Worship of Malala the Muslim

Recently Pastorius sent me this article (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/faheem-younus/malala-yousafzai-does-islam-even-give-you-a-right-to-education_b_1960116.html) and asked whether I knew anything about it.

I've tended to ignore Malala because, like I told Pastorius, as sad as it is that a girl was shot in the head at the age of 14, it is a Muslim matter. To me Malala's story is as important as Syrians busy killing each other. At a time when Christian men, women and children are openly being murdered in Muslim countries and no one bats an eye, I don't think I give two shits about Muslims killing or trying to kill each other.

With that said though, the article is written by a Muslim who seems to claim that Islam is a religion of peace and that the Taliban are trying to damage Islam's image and anyone who thinks the Taliban are Muslims or doing anything for Islam is an Islamophobe. You can read the whole article, I'm just going to comment on some of the things the guy said (the guy wrote this article with an air of I-know-everything-and-no-one-else-knows-anything-so-let-me-cryptically-set-them-straight-so-I-can-feel-better-about-my-miserable-self, so in case you don't understand who he's referring to when he says someone, its Mohammed the child rapist. He mentions that at the end but the article is a pain to read all the way through):

Someone is missing from this picture. Because just when I was wondering if extremists could do anymore damage to Islam's image, they committed yet another despicable act.

As if flogging the adulterers, executing the civilians, and selling the women were not enough...

Here he seems to suggest that flogging adulterers, executing civilians and selling women has nothing to do with Islam since, as he says, someone is missing from this picture, as if Mohammed never advocated or practiced any of it.

Flogging adulterers is in the Quran: "The adulterer and the adulteress, scourge ye each one of them a hundred stripes. And let not pity for the twain withhold you from obedience to Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a party of believers witness their punishment." 24:2

Killing civilians is mentioned a bunch of times in the Quran, for example: "Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them, and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful." 9:5

and

"Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low."  9:29

Other cases in the hadiths where Mohammed wants apostates killed can be found very easily as well.

But Mohammed actually carried out killing of various civilians like Asma Bint Marwan, Abu Afak, Ibn Sarh, etc. Mohammed had 700 males 14 years and up murdered because they didn't support him (or the opposition for that matter) during one of his battles against the Meccans. Imagine murdering all Swiss males during WWII because they chose to remain neutral.

Selling women again has been a part of Islam and still is to this day.  You can find references to rape and selling of female captives by Mohammed's soldiers in the hadiths (like the practice of "coitus interruptus" because if a slave became pregnant, she couldn't be sold in the market).

I agree with the guy that these three practices are despicable but don't for one second try to tell me they are contrary to what Islam teaches; these practices form an integral part of Islam.

Yet, some commentators are using this cowardly act to attack my faith by casually suggesting: "Well, Islam does not give women the right to seek secular education."

Its true, it does not.

Why should we let a bunch of uneducated cowards and thugs be the press secretaries of Islam...?

I don't know, maybe because the uneducated coward and thug created the damn religion?

"Education is a fundamental right of women," Leila Zerrougui, the U.N. special representative for children in armed conflict, said. But 1,400 years ago, someone stated, "Seeking knowledge is obligatory upon every Muslim man and woman." Islam, therefore, presents education as a duty, not a mere right, for all.

Okay its basically lies and manipulated statements from here onwards.

The real hadith, it is hard to find references for it and is most probably a weak hadith (this hadith is quoted by Al Tirmidhi) actually reads "Seeking knowledge is obligatory upon every Muslim." Now to a Western mind that would be like "well of course that must include women as well." And to that I say, not really. If you read the Quran, a Muslim usually refers to a male Muslim. When women are included, the reference clarifies that women are included.

This was a male run, male dominated (there were women of status as well, I'll get to that below) society and the Quran and the hadiths don't make any effort to hide that fact.

Anyway, Mohammed had four daughters, none of them educated. They could recite bullcrap from the Quran but that's not education, that's brainwashing. The guy was specifically trying to prove that Islam allows secular education.

"Give a girl an education and introduce her properly into the world," said novelist Jane Austen. But 1,400 years ago, someone went a step further: "If a daughter is born to a person and he brings her up, gives her a good education and trains her in the arts of life, I shall myself stand between him and hell-fire."

Before Pastorius sent me information about Malala and this article, I'd never heard about this hadith. I'll reproduce what I wrote to him in an email:

Here's the thing with Muslims. They think that all that is "good" (according to Muslims) comes from Allah. So if Muslims see something in the West that they perceive as good then they ALWAYS, without exception, come up with phrases like, "All the rights and good things in the West that exist today were copied from prophet Mohammed's sayings and the Quran." Of course when that is said in Muslim countries, no one questions it.

But when that claim is made in the West, Muslims feel like producing some evidence. But the problem is that most of the time, this "evidence" just appears out of thin air. Its exactly like Mohammed used to get "revelations". People would question his stupidity, and "POOF!" he'd get a revelation from Allah defending whatever it was that Mohammed wanted to achieve. Likewise, Muslims come up with sh*t out of nowhere that all of a sudden proves their claims. Now most of the liberals and Western media these days are as stupid and gullible (or evil, for which an argument can be made but maybe another time) as the Arabs were during the time of Mohammed for none of these idiots ever want/wanted to test the claims of Muslims/Mohammed.

The hadith that you quoted, I have never heard it before. And it is also not found ANYWHERE with any kind of reference. And on top of that it seems to have been designed, once again, for the Western audience and seems to have surfaced recently in books, forums and articles. Like most of the other "women's rights" hadiths, I call this one a fake designed specifically to dupe the West.

Other than looking pretty fake, there are other reasons this hadith wouldn't have come out of Mohammed. Mohammed (and not even Satan aka Allah) are known to issue commands specifically regarding "daughters" except for in cases of inheritance. Mohammed himself only had daughters but he never had them educated. They were locked in their homes most of their lives. Even his favorite daughter, Fatima, wasn't educated. So sh*t like "educate your daughters and I stand between you and hellfire" doesn't make sense at all in anyway judging from the pedophile's own actions.

1,400 years ago someone elevated, Ayesha, the daughter of the Prophet's companion, to the status of a teacher and jurist.

This one was hilarious. Again, from the email I sent to Pastorius:

WTF? Two things here. He deliberately hid the fact that Mohammed was sexually attracted to her while she was around 5 or 6 years old. He married her at that time and raped her when she was 9 years old. He also hid the fact that "the prophet's companion" was actually against this marriage but complied because he wanted to please Allah.

Now that that's out of the way, a teacher and a jurist? AYFKM? He lowered her from the status of being an innocent child to the status of being his sex companion. Does no one question why he married her at the age of 6? It wasn't so he could have sex with her at the age of 6 (because if he really wanted to, he would have, raping children doesn't seem to be something he had anything against, after all, he did rape her at the age of 9), he married her and waited three years so NO ONE ELSE WOULD SEE THE CHILD (clarification: As in, lay their eyes on her). This child was going to be ALL FOR HIM. That sh*t escapes these idiots who try to put Ayesha's example up as if she must have been elevated to a higher status. F*** these assholes.

The thing about "teacher and jurist" is that when Mohammed died (and got f***ed in the ass by Satan) Muslims would ASK Ayesha what Mohammed had said while he was alive so they could remember it for themselves (while f***ing their goats and camels). Why did they come to Ayesha? Not because "she was a renowned scholar" as Wikipedia would have you believe. It was because Mohammed used to spend a lot of time with her and she was with him when he died.

Its like people asking my wife what I was like (after I've died), would you call that "me" raising "my wife" to the status of a jurist and a scholar? The f*** is wrong with the world?

And on that comment, just saying that MOHAMMED, a man, basically LET Ayesha, a woman, attain the status of a jurist and a teacher? Doesn't that go against the feminist code of women's rights or some sh*t anyway? Why couldn't Ayesha do it for herself? But hey, I wouldn't expect liberals to ask any questions when a Muslim talks.

it was the singular effort of a Muslim woman, Fatima-al-Fihri in 859 A.D., that helped found the University of Karueein in Fez, Morocco

Again, from the email:

So like I said before, there were some women of status in Arab society as well and this would be one example of that. But here's the thing, Khadija, Mohammed's first wife, used to run a trading business between Mecca and Damascus (according to Muslim sources).  Now that maybe sounds like, "well wow, women business owners, Islam, woohoo." But two things, one, this was pre-Islamic. And two, as a woman she was still confined to her home and neighborhood. In fact, Mohammed met this unfortunate woman because she needed a man to actually go and do the trade for her. All business dealings had "her name" or her family name attached to them but Mohammed and other men would actually carry out the deals. Khadija, literally, was dependent on the honesty of these men to bring her a profit.
I wouldn't be surprised, again because I haven't done much research, if the whole deal was struck by men and the name of Fatima al Fihri attached to the educational institution. It was pretty common in pre Islamic times and I wouldn't doubt the practice continued even afterward. In fact even today, princesses (in GCC countries) get their names attached to projects but the princesses themselves have nothing to do with it.

Either way, the fact that there were some prominent women in Arab societies goes only to show that after Mohammed died some of the so called Muslims didn't really hold on to all his words like their life depended on it. Mohammed, after Khadija died, made sure that all women stayed home and didn't even talk to strangers so I'm chalking this one up as "despite Islam", not "because of Islam".

As for the West not having higher education...well, you know, if barbarians constantly attack your borders and you ALWAYS have to defend your life against Muslim hordes then I would give the Europeans a pass on not being able to establish universities and instead focusing on trying to stay alive. 

Malala wanted to be a doctor. But her father knew: Pakistan needed a change agent. So he inspired her to become a politician. What if she became Pakistan's next president?

I would hope, for Malala's sake that she doesn't become the next president. Presidents in Pakistan have zero power, it would be honorable for them to just be able to give a round of blowjobs to all the parliamentarians. Do some research you dimwit writer (and he calls himself a DOCTOR), its the Prime Minister who has powers in Pakistan (well actually its the military and the Taliban but who cares about the little details...).

So here is my message to Malala: You are not alone...That someone will win. That someone who enshrined the right of a girl's education in the Muslim faith. That someone whose name is prophet Muhammad.

First off, I don't give a shit about Malala. But secondly, he seems to say that Mohammed will win. As I already pointed out that all that the Taliban did and do is because of Mohammed so he is basically saying, "F*** you Malala! Mohammed the child rapist and his Taliban minions will win."