Iranian woman facing death by stoning: "Many nights, before sleeping, I think to myself how can anybody be prepared to throw stones at me; to aim at my face and hands? Why?"

And what do you think about the woman facing the horror of stoning under Islamic law? Is that a trivial matter to you, as well?

"And what do you think about the woman facing the horror of stoning under Islamic law? Is that a trivial matter to you, as well?"

No. No it is not.

That's what they call a loaded question. I'm not here to play games with you. Please be civil.

Oh Yusef, you cute little jihadi you. Lie yourself silly but don't change the subject; I won't let you. You are never so proud of that part of society that you treat like absolute dog crap, (your women,) as when they are trying to pull a fast one on a "stupid" kafir. But your little Muslima didn't get away with anything. She didn't get the items she wanted. She didn't get to sell her victimhood claim with the "Are you insulting me?" nonsense because I nipped it in the bud and did not take the bait. In fact I slammed it right back at her and she couldn't take it. And in the end there was no submission, just a pissed off Muslima who slithered back from whence she came. All in all, not a bad day.

Folks, Yusef thinks we're stupid. Too bad in his arrogance he doesn't know we're on to him. ; )

Marisol wrote:

And we're told Islam "elevates" women -- except usually, in Iran, that's done with a noose and a crane.
...............

Very grim—and very true, Marisol.

ZK, I agree with you about "The Stoning of Soroya M". It is not a perfect film—it is a bit clunky in places, and unfortunately rather lets Islam itself off the hook.

But my criticisms of the piece are generally minor—over all it is a brave and important movie, and shows close to the full horror of stoning.

Everyone *should* see it. Like confronting so many of the horrors of Islam, though, it is not for the faint of heart.

ZK, (PBUY)

After careful study here at the IITS (International Institute for Troll Studies),
our staff-researchers have concluded that Yusef
is in the "Punxsutawney Phil" category of troll. He pops-up out of his hole and hurls insults, but as soon as he sees the shadows of approaching reason or question he zips back into his cave. 6 more weeks of islam for him!

BTW, shouldn't Jibril have an answering service or emergency cell-number or something?

Isabella, take it from someone who's lived a long time in the Far East. If your stuff isn't marked, and hijabis (the tribe that wears the hijab) comes along, initially demand about 3-5 times the amount you're willing to settle on for the stuff. Tell them that your $0.50 knicknack is worth $2.00 to you, and you'll probably get $0.75-$1.00 for it.

I don't claim to be the expert on haggling (my wife, who is a native of Taiwan, claims that honor). But I got to the point where I could save a few baht on taxi fare in Bangkok back before they installed meters; and got slightly less than "foreigner" prices in a fruit market in Taiwan.

"After careful study here at the IITS (International Institute for Troll Studies)"

George, you crack me up. So, can this be a major in college, and if so, what type of degree do you get?

Thanks Kepha. We actually made almost $1200 selling junk over a four week period and I found it was more effective and less time consuming not to mark things with the understanding that we were clearing things out. There were a few things that I decided to sell if I got my price and that if I couldn't I'd keep them. It was a principle sort of thing. But anyone who wanted to act stupid was not going to be taken seriously. What was so interesting about the Muslima today was that I think she actually thought that if she could talk fast enough I might go for it. But she rubbed me the wrong way right off the bat and I couldn't stop thinking about a story one of the Coptic Christians used to illustrate his point yesterday which just reminded me how out to lunch most Muslms are when it comes to thinking logically and what a skewed view of reality they have. Apparently there was a Muslim doctor who went to school in the U.S. who wanted to move some place where he could practice pure Islam so he moved to Mecca. He put his son in some sort of boarding school there and after two years the son told him that the principal of the school had been raping him on a regular basis. The dad was furious and decided to sue the principal in court. The doctor's friends advised against this. They pleaded, offered money and tried to no avail to convince this guy not to sue the principal but he insisted. Long story short, the court based their decision on the Quranic verse that says there needs to be 4 witnesses to prove adultery otherwise the accuser is punished. The principal got off scot-free and the doctor whose son was raped, was sentenced to 80 lashes because he couldn't produce four witnesses. That kind of thinking skews a Muslims basic grasp on reality. Perhaps that's why that chick today thought she could do what she wanted and that I had to go along with it. LOL! It is amusing (if not disturbing) though, to tell a Muslim no and watch them go beserk. There is an Achilles Heel in there, somewhere.

BTW, is it just me or does Yusef remind anyone else of Abdullah Mike?

If Satan offered her asylum, she'd probably discover that Hell is a better place than Iran. Of course, the useless YusefYK thinks Iran is the model for the world, and the best way to keep our societies free is to boot out savages like Yusef, who wish to see Western women stoned to death on trumped-up charges of adultery.

Well done Isabella! Nothing like defying them in their face. I would have loved to do that myself...

Its an expression aimed at those who can't see the obvious. Remember Bill Clintion saying "It's the economy, stupid"?

And if she can't, or refuses to see that the problem is Islam, then she must be stupid, and the same goes for everyone else who does likewise.

Then Yusef, why do you continue to support that sadistic sex monster Mohammad and his horrid 7th barbarity, Islam?

Because thats the way he is. He's a satanic and misogynistic barbarian.

With respect, Spirit of 1683, to me the gross inaction and ignorance of the followers of the world's other faiths seems to come from a great lack of purpose and unity.

Nature abhors a vacuum and if we simply want to get rid of Islam, what is then supposed to fill the vacuum, if we succeed?

Again with respect, I feel that people who realise how bad Islam is, should endeavour to find it's preferred alternative in such a way that it can be used to unite at least 51 % of the people of: The Democratic world, then the Islamic world, then the rest of the world, or 2 and 3 in reverse order.

To me a common denominator for what anti-Islam people can be for in unity with great numbers, is Democracy and its 5 pillars; fair elections, constitutional state, separation of state and mosque, autonomy for the individual, freedom of speech. This also will give science free reign and science can help mankind progress enormously. So this too is something we can be for. I think Islam stifles science and Democracy cherishes and stimulates it.

I see your valid point and it has vexed me too immeasurably, especially when I see the many Muslima's in Holland, easily recognizable as they are with their headscarves.

My thought-experiment is not about what they think, follow and do too much but about what they think, follow, do too little. Because of this huge Islamic obstacle.

What they think, follow, do too little is to consider, adhere to, act in accordance with, the ideas of enlightenment-democracy.

I think Kilian Klaiber in the thread of Al-Awlaki, it was I think, was right about one thing; It is very hard to hold each and every Muslim accountable for him/ her being Muslim(a). Especially in Islamic countries. What with social pressure and death-penalty for apostasy.

And, if a person is not accountable for being Muslim, it is as futile to blame that person as it is to blame an animal, lunatic or child.

That lack of responsibility, lack of possibility of holding Muslims accountable may be your weak spot, Hesperado. It may earn you unfavorable qualifications by the Political-Correct people, which you can avoid. Because the Political-Correct people en masse do not seem to hold Muslims accountable for their choices. Even if they are aware, or should be by now, of Islam's teachings. Or at least those in some popular versions of it.

So that's why I, only theoretically I concede, would want us to look to something that we definitely can hold Muslims accountable for. By the way regarding them as sane adult HUMANS, who CAN choose.

And that would be about asking them to choose for or against our basic democratic principles AND complete reciprocity between Democratic and Islamic countries in treatment or religious minorities and apostasy. Even if parts of that flatly contradict Islamic laws, values and interests.

For starters.

Would you support banning Sharia law in the US and Europe?

(I'll bet a used set of dishes that he will not give a simple yes/no answer)

All your attempts at white washing your faith and attempting to attach goodness to your murderous "prophet" is of no use. Your "prophet" had people stoned to death. End of story. You should be ashamed of following such a notorious man. Obviously you have been brainwashed enough to have lost your humanity. Thus you talk of stoning people as a "cautionary tale for those who observe it". Shame on you.
Compare this behavior of your "prophet" with Christ who said "Let him be the first to throw a stone who has done no wrong".
What about your own "prophet"'s adulterous behavior (for you can call it nothing else) with his own adopted daughter in law, with the salve girl Mary the copt and others. Again, I will recall to you christ's words - "he who has looked at one not his spouse in a manner that he would look at his spouse has already committed adultery in his heart."
islam is the fruit of a poisonous tree. It will never teach teach you to be a better human being.

Dank, here too you adhere to a religion/ totalitarian ideology in regards to a law that is in contradiction with the law of the land you live in (I suppose you live in a democratic country, maybe even Holland, because Dank in Dutch means Thanks). In no democratic country adultery is punishable by law. It's painful that so many citizens of Democratic countries (the Muslims) adhere to laws so unlike and contradicting the law of the land they say they are loyal citizen of, they say they won't leave.

Muslims, according to you, seem to rely on the afterlife and atonement. Well, an individual may punish her/himself but society may not punish a person who does not believe in those concepts.

And of course in Islamic countries there is such widespread double standards in practicing this law, that punishing only a caught woman now and then does not serve much purpose. Take Iran, we heard that the revolutionary guards in the prisons often rape young female or even male prisoners. And some of them will be married but this and so much else men do IS allowed.

Furthermore, I doubt if the character you paint of Muhammad can really be proven with texts. It might just as well be added, made up to sugar your version of Islam. While at the same time your group perhaps happily ignores texts that are not to your liking. You may well be challenged by some ex-Muslim Islam-experts on this some time in future.

Dank isn't ashamed of following Mohammed. Far from it - he's proud of having a rapist, misogynist, thief, vagabond, murderer and serial adulterer as a prophet. A beheader to him is far superior to one who brought the dead back to life and stood up against injustice.

And he says he was 'shocked' at first at the punishments inflicted for certain 'sins' or crimes'. But stonings on trumped-up charges of adultery or execution for being raped no longer shocks him, because to him it is commonplace and thanks to that, he thinks that is exactly what should happen to adulterers and rape victims. And not just Muslim ones. If your wife or daughter gets raped, don't expect any sympathy from Dank, because being an adherent of the cult of evil makes him think your wife or daughter should be brutally murdered and the perpetrators should get off scot free, just like they do in so many Muslim countries. The evil monster behind the Bali atrocity received only 30 months for murdering 202 infidels or a handful of days per victim. That shows how little value the Danks of this world place upon the lives of an infidel, aside from the fact that infidels themselves have cheapened infidel lives in the eyes of Muslims because they're too spineless to retaliate in the way they should, like chargrilling him with a well-placed Hellfire missile. An infidel can expect far more severe punishments for not stepping aside when a Muslim wants to pass, or for daring to ride a horse, or for wearing western dress if you're a woman in Iran, and should an infidel have the effrontery to draw cartoons of Mohammed .......

With respect, Spirit of 1683, to me the gross inaction and ignorance of the followers of the world's other faiths seems to come from a great lack of purpose and unity.

And what exactly has brought about the gross inaction and ignorance of the followers of other faiths, and none, through a lack of purpose and unity? Again, our old bedevilments political correctness, accusations of bigotry and racism at those who dare to criticise Islam, and fear of being killed or maimed by them because we have let too many of them in over the last 50 years.

Isn't it funny how he(Mohamdamnits) will not answer a direct question with a simple answer?

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. John 8:44

Religion is a choice.

Look who Yusef chose! What else would you expect?

CW,

We're most proud of our BS (Barry Soetoro) degree in Troll Management. Our "Bridge Demolition" course is world-renowned.
Right now, the staff is focused-on the traitorous muslim troll "Dank." On another thread, this loser claimed to have fought in the Gulf War. We're tryng to determine on which side...

Go and live in Saudi Arabia, commit adultery and then face the stoning - and then see how you feel - I bet you would change your vile judgemental world. Are you without sin so that you can cast the first stone? Humble yourself and ask yourselve sincerely that question. There is no-one on this earth who is worthy to cast that first stone and pass judgement on another human being. muslims have no forgiveness and your vile ideology preaches nothing but hate, hate. hate and murder.

Isabel. sad thing is that the two muslim women are now 'praying' for your death to their 'just god'--whereas you, I suspect, only have pity for them. Islam is the religion of hate and death and lies to propagate itself.

You are missing the most important point. Have you ever wondered why Democracy has been the foundation of so few governments throughout history? There were Greeks, then Romans, both short lived. Now us--hopefully not short lived--but we ain't exactly healthy right now, no?

Democratic rule is rule by the people. So what if the majority of the people have no ethics--no morality? I mean each one, personally, inside themselves. Each self limits greed, lust, power, and instead has the characteristics of love, caring, compassion--in short a 'wanting to do what is right', as opposed to 'me first'. I think you can see from the shape we are in, or tending to go, that these benevolent qualities do not come naturally for the bulk of humanity! They must be taught. "Bring up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old, he will not depart from it".(Somewhere in the Bible :))
This verse is true. Teach a child good--it's generally followed. Teach a child 'evil'(anything negative is what I mean here)--or teach him nothing at all--same results, for the most part. My mother always said, "If you hang around with bad people, they will pull you down to their level. You will seldom bring them up!"

The point I want to make here is that morality must be taught-at home(!), early on, to produce citizens who can run a democracy!
A Religion is a base for morality. Good-Christan, Jewish,(I'm not familiar enough with others to include them, but you may-if you CHOOSE.) Bad(very bad) Islam.
Or, you can choose no religion--but you still need to use the precepts of the Torah(Old and New :))--because-again, even if you account it no 'divine' status--there are contained therein 'rules' for peaceful, social human life that have been proven true for what, 3000 years?!

So without a majority of people with an inherent moral code, democracy fails. The savage rules.

It might surprise you, but I agree with you there. Even in 1923 H.G. Wells already said there were necessary preconditions necessary for Democracy to function at all. He mentioned good education and independent news-providers. So that people could make a lot of informed choices.

What you mention about morality also sounds good. And about the poor quality compatibility of Islam with Democracy; that seems right to me also.

I am just hoping that progress with literacy, good education and a modicus of good morality will be going on. Going on because we did see progress since 1923 with that already.

Sad to say, Dank, you've drunk the Islamic Kool-Aid big time. There's so much evidence that Mohammed was a brutal psychopath, but even worse than this was his perverted sexual appetite. He lusts for his daughter-in-law Zaynab and ends up getting her. He goes to bed with Mary the Coptic and his wives complain and he gets a highly convenient revelation (he got loads of convenient revelations) from Allah that if the wives keep complaining, he can take new wives.

But worst of all is the whole sorry Aisha affair. No man in his fifties at any time in history should have had sexual intercourse with a nine-year old girl. This alone disqualifies Mohammed from being revered or held in high esteem. I really don't think enough Muslims grasp with what revulsion Mohammed is held in by millions of non-Muslims like myself. He's got fraud, violence and perversion written all over him. What a contrast he is to Jesus. The wonder of it all to me is that more Muslims can't see that Jesus was an almost infinitely superior character to Mohammed. And I write this as one who is not religious in the least.

jewcat asked the Muslim commenter:

"Knowing what you do about Mohammad and his system, why do you -- as a rational human being -- continue to support this?"

This question becomes even more acute when we would pose it to Sakineh, the victim about to be stoned.

Unless Sakineh is a secret apostate, the question reveals the madness, and the depth of the power of brainwashing, in Islam -- and thus reveals why it is far more formidable in both fanaticism and in mass brainwashing than Nazism, Fascism or Communism ever were. In those mass ideologies, victims rarely enabled and outright supported the monster which was victimizing them. In those ideologies, the victims had the sense, and the humanity, to try to escape their respective gulags. Not so Islam. This woman about to be stoned still worships Mohammed, Allah, the Koran, Islam. She is on one important level no less diseased than her stoners.

Demsci,

This isn't about holding all Muslims "accountable". This isn't about "hating" all Muslims.

It's about recognizing the uniquely formidable brainwashing power Islam has over millions of Muslims. From there, what we should learn is that Muslims are uniquely dangerous and that we cannot trust any Muslim who seems secularized and harmless.

We have to protect our own people and stop worrying about the victims of Islam. Grotesque stories like this one should be a rhetorical example of why we do not want any Muslims in our societies, and why we should not spend one dollar on trying to help all the Muslims who are being ground into bloody hamburger by the maw of the same monster they continue to adore and support. This kind of story should not be a moral-emotional goad to mobilize us to try to help masses of Muslims.

"Slight clarification to my last post (with clarification in bold):

"We have to protect our own people and stop worrying about the Muslim victims of Islam."

Agree. Of course you're going to take a lot of flack about that, Hesp, as you always do, but soldier on!

"It (Islam) is a "legal" system wherein all responsibility is put on women for the actions of men. It is an abuser's paradise."

Exactly. The chest-beating misogynist Muzlim males rule.

Thanks Courreges.

We can both protect our own people first and foremost AND worry about the victims of Islam secondarily. You don't get this, Hesperado. Telling.

Hesperado, I suppose that in times of extreme danger or even war you should and WILL get your point across with many people. Right now though, there seems to be no sense of any imminent danger among the vast majority of the people of the West and India. Not even Muslim-demographics on YouTube convinced enough people of the Islamic threat.

And if the Muslims are not perceived as cutthroat-possibles and clear aimers and accomplices for supreme power, well then the next best thing in my opinion is to take care that at least they are as best as possible confronted with the consequences of their choices.

But being only for Islam seems in reality not to be seen as a hostile choice of them, not even AS a choice of them.

And under these circumstances ANY laws that discern and discriminate between followers of democratic essences and those of the totalitarian ideology Islam seem for now out of the question in our countries. And we need such laws to stop Islamic immigration and to ban Islamic schools and to stop giving money to Islamic goals, because without them it is still illegal to discriminate against Islam. So for instance, if there are immigrants of other faiths, schools for other faiths, then Islamic ones cannot be stopped!

So, I hope that the next generations of Democracy-defenders find ways to at least hold Muslims accountable for their choices and with the Islamic reactions ways to convince or confound the neutral masses of the possible treason and sedition of Muslims.

Putting a (justified) pricetag on being a Muslim in a democratic society, because of incompatibility of laws and failure to choose for democratic essences (or neutrality) when in conflict with Islamic ones.

Which choice in future must somehow be put before them, but I don't know how exactly.

It's interesting that while Dank whines for those faithful husbands who sit in American prisons for having murdered their "unfaithful" wives, no word on the injustice of capital punishment inflicted on women who are raped and then thrown under the bus by lying Muslim men who wanted to have sex with them and who understand only too well what the ramifications of adultery are.

Dear Dank, you're a fraud. Your holier than thou attitude reveals the true meaning of Islam; the powerful preying on the weak, the lustful planning their attacks so carefully behind the scenes so as to let the victim take the fall, all the while proclaiming Muslim family values and telling the world that the family is everything. You want us to believe that you are noble and good, sacrificing for the good of society, all the while jockeying for position in Mo's Worship-the-Penis-Club. You don't actually believe that your system is for the good of anyone but horny men, do you. Neither do we.

I think in your world fucking is everything but it's a problem for you. You definitely don't make love so spare us the "flouting the sacrament of marriage". (Nice revelation that you used to be a Christian, though. Thanks for sharing.) You have to have women to have sex with but you're afraid of their power and do everything to suppress and control it, destroying the woman in the process. Please explain how that supports the good of society. You also have an inherent insecurity that runs through the psyches of every Muslim male along with an inability to control your tempers when you lose the illusion of control. Talk about a potent cocktail. I wonder if that insecurity is what drove you to Islam.

Hesparado, I commend you on your position on how to solve the problem of Muslims. It may work if implemented. The only hesitation I have had is that implementation would be impossible with the way things are right now. Add to this the fact that the federal government only enforces the laws that the administration decides to enforce (re: new Arizona Immigration). Also add to this the fact that the federal government is going broke at a very rapid pace, is totally incompetant, and a very large portion of liberals (including many of the President's own advisors) are pushing for a dictatorship.

There may be one day soon, however, when the world changes drastically due to an event or series of events. When that happens, your position may well indeed be the popular way to solve the problem. That day, people may come out of dreamland and see Islam for what is really is...a bloody barbaric cult. The good thing, is that on that day, we may find some agreement on the how to deal with Muslims and other barbarians.

Spot on, you are, well, spot on! It's been my experience that people who used to be Christians and converted to Islam have something deep and dark going on in their past that lurks and tortures them. They missed the memo on forgiveness and don't think it is available to them. So they go this other route which is guaranteed to continue their suffering (maybe as a self imposed punishment) but not render them any better oof than when they began. I imagine there are people who take the Islamic fork in the road only to realize a decade or so down the road that this didn't get them where they thought they needed to go.

Yes, Wellington: it's always nice to have one's cake and eat it too. Why didn't I think of that!

Good point on the necessary connection between functioning democracy and morality. I think it was John Adams himself who said that the US Constitution was written for a "moral and religious" people and that it would not work for any other. I'd go further and say that it will work only for those with a deep and serious respect for the Old and New Testaments in their cultural DNA.

Maybe the harshness of hudud punishments is a reflection on how Islam, despite its bold claims, really doesn't produce a moral society. I hear so many Muslims bringing up the flagrant homosexuality of the West as an example of Muslim moral superiority, but travelers of both past and present report that no part of the world is as full of the sin against nature as the Islamic world.

Also, folks, ease up on Dank. I suspect he's the sort of searching youngster who happened on Islam at a time when he was disgusted with so much of the family meltdown and rampant, shameless sexual revolutionaries in our society. Give him time, and maybe he'll rediscover Jesus Christ (NOT the Muslim impostor who did not die on the cross).

Demsci,

I suppose that in times of extreme danger or even war you should and WILL get your point across with many people.

There are two types of extreme danger:

1) active, obvious, with cities being blown up

2) #1 in the planning stage.

It is reasonable to assume that we are already in a #2 situation: innumerable Muslims networking throughout the world in order to plot horrific attacks against us at times and in places we may not be able to predict in order to stop. There have already been dozens of plots stopped. It is reasonable to assume that dozens more remain unknown and we will not be able to stop them.

Our situation of being in #2 requires preventative measures -- unless one is happy waiting around and not taking the actions that will minimize or even eliminate the potential danger, resulting in the deaths of thousands or hundreds of thousands of us. Is it worth it to wait around?

Right now though, there seems to be no sense of any imminent danger among the vast majority of the people of the West and India...

That's their problem. They are being recklessly obtuse. I'm going to keep hammering my point home. The more people who do so, the more likely we will effect social change of mind about this issue.

Hesperado, I HEAR your message.

It seems a bit like in the movie "Dante's peak". The expert, Pierce Brosnan, warned about an imminent volcanic eruption. But he was gainsayed and outvoted by other volcanic experts AND politicians who saw the massive disadvantages of sounding the alarm and who withheld an appropriate reaction.

Needless to say; in the following days Dante's peak DID erupt, causing massive damage and misery.

I hope to God you're wrong. Because it seems that something TERRIBLE MUST happen before enough people in authoritative places, experts and politicians, and their voters, can be persuaded by people like you.

At least in the meantime let our-side politicians and activists and writers do what they CAN do.

I do see your point, but if you say Muslims must be seen as "guilty until proven innocent" that MUST mean that they must be held accountable for their choices in a reasonable way to rational people. And that they are not (enough) right now.

Demsci,

Realistically, I agree that the West will likely have to suffer horrible mass-murders before it takes the measures it would have taken had it known those horrible mass-murders would have taken place. I.e., the West is irrationally slow about waking up to the danger of Muslims, and it is highly likely it will wait too long.

When I say "too long", it doesn't mean I believe the West will lose -- but I do believe it will wait too long to save hundreds of thousands, perhaps a few million, Western lives (as well as the physical anguish of hundreds of thousands who survive the successful Muslim terror attacks that will surely happen in the future, along with severe destruction of infrastructure and social dislocations) -- all of this preventable had the West woken up sooner to take prejudicial action against Muslims in the West.

However, even if the Wes reacts slowly, I believe it will be good for a slowly building nucleus of social consciousness to be growing in the meantime. Paradigm shifts in society don't happen by themselves: they are not mechanical inanimate processes: they are human processes -- involving a change of mind. As such, their development is not only helped by a small but slowly growing nucleus of "canaries in the coalmine" -- those canaries are the very beginnings of such a change.

Secondly, my phrase "guilty until proven innocent" merely reflects the convenient use of a common well-known phrase: I don't necessarily mean it literally in the legal or moral sense. A more accurate phrase for what I mean is that we should consider all Muslims equally dangerous until proven harmless. (And needless to say, I have stringent requirements for what would constitute "proven harmless" == requirements so stringent, due to limitations rationality imposes upon us given the nature of the problem, that it likely is virtually impossible: which, of course, translates as simply impossible.)

Once in a while it can happen.

The appalling "Dank" implies that the psychopathic "Prophet" Muhammed was actually a "moderate" who only practiced stoning when he had no other alternative.

What utter crap. The Jews in Muhammed's time had long abandoned stoning—a number of Hadiths, in fact, chastise them for just this. And Christians, per Jesus' example, had *never* formally practiced stoning.

The vicious "Prophet" enshrined a barbaric practice that was on the way out in his time.

The idea that all victims of marital infidelity want to see their spouses buried in a hole and *stoned to death* by a mob says nothing about human nature, but a great deal about the perverse moral sense of the followers of the obscene "Prophet".