http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/ayesha.htm

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 Ayesha when she was 6-years-old and consummated his marriage with her when she was 9. He was then, 54 years old:

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/008.smt.html#008.3310

'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.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/062.sbt.html#007.062.064

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).

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/062.sbt.html#007.062.065

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)'

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/062.sbt.html#007.062.088

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).

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/073.sbt.html#008.073.151

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)

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/008.smt.html#008.3311

'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.

More about Aisha's age:

http://www.apostatesofislam.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=357

Posted by: Ali Dashti at October 1, 2004 7:36 AM

The people in the West are suppose to welcome Islam and the Muslims with open arms but god forbid we get to know anything about Islam, or debate Islam; if you try to ask questions or question anything about Islam you are a racist and that’s that. Just welcome it, accept it, and don’t ask any questions!!! I’m from an ex-communist country where the rule of our communist party was the same: Just welcome it, accept it, and don’t ask any questions!!!

Posted by: gloria at October 1, 2004 8:06 AM

Mr Bennett is only stating facts related by Muslims themselves. As Mohammed had numerous wives
and concubines there was absolutely no reason[except that of a pedophile] to have sex with a nine year old girl. Not only was 'Holy Mo' a rapist,torturer,murderer,thief and liar, he was also a dirty old man. Is it any wonder criminals are attracted to Islam? The example of its founder
gives its followers every excuse to indulge their
basest and most sadistic appetites with the approval
of their Religion. So the UNHOLY is made HOLY!

Posted by: Morgane at October 1, 2004 8:12 AM

To save you all the time I'll respond on behalf of the BPG (Brainwashed Parrots Brigade)...

"This attack on the prophet/Qur'an/Deen/Ummah is absolutely outrageous. You know very well that it was a different culture/the prophet acted only in the best interest of the people around him/you are a racist for questioning other cultures like that. Besides you quote out of context/don't know Arabic/have to read with a believing heart otherwise it will not be clear. Your comments just shows that you are part of a Jewish conspiracy/want to protect your Western materialistic ways/section of society yearning for colonial times. Besides many people are converting to Islam/Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world/Islam is being confirmed by modern science. So there!"

Posted by: PJS1 at October 1, 2004 8:24 AM

"...while the Rev David Kirk-wood, of St Paul’s Church, in The High, Harlow, said: “There are differences of opinion between Christians and Muslims but it’s very important we respect each other’s beliefs and that we don’t try to undermine the founder of their religions."

The BBC runs a 'Historical Jesus' programme about once every two years. Something in which Rev. Kirk-Wood would probably participate in to 'prove' that he (Jesus) should not be taken too seriously after all and that the main point is that we should all please be very nice to each other.

I'm waiting for the first critical 'Historical Mohammed' programme...not holding my breath though.

Posted by: PJS1 at October 1, 2004 8:33 AM

Oops forgot to close the Italics. Will I be subject to a fatwa because of this!? :-)

Posted by: PJS1 at October 1, 2004 8:35 AM

I doubt Mr. Bennet would want to lick the shoes of the prophet, so perhaps he and Inayat Bunglawala have some common ground after all.

Meanwhile, you have nailed it: "it is not a question of criticizing the founder of someone else's religion, but of asking whether the example of that founder is really a positive thing in 21st century society." As someone who knew very little about Islam I always assumed it was a poitive thing, until I started to learn about Muhammad and Islam.

It is amazing how much all of us have learned about Islam since 9/11. Everyone here knows what a "hudna" is, and "taqiyya." I am grateful for all I have learned here and in your books.

Posted by: Miss Moneypenney at October 1, 2004 8:49 AM

Gloria is correct in the connection she made...Islam is more akin to a political ideology than a religion.

So muslims and their apologists say that a 54 year-old man who marries a child of 6 and consumates that "marriage" is not a pedophile? More Clintonesque, "depends on what your definition of a pedophile is"...

The best advice we received from the muslim community after 9/11 was that we should read the Quran and find out more about islam...we did.

Which is why sites like this one have become immensely popular throughout the country.

Mr. Spencer, Hugh, Ali, Mentat, Bob Owens and all whose intelligent and well documented sources have given us the truth...I thank you for giving us the knowledge we need to discover the true face of the enemy and fight accordingly.

Posted by: jawa at October 1, 2004 8:54 AM

For all the Psychologists out there. Modern Islam is the best case study of Stockholm Syndrome around.

Their 'Prophet' holds them hostage through his terrible example (Assasination/Rape/Highway Robbery/War Crimes/Paedophilia). Yet they are touchingly thankful and seeks to protect his 'honour' at every opportunity!

Posted by: PJS1 at October 1, 2004 9:12 AM

Slightly off topic. Since this thread deals with a British subject there is some relevance.

Why I have hope for the UK yet...

A lot of the posts on here paints a picture of the UK as already having acquiesced to being part of the ‘Eurabian’ project. Although it is true that there are elements of society that have already put on ‘dhimmi’ cloaks, and that the public discourse is overwhelmingly Islamophile; the battle is far from over. Therefore without further delay…

The Top 10 reasons - some silly and some sensible - why the UK should be a tough nut to crack for those seeking to establish a version of Eurabia here.

1. The rediscovery of Nationalism (English of course, the Scottish and Welsh versions have always been around). Understanding who you are means that you know when your identity is threatened.

2. In terms of the Asian community there are almost as many Hindus and Sikhs as there are Muslims. Groups that stand to lose a lot from the growth of Islam and (especially Hindus) that are traditionally hostile to Muslim demands. They also tend to be much more socially integrated.

3. The UK attracts immigrants from all over the world, with almost a million black people identifying themselves as Christian. Immigrant Christians have often experienced the 'peaceful religion' firsthand and are therefore not slow to speak out. Muslims find them awkward to deal with since the 'racist' tag does not stick as well.

4. Muslims often tend to isolate themselves physically (proximity to a Mosque being a major factor). This works against their penetration into the wider community.

5. Vast swathes of the population are deeply suspicious of the EU. Forcing politicians of all stripes to take a more independent stance on European issues. It also means that they have highly developed cultural antennae to spot anything that challenges their 'Britishness'. Something which comes in useful in this context.

6. Social interaction and politics are lubricated by alcohol.

7. In spite of (what seems to be) media policy not to name the religion of those being arrested for terror offences anyone with half a brain knows that they are Muslims. People are beginning to wonder aloud about the presence of a 'fifth column'.

8. 85% of Imams are foreign born and are therefore not able to equip their followers to preach Islam in a contextually relevant way. Almost all da'wa activity that I come across attacks elements of Christian belief, whereas this is an essentially secular society.

9. It's hard to obtain statistics but it seems that a lot of British 'reverts' relapse. Some of them are highly critical of Islam after leaving. This makes the PR job a tad more difficult.

10. ‘Integration’ (or lack thereof) is one of the major concerns of the British population as far as immigration is concerned. To such an extent that it has become very much part of the debate. In response to this, language and citizenship tests are being introduced. Raising the issue of ‘integration’ is often a coded way of pointing fingers at the Muslim community. It should (theoretically) be a small step from here to call a burka a burka.

In listing my 10 reasons I’m not putting on rose tinted spectacles. We need to know where our ‘strengths’ (if this is indeed what they are) are and capitalise on them. Any suggestions?

Posted by: PJS1 at October 1, 2004 10:29 AM

Charles Jackson, "president of the Harlow Jewish Community," accused Mr. Bennett of "trouble-making." This reminds one of the old joke -- a telling joke. Two Jewish villagers, Moshe and Mendel, have been seized by the Nazis (or Stalin, or -- name your own favorite) and immediately taken out to be shot by a firing-squad. Moshe asks the head of the squad if he can have a last cigarette. And at that point Mendel explains: "Oh, Moshe, why are you always making trouble!" Mr. Jackson would fit in perfectly -- but this is no joke.

As for Rev. David Kirkwood,of St. Paul's Church, in The High, Harlow, he seems to think that raising the little matter of nine-year-old Aisha (Muhammad's favorite wife)is simply -- well, just not said. Polite people do not mention such things. Ca ne se fait pas. No, no, no. His attitude is, writ little, the larger European attitude, or perhaps the attitude that the entire non-Muslim world thinks it should adopt. Don't say anything, don't point out any of those 100 passages in the Qur'an about Jihad, don't talk about the prayers denouncing Infidels, don't talk about the inculcation of hostility from cradle to grave, don't discuss the hell-hounds of hysteria and hate that are the only kind of dogs that Muslims make into their domestic pets, don't say anything about the folly of welcoming into a "tolerant" and "pluralistic" society those who do not, and cannot, support genuine tolerance and pluralism, and at the moment may pretend to only because, at this point, they still need it to protect themselves from inquiry and question.

Rev. Kirkwood says that "it is very important that we respect each other's beliefs." What if those beliefs are full of manichaean hatred? What if they encourage fanaticisim? What if they discourage mental freedom, artistic creation, scientific inquiry? Why is it "very important that we respect each other's beliefs?" To what end? The death of Western civilization? Is demography destiny? Is that it?

Posted by: Hugh at October 1, 2004 10:39 AM

Equally disturbing is the Islamic take on incest. While many muslims insist that incest is forbidden in Islam, the prophet certainly sanctioned and engaged in it. Incest is rampant in muslim countries, and one might attribute this to the brain drain in the Islamic world. Many of the victims of incest are summarily disposed of for either the crime of adultery, or for bringing shame to their families. But the tradition of first cousins marrying first cousins in Islamic countries is prevalent. I recently read about the severely deformed baby of an Iranian woman who was married to her brother! Who knows what goes on in some of these countries with extremely censored news media? It appears to me that like many other perverted and vile practices, muslims publically insist that incest is forbidden and discreetly condone and engage in it.
Quran 033.050:
O Prophet! We have made lawful to you all the wives to whom you have paid dowers; and those whom your hands possess out of the prisoners of war spoils whom Allah has assigned to you; and daughters of your paternal uncles and aunts, and daughters of your maternal uncles and aunts, who migrated with you; and any believing woman who dedicates her soul to the Prophet if the Prophet wishes her; this is a privilege for you only, and not for the rest of the Believers; We know what We have appointed for them as to their wives and the captives whom they possess; in order that there should be no difficulty for you and that you should be free from blame.”

Yes, muslim women are indeed the most liberated of all females, those lucky girls! How I envy them.

Posted by: Susanp at October 1, 2004 10:43 AM

PJS1:
I can't see the British pub disappearing. I agree with you, that we should start compiling our strengths. It will give us hope.

ONe more thing: the gay rights movement won't take a muslim invasion lying down either.

Posted by: Voltaire at October 1, 2004 11:03 AM

It is interesting to note that this whole episode heightens our awareness of one clear fact; freedom of expression holds no place in the Islamic belief system. They are so thin-skinned, yet they expect others to show such tolerance.

Posted by: Buck at October 1, 2004 11:37 AM

A fact is a fact. Aisha was 9 and Mohammed was over fifty. That makes him a pedophile. If Islam becomes a force in non-Muslim countries, we will see younger and younger girls (and boys) legally fall victim to pedophiles. (Certainly the world's Infidel pedophiles are cheering, hoping that they fnally will mainstream. Ain't that a kick.) As a French king once said, "Paris is worth a mass," the same principle applies to those that adhere to pedophilia - they will flock like flies to that loathsome ideology for the chance to freely indulge their vile and sick passion.

Posted by: epg at October 1, 2004 12:08 PM

Voltaire wrote:

'ONe more thing: the gay rights movement won't take a muslim invasion lying down either.'

Good point. Gay activist Peter Tatchell has been demonstrating against Islamic extremism for years. Of course, as Pym Fontain (sp. ?) demonstrated, it's much harder for the PC left to dismiss someone as (yawn) 'racist' when he's also a leading gay activist!

I have to say I don't understand the muslim stance on homosexuality at all. When I travelled in the Middle East years ago (and lived for a time in Saudi Arabia) it was very common to see men walking hand in hand and for men to offer each other a flower in the street. And isn't there an old Arab saying: "Women for sons, boys for pleasure"? Plus, as we know the Koran promises eternally young boys in Paradise as well as the more familiar eternal virgins...

So what's the official muslim position? Is pederastry okay but homosexuality gets you a death sentence? That seems really perverse. Or is it a case of 'you can do whatever you want - as long as you're dead when you do it'?

I'm equally baffled by the Islamic position on alcohol. Saudi Arabia is officially 'dry', though well-off Saudis certainly drink in private. The poetry of Omar Khayam was banned in SA because he praises wine in his verses...yet in the Koran the devout believer is promised 'rivers of wine' when he enters Paradise!

Anyone here who can explain these baffling contradictions?

Thanks,

Benelux

Posted by: Benelux at October 1, 2004 12:18 PM

Does anyone know if this relevent quote from that bundle of fun the Ayatollah Khomeini is authentic? He apparently made more assertions in a similar vein. If they are authentic they should be fowarded to the UK Independence Party and The Star newspaper asap!

"A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However he
should not penetrate, sodomising the child is OK. If the man penetrates and
damages the child then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her
life. This girl, however does not count as one of his four permanent wives.
The man will not be eligible to marry the girls sister."
From Khomeini's book, "Tahrirolvasyleh", fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom,
Iran, 1990

Posted by: Benelux at October 1, 2004 12:28 PM

Another relevent quote from the saintly Ayatollah:

"A man can marry a girl younger than nine years of age, even if the girl is still a baby being breastfed. A man, however is prohibited from having intercourse with a girl younger than 7, other sexual act such as foreplay, rubbing, kissing and having pleasure is allowed..." (Ayatollah Khomeini)

This is from www.homa.org - an Iranian Women in exile site.

Benelux

Posted by: Benelux at October 1, 2004 2:22 PM

Voltaire: 'the gay rights movement won't take a muslim invasion lying down either'.

Can't resist a childish snigger at that!

I haven't always been a fan of Peter Tatchell, but I admire his logic and consistency. Recently he has been in hot water for his outspoken criticism of rap music which can be extremely homophobic (and I would add misogynist). There has been a deafening silence from the left on this because the 'artists' are black. This parallels the silence of the left on Islam, which, as a non-Western or anti-Western ideology, gets a pass.

Posted by: Interestd at October 1, 2004 2:26 PM

Take a pedophile, dress it up in a robe, throw a sheet on top of his melon, give him a badly needed bath, brush his tooth, make sure he is unable to read or write, hand him a rock and tell him it's a supreme being, then hand him a machete and send him on his murderous path.....

Do all of this, and he's still a pedophile. This is no slur, what are they so upset about? Defending the undefendable is like peeing in the wind......

Posted by: DCWatson at October 1, 2004 3:28 PM

It is difficult to accept that the Holy Prophet married Ayesha when she was 6-years-old and consummated his marriage with her when she was 9

Indeed it is difficult to accept.

So Mohammed fancied Aisha when she was just 6. Then waited three years to consummate the marriage.

Given what we know of the obscene character Mohammed, that wait seems highly unlikely. I have a feeling that some re-writing of history has occurred. More likely course of events are:
This guy fancied a child ie he fancies children. He is not going to wait 3 years as she grows up. No way. He fancies the child and not a 9 year old. And who exactly is going to stop him. Even allah is terrified of mohammed.

Posted by: DP111 at October 1, 2004 4:30 PM

"it is not a question of criticizing the founder of someone else's religion, but of asking whether the example of that founder is really a positive thing in 21st century society. But that, of course, is the question that must never be asked."

And if it were asked, what then would be YOUR answer Mr. Spencer?

If you did concede that the founder was not in fact," a suitable thing" in our urbane 21st century -- would you then say that the founder might have been appropriate in a more primitive time and place?

Or would you instead leave the question unanswered, perhaps hopeing that the nasty implications of such an inquiry, would fade away along with the question itself?

It is after all, so academic; and nothing of use is ever really accomplished, is it?

Posted by: witness at October 1, 2004 4:34 PM

I've always wanted to know what is the form of Muslim prayer. What do they pray for? Do they have something in the nature of the Lord's prayer?

Does anyone have any idea?

Posted by: DP111 at October 1, 2004 5:36 PM

Oooh how badly do they want everyone to shut up ? Slowly but surely it is begining to dawn on people that the "prophet" was nothing more than an arab warlord and slave trader. I have nothing but contempt for this "religion of peace" and the wackos who follow it.

Posted by: ReligionOfPeaceMyArse at October 1, 2004 6:06 PM

ReligionOfPeaceMyArse:

I have nothing but contempt for this "religion of peace" and the wackos who follow it.

I hope that for Muslims anyway, you will temper your contempt with some pity as well.

Muslims are so brainwashed from birth that it is almost akin to a physical tampering of their minds. It affects the way they see the world. I tend to regard Muslims as plagued by a mental disability known as Islam.

Most times I feel a kind of pity for Muslims, except on occasions such as Beslan or 9/11.

Posted by: DP111 at October 1, 2004 6:19 PM

Businessmall All-Raging All-Raking

Salami Allwhocome!!!

We here at the BPG (Blind Parrot's Brigade) cannot help but notice that you dhimmis continue your terrible slurs on our Profit (PUB). Don't you know that Allan (SWAT) will smite you with the best the 7th Century has to offer. We suggest a large portion of clay dropped by birds (Allhamburgerland our greatest victory!) garnished by the fart of the the celestial horse that took our profit sightseeing.

Despite our clear rebuttal of your slanderous accusations (see about 20 posts above) you persist in your malice.

You leave us with no choice but to use our favourite and most trusted debating technique. We shall shout you down!

Alltogether now: Aloha Snackbar!!! (Repeat 250 times, or until inaudible due to damage to vocal chords)

Posted by: PJS1 at October 1, 2004 6:32 PM

what is wrong with the christians and jews
that they don't read the source texts
of the supposed last and final prophet
of a monotheistic religion that claims
islam is the best?
Are they afraid that the muslims are right?
Are they afraid of their hate and might?
Or do they worship a new god now,
the god of politically correct multiculturalism?

And it's not just in Britain,
it's all over the world that willful ignorance
prevails. What ails us? Is our fear so great
that we will allow evil and hate to rule?
I'm sad tonight but I'll raise my wine glass
to toast the Brave and the Free who have died
for liberty throughout history
and for those hardy fractious souls who write here and strive to keep the Light alive.

Posted by: the poetess at October 1, 2004 8:13 PM

I have to take umbrage with Voltaires remark about how the Gays are an ally in this fight...

The reality is that the Gay Agenda is as hateful and intolerate as Islam and both deserve a pox on there houses........

They are both dangerously intolerant and hateful to anyone that disagrees with there ideologies!!

So if they both want too fight it out, fine, but I am not picking either horse between these two!!

Thanks

Posted by: Albertanator at October 1, 2004 8:34 PM

Want to ask everyone else a question.

Can anyone else here recall a famous historical figure being a pedophile? I can't think of any at all. That must make Mohammad extremely abnormal. Hell as far as I know Genghis Khan, Hitler, stalin...these guys were pure ruthlessness but they were not pedophiles.

Hang on...to think of it the only famous pedophiles I know of were cult leaders like David Koresh. Intersting? Yep, these people were pedophiles to begin with but they needed a cult to get access to the kids. Yuk!!!

Remember how Koresh's followers knew he was abusing/raping the kids, yet they worshiped him as the perfect man. Many still think what they know was a pedophile was perfect. Whenever his followers asked him about this pedophilia he would just come up with some bullshit revelation from God justifying it(it was gods will...yuk!!!). Gee, sooo easy!! Yet these people before they joined the cult knew pedophilia was abnormal and evil. Makes me wonder, was pedophilia really a common cultural practice in Mohammads time? I really wonder, Aisha's father protested against the marriage but he had to accept didnt he? Otherwise Mohammad would have had a revelation (yeah right) from Allah to kill him.

Stockholm syndrome...most definately. People trying to cover up for what they know is a pedophile, because regardless of the cult leaders extreme faults they worship him as a prophet. When you are in a cult the first thing the cult leader does is use mind control techniques (i.e. made to order sripture) to shut down the reasoning part of your brain. Hey, how else is he going to get to abuse the kids!! Cult members always act the most extreme and the most illogically. Remember the the Japanese cult "supreme truth". Yep, psychopathic murders. Like many cults...you come into the cult curious..and come out as a psychopathic zombie (covering up for the great pedophile).

Posted by: obl r us at October 1, 2004 8:39 PM

Do I understand this correctly,beheadings in Iraq by people yelling to Allah in praise is OK
and doesn't even draw a small protest in London.
Someone tells the truth about a 54 year old
man lusting for a 6 year old and showing such respect for her he wait until she's 9 befor he rapes her,and Muslims go ape over it.

Just because a Muslim man would let his 9 year old daughter get raped by a 54 year old paedophile,doesn't mean it's right,after all the Quran condemns adult males having sex but if the same guy did it to a 9 year old Muhammed would approve it.

Several Islamic site I've been to post a biography for Muhammed,it's selective on which
years to publish and also indicates it's in Arabic-only print. Why would non arabic reading people be exempt to this knowledge,might it be the Prophets life of Murder,misogynistic treatment,paedophilia,and antisemitism.

They're waiting to lull us to sleep with
their passive peaceful version of Islam,then
the Jihadists will attack a dawn while praising Allah during their murdering of Gods children.
Yes,Gods children,Allah is the God of Muslims and
has no connection to my faith. Everyone is Gods children and even the Iraqis are worth liberating
and costing American lives,even if Michael Moore
produces a movie demonizing Arabs and implying Iraqi aren't human enough to help.

NO ISLAM - NO PAEDOPHILES

Posted by: ala-sux at October 1, 2004 9:17 PM

Posted by: Benelux at October 1, 2004 12:18 PM
Does anyone know if this relevent quote from that bundle of fun the Ayatollah Khomeini is authentic? He apparently made more assertions in a similar vein. If they are authentic they should be fowarded to the UK Independence Party and The Star newspaper asap!

"A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However he
should not penetrate, sodomising the child is OK. If the man penetrates and
damages the child then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her
life. This girl, however does not count as one of his four permanent wives.
The man will not be eligible to marry the girls sister."
From Khomeini's book, "Tahrirolvasyleh", fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom,
Iran, 1990

Posted by: Benelux at October 1, 2004 12:28 PM

Yes, this is indeed a quote from the demon Khomeini's satanic book. His venerated literature is posted on many Islamic websites. It isn't likely that the news media would publish his holy dictums, since they might incite "hate." Hate directed at Islam, not emanating from it, which is the only valid hate. The horrible acts Khomeini's books might inspire are inconceivable to the politically correct, multiculturalist, social engineers.
If they were really worried about the incitement of hate, the Quran and Hadith would be banned. Islamic scriptures are the most abhorrent ever perpetrated on mankind.

Posted by: Susanp at October 1, 2004 10:24 PM

Hmmm. I've noticed that in China, Christians are law-abiding (apart from holding unregistered meetings), and get jailed and tortured right and left. Outside of Eastern Turkistan, where it has gotten violent, Islamic dissidence gets treated with kid gloves. I not that the Left feels free to trash Christianity right and left, but masochistically embraces Islamic militance. The point is, when you deal with the Left, you've got to be nasty to them.

Maybe it's time we Christians organized mobs to trash tax-funded art shows that insult our religion, pour mobs into the streets to beat people up and maybe lynch a few well-chosen victims (a prominent actress or two would be good). Perhaps we need to take over a school board meeting or two, burn some of the worst textbooks, and put dunce caps on the loopiest teachers and administrators. Sure, people will whine and shout about us being "religious hypocrites" (and rightly so), but we can answer that we're only using methods they've legitimized, and they'll respect us again.

Posted by: Kepha1 at October 2, 2004 12:15 AM

There's another possibility concerning Aisha: she was a "Lolita"--a little girl who welcomes the sexual advances of men (after the character in Vladimir Nabokov's novel).

Naybe this is one reason why Islam is so sex-obsessed that its male followers can't contain themselves when they see women in shorts or swimwear--even in appropriate times and places like hot weather or at the beach.

Posted by: Kepha1 at October 2, 2004 12:23 AM

Notice how some imbeciles of non-Islamic religions rise to the defence of Islam.

The usual anti-defamation sobsisters standing up for anything they view as intolerance to another "much-maligned" group, disregarding that this group (Moslems) could and would slit any sobsister's throat as allowed by their scriptures.

Then the placating of Islam by another one who would last not long under Islamic rule:

“There are differences of opinion between Christians and Muslims but it’s very important we respect each other’s beliefs and that we don’t try to undermine the founder of their religions.”

--Rev. Kirk-wood (why the hyphen?)

Respecting all the BS of Islam and its originator is a one-way street. A non-Moslem's respect for Islam is not reciprocated.

Now, if today's Moslem ideologogues would not interfere with our religions, nobody would give a hoot whether some old Arab brigand engaged in revolting deeds 1300 years ago. But even if Moslems practiced in silence and did not try to impose their disgusting ideology on us, as soon as any of us became familiar with the life and deeds of the founder of Islam, they could not ask for respect for him nor for their ideology.

Posted by: unicorns62000 at October 2, 2004 3:04 AM

"His main claim is that the Prophet married an underage girl but at that time in Arabia they had different laws."

What laws? Didn't Mahomet make his own laws as he went along, that everybody had to follow?

The statement by Bunglawala excuses the abhorrent act by pretending that Mahomet lived under the laws of a government that allowed old men to marry children. More Islamic convoluted explanations for its immoral practices.

Posted by: unicorns62000 at October 2, 2004 3:17 AM

Mystic Paedophile's known as "allah" or "mohammand" should only be accorded the status of what they have begat upon humanity.

Clearly the fruits of "allah" and her/his prophet "mohammand" are those fruits that are best left to the repository of HELL where all those who have followed and do follow their vile filthy code of Barbarism and Savagery will be most welcome.

To the Followers of the beast, Renounce Satan and become part of the Human Race as created by God in the Image of God and not some dog man beast race of mutants worshipping at the feet of the Anti Christ.

Yours faithfully,
RSole

Posted by: RSole at October 2, 2004 3:22 AM

ASSASSIN

Main Entry: as-sas-sin
Function: noun
Etymology: Medieval Latin assassinus, from Arabic, plural of hashshhashin worthless person, literally, hashish user, from hashshhashish
Date: circa 1520

1 capitalized : a member of a Shia Muslim sect who at the time of the Crusades was sent out on a suicidal mission to murder prominent enemies.

A religion of peace doesn’t kill its converts or its critics!

Posted by: Bar at October 2, 2004 4:07 AM

There was a similar article in the Telegraph UK, 26th September, I tried to paste but failed. Type 'Tony Bennett' into its search option.

The bit that really got me was the muslim spokesman saying Mo married Aisha at a young age but the marriage wasn't consummated until years later. 'Years later' would lead 99 out of 100 readers to assume that he waited until she was adult. More taquiyya.

Benelux: I think you're right that pederasty is perfectly okay in the muslim world, while a homosexual relationship between consenting adults is not, maybe because it might imply equality and love, a love that would compete for the love of Allah, which is the only real love allowed. I read somewhere also that there is actually no word for homosexuality in Arabic and that the muslim world only started condemning homosexuality when its prevalence in their countries was criticised by non-muslims. Sorry I have no sources for these, but I came across these little nuggets ages ago.

To review the muslim acceptance of pederasty, you only have to google 'Kandahar' (Afshanistan)and 'boys'. Apparently Kandahar is the world capital of pederasty.

Posted by: Setanta at October 2, 2004 4:35 AM

Benelux: wine in heaven is not intoxicating so it's allowed. When the Aga Khan drinks wine (on earth!)it turns to water in his mouth.

Susanp: for more on incest in Muslim families, read Theodore Dalrymple, a doctor working in inner-city London:

From an article by him quoted at
Parapundit.com/archives/002044.html
about a girl forced into marriage with a first cousin:
"She had two children in quick succession, both of whom were so severely handicapped that they would be bedridden for the rest of their short lives and would require nursing 24 hours a day. (For fear of giving offense, the press almost never alludes to the extremely high rate of genetic illnesses among the offspring of consanguineous marriages)..."

The girl's fate? Her husband divorced her and her family ostracised her. Muslim family values in action.

Theodore Dalrymple is brilliant. See also, among his other articles, 'Reader, she married him - alas' where a girl is forced to marry a boy, always thought to be her brother (they were brought up as brother and sister in the same family) but she is then told he is a cousin and she has to marry him. Who knows?

The muslims favour endogamous marriages because that way the family's wealth is kept within the family. And they call us materialistic..
Where no male family member is available for marriage - though with polygamy I don't know why this would be so - girls can be made to marry the koran, but I think this only happens in remote places.

Posted by: Setanta at October 2, 2004 5:01 AM

DP111 - you ask about Muslim prayer vs Christian prayer. That's a very good question, and I think it goes to the heart of the difference between the Judeo/Christian God and the Islamic God/Allah.

Certainly for a Christian, though there are rituals in prayer, there is a personal relationship with God. Traditionally we speak of God the Father, although the Mother is just as appropriate. In other words a kind and loving parent, who knows what's best for you.

'Allah' on the other hand, comes across as being a bit like an oriental despot. His rules are quite arbitary and his followers are slaves. There is no personal involvement on his part - he doesn't suffer as we suffer.

Having said that, I know a few 'bad' Muslims, ie Muslims who are good human beings, whose concept of God is very similar to the Christian one. But that's only because they live in the West - they don't know the real Islam. It's very difficult to know what to say to them - if you talk about Mohammed's paedophilc relationship with Aisha they just go into denial.

Posted by: Interestd at October 2, 2004 5:42 AM

Businessmall All-Raging All-Raking

Salami from the BPB!

Still you persist even though many of our members voices became shahid through airing our convincing one-word argument.

Look, all you have to do is read the Courant in Ahmaric and you will be convinced of it's beauty, purity and truth. But above all of the fact that it is a wonderful cure for insomnia. Which is why most of you are here anyway.

May the message of Allan (SWAT) and his profit (PUB) guide you to Gate 54 and keep the Jinn far away from the smallest room in your house. (You still have to enter with the right foot though!)

Aloha Snackbar!!!

Abdullah bin Model T Al-Onearm
Belt Assembler BPB

Posted by: PJS1 at October 2, 2004 6:48 AM

Albertanator wrote:

>So if they both want too fight it out, fine, >but I am not picking either horse between these >two!!

When we're facing an enemy that claims a billion and a half on its side, I don't think we have the luxury of picking and choosing who can or can't be on 'our team' like it was some playground game instead of a struggle to save western civilization.

What's needed is a 'coalition of humanity' in which people of all faiths, races, philosophies and inclinations join together against an evil ideology that threatens every non-muslim on the planet.

WW2 dragged on for much longer than necessary because the various rival European resistance groups - Catholics, Protestants, Communists, Monarchists etc - refused to work together or share weapons and intelligence. In some cases they ended up collaborating with the Nazis rather than see a rival group have any success!

Division is the one sure recipe for defeat.

Posted by: Benelux at October 2, 2004 7:03 AM

Setanta wrote:

"When the Aga Khan drinks wine (on earth!)it turns to water in his mouth."

Hmm, I think his wine merchant ripped him off on that $3000 champagne!

Thanks for the info on Islamic attitudes to alcohol and pederastry. I get the impression that the mullahs and scholars interpret the texts according to their personal inclinations. Khomeini certainly seemed to have a paedophile agenda as well as a taste for hashish and hard drugs.

Dalrymple sounds interesting: I'll check him out.

Posted by: Benelux at October 2, 2004 7:16 AM

On marrying cousins and birth defects: Arab News has published articles on both.

In one, they announced that over half of all Saudi marriages are between what they call "close relatives". Even Western educated Saudis - whom you'd think would know better - will arrange marriges between their children and their nephews and nieces. It is permissible.

In another article, they publically announced a 25 - 30% birth defect rate. That means the rates are probably worse. In some areas, half the inhabitants are carriers of thallasemia, a genetically linked form of anemia. Two carriers have one chance in four of producing a child with the disease. There is no cure. The only curative measure is life-long blood transfusions.

Posted by: jay at October 2, 2004 7:59 AM

Well said Benelux. United we stand, divided we fall.

Jay, if only Mohammed had forbidden blood transfusions.

Posted by: Voltaire at October 2, 2004 8:51 AM

Jay, do those with birth defects still have to pray 5 times a day? How does a rigid religious system deal with the mentally and physically disabled?

Posted by: Voltaire at October 2, 2004 9:06 AM

Talassamia mediterranea -- as if it is not unknown around the Mediterranean -- is what the disease is called in Italy, and it also infects small island populations where inbreeding -- for lack of choice -- is practiced. In Islam the Great Loyalty is to Islam itself. Lesser loyalties include the immediate family, the extended family, the tribe and, if one is a city-dweller, to the particular city (Fallujah, Baghdad, Damascus, etc.).

Genetics, of course, doesn't matter. Because if it mattered, there would be something about it in the Qur'an. And there isn't. So it doesn't.

What is the real age of the earth? Well, in human terms, it is 2004, now going on 630.

Posted by: Hugh at October 2, 2004 9:17 AM

Talassamia mediterranea -- as if it is not unknown around the Mediterranean -- is what the disease is called in Italy, and it also infects small island populations where inbreeding -- for lack of choice -- is practiced. In Islam the Great Loyalty is to Islam itself. Lesser loyalties include the immediate family, the extended family, the tribe and, if one is a city-dweller, to the particular city (Fallujah, Baghdad, Damascus, etc.).

Genetics, of course, doesn't matter. Because if it mattered, there would be something about it in the Qur'an. And there isn't. So it doesn't.

What is the real age of the earth? Well, in human terms, it is 2004, now going on 630.

Posted by: Hugh at October 2, 2004 9:17 AM

Jay, with a birth defect rate that high, no wonder they have to import westerners to work for them.

Posted by: Voltaire at October 2, 2004 9:19 AM

Outrage at prophet slur?

What slur?

There's a difference between a slur and the truth. As for the mulla apologists, too bad dudes, a reason is not the same as an excuse.

Posted by: voletti at October 2, 2004 9:43 AM

Interested:

Keep bringing up the subject of Aisha. When your muslim associates "go into denial", tell them not to believe you, but to check with their imam.

Several months ago we had a few muslims (I think it was at JW) going apesh*t over this subject, accusing us of defaming their "prophet", the perfect man, etc. I told them to check with their imams. They did, and came back DEFENDING muhammad's behavior. But they weren't denying it anymore.

Posted by: CGW at October 2, 2004 10:06 AM

Dear dp111

The Muslim equivalent, or one might say inversion of the Lord's Prayer is called something like the Fatihah.

The last three lines say something like:
Lead us to the straight path
Not like those who have gone astray (ie Christians)
Nor those who have incurred Your wrath (ie Jews)

______

It seems that Allah must be very bitchy and childish if he can't resist making a dig at Christians and Jews in his personal prayer.

As for Aisha:
The reason why Mohammed did not consumate the marriage earlier was because Aisha had some disease.

However there is evidence to suggest that he didn't wait quite until she was nine.

Aisha's account of being taken to the prophet to consumate the marriage says that her nurse came and wiped her face, then lead her to Mohammed's house and by the time they arrived Aisha was out of breath.

Being out of breath when walking along with an adult is not something that is common amongst nine-year olds and is something that you would associate with a younger child.

Posted by: Elephant at October 2, 2004 2:13 PM

Benelux, with all due respect, since the Gay Agenda hates us Christians as much as the Muslims do and since they only constitue less then 1 percent of the population, I am not in the lease interested in gaining an alliance with people that are no less hateful then Islam.

These groups deserve one another....

I can work with Liberals, Secularists, All other faiths but I will not work with people that are as hateful as Islam......now for those more moderate gays that can learn to accept that we Christians will never accept there 'alternative lifestyle' then that is fine.......but most gays are every bit as intolerant as the Islamic world!!

Again, a pox on both there houses!!

Thanks

Posted by: Albertanator at October 2, 2004 4:55 PM

Albernator: have you ever heard of gay christians? There are probably some at your church.

Posted by: Voltaire at October 2, 2004 6:16 PM

Albertanator: 'gays are every bit as intolerant as the Islamic world'.

Come off it! When have gays beheaded Muslims or stoned them to death?

Tolerance is not the same thing as approval. There are many lifestyles and attitudes which one may not approve of, but in Western free societies we live and let live. Unlike Isamic societies.

Posted by: Interestd at October 2, 2004 6:19 PM

Since you're on the Gay issue,it's interesting
that two adult men showing affection towards each other is a sin and offensive to Allah,but if one of the men repented back to a heterosexual desire and wanted sex with a 9 year old girl,Allah would bless it and Muhammed would approve it.

Some things are beyond reasoning,the Quran has verses condemning violence and yet has the verses that follow the famouos "BUT" that over ride the Peace verses and allow killings for Islam.

NO ISLAM - NO PEDOPHILES

Posted by: ala-sux at October 2, 2004 7:31 PM

One has to remember this:

There are gay people.

And there are gay activists.

The activists are the ones who will promote hatred of Christianity, to further their cause.

I have two gay friends in England, and they see No problem with having me as a Christian friend.

Posted by: Gary at October 3, 2004 4:01 AM

Muslims saying that Mohammed's consumating the marriage when Aisha was only nine was part of the customs in Arabia at that time is not a valid argument.

If Mohammed was truly the messenger of God and an example of the most perfect man then his behaviour should have transended time and place.

After all the whole reason for Mohammed's ministry was supposed to be turning people away from the pagan habits.

He knew that he would be taken as a role model, but he still did it.

Posted by: Elephant at October 3, 2004 5:36 AM

interestd, Elephant

Thanks for the info on the muslim prayer.

I wonder of that os all there is to it.

For Christians, whole books have been written on the contemplative and meditative aspects of prayer. The power of prayer not just for intercession but as balm for the soul, apart from the worship aspects of prayer.

If what you say is all there is to islamic prayer, then small wonder that the civilised world is fooled about Islam. They think it is similar to Christianity. muslim spolesmen of course go out of their way to encourage this idea.

Robert Spencer, Hugh

Is there any thing to Muslim prayer like in Christianity?

PS: As of now, no capitalisation of islamic terms. Also references to dar al harb, non-muslim world, kaffir world tc, will be replaced by the more correct 'civilised world'.

Posted by: DP111 at October 3, 2004 3:36 PM

Maybe they misunderstood the comment,the recent slur towards Saudis about Oil-Money could be a "Profit" slur to Islam not sharing the wealth.

NO ISLAM - KNOW PEACE

Posted by: ala-sux at October 3, 2004 6:03 PM

Men showing affection to each other? Who says it's gay? I know a Cuban-born guy who, whenever he sees me, gives me an abrazo. Other men of whom I am fond exchange kindly words and emotional pats on the back when we meet. However, we're all married, practicing hetero males with children who's paternity we cannot deny--even if, at times, we'd like to.

Posted by: Kepha1 at October 4, 2004 4:34 AM

Actually, the gay rights movement has more in common with Islam than it might care to resist. Many report that sodomy is a common vice in Islamic society.

Posted by: Kepha1 at October 4, 2004 4:39 AM