I'm really angry and sickened by this story.

Posted by: KAOSKTRL at October 22, 2006 4:49 PM

The father was probably just getting her ready for a marriage...after all, the poor mite will be nine soon.

I hope they fry the bastard. The mom, too, for not knowing/checking.

Posted by: proud infidel at October 22, 2006 5:01 PM

How on earth could the mother not know?

Posted by: Kate at October 22, 2006 5:15 PM

This happens in the Somali community all the time in Minnnesota, although it is against the law.

Alarmed Pig Farmer can tell you much more. I hope he shows up.

Posted by: CGW at October 22, 2006 5:46 PM

freewoman, this isn't circumcision, this is genital mutilation at its finest.

Posted by: EliasAlucard at October 22, 2006 5:51 PM

How about somebody snips the father's glans off? Or... find some way to completely deaden the nerves in his penis. Or.... castrate him.

Posted by: Monkeywho at October 22, 2006 5:59 PM

"Fortunate Adem refused to comment for this article but has said her daughter suffered severe pain since the circumcision."

"What mother would not know that this has happened to their daughter for two years?"

"Hill [Adem's attorney] has said the family of the girl's mother, Fortunate Adem, also is from Africa and could have performed the circumcision.

Something tells me that dad didn't do it.

Posted by: PRCS at October 22, 2006 6:21 PM

ALL genital mutilation (aka circumcision), be it male or female, should stop.

Posted by: Kim Hartveld at October 22, 2006 6:26 PM

give the father a choice 40 years as a girl for some prisoner or castration by tieing him by a chain around his cock and balls fasten it to the floor and hand him a dull pair of schisors set the room on fire and tell him he can leave when he wants and lett the sadistic son of muhamad castrate himself

Posted by: islamakapigeaters at October 22, 2006 6:35 PM

Are they trying to tell us the mother changed that baby girl's diaper and never suspected anything? B*lls**t!

Posted by: Carolyn2 at October 22, 2006 6:59 PM

The mother knew.

Can you imagine how much that child must have cried and screamed from the pain? If the perpetrator followed custom, the scissors weren't sterile, the wound wasn't stitched up with real surgical thread and, of course, the child was denied anesthetic and analgesics.

The child's underpants or diaper would have been bloody for days or weeks. The wound probably would have gotten infected.

The mother knew.

Posted by: Josephine at October 22, 2006 7:11 PM

The mother knew.

The only way she wouldn't know is if she was in a coma.

Posted by: Eatyourpeas at October 22, 2006 7:13 PM

I did not have an understanding of what female genital mutiliation was all about and how it's done. When I looked it up on the internet and saw pictures, I felt sick for weeks. I still feel sick when I think about it. The idea that anyone could do this to any child, much less their own? What kind of savages would think up such a thing?

There is no way the mother couldn't have known. This story needs to be on the front page of every newspaper.

Posted by: Mo at October 22, 2006 7:23 PM

Greetings in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, Who is able to save to the uttermost all who call upon Him.

That this practice is savage is an understatement, Mo. You should also read up on female fistulas, which is another astonishingly horrid legacy of Islam.

The abuses of women and children are part and parcel of this disgusting cultural cult.

I pray that every single person could be freed from this revolting ideology.

Posted by: Stand fast in the liberty at October 22, 2006 7:43 PM

Several years ago, I helped sponsor an Eritrean girl to the US to save her from this barbaric mutilation. She had been taken to Saudi Arabia with her father and mother who had become "employees" of a rich Saudi. The mother and daughter were Christians but her father had become Muslim and he and their "employer" were insisting the girl be "purified" before she hit puberty.

Under the pretext of visiting her husband's mother, the little girl and her mother were allowed to go home briefly to Eritrea. There, her aunt got her on a plane to Rome (the aunt held Italian citizenship) and we got the mother and child into the US. Then began two years of bureaucratic hell while the INS tried to have them deported, not to Eritea, but to Saudi Arabia.

The Saudis insisted that they were under contract to remain in Riyadh and insisted that the father had sole custody under Saudi law. The truth was that her Muslim daddy didn't want to lose his Christian wife and daughter to infidels and the US government took the side of the Saudis. It was only because the Immigration judge understood the brutal nature of what the child faced that she was allowed to stay. Today she is a beautiful and well-adjusted teenager in the US.

Female "circumcision" is really female castration and is one of the most evil abuses imaginable. It can consist of just removing the clitoris but often involves the full excision of the labia. It is also horribly ugly because it leaves the natural beauty of the female genitalia completely destroyed. Even worse is the emotional and psychological trauma that the victim must suffer.

Unfortunately, it is widespread in Egypt and much of black Africa. It is not Islamic per se and is virtually nonexistent among Muslims outside of Africa and Arabia. It was also practiced by some African Christians and Animists and was not unknown among Ethiopian Jews. However it has now been almost completely eliminated in those communities. The fact that some Islamic "scholars" still defend this practice shows how debased Islam really is.

Posted by: Provoslavni at October 22, 2006 8:33 PM

Circumcision? Isn't that misleading for a cliterectomy?

Posted by: John Sobieski at October 22, 2006 9:00 PM

So this is what dubya ment when he said 'Islam makes America culturally rich.'

Posted by: Alert at October 22, 2006 9:08 PM

Imagine, soon after you are born onto Earth, your genitals are attacked by an idiot with scizzors.
The first major pain you feel is between your legs.
You just got here and the black magicians with the magical tools, scizzors or a rusty knife, prove to you who is in charge and who is helpless. Using the sword (knife/scizzors}, in the evil ritual, the victim is forever bent to thier will.
'The true black magicians are your fellow man...if you dont believe that, just try and break away from the path they have set for you'. (Carlos Casteneda/Don Juan)... (A Yaqi way of Knowledge).
Those so mutilated will never break away from their evil masters. Allah has seen to it...

Posted by: duh_swami at October 22, 2006 9:12 PM

maybe the next time the council on arrogant islamic rodents complains because muslims are sometimes compared to animals, this article should be presented to them. idiot muslims

Posted by: Prickzilla at October 22, 2006 9:48 PM

This illiterate's punishment should include having his genitals being mutilated, with a plastic butter knife and a tablespoon of salt.

Posted by: Prickzilla at October 22, 2006 9:50 PM

Although far more common amongst the Muslim residents of traditionally Christian Ethiopia, sources indicate that some Christians engage in the practice as well, albeit at lower rates.

Posted by: Kafir Nonbeliever at October 22, 2006 9:54 PM

I agree with many above posters: it is impossible that the mother couldn't have been aware of it unless they never bathe their kids or change soiled undergarments,,,not to mention the cries of pain.

Bad enough that this happens in many areas, but in the US of A?

The parents should be made examples of and dealt with so severely that no one else will ever contemplate such a thing.

All medical institutions should be put on notice to report any such incidents they encounter and the harshest measures taken.

Posted by: Gramfan at October 22, 2006 9:58 PM

"Circumcision? Isn't that misleading for a cliterectomy?"
Posted by: John Sobieski

Yes.

"ALL genital mutilation (aka circumcision), be it male or female, should stop."
Posted by: Kim Hartveld

You seem to be on a little mission on this one don't you? (Google "Kim Hartveld" and LGF)

There are medical/health/hygenic advantages for a male to be circumsized of the prepuce. Easier to clean, avoids troublesome synechiae, secondary phimoses, decreases cancer and even AIDS transmission.

The male equivolent of what they are doing, however, would be to remove the glans. There is no medical or other reason to remove a normal glans or normal clitoris.

What you have done, by this straw man comparison, is trivialize a brutal, disfiguring, needless abomination used to sexually cripple women as a means of controlling them. Have you no conscience? Do you really mean to be an advocate for mutilation by trivializing it? Go find another forum to debate male circumcision on.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at October 22, 2006 10:08 PM

The author Alice Walker wrote or co-wrote an excellent book about Female Genital Mutilation several years ago. She was also involved in a documentary film about it.

Posted by: Josephine at October 22, 2006 10:09 PM

"Warrior Marks: Female Genital Mutilation and the Sexual Blinding of Women"

by Alice Walker and Pratibha Parmar
1993

Posted by: Josephine at October 22, 2006 10:15 PM

Where's Iblis Hooper to defend this crap? The scary part is that we will probably see more of these dreadful stories in the future because, after all, this is a "cultural thing" and in our multi cultural society all cultures are equally valid.

This is why we need a sane immigration policy with some teeth in it. At the rate we're going we will be turned into a third world country from the inside with this sort of insanity becoming the norm rather than the exception thanks to immigrants such as these.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at October 22, 2006 10:22 PM

So after two years the mother did not know that her daughter was damaged severely. She is an unfit motherand should never have custody of any children again it is that simple.

Posted by: mark52 at October 22, 2006 11:36 PM

I like the way the article points out "the girl was only two" in the second paragraph, as if it would be somehow better if she had been 6 or 8 or 13.

*spit*

Posted by: radishthegreat at October 22, 2006 11:43 PM

Come now; one of the things they attempted to teach me in teacher's school was that all cultures are valid in their own ways.

Who are *we* to question whether or not female genital mutilation is right or wrong? Or with-holding education from females? Or slavery? Foot-binding? "Untouchable" castes? Selling sexually explicit entertainment to pre-pubescent children?

Isn't it just all part of life's rich pageant?

*grimaces in irony*

Posted by: Wrymouth at October 22, 2006 11:57 PM

Here is a link to the practice of female mutilation. Scroll down....no read it all.
http://www.middle-east-info.org/gateway/womenchildabuse/index.htm

Posted by: Carolyn2 at October 23, 2006 12:06 AM

From my link above:
Why is FGM any different to the circumcision of boys? (Spinifex Press, Nov 14, 2004): "The circumcision of boy-children, in the form it is known in Australia, involves the removal of the foreskin, or prepuce, from the penis. This act is performed for reasons of religion, in the Jewish faith, or for culturally imposed concepts of hygiene or for aesthetic reasons. 'The degree of cutting in female circumcision is anatomically much more extensive [than in male circumcision]. The male equivalent of clitoridectomy (in which all or part of the clitoris is removed) would be the amputation of most of the penis. The male equivalent of infibulation (which involves not only clitoridectomy, but the removal or closing off of the sensitive tissue around the vagina) would be removal of all the penis, its roots of soft tissue, and part of the scrotal skin.'(Nahid Toubia, Female Genital Mutilation, p.9) Unlike FGM, male circumcision is not performed with the aim of diminishing the sexual desire or drive of the male, nor to ensure chastity or virginity."

Posted by: Carolyn2 at October 23, 2006 12:09 AM

There isn't just physical pain and psychological trauma involved here (which is bad enough). With the extreme forms, you're not just talking clitoral removal, they will also remove the labia majora and sew her up so that a small amout of urine can pass through.

These women can spend a lifetime with serious urinary tract/gynecological problems. Some have infections that don't go away without surgical intervention. Imagine childbirth with all of the adhesions and scarring. Imagine the loss of virginity with forced sex by the new husband. Some have trouble even passing menstrual fluid.

And some girls die right at the beginning because of infection or they just bleed out.

For what? Because men in this culture are so damned intimidated and scared of women that they have to mutilate them in order to maintain some sort of pseudo self-esteem?

This isn't a religious issue no matter what anyone says. It's the ultimate act of control. Pathetic and sick.

The women don't need FGM, the men need shrinks.

Posted by: Eatyourpeas at October 23, 2006 12:13 AM

There are medical/health/hygenic advantages for a male to be circumsized of the prepuce. Easier to clean, avoids troublesome synechiae, secondary phimoses, decreases cancer and even AIDS transmission.

Those are all old myths. There is no empirical evidence for any of that. It is a cultural practice, dating back thousands of years, with no medical virtue or health benefits. Ask a doctor, any doctor. Hundreds of millions of men in the western world are not circumsized, and I have never even heard of any of those "penis" ailments. The foreskin, is perfectly sterile, natural, and is there for a purpose. But so many men have been mutiliated at birth, for so long, that we have come to think of it as normal and parents go along with it.

Posted by: August22 at October 23, 2006 12:30 AM

"ALL genital mutilation (aka circumcision), be it male or female, should stop."

Male circumcision does not prevent a boy/man from having an orgasm or urinating. On the other hand FGM complicates sex, urination, menstration, childbirth. Big, big difference. But I wouldn't expect you to understand it..

Posted by: Kemaste at October 23, 2006 1:09 AM

I have little hope that this case will yield any justice for the little girl. She is still mutilated. There has been a law on Minnesota books making this practice a felony since 1994, and it is a federal felony as well, but so far this is the first case brought for prosecution.

Several states have anti-fgm laws, and all have clauses that recommend education on the health and psychological harm this practice inflicts on victims. None of the statutes include mandatory reporting by health care workers. Because this is such a sensitive issue, few women or girls who have been mutilated in this way are going to speak out about it, hence it is driven underground.

All children are required by law to have medical check-ups at regular intervals. Like any other type of child abuse, our legislators need to make this an abuse issue, not a cultural sacred cow that a little 'education' will correct.

Now excuse me while I clean the vomit from my monitor.

Posted by: Shakey_Premise at October 23, 2006 3:25 AM

Where is the scissors for this backwash of satans spawn? May his "you know" fall off, and he can't reproduce anymore.

Posted by: mustang65 at October 23, 2006 5:37 AM

I guess a**ah just plain screwed up on girls.(pardon the pun) Some "Men" wanna puttem right.

Posted by: mustang65 at October 23, 2006 6:09 AM

IMO this is rape, and everyone connected should undergo penalties for rape.

Posted by: moderationist at October 23, 2006 6:13 AM

CIRCUMCISION ACCORDING TO MUSLIM LAW

1. Male circumcision
According to classical Muslim jurists, male circumcision involves the cutting of the foreskin, preferably the whole foreskin. If the man has two penises, some say that both should be circumcised, others say that only the one passing urine should be circumcised. If the child was born circumcised, some are of the opinion he should be left as such, while for others, the knife should be passed over the emplacement of the foreskin to fulfil the Commandment. If the circumcision is incomplete, it should be completed

2. Female circumcision

Al-Sukkari, a modern author, describes female circumcision as follows:

"For a start, God should be called upon by saying the opening statement: in the name of God, most gracious, most merciful, followed by praise to God and prayer to the Prophet, the author of this supreme makrumah".

Female circumcision must be carried out by one male or female surgeon of Muslim faith and devout appearance, knowledgeable of the teaching of Mohammed.

The best medical means must be used to reduce pain. Female circumcision must be done by day to allow the physician to perform in full day light, but also in full secrecy; only her mother or her tutor must be present, or the one who feels the most compassion for the girl .

He does not clarify what female circumcision consists of. For Gad-al-Haq, female circumcision consists of "cutting the skin which is located above the urinary orifice without exaggeration and without rooting it out". Al-Sha'rawi stipulates that if the girl does not have any flesh protruding, circumcision should not be done.

What is described above as in compliance with sunnah remains theoretical. In fact, it is rather clitoridectomy (performed in Egypt) or infibulation (performed in Sudan and Somalia). In Sudan, a study has brought to light that 64% of female circumcisions are done by the traditional matrons, 35% by midwives and 0.7% by physicians.

clitoridectomy also means sunnah

Posted by: shiva at October 23, 2006 6:23 AM

This is horrible. Worse it happened in the USA. As I have said, terrorism and now oppression is the fruit, Islam is the root.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at October 23, 2006 6:29 AM

"Circumcision? Isn't that misleading for a cliterectomy?"
Posted by: John Sobieski

Several classifications of female circumcision exist; one of which (for simplicity) is the following:

Clitoridectomy (1st degree circumcision) is the removal of the prepuce of the clitoris.
Excision

(2nd degree circumcision) consists of removal of the prepuce and glands of the clitoris and often the removal of the whole of it.

Sunnah circumcision (3rd degree circumcision) includes excision and paring of the adjacent parts of the labia minora above the plane of the labia majora, or the removal of the whole of it.
Infibulation

(4th degree circumcision) -or Pharaonic circumcision- consists of removal of all the external genitalia, the whole of the clitoris and the entire labia minora.

http://www.islamonline.net/iol-english/dowalia/techng-2000-August-22/techng9.asp

Words cannot describe the rage I feel toward the perverts who commit this. There's something deranged about anyone who persists in circumcising young children and innocent people.

After writing these last few posts it struck me that these are the same butchers who were murdering Jews in Nazi Germany.I think that every society has these "closet sadists" who emerge only when social constraints are removed.

What I find even more alarming is Islam allows this crime to be committed openly.

These sadists have now found their niche as true holy men who circumcise. For a brief moment they are God, with total control over another's sexuality.
It's the perfect crime. Sanctioned by unsuspecting, misinformed parents, clericsl, and an ignorant society, they hide under the guise of a religion .

And the consequences only appear years later when they are long gone and their trail cold. Some of these fanatics really don't know any better, and when told about the gravity of their actions, stop.

But most just keep on cutting in the name of their unholy god. There's something really frightening about the Abduls,and Mohammeds and Hassans it's not onlt circumcision that needs to be stopped;But also the religion that allows these circumcisers.

This foul evil praxis must be stopped

Warning the link is very graphic as it deal with both male and female genital mutilation

http://illustratedpig.blogspot.com/2006/07/evil-praxis.html

Posted by: shiva at October 23, 2006 8:00 AM

This 'man' and his trained cow won't be able to hide behind tradition in Duluth, GA.

Mo-foes.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at October 23, 2006 9:24 AM

"Those are all old myths."
Posted by: August22

Might want to be careful where you step, you may fall into another Hartveld's Hole.

Is the association between balanitis xerotica obliterans and penile carcinoma underestimated?

Penile cancer.

Odds of penile HPV are reduced for circumcised men and condom users.

New ways of preventing HIV infection: thinking simply, simply thinking.(Sevenfold reduction)

Randomized, controlled intervention trial of male circumcision for reduction of HIV infection risk: the ANRS 1265 Trial. (61% reduction)

Circumcision and HIV prevention research: an ethical analysis. (Six fold reduction)

Male circumcision, penile human papillomavirus infection, and cervical cancer in female partners.(Role in cervical still being debated)

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at October 23, 2006 9:37 AM

Why do we allow these criminal cultures to immigrate to America in the first place? The government welcomes Somalis as refugees, giving them money to come here, yet 98 percent practice FGM, a form of torture and child abuse.

http://www.gmu.edu/student/mrrc/FGM%20PROJECT.html

Posted by: Dana at October 23, 2006 12:10 PM

I am from Ethiopia. I believe that this is a story that the mother made up in order to win the custody battle. There are too many inconsistencies in this story. Men never ever cirucmize their daughers in Ethiopia. When and if it is done, it is always done by women because it is a female ritual. Adem came here when he is 16 and is from the city. There is no way he cirucumsized his daughter. If the girl was cut when whe was 2 years old, how can the mother not have known?! The infant would have been bleeding with a wound that is obvious when she changes her diaper! How could a four year old later claim she remembers what was done to her when she was two years old?!

The wife is lying and framing him. I think she did it herself to make up this story.

She is another estranged pycho ex-wife out to get her ex-husband just like the ones who make up stories about child abuse to get back at their husbands.

Posted by: Rukia at October 23, 2006 1:20 PM

Concerned citizen, all those links are from the same website. I can go to an islamic website and give links supporting the theory that islam is peaceful. That does not make an argument.

You have to look at the medical world and hundreds of sources on this topic. Uncircumsized men do not suffer from any type of disease not equally common to non-circumsized men. There is no accepted medical empirical evidence to prove that they do, or even to suggest that they do. Ask one doctor or ten doctors. You will get the same answer.

Circumcision is an age old cultural practice that has no advantage. All it does is desensitize the now-exposed glans, which is a disadvantage for obvious reasons.

Circumcision is only recommended by some physicians to treat pre-existing medical conditions like phimosis or penile cancer, which itself is very rare.

Circumcision had its roots either as a form of ritual sacrifice or offering, a rite of passage to adulthood, a sign of submission to a deity, or a mark of defeat or slavery.

Circumcision began as a semetic practice. It was used only by Jews and later the muslims. Very similar in origin to the common ritual slaughter of animals by holding them upside down and letting them bleed to death by cutting their throats.

A lot of Christian men in the States have been circumsized as the tradition was brought here, but most of the Christian male population, and that includes all of Europe, is not circumsized. There is no problem with their hundreds of millions of penises. Not to my knowledge. Of course, you could ask the women.

Posted by: August22 at October 23, 2006 1:26 PM

August 22,

The site is MEDLINE. It is THE site for medical information. These are the actual journal article citations and abstracts.

"There is no accepted medical empirical evidence to prove that they do, or even to suggest that they do. Ask one doctor or ten doctors. You will get the same answer."

Please stop embarrassing yourself. You're a great poster. I always read your posts.

"Circumcision began as a semetic practice. It was used only by Jews"

Now we get to the crux of it. Yes, it was fashionable to trash the sacred cow procedure. Now it's full circle. Now the medical literature has these "epiphanies" of finding these things out fresh and anew.

"A lot of Christian men in the States have been circumsized as the tradition was brought here, but most of the Christian male population, and that includes all of Europe, is not circumsized. There is no problem with their hundreds of millions of penises."

Isn't interesting that that works out great in civilized countries with hygiene developed based on the sciences rooted in the JudaeoChristian tradition. Isn't it interesting that the New Testament, being the source of this progress, DOES NOT prescribe circumcision.

My point was there is no comparison between FGM and circumcision. We should never use the term "female circumcision". The comparison trivializes the issue of FGM.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at October 23, 2006 2:07 PM

Unfortunately, this man has ALREADY mutilated his daughter. Even punishing him will not change this and it is almost certainly NOT going to stop other Muslims from mutilating THEIR daughters' genitalia in this or any other country. Muslims in general do not respect any law other than shariat.

This atrocity was committed in America?????

Dear god, somebody make these people leave. I am ready to puke my guts out over this and other equally horrifying stories about Muslims in America (where truly Islam does NOT belong and merits outlawing).

Islam is NOT welcome in America. Not now. Not ever!

Posted by: pythagoras at October 23, 2006 2:36 PM

"This atrocity was committed in America?????"

pythagoras - It happens in Canada, too. I think the families must take their daughters to physicians who agree with the practice (after the fact, I mean); otherwise, wouldn't doctors be obliged to report it as evidence of child abuse?

Posted by: Josephine at October 23, 2006 3:04 PM

Interesting reading:

Ontario (Canada) Human Rights Commission
Policy on Female Genital Mutilation

http://tinyurl.com/yxvuke

"Approved by the Commission: April 9, 1996"

Posted by: Josephine at October 23, 2006 3:07 PM

Concerned Citizen, I never suggested that male circumcision was as repugnant as female circumcision. It isn't.

That does not in any way give male circumcision any medical validity. Medical organizations have a neutral policy on circumcision, accepting that it is a cultural choice, with the decision up to the parents. None of these medical organizations advocate or condemn, neo-natal circumcision, which would certainly not be the case if it was beneficial to any measurable degree. There are some possible benefits and also some recognized problems with it. There is no concensus in the medical field that circumcision is beneficial to men.

I do not trash sacred cows. I trash senseless ritual stone age practices that masquerade as "hygiene or health", just as female circumcision masquerades as "morality" in some cultures.

Posted by: August22 at October 23, 2006 4:46 PM

"Medical organizations have a neutral policy on circumcision, accepting that it is a cultural choice, with the decision up to the parents. None of these medical organizations advocate or condemn, neo-natal circumcision. There are some possible benefits and also some recognized problems with it."
Posted by: August22

Hope you don't mind the redaction. On that much we can agree. However, you should not be surprised by the many medical organizations advocating the medical benefits of circumcision. Try Google.

Yes, this "senseless ritual stone age practice" can save lives.

"just as female circumcision..."

You're mad about something (absent foreskin maybe?). I guess you didn't really agree with my final point "there is no comparison between FGM and circumcision. We should never use the term "female circumcision". The comparison trivializes the issue of FGM."

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at October 23, 2006 6:26 PM

I guess you didn't really agree with my final point

Yes, I did agree with our final point, but your final point does not address the issue of male circumcision, which is what I am addressing.

And by the way, I have my foreskin, thank God for that. My parents were European-born

Posted by: August22 at October 23, 2006 8:14 PM

"but your final point does not address the issue of male circumcision, which is what I am addressing."

Then I missed something. It decreases cancers (male and probably female), and decreases infection, including HPV and HIV. I gave a Google link to innumerable Internet articles on the latter, and links to journal article references on multiple other points. You state in your own answer it has medical benefits (you say possible, they have been confirmed).

I inferred it is a Judaic tradition (by the way, the Tanakh does not claim to have started it), and stated it is not a Christian mandate (you can make a pretty good theological argument for a Christian not to, especially if doing it for "moral" reasons).

I stated its benefits may be less in certain societies than others.

I don't know what is left to discuss besides the complication rate (compared to most surgical procedures), which is very low, whether in the hands of "ritualistic" religious practitioners or surgeons

Complications of circumcision in Israel: a one year multicenter survey.

except perhaps in Islamic countries

Late complications of circumcision in Iran.

That does not, of course, make it a trifling thing to do. But, since, as you state, the risk benefit ratio is at least neutral (which you admit, and from which does not follow that lack of advocacy/condemnation "would certainly not be the case if it was beneficial to any measurable degree" given liability issues), there is no reason to deny its cultural use. And this is in developed countries. One cannot say that about FGM, in any country.

All that aside, you're a great poster, and I hope I don't piss you off so much next time around.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at October 23, 2006 9:01 PM

Islamic justification for genital mutilation of girls.

Female circumcision has not been prescribed for no reason, rather there is wisdom behind it and it brings many benefits.

Mentioning some of these benefits, Dr. Haamid al-Ghawaabi says:

The secretions of the labia minora accumulate in uncircumcised women and turn rancid, so they develop an unpleasant odour which may lead to infections of the vagina or urethra. I have seen many cases of sickness caused by the lack of circumcision.

Circumcision reduces excessive sensitivity of the clitoris which may cause it to increase in size to 3 centimeters when aroused, which is very annoying to the husband, especially at the time of intercourse.

Another benefit of circumcision is that it prevents stimulation of the clitoris which makes it grow large in such a manner that it causes pain.

Circumcision prevents spasms of the clitoris which are a kind of inflammation.

Circumcision reduces excessive sexual desire.

Then Dr al-Ghawaabi refutes those who claim that female circumcision leads to frigidity by noting:

Frigidity has many causes, and this claim is not based on any sound statistics comparing circumcised women with uncircumcised women, except in the case of Pharaonic circumcision which is where the clitoris is excised completely. This does in fact lead to frigidity but it is contrary to the kind of circumcision enjoined by the Prophet of mercy (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) when he said: “Do not destroy” i.e., do not uproot or excise. This alone is evidence that speaks for itself, because medicine at that time knew very little about this sensitive organ (the clitoris) and its nerves.

From Liwa’ al-Islam magazine, issue 8 and 10; article entitled Khitaan al-Banaat (circumcision of girls).

The female gynaecologist Sitt al-Banaat Khaalid says in an article entitled Khitaan al-Banaat Ru’yah Sihhiyyah (Female circumcision from a health point of view):

For us in the Muslim world female circumcision is, above all else, obedience to Islam, which means acting in accordance with the fitrah and following the Sunnah which encourages it. We all know the dimensions of Islam, and that everything in it must be good in all aspects, including health aspects. If the benefits are not apparent now, they will become known in the future, as has happened with regard to male circumcision – the world now knows its benefits and it has become widespread among all nations despite the opposition of some groups.

Then she mentioned some of the health benefits of female circumcision and said:

It takes away excessive libido from women

It prevents unpleasant odours which result from foul secretions beneath the prepuce.

It reduces the incidence of urinary tract infections

It reduces the incidence of infections of the reproductive system.

In the book on Traditions that affect the health of women and children, which was published by the World Health Organization in 1979 it says:

With regard to the type of female circumcision which involves removal of the prepuce of the clitoris, which is similar to male circumcision, no harmful health effects have been noted.

And Allaah knows best.

Well, fancy that!

Thanks to this information, I am now aware that I should have been cut up so that my private bits would look better for my husband, and any sexual arousal would be avoided so as not to annoy him.

So muslim men are upset at a woman enjoying herself? What sad, empty creatures they are, to be so terrified of a woman enjoying a sexual relationship that they must mutilate and beat her into submission.

L.Drummond.

Posted by: L.Drummond at October 24, 2006 3:50 AM

"...any sexual arousal would be avoided so as not to annoy him."

L. Drummond, I am LMAO!!!

But seriously, what are we truly dealing with here, when Islam destroys love in any and every capacity? To have a mutually satisfying and edifying sexual relationship with your spouse increases love, in the family and in society. It is a mystical as well as physical union.

Forget about Islam being a religion devoid of peace. Islam is an ideology devoid of love. What profiteth a man if he gaineth the whole world but has not love?

And here is the crux of the matter: by allowing Islam, we are allowing a world that is devoid of love, and we can't live without it. Look at how these poor pathetic people live. If a daughter is raped, she is then killed for dishonoring the family. Where is the loving support for a family member who was hurt? A man can go to his tilth (wife) and use her sexually in anyway he pleases, with no consideration for her feelings, let alone her pleasure. No wonder this system breeds such barbarians. When children are little, they are taught to hate their enemies, not to love them. Is it any wonder we have Islamic youths roaming the street and when confronted with force by those who will not go quietly or submit freely, these mindless automatons back down until they can increase their numbers and have another go at it?

The tragedy of this ideology is not that there is no peace but that there is no love, and without love, there is no soul. Islam seeks to destroy the souls of nations by destroying the souls of the people who live in those nations. That is where the focus of our battle must begin.

And if a man truly loved his woman, he'd seek to protect her private parts, for his own well being, as well as hers. Civilization depends on it.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at October 24, 2006 7:44 AM

"...any sexual arousal would be avoided so as not to annoy him."

What normal man could ever be annoyed by his his wife's sexual arousal? Oh I forgot, no one who truly follows Islam could be considered normal!

Posted by: Provoslavni at October 24, 2006 2:35 PM

Provoslani, exactly. These Muslim guys don't know what they are missing. But then, Allah knows best.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at October 24, 2006 3:12 PM

If what the Moslems do to their young girls is female circumcision, then male circumcision would involve lopping off the penis of young boys. And the Jews, who invented circumcision would never do that; they love their women too much.

* 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 *

This happens in the Somali community all the time in Minnnesota, although it is against the law. Alarmed Pig Farmer can tell you much more. I hope he shows up.

Having had some good measure of professional contact with senior commanders in the first responder community in Minnesota (as a technology consultant), I can tell you a story told me several times by independent sources.

I was engaged in a series of major projects before, during, and just after 2001 that put me into meetings withi Deputy Chiefs, Precinct Commanders, emergency call center Directors, fire captains, and other such types. After 9/11, these usually closed lip people got a little talky, mostly out of anger and frustation over 9/11, but also no doubt somewhat greased by my incessant reference to the Mpls Star Tribune as the Red Star.

When they became comfortable that I was not a news leak, a DC from the fire service told me a story. I had heard rumblings, but I could not believe what he said.

First, understand that the fire service has become the first responding unit on almost all medical emergencies. This is because they can be at any address in just around two minutes, where an ambulance averages 5 - 7 minutes. Just as important is that this medical duty allows modern fire departments to stay in business (extinguisher systems, fire retardant materials, etc. had cut down on the incidence of fires).

Anyway, after Bill Clinton worked his Black Hawk Down magic, the Lutherans of course stepped in and began shipping tens of thousands of Somali Moslems to the Twin Cities. Next thing you know, my Deputy Chief friend is being called into Somali apartments (all paid for by HUD Section 8) to see bleeding 10 yr old girls, screaming Moslimas, and dear old dad with a bloddy steak knife in hand screaming at the walls about the blood squirting feet from the girl's vaginal area after a botched home removal operation. Not a circumcision, a clitorodectomy.

My source saw this many times. It got to the point where when a fire captain would radio, he wouldn't even bother going.

I have independently corroborated this pattern with other senior first responder sources.

The basic deal was this: The firemen and EMTs got pissed and started radioing in the squads. The horrified cops got pissed and did a few arrests. The Imams complained bitterly.

The politicians, concerned, let the word out both through command and the unions that enforcing felony laws against Somalis dads would surely be a career ending event for the first responder.

Everybody was pissed. Most everybody is still pissed, especially after 9/11.

But the local TV hair puffs and the Marxists at the two local newspapers, three if you include the local alt rag, all knew what was going on, but not a peep in the press or over the airwaves.

And so the carnage continued. Concerned about a couple of near fatalities, the powers-that-be cut a deal with the Imams whereby the local authorities now look the other way as newly-minted Moslem MDs perform clitordectomies under sterile conditions in clinics clustered around inner city hospitals.

There is at least one such clinic in every major American metro, probably dozens in southeast Michigan and NYC, and certainly a few in Moslem hotbed like Oklahoma City.

Sharia has a foothold, if a furtive one. But the clits are being cut nonetheless.

* 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 *

Jill Ireland, I can't hear you.

I can hear you Rosie, but you're such a moron that you wouldn't know any better even if you were actually capable of knowing reality, not that being ignorant has ever motivated you to shut that big stupid fat mouth of yours.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at October 24, 2006 9:04 PM

Alarmed Pig Farmer,

Well that sent chill down my spine. Your story has got to get a broader audience. It makes the Atlanta story seem tame, and that is really sad.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at October 24, 2006 9:56 PM

More and constant horror from the Religion of Piece.

Let's hope daddy gets convicted (or settles the argument of "Who Did It" by pleading guilty), and receives real jail time.

If that happens, then momma should be arrested IMMEDIATELY for "failure to protect." If dad walks, then there's no case against momma, either.

This muslim FGM crap just makes me want to puke. Too bad the media, and politicians, are so afraid of it. Women's rights outfits, too. Isn't multiculturalism wonderful?

Posted by: texan at October 25, 2006 3:27 AM

"Too bad the media, and politicians, are so afraid of it."

Texan,

That's the part I just don't get. WHY? If there was only one thing that we all should agree was heinous, nauseating, cruel, sick, unnecessary... that we could DO something about... why wouldn't this be it? We bitch about the niqab, and we let this be done to children? It almost says as much about us as the ones doing it.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at October 25, 2006 5:04 AM

"It's even more disturbing to see progress in Africa while in this country we're not prepared to address the issue"
"In 1997, the Atlanta-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that over 160,000 girls and women in immigrant communities in the United States may have undergone 'circumcision.'"
http://www.hvk.org/articles/0703/162.html

A sympathetic article naming some activist groups against this practice, but notice the COMPLETE absence of any reference to Islam.

"First [Assistant District Attorney] said the couple was married in 1997 and their daughter was born in September 1999. For the first years of young girl's life, the couple was married in 1997 and their daughter was born in September 1999. For the first years of young girl's life, the couple had an "on-again, off-again" relationship, First said.

In late 2002 and early 2003, Adem made two very "unusual" statements about female circumcision, First said.

"He said if [circumcision] is not done, it will be a shame to the family," First said. "He said he wanted [the girl] to have it done so that she will not be promiscuous."
http://www.ajc.com/search/content/metro/gwinnett/stories/2006/10/24/1025gwxadem.html

"Unusual" indeed. Notice the verb tenses. The maternal grandmother is a registered nurse. They are also from South Africa. Mother and grandmother were the ones primarily caring for the child.

This guy is going to walk because he probably didn't do it, then the whole case will just disappear.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at October 25, 2006 6:03 AM