture, amputation, theft, robbery, etc. are evil deeds that should be prevented and prosecuted.

Islam holds the above activities as not only legal, but commendable as Mo himself did these things.

Not a matter of if, but when, the two collide.
I'm totally with the dog lover and patriot Alaskan Infidel who says "Islam is a lie and the truth is killing it."

/OT - Those who post anonymously/pseudonymously are OFTEN no different than police officers who don't have their names on their badges, but are identified by number, no different from intelligence operatives who don't go by their real names, nor military personnel who don't have their full names, cities, etc. in the open for the enemy to see.
RANT OFF.

Muslim "Commandments" per Koran

For three years before he raped Aisha at the age of nine, the 'Perfect Man' was in the habit of placing his penis between the child's thighs, though without penetrating her vagina. He then rubbed himself to orgasm on the little girl, and when he had finished he made her clean his semen up. It's all recorded in Bukhari: http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/mufa-khathat-cleaning-mess-up.html

http://newstime.co.nz/2010/muhammad-aisha-and-quran-654.html
13:00 – 18.00 fatwa No. 12708 “… and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their ‘Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise”

[al-Talaaq 65:4] …”

Mr. "Love & Peace" Muhammad was a PEDOPHILE Misogynist,
a mass murderer and a torturer!

Another thing that even many muslims don't know....

We do know muhammad married Aisha when she was 6, but waited until she was 9 to consummate the marriage. That alone doesn't make muhammad any more noble - he, at 54 years old, still raped a child.

But muslims claim he waited for her to reach puberty, completely ignoring Aisha's lack of mental maturity, as though somehow that made it more acceptable.

In fact, Aisha was so frightened of muhammad and the thought of being taken from her home to live with him, she became ill and her hair fell out:

Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith 5.234
Narrated by Aisha:

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house.

I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage).

Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

Another thing to note is that when muhammad came and took Aisha away, she carried with her TOYS. This is evidence that she was NOT mentally mature.

muhammad raped a child. A disgusting pervert. And this is the man muslims consider to be a perfect example.

Aisha the Child Wife of Muhammad

By Ali Sina

The thought of an old man becoming aroused by a child is one of the most disturbing thoughts that makes us cringe as it reminds us of pedophilia and the most despicable people. It is difficult to accept that the Holy Prophet married Aisha when she was 6-years-old and consummated his marriage with her when she was 9. He was then, 54 years old.

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3310:

‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64

Narrated ‘Aisha:

that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 65

Narrated ‘Aisha:

that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that ‘Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death).” what you know of the Quran (by heart)’

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88

Narrated ‘Ursa:

The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with ‘Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

Some Muslims claim that it was Abu Bakr who approached Muhammad asking him to marry his daughter. This is of course not true and here is the proof.

Sahih Bukhari 7.18

Narrated ‘Ursa:

The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for ‘Aisha’s hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said “But I am your brother.” The Prophet said, “You are my brother in Allah’s religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry.”

Arabs were a primitive lot with little rules to abide. Yet they had some code of ethics that they honored scrupulously. For example, although they fought all the year round, they abstained from hostilities during certain holy months of the year. They also considered Mecca to be a holy city and did not make war against it. A adopted son’s wife was deemed to be a daughter in law and they would not marry her. Also it was customary that close friends made a pact of brotherhood and considered each other as true brothers. The Prophet disregarded all of these rules anytime they stood between him and his interests or whims.

Abu Bakr and Muhammad had pledged to each other to be brothers. So according to their costoms Ayesha was supposed to be like a niece to the Holy Prophet. Yet that did not stop him to ask her hand even when she was only six years old.

But this moral relativist Prophet would use the same excuse to reject a woman he did not like.

Sahih Bukhari V.7, B62, N. 37
Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas:

It was said to the Prophet, “Won’t you marry the daughter of Hamza?” He said, “She is my foster niece (brother’s daughter). “

Hamza and Abu Bakr both were the foster brothers of Muhammad. But Ayesha must have been too pretty for the Prophet to abide by the codes of ethics and custom.

In the following Hadith he confided to Ahesha that he had dreamed of her before soliciting her from her father.

Sahih Bukhari 9.140
Narrated ‘Aisha:

Allah’s Apostle said to me, “You were shown to me twice (in my dream) before I married you. I saw an angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said to him, ‘Uncover (her),’ and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), ‘If this is from Allah, then it must happen.

Whether Muhammad had actually such dream or he just said it to please Ayesha is not the point. What matters here is that it indicates that Ayesaha was a baby being “carried” by an angel when the Prophet dreamed of her.

There are numerous hadithes that explicitly reveal the age of Ayesha at the time of her marriage. Here are some of them.

Sahih Bukhari 5.236.

Narrated Hisham’s father:

Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married ‘Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.

Sahih Bukhari 5.234

Narrated Aisha:

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

And in another Hadith we read.

Sunan Abu-Dawud Book 41, Number 4915, also Number 4916 and Number 4917

Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin:

The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) married me when I was seven or six. When we came to Medina, some women came. according to Bishr’s version: Umm Ruman came to me when I was swinging. They took me, made me prepared and decorated me. I was then brought to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him), and he took up cohabitation with me when I was nine. She halted me at the door, and I burst into laughter.

In the above hadith we read that Ayesha was swinging, This is a play of little girls not grown up people. The following Hadith is particularly interesting because it shows that Ayesha was so small that was not aware what was going on when the Holy Prophet “surprised” her by going to her.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 90

Narrated Aisha:

When the Prophet married me, my mother came to me and made me enter the house (of the Prophet) and nothing surprised me but the coming of Allah’s Apostle to me in the forenoon.

Must have been quite a surprise! But the following is also interesting because it demonstrates that she was just a kid playing with her dolls. Pay attention to what the interpreter wrote in the parenthesis. (She was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty)

Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151

Narrated ‘Aisha:

I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for ‘Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3311

‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

The holy Prophet died when he was 63. So he must have married Ayesha when he as 51 and went to her when he was 54.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 33

Narrated ‘Aisha:

I never felt so jealous of any woman as I did of Khadija, though she had died three years before the Prophet married me, and that was because I heard him mentioning her too often, and because his Lord had ordered him to give her the glad tidings that she would have a palace in Paradise, made of Qasab and because he used to slaughter a sheep and distribute its meat among her friends.

Nigerian senator Sani denies marrying girl of 13 -
from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/8651043.stm

"A Nigerian senator accused of marrying a 13-year-old Egyptian girl says he has done nothing wrong.

Ahmad Sani Yerima, 49, told the BBC that his fourth wife was not 13, but would not say how old she was.

He denied breaking the law but said he would not respect any law that contradicted his religious beliefs.

The Nigerian senate ordered an investigation after complaints from women's groups but the senator said he did not care what the groups thought.

Mr Sani was the governor of Zamfara state, where he oversaw the introduction of Sharia law - for the first time in a northern state - in 1999.

As a Muslim as I always say I consider God's law and that of his prophet above any other law
Senator Ahmed Sani Yerima

He said he felt it was this that was behind the uproar over his marriage.

"I consider all those complaining about this issue as detractors, because since 1999... many people have been waging different kind of wars against me," he told the BBC's Hausa Service by telephone from Egypt.

The senator said he had followed "standard rules for marriage in Islam".

"I don't care about the issue of age since I have not violated any rule as far as Islam is concerned," he said.

"History tells us that Prophet Muhammad did marry a young girl as well. Therefore I have not contravened any law. Even if she is 13 as it is being falsely peddled around."

It would be appropriate fora a fellow member of the Board of Directors for the American Conservative Union or for another Senior Fellow at the Institute for Global Engagement to ask Suhail Khan several questions about little Aisha.

First, does Suhail Khan recognize the authority of Bukhari as with Muslim the greatest of the muhaddithin?

Second, does he recognize the significance of the Hadith as important (some say for Muslims the Hadith are just as important) as the Qur'an for the world's Muslims?

Third, does he agree that that learned theologian the Ayatollah Khomeini reduced -- as virtually his first act on coming to power -- the marriageable age of girls in Iran to nine years, because that was the age of little Aisha?

Fourth, does he agree that many Muslims, embarrassed about the fact of Aisha's age, and what Muhammad did, in this as in other matters attempt to deny it in as many ingenious ways as they can come up with?

Fifth, would he not agree that all of these attempts, so based not on a desire to tell the truth but on a desire to misrepresent those aspects of Islam that are most obviously horrifying to non-Muslims (if Muhammad had sexual intercourse with Aisha when she was nine, and if Muhammad is regarded by Muslims as the Perfect Man, al-insan al-kamil, non-Muslims may not exactly be impressed with Islam, may start to have their doubts), simply reflect the willingness of Muslims to engage in taqiyya (or kitman), that is the religiously-sanctioned dissimulation about Islam, which is engaged in by Muslims (taqiyya has its origins in Shi'a Islam but has Qur'anic textual authority, and it is a doctrine relied on by Sunni Muslims as well -- who also can invoke their own (not originating in Shi'a Islam) doctrine of "kitman" or "mental reservation"). Bot taqiyya and kitman have the textual authority of Qur'an and Hadith to support them. Muslims are in a state of permanent war, though not always of open warfare, against non-Muslims who do not yield to their demands, that is to the encroachments of Islam. And Muhammad famously said "War is Deception."

Fifth, Suhail Khan is on the Board of Directors ofthe American Conservative Union. And from his perch on the Board he no doubt monitors the discussions and proposals, and knows who is most willing to collaborate, and accept his smooth and plausible presentation of a "for non-Muslims only" version of Islam, and who shows disturbing signs of independent thought, intelligence, and -- therefore -- resistance.preposterous version of Islam, and who shows disturbing signs of resistance to Suhail Khan and all the other suhail-khans, with their smiles and wiles.

One of those people -- there must be some, they can't all be gullible or fellow travellers of Islam -- should at a meeting of the Board, in the presence of others, ask him about his remark on little Aisha and her age, and adduce the evidence from Bukhari's collection, one of those deemed worthy of the term "Sahih." He should not be let off the hook. He should be asked to explain this, and perhaps other remarks he has made to hide the truth of Islam from prying non-Muslims.

Those are five things to ask Suhail Khan.

There are others.

But that's a start.

If you know people in either of the organizations with which he is now associated, and particularly members of the Board of the American Conservative Union, you may wish to forward the questions contained in this post.

Perhaps Suhail Khan would prefer to answer in writing. That's fine. That's even better. Less room for slither.

http://answering-islam.org/Silas/childbrides.htm#s4
“… MORE PHYSICAL DAMAGE TO YOUNG GIRLS

Modern medicine teaches that a female’s body is not fully developed at age 9. Sexual intercourse at that age could damage a female’s sexual organs. For instance, at the age of 9 years old, the cervix of the female is yet undeveloped, as are many of the child’s sexual organs. Further, intercourse at this age leads to an 80% increased risk in her developing cervical cancer later in life.

PSYCHOLOGICAL DAMAGE TO YOUNG GIRLS

http://newstime.co.nz/2010/muhammad-aisha-and-quran-654.html
No ‘iddah (also for Pre-Puberty Kids)
when you do not thouched them (in a sexual way)
Qur’an Al-Ahzab 33 Verse 49

‘iddah for Pre-Puberty Kids
when you have touched them (in a sexual way)
Qur’an 65:4, At-Talaq (Divorce)

Allah allows Sex with Pre-Puberty Kids! (Q 65:4 + 33:49) 65:4 is the most ugliest & filthiest Sura of the Shit Quran … it allows pedophilia! THAT’S ENOUGH TO SAY: “ISLAM IS A PERVERT MEN CLUB”

4 aya 65 الطلاق “… Allaah says, describing several Alaisp which is interrupted by menstruation how big it is three months instead of three menstrual periods in the right menstruate as evidenced by any cow, as well as young women below the age of menstruation that Dhn as various Alaisp three months” (period for divorce)

(PDF 333 KB) Thighing of children: Mohammed married Ayesha when she was six, but as she was too small to consumate, he practised the sacred rite of Mufa’ Khathat (otherwise known as ‘thighing’) whereby he rubbed himself between the tops of her thighs, but did not enter, until she was nine (lunar years). …”

"Suhail A. Khan serves ...as a Senior Fellow at the Institute for Global Engagement, a Christian organization dedicated to religious freedom worldwide."

I wager that over 50% of Western Christians are PC MC about Islam.

Consider the National Council of Churches (NCC), whose members are the following:

African Methodist Episcopal Church
The African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church
Alliance of Baptists
American Baptist Churches in the USA
Apostolic Catholic Church
Diocese of the Armenian Church of America
Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)
Christian Methodist Episcopal Church
Church of the Brethren
The Coptic Orthodox Church in North America
The Episcopal Church
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Friends United Meeting
Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Hungarian Reformed Church in America
International Council of Community Churches
Korean Presbyterian Church in America
Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Mar Thoma Church
Moravian Church in America Northern Province
and Southern Province
National Baptist Convention of America
National Baptist Convention, U.S.A., Inc.
National Missionary Baptist Convention of America
Orthodox Church in America
Patriarchal Parishes of the Russian Orthodox Church in the USA
Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends
Polish National Catholic Church of America
Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
Progressive National Baptist Convention, Inc.
Reformed Church in America
Serbian Orthodox Church in the U.S.A. and Canada
The Swedenborgian Church
Syrian Orthodox Church of Antioch
Ukrainian Orthodox Church of America
United Church of Christ
The United Methodist Church

On the NCC official website, other than a sprinkling of anxious notices about Christians being persecuted by people described either as faceless "extremist elements" or if alluded to, elliptically, as Muslims, immediately contextualized in terms of a situation where both sides seem to be at fault (see below for examples), they provide their readers with this sugar-coated "message" of pure taqiyya -- "A Common Word between Us and You" -- the "Us" being the Muslims who wrote the piece:

http://www.ncccusa.org/NCCdocs/acommonword.pdf

At "religiousnews.com" we find this report where it is mentioned that --

When the NCC speaks out on issues including health care and immigration reform, it typically partners with Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Native American and other religious groups.

So the NCC typically "partners with" Muslim groups, eh?

One example of the NCC "partnering with" Muslims was this 2008 public letter to Pres. Bush --

http://www.ncccusa.org/news/080221torture.html

-- urging him not to veto an Act by Congress that would prohibit the CIA from using "torture" in the interrogation of terrorists who want to mass-murder us -- in which one of the four signatories of the letter was Ingrid Mattson, President of the Islamic Society of North America who has a habit of sporting space-age burkas for the 21st century that look like a combination of Aquaman and the Jetsons. More importantly, Mattson teaches the Koran to Muslims seeking accreditation as chaplains throughout North American prisons and the U.S. Military, and she is on record praising the Koranic tafsirs of those notorious advocates of supremacism, paranoia and violent jihad, Maududi and Sayyid Qutb:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/aug/26/democrats-soft-jihadist/

If the implications of that kind of "partnering" isn't clear enough, consider this official statement in 2008 by NCC Secretary General Michael Kinneman:

"As an ally and friend of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), I lament that the United States of America has neglected to consult with ISNA leadership before publicly designating the organization as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in the alleged terrorist funding activity of the Holy Land Foundation. One of the greatest strengths of the United States is diversity. Yet since September 11th, it has become increasingly socially acceptable to fear difference in others, occasionally even in the arenas of law and public policy."

Examples of the kinds of indirect semi-conscious awareness the NCC have of the impingement of Muslims on Christians can be gleaned from their news stories on their site:

Two 2005 notices under their section titled "Policy Statements, Resolutions, Messages and Documents". I bold the relevant passages and in brackets interject my comments:

Pastoral Message on Alexandria
Adopted by the General Assembly November 10, 2005

We the delegates to the General Assembly of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA and Church World Service, meeting in Baltimore, Maryland, November 8-10, 2005, have heard with great concern of the horrific and violent acts against the Coptic Orthodox and Protestant Christians in Alexandria, Egypt...

[violent acts committed by whom?]

...on October 21-22, 2005. In solidarity with one of our member communions, the Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America, we join our Egyptian sisters and brothers in Christ in fervent prayer for peace, justice and equal rights in their native and beloved country, Egypt.

We also commend President Hosni Mubarak for his condemnation of the violence, his acknowledgement of deepening tensions between Egypt’s Muslims and Christians...

[Ah, so "tensions between Muslims and Christians" is the cause of these "horrific and violent actions" against Christians? As we at Jihad Watch all know (and as anyone with a lick of sense should be able to surmise), the phrase "tensions between" implies a situation where both sides are at fault, and thereby a context of a "cycle of violence".]

... and his [Mubarak's] exhortation to Muslim scholars to teach tolerance and shun extremism.

[Why should Muslim scholars have to do that? And why not also Christian scholars? Apparently, one side is causing more trouble than the other...?]

In this same spirit, we commend Sheikh Mohammed Sayed El-Tantawi, Rector of Al Azhar University, for his encouragement of tolerance and peaceful coexistence among Muslims and Christians in Egypt in the wake of these recent events.

[As Jihad Watch has documented, Tantawi endorsed violent jihad against Americans in Iraq, and also praised suicide-bombings against Israelis committed by men, women and children:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/09/karen-hughes-goes-to-see-tantawi.html]

Pastoral Message on Constantinople
Adopted by the General Assembly November 10, 2005

The National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA meeting in its General Assembly in Baltimore, Maryland, USA, expresses its sadness and dismay at the recent attacks and demonstrations by extremist elements in Turkey against the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the person of His All Holiness, Bartholomew, Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch.

[What "extremist elements" would that be...?]

We appreciate the timely response of the police in Istanbul in containing these elements of fanaticism and extremism.

[Damned "elements"...! The weather must be bad in Istanbul...]

Or this story on Iraq:

Recent attacks in Iraq on Christians and other minority groups...

[Attacks by whom?]

...have prompted the National Council of Churches to ask U.S. government officials to communicate with Iraqi authorities in an effort to bring the violence to an end.

[Violence by whom?]

In letters sent April 26 to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and to U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, NCC leaders expressed concern about the attacks...

[Attacks by whom?]

...and asked the secretaries to urge Iraqi authorities and the commanders of Coalition forces in Iraq "to take all possible steps to prevent further incidents of this type."

[How can they take steps to prevent these attacks if they don't know who the attackers are? Or do they?]

"Christians in Iraq have suffered more than a dozen violent deaths so far this year...

[Who is killing these Christians?]

...including a three-year old child in Mosul who died on March 27 after a bomb, placed next to his family's home, exploded...

[A bomb placed by whom?]

..."As you know, thousands of Christians have been forced to flee their homes because of their fear of violence."

[Just general violence, eh? Well, it's a war zone, right? And we Americans caused the war, eh? So maybe that's the problem, eh?]

The NCC letter was signed by the National Council of Churches General Secretary, the Rev. Dr. Michael Kinnamon; the Rev. Canon Peg Chemberlin, NCC President; and 21 heads of NCC member communions and ecumenical officers.

"Our concern is now particularly acute because it is possible that tensions will increase as various political forces continue to vie for power following the recent elections,"

[Why would Christians get murdered because of "tensions" among political forces? Is that what happens in a normal country when political "tensions" "increase"?]

..."We fear that a growing climate of mistrust and animosity will further threaten the fragile Christian community."

[Mistrust and animosity? By whom? And why would anyone who "mistrusts" and has "animosity" go around murdering Christians, including little children?]

...The NCC letters requested that Secretaries Clinton and Gates work directly with Iraqis to "protect minority groups, including Christians in Mosul and other parts of Iraq"...

[Protect them from whom?]

In addition to Kinnamon and Chemberlin, signers of the letters are:

Bishop John F. White, Ecumenical and Urban Affairs Officer, African Methodist Episcopal Church; the Rev. Paula Clayton Dempsey, Ecumenical Officer, Alliance of Baptists; the Rev. A. Roy Medley, General Secretary, American Baptist Churches USA; Bishop Charles Leigh, Apostolic Catholic Church; and Archbishop Vicken Aykazian, Legate of the Diocese of the Armenian Church of America and immediate past president of the NCC.

Also, the Rev. Dr. Robert Welsh, Ecumenical Officer, Christian Church (Disciples of Christ); Stan Noffsinger, General Secretary, Church of the Brethren; His Grace Bishop Serapion of Los Angeles, Coptic Orthodox Church in North America; Bishoy M. Mikhail, Ecumenical Officer, Coptic Orthodox Church in North America; the Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, Presiding Bishop and Primate of the Episcopal Church; and the Rev. Mark S. Hanson, Presiding Bishop, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.

Also, the Rev. Michael E. Livingston, Executive Director, International Council of Community Churches; the Rt. Rev. Dr. Geevarghese Mar Theodosius, Bishop, Diocese of NA and Europe, Mar Thoma Church; Dr. Julius R. Scruggs, President of the National Baptist Convention, USA, Inc.; Thomas Swain, Clerk, Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends; the Rev. Gradye Parsons, Stated Clerk, Office of the General Assembly, Presbyterian Church (USA); and the Rev. Doug Fromm, Associate for Ecumenical Relations, Reformed Church in America.

Also, Metropolitan Christopher, Primate, Serbian Orthodox Church in North and South America; the Rev. Geoffrey Black, General Minister and President, United Church of Christ; Bishop Sharon Zimmerman Rader, Ecumenical Officer of the Council of Bishops, United Methodist Church; and the Rev. Dr. Stephen J. Sidorak, Jr., General Secretary, General Commission on Christian Unity and Interreligious Concerns, United Methodist Church.

http://www.ncccusa.org/news/clintonletter0410.htm

An interesting convert story that I saw on PBS a few years ago: This female convert from Catholicism to Islam said that a Muslim man asked her why Jesus prayed if he was God. She didn't have an answer for him so she signed up at a mosque. I was a bit shocked at that as the answer should been clear to anyone who took third grade catechism. It is that, in addition to being our Saviour by dying the cross, Jesus was sent here to teach us by leading an exemplary life (true or not that is the doctrine).
I have also talked to other Catholic youth who have very little knowledge of their faith other than being kind and tolerant. No wonder we are losing people to Islam!

Here is the letter I am drafting to Mr. Khan. Unfortunately I am not seeing his personal email address, only the general one: info@globalengage.org. If anyone comes across something better, please let me know.

***
Mr. Khan:

My letter is in regard to your article:

Anti-Semitism on training wheels

http://dailycaller.com/2010/04/27/anti-semitism-on-training-wheels/

In the article you state:

“Anti-Muslim blogger Robert Spencer proclaims that the Muslim prophet Muhammad was a guilty of host of heinous crimes including the rape of a child because he was betrothed to Aisha when she was nine years old. Of course, most are keenly aware that a betrothal and actual marriage are two separate things and readers of the Old Testament recall that Isaac was betrothed to Rebecca when she was three years old. Like Wilders, Thomas, and Coulter, Spencer's bigotry easily morphs into anti-Semitism.”

First of all, please provide the evidence that Isaac was betrothed to Rebecca when she was three years old. There is nothing in the OT that says this. It is a flat-out lie.

Secondly, betrothal and consummation are two very different things.

Thirdly, this is a false comparison.

The most widely accepted Islamic sources tell us the following:

Bukhari

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/062.sbt.html

Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64:
“Narrated 'Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).”

Volume 7, Book 62, Number 65:
“Narrated 'Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)." what you know of the Quran (by heart)' “

Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88:
“Narrated 'Ursa:
The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).”

I don’t know exactly how old the biblical Rebecca was, but she was certainly more than six. Or nine.

Since your comparison is factually false, then your accusations of anti-Muslim bigotry and anti-Semitism against Mr. Spencer are slander.

I would request that you print a correction to this article. I would also request that you apologize to Mr. Spencer both publicly and personally. Slander of this magnitude is a serious matter, as it involves the destruction of someone’s personal and professional reputation.

I eagerly await your response.

Respectfully,

[Name]

Good letter Mo.

Can we send Suhail Khan to Nigeria to be sorted out by Nigerian senator Ahmad Sani Yerima who disagrees with him?

About the thigh thing. I agree that we need to find a good reference for this, otherwise stop even mentioning it because it degrades the argument. Any mentioning of Khomeini and his filthy book will not be met with anything when speaking to a Sunni audience - they really don't put a lot of stock in any Shia sources.

It's really important that we make sure to have backup and real data because when we are out on the net writing and responding to comments, we want to be seen not as "nutters" but as people who know their stuff and can carry on an intelligent conversation about it.

We may or may not get a Muslim to question their belief system but we do have it in our ability to get even the most rabid multi-cult type to listen to us and that's important.

About the thigh thing. I agree that we need to find a good reference for this, otherwise stop even mentioning it because it degrades the argument. Any mentioning of Khomeini and his filthy book will not be met with anything when speaking to a Sunni audience - they really don't put a lot of stock in any Shia sources.

It's really important that we make sure to have backup and real data because when we are out on the net writing and responding to comments, we want to be seen not as "nutters" but as people who know their stuff and can carry on an intelligent conversation about it.

We may or may not get a Muslim to question their belief system but we do have it in our ability to get even the most rabid multi-cult type to listen to us and that's important.

"Anti-Muslim blogger Robert Spencer proclaims that the Muslim prophet Muhammad was a guilty of host of heinous crimes including the rape of a child because he was betrothed to Aisha when she was nine years old. Of course, most are keenly aware that a betrothal and actual marriage are two separate things and readers of the Old Testament recall that Isaac was betrothed to Rebecca when she was three years old. Like Wilders, Thomas, and Coulter, Spencer's bigotry easily morphs into anti-Semitism." --Suhail Khan as quoted.

This is probably the least substantive apologetic about Aisha's age that I've come across. Yet imagine that you are a typical Western non-Muslim reader who knows little to nothing about Islam, Muhammad, and Aisha, and the present-day persistence of the Islamic practice of marriage to child brides. Suhail Khan manages to insert three main "strikes" against naive non-Muslims in his jihad of tongue and pen in this paragraph.

1. Ad hominem. -Insults and tries to stigmatize Spencer and some others who are critical of Islam, calling them bigots and thus trying to persuade readers not to believe Spencer.
2. Taqiyya. -Impressionistically suggests that Aisha was married to Muhammad at a much later time, presumably much older than nine years of age. He doesn't explicitly claim that of course, allowing himself plausible deniability if he is later challenged on it. Probably he is banking on the likelihood that most people don't know what the Islamic texts say about Aisha's age.
3. Tu quoque. -Alleges or implies that the Christians and Jews are tied to something similar (if not worse) in their scriptures.

Something from the jihadwatch archives:

"Really, really wishing Aisha weren't nine"

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2007/05/really-really-wishing-aisha-werent-nine.html

Oh, wouldn't you know it? I sent the letter and it bounced right back! I will try again later or look for another email address. How frustrating! I put a lot of time and effort into the letter.

Robert,

What would Khan's agenda be in comparison to your own? If we look dispassionately at what Khan says in comparison to your own work, the questionable agenda appears to be yours.

We can start with rudimentary points, Khan is an academic and as much as you have attempted to portrait yourself as, your not. So from that standpoint - he has one up on you.

Shaming the American Conservative Union and the Institute for Global Engagement for not agreeing with your unacademic and rather hate-for-profiteering does not stick, I am sure they are one hundred per cent behind Mr Khan.

Many would agree with Khan in calling you an "anti-Muslim" I do. Attempting to call chalk as cheese under the loose banner of freedom of speech or conscience still results in your talking chalk. As for talking about "before the law" it is just nice looking phrases and a perfect example of your misdirections that are notorious simply because you never actually mention any when it comes to substance.

Your attempt to muddle references to Zionism, Judaism, Islam and pan-Arab politics also does not stick and though you attempt to look the wiser by telling Khan what you think is errors in his language, your reference to Islam being an "Arabic Faith" is all the more a perfect example of why your not an academic.

You have used the word Sharia and yet not once does your writtings, speeches and website ever pointed out that Sharia Law is a minority in the real and existing Muslim world, but then you have a need to avoid refering to that real and existing world because it is not the image you wish to put.

Then again, as you are not an academic, perhaps you have not noted the simple fact that only less than half the Muslim countries in this world have Sharia Courts systems but actually run full-on non-theologically run Secular Legal Systems, mostly copied from western governments that had been previously the colonial power. Of those less than half that do have Sharia Courts, again the majority have only Family Courts that are under the supervision of Secular Appeal or High Courts. Thus the number of theocrats running Sharia Courts over a population is just under a dozen nations. Why do you not point that out and get some perspective running?

The reality perhaps, Mr Spencer, is that you would rather support, advertise for and assume that the radicals of 11 nations and the violent, radical and exteremist fringe groups are Islam and the rest must be following them or are heretics. You seem to assume that Khan is.

If the Muslims are the "new Jews" it is because people such as yourself are making them. As mentioned above, your supporting and acknowledgment only to radicals, extremists and terrorists within the Muslim world is the bamboozle attempt. It is the majority of Muslims and the general population in the west are the victims through your assumption that they are stupid.

I would also consider that you are a "blogger" Mr Spencer because your not an academic. Being a bestselling author does not make you one, so is Stephen King and he does not try and assume he is anything other than a fiction writter.

Pray tell, Mr Spencer, when does sitting at a metting that is sponsored by the FBI make you an adviser? Where in the annuals of the FBI documentation is that acknowledgement, let alone from Centcom? We should, if anything, remember how you used to claim that various universities invited you to speak, when they were only the far-right student bodies that had the right to invite anyone because that was the Campus rules.

Debating you Mr Spencer would be farce and pointless, as you will just continue the well known habit of quoting only parts of versus and parts of other items ad nauseum and continue to only highlight the actions of extremists and radicals with the goal of assuming it is the whole, like the Sharia farce.

You will nevertheless play to the crowd, instilling the age-old "mob" response that is indentical to the radical Muslim cleric in some mountainside mosque - equally a wannabe academic.

I find your targetting the Aisha age controversy as some form of proud justification on your part. Playing on 7th century writtings as evidence and carefully joking away similarities within the writtings of others and always avoiding, as per usual, the context. Most certainly Bhukari wrote those things and most certainly not many clerics are willing to dispute it - but of course you never mention that there are those that do. That the events that are well documented actually contradict it never enters your works. That you wish to play the game of "betrothed versus consumamtion" and yet it is still a practice in so many parts of the world to this present day, and most not amongst Muslims. Why is that Mr Spencer?

Your willingness to argue Old Testiment of your version but all Muslims must accept what you think is the version you accept, quoting Bhukari and even Aisha herself but never the other quote of Aisha refering to her not being sure of her own age in the first place.

Muslims make it easy for you, that is for sure, but it can be just as easily argued that your playing to those areas that are radicalized, staged by puritanical Salafis and Wahhabis as only reflecting upon yourself and not them.

I have condemned you in my own blog as being a radical and thankfully fringe, that your hate-for-profiteering fortunately is money making from an already extreme-right hate community. Radicals always come down to a number of "musts" that history has shown is guarenteed. That radicals to insert themselves must "lie". To push that lie they must conceal it or make it appear as a truth and the usual method is by breaching the rules of context and that they must assume that the target audience are stupid. The other reality is that eventually they are caught out and if they lucky it is the next generation that does it. The simple fact, attributed to Erasmus Rotterdamus, is that "radicals are willing to modify their faith, morals and standards to meet the ideology rather than the opposite".