Tuesday, January 30, 2007

The Ayatollah Khomeini's Fling With A Four Year Old

The Ayatollah Khomeini was the man who led the Islamic Revolution which established the Islamic Republic of Iran in 1979. Khomeini died in 1989, and the current Ayatollah Khameini took over the reins of power from him at that time.

If you want to understand the depths of depravity upon which Iran is founded, you need look no further than this story:

Khomeini slept with 4-year-old girl.

An excerpt from 'Hal Ataaka Hadeeth ur-Raafidah?' by the late Sheikh Abu Mus'abaz-Zarqaawi

“The author of the book 'For Allah, Then For History' [1] mentions to us an event that took place before his very eyes, when al-Khomeini [2] was living in Iraq, and was visiting an Iranian individual by the name of Sayyid Sahib.

He says: 'Sayyid Sahib was joyous with our visit, and we arrived at his house around the time of Dhuhr. So, he prepared for us a lavish dinner, and called some of his relatives, who came to see us, and the house became crowded in celebration of our presence.

Sayyid Sahib then requested that wespend that night at his home, to which the Imam agreed. When it was night time, we were given our supper, and the guests would take the Imam's hand and kiss it, and they would ask him questions, with him answering their questions.

When it was time to sleep, the guests had all left, except for the inhabitants of the house. Al-Khomeini laid his eyes on a young girl who, despite being only four or five years of age, was very beautiful.

So, the Imam requested from her father, Sayyid Sahib, that he spend the night with her in order to enjoy her. Her father happily agreed, and Imam al-Khomeini spent the night with the girl in his arms, and we could hear her crying and screaming.'”

[1] This book was written under the alias Husayn al-Musawi, a former companion of al-Khomeini who later abandoned his previous beliefs.
[2] Ayatollah al-Khomeini was the leader of the Shee'ah Raafidah of Iran in the 1980s.

One may reasonably ask, "But Pastorius, why do you believe this story? After all, it could be a lie, couldn't it?"

Sure, it could. But, I don't believe it is, and here's why:

Let me begin with a quote from a fatwa by the late and unlamented Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran.

"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 nine, other sexual acts such as foreplay, rubbing, kissing and sodomy is allowed. A man having intercourse with a girl younger than nine years of age has not committed a crime, but only an infraction, if the girl is not permanently damaged. If the girl, however, is permanently damaged, the man must provide for her all her life. But this girl will not count as one of the man's four permanent wives. He also is not permitted to marry the girl's sister."

You need not fear that your Muslim male baby-sitter will rape your 7-year-old daughter. If he is a good Muslim he will only sodomize her. If he does force his penis into her tiny vagina he is obligated to pay for any surgical repairs that may be required. If those repairs are deemed insufficient you may work out a financial settlement to compensate you for his trivial infraction. No big deal. Muslim boys will be Muslim boys. And, after all, she is only a girl.

Other forms of sexual abuse inflicted on children by Muslim male family members include fondling of genitals, coercing a child to fondle the abuser's genitals, masturbation with the child as either participant or observer, oral sex, anal or vaginal penetration by penis, finger or any other object.

Another technique used by Muslim men is called "thighing". The child's legs are pressed together and the abuser inserts his penis between the thighs of the little boy or girl. As this was how Mohammed had sex with his wife, Aisha, from the time she was six years old the practice, of course, was approved of by Ayatollah Khomeini who in his Little Green Book asserted “It is not illegal for an adult male to 'thigh' or enjoy a young girl who is still in the age of weaning; meaning to place his penis between her thighs, and to kiss her.”

Yes, indeed, you can be a good Muslim while copulating with the thighs of an infant. An Arab woman vigorously denounces this vile practice in the following video clip from Bahrain TV. Her denunciation of the "thighing" of infants and young girls comes towards the end of the interview.

This practice flourishes in Muslim countries where women are ruthlessly oppressed and normal sexual development systematically suppressed. That would include the Arab world, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Deny men wholesome and natural sexual outlets and they will find unwholesome and unnatural alternatives.

The Grand Ayatollah's full ruling on marriage can be found here. The institution of "temporary marriage" appears to be designed to facilitate prostitution. A USA Today article tells the story.


Anonymous said...

More Islamic vileness towards little girls:

FROM http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/mhviran.htm

"An 11-year-old girl was married off to a 27-year-old man. The father, who had seven daughters, received $300 for his consent. The morning after the marriage ceremonies, the girl was taken to hospital suffering from severe lacerations to her genitals."

"According to the penal code, a nine-year-old girl can be punished as an adult by flogging, execution and even stoning. Given the arbitrary punishments and the virtual lack of due process of law, large numbers of children have been executed, in many cases without being officially charged or even having their identities established."

"According to a special "religious decree" issued by Ayatollah Khomeini, virgin women prisoners must be raped before execution to prevent their going to heaven. A Guard conducts the rape the night before their murder. The next day, the religious judge at the prison issues a marriage certificate and sends it to the victim’s family, along with a box of sweets."

"...the small children of many young women in Evin Prison are viciously abused ....they are kept "because they are an asset to the prison authorities for gaining confessions." Szimkus ... witnessed several cases where Iranian children were tortured in the presence of their parents. "One time these guys [torturers] raped a nine-year-old girl. The parents had to watch. The father shook and rattled so badly that he could no longer sign the espionage confession they put before him."

"the Elle magazine reporter wrote in January 1997 about the life of a 9-year-old girl whose destitute parents arranged for her to be a sigheh. The man visits his temporary "wife" every weekend at her father’s house, for which privilege he pays her father about $12 per visit. Not surprisingly, AIDS is spreading in Iran at an alarming rate. Despite the serious health and social problems this poses, little is being done to address the crisis."

"The report added that girl children as young as ten, instead of spending their days playing with other children, were being forced to marry men three to four times their age. Meanwhile as "married women," they are banned from attending school. "

FROM http://www.cathud.com/LINKS/pages_GL/Islam.htm

"female genital mutilation is normally performed by traditional practitioners with crude instruments, such as knives, razors, blades and broken glass, usually without anesthetics." 1 This report finds that, though some girls are mutilated at birth, "most girls are mutilated between the ages of 4 and 12."

"Young girls who are sentenced to death in Islamic countries present a problem for Islamic authorities. Islamic clerics and rulers, unsatisfied with a mere penalty of death for the accused, wish to ensure that these women will suffer eternity in hell as well. However, quite a number of the accused girls are virgins, and Islam teaches that virgins go to Paradise upon their deaths. As a solution this problem, in order to ensure the damnation of the accused, Islamic authorities will often order the prison guards to systematically rape female prisoners before they are killed. According to Amnesty International, this practice is widespread in Islamic countries.

"During Khomeini's rule, the minimum age for the death penalty for girls was nine years old, and all these girls were systematically raped before they were executed. All this to ensure damnation. All under the sanction of law. All because of the teachings of the Koran. What this all adds up to is a very unpleasant picture. Those girls who are in prison on fornication charges are actually victims of rape. The remaining female prisoners are raped to ensure damnation. It is no exaggeration to say that Islamic countries are nations of rape victims. "

"Partially due to the fact that these girls have already undergone the sexual mutilation of female circumcision, and partially due simply to their juvenile biological makeup, these children suffer immensely when they are married. In Egypt, honeymoon centers have been built outside communities "so that the screams of the brides will not be heard." 11

"There is no nice way to say it: Moslems across the world are practicing pedophiliac rape, a most vicious form of child abuse, and nothing in their behavior contradicts "true Islam." ....Islamists have for centuries preached that the rape of child slaves is perfectly commendable in the eyes of Allah.

"Imagine for a moment the life of a young Christian girl in an Islamic country, such as Sudan. She is abducted from her parents in a slave raid at the age of four. She is given a new Islamic name and, under gunpoint, forced to pray as a Moslem. At age five, she is forced to undergo the torture of mutilation. At age six, she is engaged to a man ten times her age. At age nine, she is married and repeatedly forcibly raped. For the next year, she is beaten daily. At age ten, she is forcibly raped by another Moslem man, and is sentenced to death because of a charge of fornication. The night before her death, she is raped by a prison guard and assured that she will spend eternity in hell. The next day, she is whipped with lashes until she dies. "

Anonymous said...

Any western female who finds herself succumbing to the next charismatic, dark handsome muhammedan better consider the possible repercussions of breeding into this 'cult'ure. We often hear about the 'closeness' of the muslim community and the tight bond within the muslim family. Leave your daughter at grandmas, aunt aisha or uncle mo's for a few hours and ponder which male muhammedan relative will pop by for a visit to bond with her.

revereridesagain said...

Well. If Big Mo runs out of virgins to service that huge influx of suicide jihadists we'll know why, won't we.

I have a project for someone. Get that "green book" of Khomeini's translated into English, with appropriate editorial commentary, and put the damn thing on the shelves of the big chain bookstores right next to the latest from Karen Armstrong and Dinesh D'Souza so browsers can see what those clowns are trying to get us to "appreciate". Better yet, get the buggers to give it away with copies of Spencer, Phares, Ali, Warraq, Phillips, Sperry, and Gabriel so they will fully understand what those good people are trying to warn them about.

And these Islamic jihadi scum call us "decadent"...

Anonymous said...

The raping of virgins to keep them from getting into heaven is an old trick. The terrorists at Beslan took many of the school girls and raped them.

It is infuriating, but don't let it get to you. They will be judged by Jesus Christ. Many people have this image of some bunny-kissing lovey-dovey Guy, but let's not lose sight of the fact that (Rev 19:15) "... He Himself treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God." These criminals will not get away with it.

By the way: I posted over at The Murky Waters today a piece that addresses this "72 virgins in paradise" stuff. You might find it useful to lighten the mood after reading all that is posted here.

Anonymous said...

revereridesagain said :

"Better yet, get the 'buggers' to give it away with copies of . . ."

good idea - which brings up another option -

'buggers'= CAIR

Let's see CAIR offer it as a bonus with their FREE koran dawa.

Recall this:


ALEXANDRA ALTER, Mimai Herald, 5/21/05

A Muslim advocacy group is using this week's furor over a retracted
Newsweek report on the Koran's alleged desecration to educate the public
about how to handle Islam's holy book.

''Within the Islamic text, there is so much respect for people of other
faiths,'' said Altaf Ali, the Florida director of The Council for
American-Islamic Relations, which is giving out free copies of the Koran,
along with guidelines on its significance. ``We hope people of other faiths
will utilize this opportunity to get the book and when they read it, they
will see the similarities between the three faiths.''

The campaign comes after Newsweek on Monday retracted an item saying
military investigators had confirmed that a U.S. interrogator at Guantánamo
Bay, Cuba, had flushed a copy of the Koran down the toilet. Violent
protests resulted in Afghanistan and other Muslim countries. There were at
least 16 deaths. It is unclear how many can be blamed on the Newsweek

The protests touched off a nationwide discussion about the treatment of
holy Scriptures. Beyond CAIR's campaign, Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich.,
drafted a House resolution this week urging that ``holy books of every
religion should be treated with dignity and respect.''

revereridesagain said...

Excellent suggestion. Let's pass that one on to Rep. Conyers, shall we?

"Holy books of every religion should be treated with dignity and respect," eh? Too bad the same can't be said for 4-year-old girls in the hands of certain "holy men".

Pastorius said...

Just for the record, RRA, the Khomeini book is in English, but it is out of print.

You can buy used copies on Amazon for around $30.

I should buy a copy.

Anonymous said...

Nah, don't believe it. At all. Obviously, you're very biased about Islam and seem to take every opportunity, whether substantial or not (mostly not), to degrade it. Well, you gotta get you're facts straight.

Anyway, what the guy said about not having intercourse with nine-year-olds but everything else (e.g. foreplay, etc.) being true is not true. From what I know (and I, for one, do get my facts straight before sharing), Islam, the religion itself, does not allow for marriage or anything linked to it (such as sex, foreplay, etc.) before puberty. So, what that guy did with the four-yr-old (although I don't believe the story anyway) is absolutely prohibited in Islam. If the guy really did do what he did, then it was he who is to blame, not the religion. This latter point is what you need to get straight: stop blaming the religion and the majority of its people on the actions of a few. Hell, if we did that, everyone would be hating every beliefs out there.

Oh, and there are many other things in this post that are wrong, or, at least, don't link with Islam. I'm tired so I don't want to point out all the wrongs. Whatever.


P.S. You know what I would find really ironic? If your kids turn older and convert to Islam and be avid Muslims. ;)

Pastorius said...

At some point, Mike K. might become not tired and come back and actually refure something I have written in this post.

For one, I'd like to see him refute the female Muslim who was interviewed on Bahraini TV. I'd also like to hear him refute what is written in Khomeini's own book. And, finally, I'd like to understand how he can say sex with pre-pubescent girls is not permitted in Islam when Mohammed himself married a nine year old, and went through the stuff described in this post. And, by the way, that stuff is in the Hadiths.

So, when you're not so tired, Mike K., fire away.

I'm open to the possibility that I am wrong, but really my friend, you're actually going to have to make a case, before I believe you.

Anonymous said...


The hadiths are very clear that Mohammed married a six-year-old, and had sex with her when she was nine.

When the Muslims can't find something explicitly in the Koran, they look to the example of Mohammed. It's not the least bit surprising that other Muslims do similar things.

I do NOT wish this to happen, but I think the irony would be if your loved ones fall victim to this.

Peace to you, friend.

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3310:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

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

Anonymous said...

It is not for us to judge such hadiths. There is schorlarly differences of opinion regarding the age, and it is better to take what the historians say.. 'cause the age is not known.. and such interpretations of hadiths should be investigated by hadiths scholars, 'cause although these hadiths could be authentic in the chains of narrations, the text itself could be false, or weak. We should also distinguish that shia are not even the part of Islam.. 'cause innovations in islam is forbidden.. and shia people even allowed prostitution and lying.. which is contrary to Islam.. they even worship other objects than God.. which is also contrary to Islam.. and all shia's don't know about the ugly side of shiaism.. who are ignorant of their beliefs and following shiaism blindly.. they would be surprised and leave their beliefs of shiaism if they really know it.. 'cause innovation and associating others with God is totally forbidden and takes the fold out of Islam.. and we should not judge muslims as true Islam, likewise christians can do things wich is contrary to Christianity.. and distinguish cultural and religious acts..

Anonymous said...

I've got to get some help.. some imput here.. I am in love with a 48 year old Muslim man.. from Lebanon (never married.) I'm divorced, a Roman Catholic and I live in the USA. I've got an ll year old daughter and now I've been reading (it's scaring me silly) about this thighing practice. My fiance is a bit 'blase' about this practice? What should I do????

Pastorius said...

You are kidding, aren't you?

Anonymous said...

My fiance is a bit 'blase' about [thighing]? What should I do????

Either marry him, submit to him, wear the hijab, and allow him to have sex with your 11 year old daughter. Or, find a different man.

Those are your choices.

Stephen said...

I'm coming in a little late on this conversation, but I'd like to add something.

In 2001, the Majlis--composed almost entirely of Muslims vetted by the Guardian Council(save 5 seats)--passed a bill raising the minimum age of marriage from 9 to 15. They seem to understand the psychological and physical pain that these girls endure, and wish to put an end to it. However, the Guardian Council--appointed by Ayatollah Khamenei vetoed the bill.

Moderate clerics joined with Parliament in supporting this bill.

I am not going to be an apologist for Khomeini's sexual appetites, or the theological conclusions of Khamenei and his disciples. I think their inability to isolate the Quran's words within its context is just as ridiculous as Christians unable to do the same with the Bible.

However, I think you all are wrong to believe in a monolithic version of Islam, or even a monolithic Shiite Islam. The fact is that there are deep schisms within it, forming a continuum between liberal (gasp) reformist clerics an the extremist, entrenched establishment. It's SO post-modern. Dig it!

A religion will only be as peaceful and tolerant as those who interpret it.

Stephen said...

Sorry, they passed it in winter of 2000. The first article I read didn't cover it until Jan. 2001.

Stephen said...

I should also add that despite the minimum age of marriage stipulated in Iran's constitution, the average age of marriage in Iran is 21. Furthermore, marriage age in Iran is more directly related to socioeconomic status than it is to religious views--although that also has something to do with it. Poorer, rural areas tend to have lower ages of marriage in Iran. I'm sure you're not huge fans of Marx, but there seems to be a bit of truth in the proposition that the economic base informs the rest of that particular society.

References available upon request.

Pastorius said...

Hi Stephen,
I was a Philosophy major in college, so I have read Marx, and I did not read him as a person who hated his ideas. Instead, I read him in the context in which most young college students read him, which he was part of the continuum of Western thought, each system of which is to be appreciated on its own merits.

To this day, I can see good and bad in Marx's ideology.

However, that being said, I can also look at the effects of his system and recognize that it has been a net bad for the world.

Likewise with Islam.

You correctly point out that there are Christians who have trouble understanding the Bible within the context within which the words were originally spoken. Additionally, many Christians do not understand many of the foundational ideas of their own scriptures, and instead, focus like the Pharisees Christ criticized upon almost arbitrary rules as if they were the way to know God.

However, let us be honest here. There is not a nation on Earth where the ruling class is a group of Christians who have such a disgusting idea of how to live as exists in Iran, Saudi Arabia, the Sudan, or Nigeria. Sharia law is a curse upon the Earth. And it is the law in the aforementioned nations. Additionally, it is grabbing more and more power in Egypt, Indonesia, and Malaysia.

Sharia law, of course, calls for gay people to be killed because they are gay. It also calls for people to be killed for exercising freedom of conscience.

I would hardly think you could have a problem with anything I said in this response to your comment.

I hope you come back and read it. People like you and I ought to be able to stand together against these kinds of human rights abuses. I don't know why you bother fighting with us. If you want me to say, Marx had some good ideas, fine. He did. If you want me to say that socio-economic factors play a part in the behavior of a culture. Sure.

I would expect that you could also admit that ideology and values effect the way a culture of people behave.

Ideas and values are not bought with money. Sure, some ideas and values are hard to uphold when money is lacking. In a sense virtue is a luxury. Yes, but not totally.

And, I'm sure you would agree that the Saudi ruling class is incredibly oppressive and decadent, and yet they have access to the entire world because of their money.

And, as I'm sure you know, the Jihadis who have attacked us have been primarily well-educated, and upper Middle Class.

Stephen said...

I came back, and I'm glad you took the time and courtesy to read and respond.

You're right. I don't have a problem with anything you've said in your post. It appears we are on the same page when it comes to the barbarity of Sharia law, whoever implements it. And, yes, ideology and values affect the behavior and the culture. The source of cruelty does not absolve the cruelty itself.

However, understanding the source(s) and nature of the threat are vital to eliminating it. All to often I see bifurcation of the issues. My end is not to be overly sensitive to the integrity of Muslims. I think we'll find that the mouth of extremism, bigotry, and oppression has multiple tributaries.

The terrorists (Jihadists has too soft a connotation) that attacked on 9/11 had been well-educated and wealthy, and I think that Saudi Arabia's domestic and worldwide funding of extremist madrassehs constitutes a serious threat to the human rights and national security. Saudi wahabbist religious thought and its cousins (the exact name evades me) export their religions to Afghanistan and Pakistan. Families who can't afford secular and moderate schools send their children to these madrassehs as their last resort.

We can agree that Sharia law is morally repugnant. Socioeconomic indicators are helpful in seeing some of Islamic extremism's roots. It is by no means a silver bullet. At the same time, I think an expanded middle class are vital for a liberal, secular country. The wealthiest country can still be the most oppressive when economic power lies in the hands of a few.

The point in my first post, which seemed ignored, was the multiple dimensions of Islam and political thought--even within places such as Iran. Even when the Guardian Council vets the candidates for all elected positions in government, the branch most representative of the entire population voted against barbarity.

To sum up this rambling, I think we'll agree that Islam alone is not the problem, nor is poverty. We just need to broaden the lens. Again, thanks.

Pastorius said...

Indeed, I agree there are mutliple streams of Islamic thought. However, Jihadic extremism exists in Shia, Sunni/Wahabbist, Sufi, and most other forms of Islam.

Why is this?

It's because the Koran values virtue over free will.

The Bible (for what it's worth, I'm one of those who believes that the Bible, and the theology which sprang from it, are among the foundational documents of Western Civilization) on the other hand, values free will over virtue.

Here's an essay I wrote on the subject where I elucidate the diffeence and it's importance in the different directions which Islamic culture takes compared to the direction of Western Culture:


The point is, a culture which values virtue above free will will attempt to enforce virtue through coercion.

This is also the problem we see in Communism. Communism values equality of resources (not equality of opportunity), over free will, and inevitably, Communism has led to the enforcement of equality of assets through coercion.

Do you see what I mean?

Once again, does Marxist philosophy play any important role in the intellectual debate (dare I say, intellectual dialectic?) of Western Civilization? It certainly does.

Does that mean we ought to follow it's precepts to the letter. I don't think so.

Now, getting back to the idea of their being multiple streams of Islamic thought; yes there are. However, I don't think there is nearly as much variance within Iran's Guardian Council as you seem to think there is. And, even if there is, Khameini is the final and deciding vote, thus he possesses the veto power on any issue. And, we know where he is coming from.

There has been lots of talk of triangulating the Mullahs, and of triangulating the various streams of thought within Iran. I have not seen any demonstrable success.

Let me ask you a question: Do you think we ought to have dealt with the Nazis that way?

Because, I challenge you to tell me how it is that the Iranian government differs from the Nazis, except in economic and indusrial efficiency.

Stephen said...

Islam, like Christianity, values free will informed by virtue, not one or the other. Most Christians would not look kindly on a life of reckless hedonism. And, both Christianity and Islam value submission and sacrifice to God or Allah, respectively.

You write of a Good Muslim:
"He is not to be analytical, because his analysis can never add anything to that which Allah has already provided."

A fundamental principle in Islamic law is ijtihad, which essentially involves forming judgments derived from one's own reason. In Shia Islam, they simply believe that an answer can be derived from either the Koran or the Sunna--but, this still requires interpretation. Sunnnis, on the other hand, believe that the Koran or Sunna do not possess all the answers, and then employ ijtihad to arrive at an answer outside of the text. The difference is only a matter of technicality to me, really.

Indeed, there are is also taqleed, or emulation of a scholar with more religious authority. We all have our pastors, youth group ministers, priests, and some of us our pope, to which we often defer.

Muslims and non-muslims can be friends. Music is not forbidden in Islam. A simple Google search will confirm that. You simply interpret the Koran or the Sunna as a fundamentalist, and then apply it to all of Islam. In fact, your interpretation seems to give credibility to the extremists' creed, which we should always try to avoid.

I'm sure you've heard it before, but Christians had their own inquisition and conversion through coersion. Culture, ideology, and values can all be changed, even if the religion remains the same. It's slow and it's gradual, though.

Oh, and I didn't say the Guardian Council is eclectic in its religious viewpoints. Most (if not all) agree with everything Khamenei does, and of course, if they don't, he can simply give them the boot. My point was that division among the parliamentary branch (Majlis) and the Guardian Council exemplified diversity of opinion in Iran, and more largely within Islam.

The Iranian regime isn't pretty, but it is far from the Nazis. I'll take up the challenge. First, their constitution:

The nineteenth principle: "the Iranian people, no matter which ethnic group, should enjoy equal rights; colour, race, language, etc. are not a cause for different treatment."

Of course, it doesn't look as good in reality as it does on paper (does it ever?). Jews in Iran face discrimination, both personal and institutional. As do most minorities, such as Ahvazi Arab Shiites in Khuzestan.

However, Khomeini also distinguished between Israeli "zionists" and the indigenous Jewish population. They are free to practice their religion there and have one seat reserved for them in parliament, and they aren't being shipped off like chattel to a concentration camp, or forced to wear an armband, etc.

The Iranian regime has also not invaded, occupied, or annexed another country since its inception.

I think it'd be a mistake to deal with the Iranians the same way we dealt with the Nazis.

Pastorius said...

Sorry, I misunderstood your point about the Guardian Council. As far as I understand, there is, indeed, a lot of diversity of opinion within Persian culture. So, I agree with you there.

I know about Ifjihad. And, I agree with you that it's process is the same as the processes of reasoning through the scriptures as Christians, and particularly, Jews do. In fact, the tradition reminds me of the Talmudic process in Judaism.

That being said, I think once again, you are implying much more adherence to the principles of Ithihad than actually exists in the real world.

Yes, Christianity went through its Inquisition, and also there were the Crusades. And certainly, there have been Christians who have openly, and subtly, advocated violence against abortion doctors, and the like.

It is upon the issue of proportionality that you and I are seeming to disagree.

I think, the fact is, you seem to have more hope for the Muslim world than I do.

In the long run, I do have hope, but I'm sorry, I do not have hope for them in the short run.

It seems obvious to me that, when a person studies history, he will find that great civilizational changes are rarely, if ever, brought about without great violence.

I often point to the successes of the American wars against Germany, Japan, and the American South, as examples of how massive violence actually seemed to have to be used to effect change. Violence wasn't the only thing that needed to be used, but massive violence was the mechanism which brought about submission, which resulted in the United States then being able to force its will on the people's of those three cultures.

In each of those cases, the United States stepped in in the aftermath and rewrote Constitutions and forced change in the foundational ideologies by banning the teaching of the previous ideology outright.

We were as cruel ideologically in the aftermath of the war as we were physically cruel during the course of those wars.

This is the direction I think we are inevitably headed with Islam. You have more hope than I.

I recognize that there are many fine and decent human beings who are Muslim. However, they have no appreciable political power within the Muslim world. Even institutions like Al-Azhar University are shot through with Islamism. Turkey recently swung massively Islamist. Malaysia and Indonesia are both shot through with Islamism. These three countries were the world's hope for a moderate Islamic model.


You make a good point about Iran tolerating Jews more than Germany, but I think it is a mistake to take the Islamists word that there is a real clear difference between a Zionist and a Jew. Why shouldn't the Jews have a country? Do you want Israel to cease to exist? Why is it that the Islamists of our world can not tolerate the tiny country of Israel?

Why is it that the President of Iran calls for Israel to be wiped off the map, and constantly alludes to its impending disappearence from the face of the Earth?

Ahmadinejad, who let's face it, is a puppet of the Guardian Council, is making the intentions of Iran clear, with regards to the Jewish state of Israel, in a way that Hitler never did prior to approximately 1939.

The Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini (Mufti of Jerusalem during the 30's and 40's) was Arafat's uncle, and Arafat declared Husseini to have been his inspiration.

al-Husseini collaborated with Hitler, and indeed called for him to extend the Holocaust into the Arab world.

The lineage of Muslim anti-Semitism is clear.

And here's something for you to read. Note the Koranic quotes about killing Jews:


I very much appreciate your reasoning skills. You have not once resorted to insult. I am attempting to be as fair with you in this disagreement as you are being with me. That is why I use the words "It seems," or it is my opinion."

I hope you recognize and appreciate what I am doing with you. I usually don't waste my time with people who disagree here, because they aren't approaching the process of argumentation as a way of learning.

Clearly, you do.

Stephen said...

I do appreciate the civility involved! You have certainly been fair and courteous. Sometimes it's difficult to avoid smarminess and belittlement with the anonymity the internet allows. I do not deny the pervasive anti-semitism rampant in Islam, and you're absolutely right to fear governmental Islamization. To my knowledge, the marriage of government and any religion has never brought about widespread liberty and happiness.

As for the anti-semitism, I will not doubt its rampant existence throughout the entire world, and the muslim world is no exception--in fact, I'll concede it's probably stronger there than anywhere else.

I really wouldn't worry about Ahmadinejad. There are multiple competing power centers in Iran, and Ahmadinejad is rather low on the totem pole. I firmly believe most of what he spews is for internal consumption in order to detract away from Iran's faltering economy. I wouldn't say he's a puppet for the Guardian Council. Khatami, Rafsanjani, Khamenei, Ahmadinejad and his mentor Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, all maneuver for power in rivalry with each other. The people deciding whether to send a nuke to Israel--should they ever get one--have proven to be much more pragmatic (although equally corrupt).

Perhaps one question is extremism's extent, which is one which cannot be taken lightly. The other question is how do we handle it? But, that's another whole can of worms.

Stephen said...

At any rate, thank you for the discussion. I'll read that link and consider your perspective more. I wish you success with your blog!

Pastorius said...

Thanks Stephen.

One of my favorite radio guys is Dennis Prager. He always says the motto of his show is that he prefers clarity over agreement.

Now, you and I are clear on where we each stand.

Let me advise you to look at what people were saying about Hitler, Germany, and the Nazis during the 1930's. There were an awful lot of people saying pretty much the same things you are currently saying about Ahmadinejad, the Guardian Council, and the Iranian people.

Problem is, this time, we won't even have as much lead time as we did last time.

So, you will trust Iran to keep peaceful and pragmatic. I won't.

I trust Ahmadinejad at his word, because history has taught me that when someone says he wants to kill you, you'd better take him seriously.

By the way, I am not Jewish, in case you are wondering, but I will be very, very angry with my fellow Christians, if they sit back and allow another Holocaust to happen.

Thus far, the Christian church has proven itself to be a bunch of pansies, and they disgust me.

That's coming from a guy who goes to church every week, and plays in the church band, and hangs out with the Pastor from time to time.

Pastorius said...

Oh, by the way, one more thing.

You may wonder why, if I know about Itjihad, and if I think it is a positive thing, then why do I talk about Islam with so little nuance.

The answer is because I think Islamism, from what I have read, and I've read alot, is dominant throughout almost all the Islamic world.

I think we are past the time for nuance. When it is time to go to a debate, you bring notes, and references. When it is time to go to war you bring a gun.

Guns have very little nuance about them.

However, that does not mean I am incapable of thinking in a nuanced way. Nor does it mean that I will not indulge in such conversations with respectful people like you.

Good luck to you too.

Anonymous said...

really think that it’s hardly fair to blame to an entire religion for the despicable misdeeds of one individual. If Ayatollah Khomeini did commit the act, then he was one sick person. If Islam is to be looked at in its purity and entirety, then this type action is clearly forbidden and punishable by death according to Shariah Law. However, some people in power who believe themselves to be “scholars” mutate the teachings of Islam to facilitate their own dark desires. This is a universal problem among all religions. His teachings and interpretations of the religion have been convoluted and transformed to such an extent they no longer resemble the original tenets. As mentioned previously, “scholars” usually pass rulings that are not embedded in the original teachings and that are based on inauthentic sayings “attributed” to the Prophet. There have been cases where they cite fabricated religious references as well. This is done to placate their own conscience and give to themselves the “divine go ahead” to commit such heinous acts when it is blatantly obvious that these actions are clearly forbidden in the religion. In conclusion, the precepts that they preach are basically BS and have either a patriarchal or personal basis and in NO WAY are representative of the true teachings of Islam.

Anonymous said...

Hi just now there is a discussion on the EDL site about this article

Here s an interesting comment

I have searched for this book on several occasions but it does not seem to exist.

Anyway the authors name and alias is a give away that this is a spoof

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Husayn Al-Musawi, as you should know are both notorious terrorists


Anonymous said...

This is SYIA!!! not real islamic teaching! I'm a muslim and islam is my rel

Anonymous said...

I'm a female muslim and my religion is islam...this is all wrong under syariah law...never heard such thing only from syiah...

Anonymous said...

He is not islam...he is syiah. ..a pedophiles

Anonymous said...


This is the more scholar explanation about Aisha age. Not 6, not 9, but 19. If you do more research, you can find it in later Islamic studies.

Being pedophile and pathethic is by choice, not by religion. Shia and Sunni, is just like Catholic and Protestant and any other cult in Christianity. So why bother? Everyone declares they are the most righteous.

It is the person who commit crime that needs to be punish, not the religion. If you read the Quran, please read the cites too (this is very important to know why the verse is written that way). I recommend you read the hard copy, not the online version), it will be very clear.

May the peace be with you.

Pastorius said...

Narrated Aisha:
The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234)

Pastorius said...

Narrated 'Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death). (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64; see also Numbers 65 and 88)

Pastorius said...

'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. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3311)

Pastorius said...

Narrated 'Aisha:
I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, NOT YET REACHED THE AGE OF PUBERTY.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13) (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151)

Pastorius said...

The problems are just starting for Muslims. Elsewhere in the Quran men are permitted to marry and divorce young girls who haven’t attained sexual maturity:

And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the 'Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubts (about their periods), is three months, and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their 'Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise, except in case of death]. And for those who are pregnant (whether they are divorced or their husbands are dead), their 'Iddah (prescribed period) is until they deliver (their burdens), and whosoever fears Allah and keeps his duty to Him, He will make his matter easy for him. S. 65:4 Hilali-Khan