![](”http://static.flickr.com/44/116364022_14e11279b9_o.jpg")
Saturday, 15 Jul 2006
Hi dear readers,
Many of you have loved my last rant, where I ripped Hezbollah a new one. Well, I hope you don't mind me taking on the Israeli Defense Forces, cause they are fuckin pissing me off right about now. I figured that the best way to relay my thoughts and why I am angry would be in the form of an open letter to the IDF and the people who run it. It will go something like this:
Dear IDF,
YOU ARE FUCKIN MORONS!
When Hezbollah did what they did and kidnapped your soldiers, a golden opprutunity presented itself to you of the kind that didn't present itself since Black September 1970, when You came to the aid of King Hussein when the syrians sent tanks into Jordan to help the PLO's attempted coup. They gave you a chance of making a friend out of Lebanon, and now you have fucked that up royally. Good Job.
Let me explain it to you: Lebanon has been occupied by Syria for the past, I dunno, 30 years, and haven't had a chance bto actually get its shit together ever since, thanks to the flurry of assassinationa that Syria carried against their eladers. Hezbollah, who is founded and backed by Syria to fight you (because the syrians are too much of pussies to fight their own battles), have been holding the entire country hostage with its weapons and refusal to disarm, following the orders of their syrian overlords. They have been picking on fights with you for the past 2 years to get you to retalliate and blow up against them the way you just did, because without you, they have abolsutely no purpose or excuse for existing.
Now, the lebanese have been wanting to disarm Hezbollah for a while now, but couldn't, because as much as they fear Hezbollah, they fear one thing even more: Another civil war. So they have been dying for a way to disarm Hezbollah, or at least weaken it, and hann't been able to. Nevermind that the Lebanese army is a joke, or that it is controlled by the President, who is also a syrian puppet. The March 14 forces, your best hope at peace, achieved nothing other than have a couple thousand hot lebanese girls to go out and protest. They needed a miracle to get rid or pressure hezbollah, and you could've provided it. Instead, you fucked everything up.
You have bombed their airport, which meant that they needed to rely more on Syria now. You have bombed areas in Beirut that didn't have any Shia's in it. You are now bombing Tripoli and Jounieh and al manaraah. You are effectively destroying the Country, and you still haven't weakend Hezbollah one bit. Had you just stuck to attacking their strongholds in the South, you would've wekaend it to the degree that would've allowed the lebanese to later on disarm it and get rid of it. God knows they were furious at it for bringing on those attacks on them in the first place. Instead, because of the way you carried your atacks, the lebanese are now forced to unite behind Hezbollah, because they have come to the conclusion that you are taking it out on the whole of Lebanon, and not only the Hezbolla supporters. You could've been their hero, instead you became their enemy. Congratulations.
Also, why the hell are you bombing Lebanon anyway? You and me know that it is Syria and Iran who are running Hezbollah, and that what is happening is very much Syria's doing. So why aren't you attacking the syrians instead? Oh, yes, I rememberd, You are afraid what would happen if Bashar is out of Power. The Devil you know and all. Well, the devil that you know has put you on the offensive on 2 fronts and they haven't sufferd the least bit because of it.Kepp up that Devil you know policy; It's a real winner.
So stop being fuckin Morons, stop bombing Lebanon, and go put the blame where it belongs.
Sincirely Yours,
SM
July 15th, 2006 at 5:34 pm
Hang on SM, Syria’s next. I can’t tell you what the strategic and tactical thinking at the top of the IDF is, but don’t think they’re not going to take this opportunity to finish Syria, as presently governed, once and for all. Do you know anything about the Egyptian ship? How would Egyptians react to Hezbollah sinking an Egyptian ship, if only by mistake?
July 15th, 2006 at 5:36 pm
Bombing ports, airports, army radar facilities and highways in Lebanon seem like legitimate military targets to me. Hezbollah are not armed and supplied out of thin air. Cutting off their supply routes from Iran and Syria is a military necessity. As for the army radar facilities and other attacks on the Lebanese military, well they have shown that they have no intention of taking on Hezbollah. In order to insure their aerial supremacy, the IDF must take out Lebanese radar facilities and anti-aircraft positions. It sucks for the Lebanese people that Hezbollah brought this on them, but spare me the logic that these attacks are based on sheer malice towards Lebanon.
As for attacking Syria, its very easy for you to call for it SM. Now if the IDF actually goes ahead and does it, you know Israel can count on instant condemnation from every single country, and will further fan the flames of a possible regional war. Israel has to look out for itself, and carefully weigh it options if it hit Syria, who despite their pathetic military, do have chemical weapons.
July 15th, 2006 at 5:40 pm
Finally SM, a post that will please all the crowds, though you better not get used to it, as you’re better off with pissing people off.
Anyway, I seriously think that Hizbouallah are funded by America, as all other Islamic Groups, even Iran are part of America’s global agenda. I think that all this is part of a plan to finally destroy Hizbouallah in Lebanon, in order to spread American and UN forces in Lebanon, and finally surround Syria from all borders to eventually contain it, since obviously Israel didn’t get the job right at shutting up Syria. Also American forces have been dying to enter Israel, the whole Intifada was created to serve this purpose, Americans wanted to spread their forces in Jerusalem. This is where the Americans might get it right, and spread their forces, and establish their bases in Lebanon and North Israel.
Let’s face it people, America are never against somebody weak, they don’t pick on the weak, they get the weak to their side and use their land as bases, they attack and pick on who can threat their interests, obviously Irak and Syria are both potential threats to America, hence the continuous attacks on both. Israel, Turkey, Iran and the rest of the Middle East are all American bases, they’re all puppets in the hands of America.
I realize you all are going to think I’m crazy, and that I’m not making any sense, but time will tell. And remember what I said, American and UN forces are going to resolve this issue, I hope they won’t resort to this, because this’ll only hurt Lebanon. Who knows what’ll happen, but one thing is for sure; we’re not going to reside in peace in the ME.
July 15th, 2006 at 5:41 pm
isn’it that great Middle-Orient going on Bush was claiming ! civilisation, oops democratisation !
July 15th, 2006 at 5:50 pm
Olmert and Israeli generals don’t strike me as Morons.
It makes sense to stop supply of Iranian and Syrian weapons to Hezbollah. Ground attack on Hezbollah likely to come next. It’s not going to be easy, so you can’t fight this war with one hand behind your back.
July 15th, 2006 at 5:54 pm
May be you are correct:( As far as I can understand from our media, they (we?) just afraid of being stopped by the world - as we usually are.
That means that army concluded that it has no more than 2 or3 days to destroy as much as possible before Big Brother (in matter of fact G8 of them) will call us (they?) off… It is of course impossible to destroy Hezb in three days, so the army is now trying “to show Lebaneese that each time Hezb will do anything alike - Lebanon will suffer”. Leaders, that yesterday talked that “This war will continue while Hezbollah exists”, are now talking that “Our goal is to pull Hezbollah to the north” - and so all this freak show will end up in a few days with several dozens of bodies on the both sides, billions of dollars losses (mainly in Lebanon, but here too - tourist season fucked up on the both sides of the border) and virtually nothing on the positive side - Hezb will shortly rebuild, proclaim its “great victory over Zionist enemy”, and both Israel & Lebanon will gain nothing.
Yeah, here is a solid proof that Jews and Arabs are both children of Avraham - both of our nations are always been leaded by pathetic loosers, and that can only be explained by some kind of genetic problem:( Or may be that is ME climate?
July 15th, 2006 at 6:04 pm
SM,
I appreciate your attempt to be even-handed despite the reality of the situation. However…
You’re right that attacking Lebanon is fruitless, but it was a no-win situation for Israel either way. The problem, ironically enough, is that the Israeli and Lebanonese governments both require the tolerance of the majority of their people.
If the Israeli government had let this incursion from Hezbollah pass without action, they would have lost the support of the Israeli people. If they had demanded that the Lebanese government solve the problem, no action would have occurred, because Hezbollah is supported by too many Lebanese Muslims (especially if they do something bad to Israel).
In fact, if Israel had not decided to go ape against Gaza and Lebanon, there would not be ANY blame by Middle Easterners (to the extent there is) against Hezbollah or Hamas at all. Instead everyone would be changing the subject to bad things Israel did up to 60 years ago and longer.
Israel and the UN have tried for a year and more to get the Lebanese government to disarm and crack down on Hezbollah to no avail. What good would another year of doing nothing accomplish?
Perhaps Israel is hoping that they will finally have a cause to attack Syria directly over this issue? I don’t know. But the status quo was untenable. The box required a good shaking before the pieces MIGHT be put back together.
July 15th, 2006 at 6:09 pm
Anyway, TV says that army deployed Patriot anti-missile batteries near Haifa. That is NOT going to help against Hezbollah rockets. So, there is probably something bigger yet to come.
July 15th, 2006 at 6:15 pm
SM..
I tried really hard to find your tongue in your cheek in this post, unfortunately I could not..
The Israelis have shown remarkable restraint over the past few month. They GIVE back land to the Palestinians, and what is their reward??? The terrorists claim military victory and ramp up their attacks. Israel not being morons as you state have figured it out, the only thing the terrorists understand is brute force. They remind me of an aligator, that only quits eating chickens when you quit putting chickens in front of it.
Well i guess finally it’s enough is enough and now Hizboooooolah, and their Lebanese hosts are paying the price. My guess is that Syria is next.
Your efforts might be better placed trying to get the arabs to stand down.. oops my bad, you and many others have tried that for almost 60 yers to no avail.
Like I said before “payback’s a bitch”
What would be the , oh lets see, the Iranian response if Israel aws lobbing rockets indicriminately into Iran, or Syria, or Lebanon, or Egypt.. How much resraint would be shown then
July 15th, 2006 at 6:19 pm
No question, this is a ruined opportunity for the IDF. At worst lebanon is a moderate country whos people just want to spend money and buy BMWs. They have no desire to be part of this, they have learned their lesson 100 fold for the last 146 years. God save them. Poor Lebanon
July 15th, 2006 at 6:19 pm
SM, it is bad for Lebanon, it is bad for everybody. But are you calling for a war with Iran and Syria? They didn’t evidently appear so far. Who did is Hizb and these nihilists are sitting in the Lebanon parliament, just to remind you. Nazrallah is fighting his bloody war to regain his smashed self-pride again - unfortunately too many people are following blindly his words of hatress and actions of violence.
Solution: unarm Hisbollah, let Hamas recognize Israel and force Israel to stop her oppression and gear up to support in getting Gaza running. All this should have been done long ago - and everybody knows and keeps quiet.
Why aren’t the Lebanese disarming Hizbollah? they are afraid of civil war? War is war! Now there is war. If vereybody helps just to stop this hizbollah madness then there is a solid basis for peace in the region. But who wants this anyway.
July 15th, 2006 at 6:27 pm
“GREG MYRE The New York Times
Published: July 15, 2006
METULA, Israel In another day of cross-border shooting exchanges, Israeli airstrikes killed more than 20 Lebanese civilians on Saturday, including at least 15 who died when their convoy of vehicles was attempting to flee the south Lebanon border area, according to news reports.”
10 years from now Israel will deny it’s aggression and brutality, they will say this never happened and the arabs are anti-semites.
Shame on you Israel!
July 15th, 2006 at 6:30 pm
What you’re seeing is only a small part. Believe me, Hizballah is getting beat up. So far out of several hundred sorties only around 15% were targeted at infrastructure. The rest are against Hizballah positions. And of course all the artillery is in the south targetting Hizballh. All the forts they had in the south were destroyed. The problem now is simply finding them as they have gone underground. Nasrallah claimed he had 12000 rockets targetting Israel but they only launched around 300 which caused relatively little damage. Can you guess why that is? As for Syria, I doubt they’ll be targetted. Hizballah is a Lebanese problem.
July 15th, 2006 at 6:32 pm
SM,
If the IDF wanted to take down Nasrallah and co. in few hours they will but no Israel has to kill all the innocent civilians and destroy arab nations. What is new? same thing they did to the Palestinians.
July 15th, 2006 at 6:33 pm
I told you before, SM. Attacking Syria automatically brings Hezbollah (and all of Lebanon by default) into the conflict. One enemy at a time, please.
As for Lebanon’s desire to control Hezbollah, be serious. What has the Lebanese government done to control Hezbollah? I mean they cannot even prevent their airports from being used as conduits for arms to Hezbollah. They have done absolutely nothing. Not a single thing. Nothing.
Twenty years from now, without Israelis doing something, Hezbollah will be as armed and dangerous as ever. The Lebanese government is a joke. It is a government that cannot govern and a government that has no intention of ever really governing.
If the Lebanese want to unite behind Hezbollah, so be it. They are worthless in this conflict in any event. If if Hezbollah was militarily on its last legs, the Lebanese government would still do nothing. They wouldn’t want to alienate the Shiite civilian population. They aren’t serious and they never have been.
News and views:
From the Moderate Voice:
http://www.themoderatevoice.com/posts/1152974570.shtml
July 15th, 2006 at 6:36 pm
dude, rock on
July 15th, 2006 at 6:42 pm
Love it when, you’re so pissed off, SM …you start spelling with an Egyptian accent
July 15th, 2006 at 7:08 pm
SM,
I think you’re absolutely correct. Aside from Israel trying to get at Hezbollah, they are actinng in a punishing mode in Lebanon which can turn most of Lebanese into Hezbollah cheerleaders. But I think the strike on Syria is not so far away. I made a short post about it last night.
July 15th, 2006 at 7:20 pm
Dear SM,
YOU FUCKING MORON!
You are the one that always tells that it is the arabs who have to clean up their own house and now you blame Israel? If Lebanese are such pussies, then they are getting what they deserve for their cowardness and inaction. You have to understand that people in Israel, people in Europe, people in US are tired of sorting out who are the good arabs (muslims) and who are the bad ones. I fear that from now on the prevailing policy will be – kill them all, let the God sort them out.
July 15th, 2006 at 7:27 pm
Pheras
I think that all this is part of a plan to finally destroy Hizbouallah in Lebanon
Yes. Hezbollah must die. Hezbollah decalred war on the US in 1983. Hezbollah must be destroyed. We are at war on terrorsist, and Al Qaeda and Hezbollah are the two primary targets in that war.
in order to spread American and UN forces in Lebanon
No. US troops will never be in Lebanon again, if I have anything to say about it. And I do. As far as UN troops in Lebanon, I couldn’t care less about that, as long as they aren’t AMERICAN troops. We need all of our troops for other things, right now.
But really, if UN troops are to go anywhere, they should go to Darfur anyway. Not Lebanon. By the way, I see the Lebanese government seems to be calling for peacekeepers as of today? The last time peacekeepers went to Lebanon, Hezbollah murdered over 300 of them in the world’s first suicide bombings. I hope UN member nations think twice about deploying peacekeepers in an area wher Hezbollah is active. There can be no peace in Lebanon as long as Hezbollah exists.
and finally surround Syria from all borders to eventually contain it
Contain it? Syria is a non issue for the US. Iran is the issue. Israel is perfectly capable of “containing” Syria, and I expect that they will, at some point in the near future. Israel takes care of Syria, the US takes care of Iran.
It’s a win/win. The only loser is is the Islamic Republic of Iran.
It’s interesting that Iran has played right into America’s hands. I thought Iranians were supposed to be pretty smart? They couldn’t have been more foolish. I think they have gravely miscalculated, and it will cost them their lives.
since obviously Israel didn’t get the job right at shutting up Syria.
Give it some time. Syria’s fate is not yet known.
Also American forces have been dying to enter Israel, the whole Intifada was created to serve this purpose, Americans wanted to spread their forces in Jerusalem.
No idea where this fantasy scenario comes from. Did you hear that on Al Jazeera or something? I can’t even plug that idea in, anywhere. Does not compute. Why would the US have any interest whatsoever in trying to contain Palestinian terrorism? Don’t you think we’ve got enough else to do?
And why on earth do you think America wants to “control” Jerusalem? Do you think we are Crusaders? Well, even if we *were* Crsuaders, the Crusades weer to free the Holy Land from the muslims, who were considered evil incarnate. Having the Jews in control of Jerusalem would be perfectly acceptable to Crusaders. Judaism is part of Christianity, after all, and Jerusalem has never been the “capital” of Christianity, it’s always been the holy city of Judaism.
This is where the Americans might get it right, and spread their forces, and establish their bases in Lebanon and North Israel.
No idea why you think we need bases in either Lebanon *or* Israel. And certainly not both, that’s silly. We have plenty of bases in the Mediterannean area already. The need for bases was in the region of the Persian Gulf. Not on the Med. If the US wanted to topple Asad, we could invade across land from Anbar province in Iraq, and get that job done within a week or two. We may just do that, actually, and then you will know the truth
July 15th, 2006 at 7:28 pm
You know what’s really, really unfortunate? That Moshe Dayan and Anwar Sadat aren’t around to figure all this out and kick some pants. Two smart, courageous, charismatic, and (dare I say it about guys) handsome warriors who knew how to make peace with each other and did so.
July 15th, 2006 at 7:34 pm
Damn dude, I got a LOT more respect for you being critical of both sides.
Hats off to you buddy.
July 15th, 2006 at 7:38 pm
Well, If i may, you’ve got a point. But you tend to oversimplify the whole situation.
Israel targeted those installations because they posed a threat to us. Be these the Radars that helped hit the Israeli battleship off the coast of Beirut, or the airport runways that could have been used for bringing in even more arms and logistics.
The political reality in Lebanon is far more intriquite than you tend to visualise. But all of lebanon are united in one cause - hating Israel. Some might even have rightful reasons for doing so, but don’t fool yourself about the overwhelming mindset. Whether it’s the Christians or The Sunnis or even thr Druz ( let alonr Shiite) - all are loving to hate israel. No metter how dangerous they percieve the Hezbollah to be, none of them will accept Israeli rull or support any military actions carried out by the IDF against Hizbullah.
And as for the other commnters, here goes:
N1. I seriously doubt whether Syria is next. Too much is at stake here for Israel to be making reckless moves like that. I believe Israel wil stick to symbolic acts of persuasion such as it did when its aircraft hovered above Asad’s palace in Damascus.
N3. dude, are you for real?!!… I mean it’s nice to go believing every conspiracy crap one comes up with, but this empirialistic mambo jambo is hilarious to say the least… Following your logic, America is suicidal.
N7. very well put
N12. the notorious arabic media strike again. Whether this is true remains to be seen, as so many “massacres” have been staged by Pallywod and their counterparts, they kind of lost credence, to say the least.
Even if this turns out to be true, it is apparent that in all the years of its existance israel has never delibirately targeted civilians.
N14. right. the ruthless jews are at it again - craving for the blood of young arabs. On the other hand, it’s not surprising considering you probably get your news from Al-Jazeera…
July 15th, 2006 at 7:44 pm
It is about laziness. If the IDF only cleaned up the terrorists and their sponsors it would have left the Lebanese to lazy around the next time, and the next time, and the next time while terrorists run around, up and down their stairs, with rockets in hand.
Hey elderly woman, next time that happens put your foot out so that he trips and falls, then hit him over the head with a pot or something. And little kid, the next time your hangin’ out and see Mr. Terrorists run by with his buddies, follow them and when they aren’t looking, steal their rocket thingy. And father, I know you fear many things but put that aside and work for a greater good. Insist on law and order. And lead by example. Stop being corrupt. Stop stealing. Stop undercutting the law. Impress upon those around you the need to be straight-up. Don’t grow weary in well-doing. Build. Nurture. Create an atmosphere of trust. Venture down the difficult path. Rein in the warmonger, the hater. Your life is pointless otherwise. Don’t be lazy, build Love. If you don’t, then whatever you do build will be torn down again, and again, and again…
July 15th, 2006 at 7:46 pm
We know Iran doesn’t have nukes yet,because they’d have taken Iraq already. If anyone thinks 138,000 U.S. soldiers ( 75% of which are supply clerks,cooks and what not) can stop them,I’ve got a bridge to sell you.
When Iran DOES take Iraq,and absorbs Syria as well,Israel will be the last line of defense for the Sunni Arab world. Ironic eh?
July 15th, 2006 at 7:47 pm
European Jews aresimilar to European Americans in their bloody mentality and their strive for vengeance and destruction. I do not think there is any difference between fascist white supramecists and fascist Jews, who identified with their European oppressors. it is realy sick to see how fucken Bush, fucken Olmert and fucken Nasrallah are playing with fire
July 15th, 2006 at 7:47 pm
whats so hard to understand? lebanon attacked israel. israel responded. There is nothing that israel can do to make muslims not hate it. nothing. It is better to be feared.
July 15th, 2006 at 7:58 pm
European Jews aresimilar to European Americans in their bloody mentality and their strive for vengeance and destruction.
Yes, we should be more like Arabs, all peaceful and shit, I’m sure!
“I’ve been humiliated! Somebody must die!!”
“Face” is pretty important to Chinese too. Somehow, though, they don’t try to regain their dignity by killing people. They seem to think that would result in even greater loss of prestige. I like the Chinese way better.
July 15th, 2006 at 8:00 pm
Maged, nice to see you learned all about the Jews from al-manar. Ever actually meet a real one in the flesh?
July 15th, 2006 at 8:01 pm
> Dear IDF,
> YOU ARE FUCKIN MORONS!
When - silly puppet - will you understand, that you the wannabe
“extremely cynical, snarky, pro-US, secular, libertarian, disgruntled
sandmonkey” are simply yet another arab untermensch from the
master race point of view?
Heydrich, Bormann and Eichmann were reborn in Israel, thus
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2871/232/400/20060408-180512-5.26.jpg
The Sinai belongs to the master race!
July 15th, 2006 at 8:02 pm
SM - You’re missing the point. Don’t you know the cliche that war is a continuation of politics by other means? The IDF is attacking Lebanon because they’re trying to play by the int’l rules. They suffered an attack from the territory of a sovereign state, so they’re obeying the relevent int’l rules and responding by attacking that state. The int’l system works this way, fair or not.
What the IDF is seeking (among other things) is an end to Hezbollah, presently camped out on Lebanese territory. Who in the world can take care of such a thing? Should the IDF bomb Syria until they agree to re-occupy Lebanon and finish Hezbollah themselves? Not only would that be idiotic, it’s not how it works. Under int’l rules, it’s Lebanon’s job to guard its territory.
The rules have always worked against Israel, but it’s trying to follow them anyway, because this makes its action prima facie legitimate. I don’t get why you don’t understand that.
July 15th, 2006 at 8:04 pm
And ask them for their matzah recipes - especially those
made with the blood of arab children and babies.
July 15th, 2006 at 8:07 pm
To those of you who are insane and nurse bizarre & sick conspiracy fantasies: Please, wake up. You’re getting nowhere, and you’re primarily hurting yourselves.
July 15th, 2006 at 8:15 pm
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2871/232/1600/20060408-180512-5.30.jpg
?
July 15th, 2006 at 8:17 pm
Been reading a lot of blogs since Wednesday, and here’s what I think I’ve learned from this episode:
1.) People feel their own pain (and the pain of their families/religious group/countrymen) far more than they feel the pain of others.
2.) However, that doesn’t stop them from expecting the other to feel their pain, too. And if the other doesn’t feel their pain, that just proves that the other is evil.
3.) The further away from a conflict a person is, the louder they cry out for war and destruction
4.) When in doubt, blame the U.S.
July 15th, 2006 at 8:18 pm
SM, The Lebanese don’t want another civil war and are incapable of fighting Hizbullah. It’s easier for them to blame Israel.
If the Lebanese are incapable of controlling Hizbullah, then Israel will do it for them.
July 15th, 2006 at 8:24 pm
This is my first time posting here. I’ve just lurked since I found SM mentioned at Michael Totten’s blog. Anyway, I just saw this at “Jpost” and thought I’d post it here:
Jul. 15, 2006 22:17
IDF warns Lebanon not to fire at army
By YAAKOV KATZ
A day after the Lebanese army fired at an Israeli AIRCRAFT on FRIDAY, the IDF sent a severe warning to the Lebanese army.
The warning stated that Israel had thus far refrained from firing at Lebanese army positions, but should the Lebanese army continue firing at the IDF, the situation would change.
The aircraft was not damaged in the incident.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150886008775&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
July 15th, 2006 at 8:30 pm
> The aircraft was not damaged in the incident.
Crying with the scum of the earth.
July 15th, 2006 at 8:36 pm
someone notify the warden that eee got out of his cage.
July 15th, 2006 at 9:11 pm
heh. Pheras you are all kinds of crazy.
“We know Iran doesn’t have nukes yet,because they’d have taken Iraq already. If anyone thinks 138,000 U.S. soldiers ( 75% of which are supply clerks,cooks and what not) can stop them,I’ve got a bridge to sell you.”
You don’t know what you’re talking about. It’s okay if you are totally wrong, but it’s probably not smart to add snarky comments “wanna buy a bridge” at the end of it.
July 15th, 2006 at 9:14 pm
Cedar tree, or skull and crossbones?
I am fascinated by the perspective we are seeing through sites like: The Lebanese Bloggers Sandmonkey Big Pharaoh There’s been some refreshing self-analysis and reflection happing there which you won’t see in the propaganda-laden Arab media like Al-J…
July 15th, 2006 at 9:28 pm
The essence of the master race is: Kill arab civilians!
Israeli attack kills 20 fleeing civilians
http://euronews.net/create_html.php?page=detail_info&article=369591&lng=1
That’s the reason why Israel needs to be removed from time and
space, their leading war criminals - and their puppets or puppe-
teers in amnesia - to be indicted referring to Nurembergs laws.
Israel - an insult to mankind and maybe to judaism too.
July 15th, 2006 at 9:40 pm
Sandmonkey you are a life example of a RETARD, it’s taking you sooo long to realize the obvious. was it so hard to see that’s Israel is after destroying Lebanon as a country!!!!!!!!!
July 15th, 2006 at 9:43 pm
eee,
Since you despise the west and Israel so much, why are you in Florida?
Libyan trash!
July 15th, 2006 at 9:48 pm
Noooo Accchhhhmad. Israel wants the Lebanese, ie Hezbollah, to leave them alone. If they hit them hard enough now, maybe it will take a few more years before the Lebanese (Hezbollah) attack them again.
July 15th, 2006 at 9:49 pm
Ahmed, Prophet Mohammed was also an example of a RETARD:
He was a child molester (married Aisha when she was 6 years old)
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/extreme_mohammed/
July 15th, 2006 at 9:52 pm
IDF is very concerned about the safety of its personal (read coward). So they prefer the futile use of disproportionate forces to kill scores of civilians than to go in land operations to get some important guys in hizbollahs command and seriously damage its ability to operate. It is the same mentality that drops 500 lb bombs from an F 16 on a residential area in a futile attempts to kill one person and instead kill 7 children and their parents. The mighty IDF is too wise ( read coward) to go and get the bad guys responsible for attacks against Israel. They would rather go and drop some bombs. Anyway their smart media specialists will invent a justification for whatever the outcome is.
July 15th, 2006 at 9:53 pm
SM,
As a die-hard Zionist military hawk and terrorist-hating bastard…
…I can only agree.
Up to a point.
I too see this as a lost opportunity, or one which perhaps isn’t completely lost yet. But the IDF better move fast. I had a wish when this started, that they would take those Free-Lebanese troops which were offered and move with them into Southern Lebanon, as well as drop leaflets like they did but also stating that they would help to rebuild a Free Lebanon without Hezzbollah, and that the only occupying force would be that of a Lebanese army which came to restore the peace and kick out the terrorists.
Seriously, they need to move on this. I don’t, however, blame them for bombing the airport and radar stations or even the supply routes. These are Hezzbollah supply chains and they have to do that to immobilize the Hezzbollah. But the IDF should be clear as to what their intent is. Right now, they say they are punishing Lebanon, which is the wrong statement to make. They should really state what I have hoped for: they are bombing Hezzbollah supply chains and trying to kick their ass so as to help Lebanon rebuild in a better way.
I know it sounds simplistic, and many other pro-Israelis will see this as a “betrayal”, maybe, but the army should learn from their mistake in the past. They should act as if they are coming to help the people of Lebanon, even if their actions will hurt for a while. Perhaps, however, they will do so in the near future.
I do not, again, fault Israel for acting the way it does. I just fault it for having a terrible PR department, which has never changed, and which really is due for a major overhaul. Like now.
For the other pro-Israeli commenters, please note that I am on your side. I just want Israel to be more clear about what the intent is, and how to achieve it without pissing off every single Lebanese around. There are Lebanese in Lebanon right now, and outside of Lebanon, which support this move. But I’m fairly sure they want to hear this as well, because they would feel a lot more encouraged if they did. Please keep in mind that some of these guys ARE our allies - in a very big way. They could be our best friends if given a chance.
July 15th, 2006 at 9:57 pm
Amgad, just admit that no matter what the IDF do you are going to say it is cowardly. They did exactly what you suggested in Jenin, the suicide bomber capital, lost about 20 troops and killed 50 militants and were accused of a massacre, a genocide, a holocaust!!! Durka durka mohammad jihad!!! Since they are damned if they do and damned if they don’t, might as well send in the F-16s and keep their boys safe.
July 15th, 2006 at 9:58 pm
ahmad says: Israel is after destroying Lebanon as a country!!!!!!!!!
you are so right… Israel is trying to take over the world too..
Don’t let the peaceful arab nations fall this one.
It’s so nice to be reminded of the voice of arabic and muslim reason….
July 15th, 2006 at 10:28 pm
That eee is one strange and fucked up dude. I’m starting to look fof his posts so I can feel better about myself.
July 15th, 2006 at 10:28 pm
> Libyan trash!
Someone should murder your whole family - the israeli style.
Not for revenge - I’m not jewish - just as a lesson, for - fascists
understand only one language - that of violence.
July 15th, 2006 at 10:48 pm
Yes, Amgad, the IDF is notoriously afraid to fight muslim warriors. Unlike the mighty Hezbollah, who fire rcokets randomely at Israel cities from 30 miles away, whilst hiding in some old ladies back yard, and waiting for Al Jazeera to defeat Isarel in the world media.
Cocksucker.
Send Hezbollah out to fight on the battlefield with the IDF, face to face. Show us how bravely they achieve their martyrdom. This could all be over in a few days, if Hezbollah would engage openly in the war they began. WIth a minimum of collateral damge. But you know, and I know, that this is the LAST thing Hezbollah would ever do.
July 15th, 2006 at 10:49 pm
eee, I mean Salem, You’ll end up in Gitmo very soon. Libyan shit!
July 15th, 2006 at 10:51 pm
Dear nothing,
you need to get you’re facts straight too about mother Aisha.
July 15th, 2006 at 10:57 pm
Former IDF ,
I’m sorry but when i see one nation bombing other nations infra structure, that’s doesn’t seem as a peaceful nation to me, despite they claim so.
July 15th, 2006 at 11:01 pm
The first military action was the attack on an Israeli military base killing 8 Israeli soldiers and capturing 2 in a land operation. Then Israel replied by bombing bridges, airports and residential areas killing 82 civilians then Hizbollah retaliated by bombing residential areas killing 4 civilians.
So which part resorted to the air, shelling from a distance and random bombing after being disgraced in a land operation asshole.
July 15th, 2006 at 11:01 pm
the previous one was for craig
July 15th, 2006 at 11:14 pm
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/ayesha.htm
The thought of an old man becoming aroused by a child is one of the most disturbing thoughts that makes us cringe as it reminds us of pedophilia and the most despicable people. It is difficult to accept that the Holy Prophet married Aisha when she was 6-years-old and consummated his marriage with her when she was 9. He was then, 54 years old.
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).
Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 65
Narrated ‘Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that ‘Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death).” what you know of the Quran (by heart)’
Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88
Narrated ‘Ursa:
The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with ‘Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).
GOOD TO SEE MUSLIMS DENY THE ISLAMIC SCRIPTS AND SHOW THAT THEY ARE NOTHING BUT TERRORISTS!
July 15th, 2006 at 11:21 pm
“How would Egyptians react to Hezbollah sinking an Egyptian ship, if only by mistake?”
Well, this pissed off Egyptian for one would like to see Hezbollah irreparably dismantled and sent to rot in hell. This pissed off Egyptian is royally tired of watching Egypt getting involved willingly or unwillingly in conflicts which other people create in order to sacrifice more Egyptian lives. This pissed off Egyptian constantly fights back episodes of violent vomiting whenever she accidentally turns on the TV only to find an Islamo-fascist demagogue like Nasrallah spewing his venomous, Nazi-like rhetoric. This pissed off Egyptian curses the day the Arabo-fascist Nasser took over her country, destroying its civil society, its freedoms, its democracy, its multi-cultural/multi-religious diversity, and bastardizing and corrupting Egyptian culture with macabre notions of Arab nationalism, militarism and fundamentalism. This pissed off Egyptian is brought to the brink of apocalyptic rage when her people regularly at the hands of Arabs get humiliated, treated like 2rd class citizens, exploited, kidnapped, beheaded, murdered while vacationing; when her people are sold as virtual sex slaves to rich Gulf bastards, and when they come back from Arab countries dead in their coffins every time the Arabs get their “serwals” in a bunch and decide to have one of their until-the-last-Egyptian soldier jihads–all the while many of her people continue to be duped into supporting the cause of Arab nationalism and Islamism; their disgusting wars; their hopelessly unsalvageable ignorance, dictatorship, oppression, conspiratorial demagoguery; continue to support Arab expansionism, imperialism, and colonialism like Syria’s invasion and colonization of Lebanon; Iraq’s invasion and colonization of Kuwait and Kurdistan; North Sudan’s invasion and colonization of Darfur and South Sudan; and of course the continued destruction and near annihilation of the indigenous cultures of those lands; etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. This pissed off Egyptian is especially and colossally sick of hearing Arabs and their rabid spokespersons in the West bitch and moan about Palestine, and their little lost dignity, and friggin’ Zionism, when they are by the far the worst offenders in most ME conflicts, having committed atrocities far worse and more numerous, and continue to, than anything Israel has ever done. This pissed off Egyptian would like to see Arabs grow up, stop acting like spoiled little brats and join the civilized modern world if they don’t want their tushes constantly kicked by the same people they despise. This very pissed off Egyptian wants Egypt to be FREE of all of those things then be left THE HELL ALONE!!
July 15th, 2006 at 11:28 pm
> You’ll end up in Gitmo very soon.
Gonna meet you and your filth in hell.
Of course you will be in a better position than
me - for you will also make the devil to work
for you too…
July 15th, 2006 at 11:40 pm
> Send Hezbollah out to fight on the battlefield with the IDF, face to face.
Watch the audacity of the amnesian master race!
Equipped with everything from 15.000 nukes to eight mayor
carrier-groups - they want the natives “face to face”!?
I don’t think that they are that moronic.
But - they will happily remember the 23. October 1983, remem-
ber the smell of the burned flesh of 241 dead amnesian marines.
July 15th, 2006 at 11:46 pm
Noufa - wow. I can’t imagine what it’s like to live in a country that *was* considered civilized eons ago. Americans see your pyramids as tourist attractions. You must see them as a constant reminder of what you’ve lost. I can’t understand the depth of your outrage because I have no way to understand it, but I can certainly see it and wish you the best of luck restoring Egypt as a center of art, science, and literature. I’d love to be able to feel safe visiting Egypt one day, and seeing in person all those great Egyptian women that SM posts. Make love, not jihad.
July 15th, 2006 at 11:48 pm
Dear Noufa, your post nearly brought this reader to tears, as if to try to put out the fire. A focused, clear flame like acetylene, not like ridiculous flaming endured to get to this! Please, Noufa, take care of yourself and try not to eat yourself alive, for heaven’s sake.
July 16th, 2006 at 12:25 am
nothing,
Please read this and try to educate yourself, it’s a bit long i apologize for this.
The marriage of the Prophet Muhammad [May the Peace and Blessings of God be upon him] to ‘Aishah bint Abu Bakr when she was at quite a young age has been the focus of quite a bit of criticism in the West. Unfortunately, in this Neo-Colonialist Age of smart bombs, MTV, CNN and the Big Mac, some of those who profess to be Muslims have themselves become critics. Many Muslims, faced with the juggernaut of allegedly “universal” Western liberal values that have permeated almost everyone around them, sheepishly avoid discussion of such “embarrassing” Islamic issues. It is a keenly true observation that even though the European powers have pulled their colonial armies out of Muslim lands and granted them “independence”, an even worse plague continues. This curse is “Colonialism of the Mind” and it is more dangerous since it is much more subtle. Insha’llah, this article will be a contribution to making both Muslims and non-Muslims aware of not only the objective facts regarding the Prophet’s marriage to ‘Aishah, but how to understand it in light of Islam and life in the “modern” world.
Regrettably, for those of us trying to spread the truth of Islam in the West, we often have to agree with the Orientalist W. Montgomery Watt when he wrote: “Of all the world’s great men none has been so much maligned as Muhammad.”1 But here, for a change, were are dealing with something that is an authentic part of Islamic history, not an apocryphal or fabricated event that Westerners have been duped into believing is authentic, such as the so-called “Satanic Verses” incident. That a man in his fifties would marry such a young girl—especially a man who is supposed to be a living example of piety—is not only difficult for many “modern” Westerners to come to terms with, but it has even gone so far as to stir up disgusting “sexual misconduct” charges amongst them. In the face of such criticism, Muslims have not always reacted well. In the past century, when so many Muslims were so “Westoxicated” and ready to monkey Europeans in almost anything, the usual reaction was to deny the sources that reported the alleged “embarrassing problem”. To Muslim “modernists”, who argued that ONLY a legal ruling found in the Qur’an was Islamically valid, brushing aside this aspect of the Prophet’s life was rather easy. They simply denied that it had occurred and attacked the sources which reported it. Fortunately for Muslims, the apologetics of these “Uncle Toms of Islam” has faded into the periphery to a large extent. However, there are still many Muslims out there who try to get around what they see as a problem by ignoring authentic Islamic sources while claiming to be followers of the Ahl as-Sunnah. (which basically means “orthodox Sunni” Muslims, for those unfamiliar Islamic terminology). Many other Muslims possibly wonder whether the story is authentic and how to understand it if it is.
————————————————————————
THE ISLAMIC EVIDENCE OF ‘AISHAH’S AGE
————————————————————————
Due to the apparent ignorance of many Muslims, possibly due to reading “modernist” apologetic literature like that mentioned above, a look at what the authentic sources of Islam say about the age at which ‘Aishah married the Prophetis in order. This way, before we move on to an analysis of the facts, we will first establish what the authentic Islamic facts are. At this point, it should be mentioned that it is absolutely pointless from an Islamic standpoint to say that the age of ‘Aishah is “not found in the Qur’an”, since the textual sources of Islam are made up of BOTH the Qur’an and the Sunnah - and the Qur’an tells us that. For those wanting (or needing) to learn more about the status of the Sunnah in Islam, please read An Introduction to the Sunnah and/or The Sunnah and Its Position in Islamic Law. Now in regards to what the authentic Islamic sources actually say, it may come as a disappointment to some “modern” and “cultured” Muslims that there are four ahadith in Saheeh al-Bukhari and three ahadith in Saheeh Muslim which clearly state that ‘Aishah was “nine years old” at the time that her marriage was consummated with the Prophet. These ahadith, with only slight variation, read as follows:
‘Aishah, may God be pleased with her, narrated that the Prophet was betrothed (zawaj) to her when she was six years old and he consummated (nikah) his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years. (Saheeh al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64)
Of the four ahadith in Saheeh al-Bukhari, two were narrated from ‘Aishah (7:64 and 7:65), one from Abu Hishaam (5:236) and one via ‘Ursa (7:88). All three of the ahadith in Saheeh Muslim have ‘Aishah as a narrator. Additionally, all of the ahadith in both books agree that the marriage betrothal contract took place when ‘Aishah was “six years old”, but was not consummated until she was “nine years old”. Additionally, a hadeeth with basically the same text (matn) is reported in Sunan Abu Dawood. Needless to say, this evidence is—Islamically speaking—overwhelmingly strong and Muslims who deny it do so only by sacrificing their intellectual honesty, pure faith or both.
This evidence having been established, there doesn’t seem much room for debate about ‘Aishah’s age amongst believing Muslims. Until someone proves that in the Arabic language “nine years old” means something other than “nine years old”, then we should all be firm in our belief that she was “nine years old” (as if there’s a reason or need to believe otherwise!?!). In spite of these facts, there are still some Muslim authors that have somehow (?) managed to push ‘Aishah’s age out to as far as “fourteen or fifteen years old” at the time of her marriage to the Prophet. It should come as no surprise, however, that none of them ever offer any proof, evidence or references for their opinions. This can be said with the utmost confidence, since certainly none of them can produce sources more authentic than the hadeeth collections of Imams al-Bukhari and Muslim! Based on the research that I’ve done, I feel that there is a common source for those who claim that ‘Aishah’s age was “fourteen or fifteen years old” at the time of the marriage. This source is “The Biographies of Prominent Muslims” which is published in book form, on CD-ROM and is posted in several places on the Internet. Just another example of why going to the sources is important . . .
————————————————————————
THE PROPHET’S MARRIAGES IN PERSPECTIVE
————————————————————————
To put all of this in perspective—hopefully without undue apologetics—the first thing that one should be aware of is that ‘Aishah was the third wife of the Prophet, not the first. Prior to this, the Prophet’s first and only wife for twenty-four years was Khadijah bint al-Khuwaylid, who was about nineteen years older than him. He married Khadijah when she was forty and he was twenty-one—which might be called the years of a male’s “sexual prime”—and stayed married ONLY to her until her death. Just after Khadijah’s death, when he was round forty-six years old, the Prophet married his second wife Sawdah bint Zam’ah. It was after this second marriage that the Prophet became betrothed to ‘Aishah, may God be pleased with her. She was the daughter of Abu Bakr, one of the Prophet’s closest friends and devoted followers. Abu Bakr, may God be pleased with him, was one of the earliest converts to Islam and hoped to solidify the deep love that existed between himself and the Prophet by uniting their families in marriage. The betrothal of Abu Bakr’s daughter ‘Aishah to Muhammad, took place in the eleventh year of Muhammad’s prophethood, which was about a year after he had married Sawdah bint Zam’ah and before he made his hijra (migration) to al-Madinah (Yathrib). As mentioned above, the marriage with ‘Aishah bint Abu Bakr was consummated in Shawwal, which came seven months after the Prophet’s hijra from Makkah to al-Medinah. At the time of his marriage to ”Aishah, the Prophet was over fifty years old.
It should be noted that the Prophet’s marriage to ‘Aishah was an exceedingly happy one for both parties, as the hadeeth literature attests. ‘Aishah, may God be please with her,was his favourite wife and the only virgin that he ever married. After emigrating to al-Madinah, Muhammad married numerous other wives, eventually totalling fifteen in his lifetime. Even though we do not have time to go into the details of each one of them here, each of these marriages was done either for political reasons, to strengthen the ties of kinship or to help a woman in need. Quite a few of the wives were widows, older women or had been abandoned and thus were in need of a home. Additionally, it should be mentioned that the same collection of Muslim hadeeth literature that tells us that ‘Aishah was only nine years old at the time of the marriage tells us that the marriage was Divinely ordained: Narrated ‘Aishah, may God be pleased with her: The Messenger of God said (to me): “You have been shown to me twice in (my) dreams. A man was carrying you in a silken cloth and said to me, ‘This is your wife.’ I uncovered it; and behold, it was you. I said to myself, ‘If this dream is from God, He will cause it to come true.’” (Saheeh Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 15) Thus like everything that the Prophet did, there was wisdom behind it and lessons to be learned from it. The wisdom behind such incidents provides us guidance on the basis of human morality, exposes the double standards of misguided hypocrites from other religions that criticize Islam and much more. But more on that subject below. . .
————————————————————————
CRITICISM ADDRESSED AND ENTERTAINED
————————————————————————
Myself and many other Muslims should no longer be surprised by the double standards that Christians display when they criticize the conduct of Prophet Muhammad , since we’ve heard it for so long. To have an atheist, agnostic—or anyone else who does not believe in a Divinely revealed basis for morality—criticize something that is “politically incorrect” by today’s moral standards comes as no surprise. Such people will always find something to criticize, since they simply have a bone to pick with “religion” in general. All of this “absolute morality” talk gets in the way of them having a good time, so they want to mock it, discredit it and do away with it.The criticism of Christians, however, is another matter. While it is true that Christians speak out against the “moral relativity” which is spreading amongst the increasingly secular society today, they too are unconscious victims of it. The values of most Christians today come from the humanist values of Western Europe (or, at a minimum, are heavily influenced by them). Their values DO NOT come straight out of the Bible—in theory or in practice—regardless of what they may claim. That Christians today try to take credit for the so-called “Freedom”, “Human Rights”, “Democracy” and “Women’s Rights” in Europe and America is nothing short of a joke. It may impress uneducated people in so-called Third World countries, but anyone who has studied history knows that these things came about in spite of the Church, not because of it. The way in which many Christians uncritically mix non-Christian values with (allegedly) Biblical values has always fascinated me. One interesting example of this is how nationalism and patriotism are supported amongst the majority of Evangelical Protestant (and even other) Christians in the United States. In America, good Christians are flag wavers. Few, if any, of these fiercely patriotic minds ever seem to realize that narrow-minded patriotism is, at its core, both selfish and non-universal. That patriotism and Christianity go hand-in-hand in the minds of many people is just an example of how we can be blindly sucked into “moral relativism” without even realizing it.
According to Judaism, Christianity and Islam, right and wrong are ordained by Almighty God. As such, morality does not change over time based on our whims, desires or cultural sensitivities. In cultures where there is no Divinely revealed ruling on an issue, what is right and what is wrong is determined by cultural norms. In such cases, a person would only be considered “immoral” if they violated the accepted norms of their society. As we will demonstrate, the Prophet Muhammad’s marriage to ‘Aishah, viewed both in the light of Absolute Morality and the cultural norms of his time, was not an immoral act, but was an act containing valuable lessons for generations to come. Additionally, this marriage followed the norms for all Semitic peoples, including those of Biblical times. Based on this, and other information that we will provide below, it is grossly hypocritical for Christians to criticise the Prophet’s marriage to ‘Aishah at such a young age. In case Christian readers are under the false impression that their values today are timeless and somehow reflect those of Biblical times, please consider the following points which are directly related to the question of at what age a person is properly ready to be married:
•Keeping in mind the ideas of “political correctness” and “absolute morality”, in Biblical times the age at which a girl could marry was puberty. However, during the Middle Ages it was usually twelve years old. Now in most “Christian” countries it is between fourteen and sixteen years old. I live in country where some states allow partners of the same sex to legally marry, but consider an eighteen year old boy who sleeps with a sixteen year old girl a “statutory rapist”. So even though Christians might disagree with much of what is becoming all too prevalent in Western society today—whether it be drug abuse, gay marriages or abortion—they too have been swallowed up (possibly unknowingly) by the ugly monster of “moral relativism”. Certainly, they might be giving in less quickly than people who do not believe in a Divine basis for morality, but they’re giving in nonetheless.
•Historically, the age at which a girl was considered ready to be married has been puberty. This was the case in Biblical times, as we will discuss below, and is still used to determine the age of marriage in what the culturally arrogant West calls “primitive societies” throughout the world. As the ahadith about ‘Aishah’s age show, her betrothal took place at least three years before the consummation of the marriage. The reason for this was that they were waiting for her to come of age (i.e. to have her first menstrual period). Puberty is a biological sign which shows that a women is capable of bearing children. Can anyone logically deny this? Part of the wisdom behind the Prophet’s Muhammad’s marriage to ‘Aishah just after she reached puberty is to firmly establish this as a point of Islamic Law, even though it was already cultural norm in all Semitic societies (including the one Jesusgrew up in). The large majority of Islamic jurists say that the earliest time which a marriage can be consummated is at the onset of sexual maturity (bulugh), meaning puberty. Since this was the norm of all Semitic cultures and it still is the norm of many cultures today—it is certainly not something that Islam invented. However, widespread opposition to such a Divinely revealed and accepted historical norm is certainly something that is relatively new!
•The criticism of Muhammad’s marriage to ‘Aishah is something relatively new in that it grew up out of the values of “Post Enlightenment” Europe. This was a Europe that had abandoned (or at least modified) its religious morality for a new set of humanist values where people used their own opinions to determine what was right and wrong. It is interesting to note that Christians from a very early time criticized (again hypocritically) the Prophet’s practice of polygamy, but not the marriage to ‘Aishah. Certainly, those from a Middle Eastern Semitic background would not have found anything to criticize, since nothing abnormal or immoral took place. It was European Christians who began to criticize Muhammad on this point, not ones who were in touch with their Semitic roots.
•It is upon reaching the age of puberty that a person, man or woman, becomes legally responsible under Islamic Law. At this point, they are allowed to make their own decisions and are held accountable for their actions. It should also be mentioned that in Islam, it is unlawful to force someone to marry someone that they do not want to marry. The evidence shows that ‘Aishah’s marriage to the Prophet Muhammad was one which both parties and their families agreed upon. Based on the culture at that time, no one saw anything wrong with it. On the contrary, they were all happy about it.
•None of the Muslim sources report that anyone from the society at that time criticized this marriage due to ‘Aishah’s young age. On the contrary, the marriage of ‘Aishah to the Prophet was encouraged by ‘Aishah’s father, Abu Bakr, and was welcomed by the community at large. It is reported that women who wanted to help the Prophet, such as Khawlah bint al-Hakeem, encouraged him to marry the young ‘Aishah. Due to the Semitic culture in which they lived, they certainly saw nothing wrong with such a marriage.
•Society’s ideas of love, family and marriage are much different in the so-called “modern” and “civilized” West of today than they were in Biblical or Qur’anic times. Unfortunately, many of us carry the baggage of “romantic love” and ideas about sex that have managed to poison our minds since the Europeans (and their ideas) came to dominate the globe. These ideas have not only penetrated into the minds of Muslims, but actually permeate many of them. The European colonial powers have pulled out of almost all Muslim lands, but the colonization of the minds continues! As we mentioned above, the sad part is that most people do not even realize that they are under such un-Godly influences. Just to reference the way things have changed, a statement in The New Encyclopaedia Britannica makes it clear that values regarding the proper age of marriage have been changing over the years: “. . . in the United States and parts of Europe the association of adult status with sexual maturity as expressed in the term puberty rites has been unwelcome”.2
•The significance that sex and sexuality are thought to play in human psychology has its roots in Freudian thought. Even though many of Freud’s ideas are being heavily challenged today, many of his ideas still play a role in the thinking of many people. Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) taught that humans are basically “sexual beings” whose childhood sexual urges are the key to understanding their behaviour. He developed the methodology of psychoanalysis and his ideas on sex, repressed guilt and sexuality, the subconscious sex drive, the Oedipus complex and other ideas have come to almost haunt the Western view of sexuality (almost as much as the repressive views of the Roman Catholic Church). Needless to say, Freud’s ideas have been criticized by believing Jews, Christians and Muslims since they basically deny human moral responsibility. In Freud’s view of things, human beings are prisoners to the effects of unconscious forces and their sex drive. Such ideas are always welcomed by “liberals”, “humanists” and others like them. The point of all this in regards to young marriage, however, might be less clear. What needs to be pointed out is the contradictory “modern” Western view of sexuality. They are taken aback by the thought of marriage at the age of puberty, even though it’s an age old custom. However, they have junior high schools where sex education is taught and a society where sexually permiscuous “dating” is considered the norm. Sometime sex is simply a natural pleasure to be enjoyed, but at other times it is a psychological demon of far reaching consequences.In short, everything from their private lives to their court systems, have fallen victim to the moral relativity of the psychiatrists and psychologists. The attitude that any experience in life can be seen as some sort of “trauma” is very widespread. Many people go through life constantly obsessed about what sort of “complex” they may be suffering from due to experiences they’ve had in their relatively normal life. The morality which is produced by such attitudes all but does away with human responsibility. People who are guilty of serious crimes, instead of being held responsible for their actions, are themselves considered “victims”, since they are only doing what their psychological makeup causes them to do.
————————————————————————
PUBERTY = MATURITY = MARRIAGE
————————————————————————
The above points having been presented, some additional details on a few of them is worthwhile. An interesting article on the age at which people married in Biblical times is Ancient Israelite Marriage Customs, by Jim West, ThD—a Baptist minister. This article states that: “The wife was to be taken from within the larger family circle (usually at the outset of puberty or around the age of 13) in order to maintain the purity of the family line;” This is just one reference to the fact that the onset of puberty was considered the age at which young people could marry. That people in Biblical times married at an early age is widely endorsed. While discussing the meaning of the word ‘almah, which is the Hebrew word for “young woman” or “adolescent female”, Gerald Segal says:
“It should be noted, however, that in biblical times females married at an early age”.3
In spite of its somewhat arrogant Western talk of “primitive cultures”, An Overview of the World’s Religions makes it clear that puberty is an age old symbol of adulthood: “Almost all primitive cultures pay attention to puberty and marriage rituals, although there is a general tendency to pay more attention to the puberty rites of males than of females. Because puberty and marriage symbolize the fact that children are acquiring adult roles, most primitive cultures consider the rituals surrounding these events very important. Puberty rituals are often accompanied with ceremonial circumcision or some other operation on the male genitals. Female circumcision is less common, although it occurs in several cultures. Female puberty rites are more often related to the commencement of the menstrual cycle in young girls.” Some female authors agree: “Puberty is defined as the age or period at which a person is first capable of sexual reproduction, in other eras of history, a rite or celebration of this landmark event was a part of the culture.” (Rites of Passage: Puberty, by Sue Curewitz Arthen)
“Getting your period” marks a rite of passage for young girls entering womanhood (From the Women’s Resource Center) Another contemporary reference relating marriage age to puberty is an article on Central Africa, which says: “. . . women marry soon after puberty”4. The previous quotations, and plenty of others which were not used, should prove to any intelligent person what anthropologists and historians already know: in centuries past, people were considered ready for marriage when they reached puberty.
It should be mentioned that from an Islamic point of view, many problems in society today can be traced back to the abandonment of early marriage. Due to the way that Almighty God has created man and woman, i.e. with strong sexual desires, people should marry young. In the past, this was even more true since life expectancy was very low (i.e. you were considered “old” if you made it to 40!). Not only does marriage provide a legal outlet for people with strong sexual desires, but it usually produces more children. One of the main purposes of marriage is to produce children—”be fruitful and multiply” as the Bible says (Genesis 8:17). This was especially important in the past, when people did not live for as long as they do now and the infant morality rate was much higher.
————————————————————————
THE AGE OF PUBERTY
————————————————————————
Even though we have established that puberty has been the historical, cultural and religious norm for indicating readiness for marriage, some may wonder at which age puberty normally takes place. This is somewhat meaningless in regards to our specific discussion of Muhammad and ‘Aishah, since the hadith literature makes it clear that she had reached puberty. However, in regards to puberty and at what age most girls have their first menstrual cycle, ‘Abdul-Hamid Siddiqi says: Islam has laid down no age limit for puberty for it varies with countries and races due to the climate, hereditary, physical and social conditions. Those who live in cold regions attain puberty at a much later age as compared with those living in hot regions where both male and female attain it at a quite early age. “The average temperature of the country or province,” say the well-known authors of the book Woman, “is considered the chief factor here, not only with regard to menstruation but as regards the whole of sexual development at puberty.”5 Raciborski, Jaubert, Routh and many others have collected and collated statistics on the subject to which readers are referred. Marie Espino has summarised some of these data as follows: (a) The limit of age for the first appearance of menstruation is between nine and twenty-four in the temperate-zone; (b) The average age varies widely and it ay be accepted as established that the nearer the Equator, the earlier the average age for menstruation.6 Additionally, an article entitled Puberty in Girls by an Australian government Public Health organization, says: “The first sign of puberty is usually a surge of growth: you become taller; your breasts develop; hair begins to grow in the pubic area and under the arms. This may start from 10 years to 14 years - even earlier for some and later for others.” An article Physical Changes in Girls During Puberty has this to say: “During puberty, a girl’s body changes, inside and out, into the body of a woman. The changes don’t come all at once, and they don’t happen at the same time for everybody. Most girls start showing physical changes around age 11, but everyone has her own internal schedule for development. It’s normal for changes to start as early as 8 or 9 years of age, or not until 13 or 14. Even if nothing looks or feels different yet, the changes may have already begun inside your body.” Many will readily agree with the information above, but still may harbour reservations about whether a marriage to an older man could be happy for such a young girl. Putting aside the modern Western notions of “happiness” for a moment, the marriage of ‘Aishah and the Prophet was a mutually happy and loving one as in expressed in numerous hadeeth and seerah books. That happy marriages occur between people with a fairly large difference in ages is known among psychologists: “When the differences (in ages) is great, e.g. exceeds fifteen to twenty years, the results may be happier. The marriage of an elderly (senescent) not, of course, an old (senile) man to a quite young girl, is often very successful and harmonious. The bride is immediately introduced and accustomed to moderate sexual intercourse” 7
————————————————————————
MORE WISDOM BEHIND IT
————————————————————————
In his comments on the ahadith in Sahih Muslim which mention ‘Aishah’s young marriage to the Prophet, ‘Abdul-Hamid Siddiqi shows points three other reasons for this marriage:
• ‘Aishah’s marriage to the Prophet Muhammad at an early age allowed her to be an eye witness to the personal details of his life and carry them on the succeeding generations. By being both spiritually and physically near to the Prophet , the marriage prepared ‘Aishah to be an example to all Muslims, especially women, for all times. She developed into a spiritual, teacher and scholar, since she was remarkably intelligent and wise. Her qualities helped support the Prophet’s work and further the cause of Islam. ‘Aishah, the Mother of the Believers, was not only a model for wives and mothers, but she was also a commentator on the Qur’an, an authority on hadeeth and knowledgeable in Islamic Law. She narrated at least 2,210 ahadith that give Muslims valuable insights into the Final Prophet’s daily life and behaviour, thus preserving the Sunnah of Muhammad.
• At that time, this marriage refuted the notion that a man could not marry the daughter of a man who he had declared to be his “brother” (even in the religious sense). Since the Prophet and Abu Bakr had declared each other to be “brothers”, this notion was done away with. This is demonstrated in the following hadeeth: Narrated ‘Ursa: The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for ‘Aishah’s hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said, “But I am your brother.” The Prophet said, “You are my brother in God’s religion and His Book, but she (’Aishah) is lawful for me to marry.” (Saheeh al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 18)
• The marriage did away with the pagan Arab superstition that it was a bad omen to be married in the month of Shawwal. They thought that the month carried this omen since the word Shawwal was derived from Shaala, which itself was believed to carry a bad omen. The authentic ahadith indicate that the Prophet and ‘Aishah were married in this lunar month.
————————————————————————
NOT MUCH ADO BACK THEN
————————————————————————
Above, we established that fact that getting married at puberty was an accepted practice amongst not only today’s “primitive cultures”, but specifically amongst the Semitic (i.e. Hebrew, Arab, Syriac, etc.) peoples of the Middle East. In order to provide additional proof that Muhammad’s marriage to ‘Aishah did not raise any eyebrows at that time, I here submit quotations from two Western female scholars who have studied Islam in detail: “It is not clear just when the marriage actually took place. According to some versions, it was in the month of Shawwal of the Year 1, that is, some seven or eight months after the arrival at Medina; but, according to others, it was not until after the Battle of Badr, that is, in Shawwal of the second year of the Hijrah. In no version is there any comment made on the disparity of the ages between Mohammed and Aishah or on the tender age of the bride who, at the most, could not have been over ten years old and who was still much enamoured with her play.”8 In the above quotation, the sources which are given for the latter date are “Nawawi” and “Tabari”. Both Imams al-Nawawi and al-Tabari were great Muslim scholars, but their works contain material that is less than authentic by Islamic standards, which is probably the reason over her questioning which date is authentic. This is all beside the point, since we’ve already shown that authentic Islamic sources state that ‘Aishah, may God be pleased with her, was “nine years old”. The main point to note is that in “no version” was any comment made on their age difference or on ‘Aishah’s young age. Why? Such an early marriage was normal in all Semitic societies - such as the ones that Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad grew up in!
Another author, Karen Armstrong, has this to add:”Tabari says that she was so young that she stayed in her parents’ home and the marriage was consummated there later when she had reached puberty”.9 This further establishes that the marriage took place at puberty and that, as such, no eyebrows were raised. “Tabari”, it should be mentioned, refers to Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Jareer al-Tabari (225-310 AH / 839-923 CE), who was a great Muslim scholar who is well known in the West for his Qur’anic commentary and history of the world.
It is no surprise that both of the above authors agree on the fact that the marriage of ‘Aishah and Muhammad took place when the former had reached puberty and that this was normal at the time. This is no surprise, since anyone who studies the Muslim sources and Semitic culture would be forced to come to the same conclusion, since it is simply a historical fact. It should be pointed out that both of the above quoted female authors do not hesitate to misrepresent Islam (intentionally or unintentionally) in their other writings. Suffice it to say that if there was some other “damaging” information available, they would not hesistate to bring it to light. Nabia Abbott, who has done some useful research on Islam in some areas, was basically an “Orientalist” in the classic sense. Her book which was quoted above, Aishah-The Beloved of Mohammed, is actually nothing but a disgusting second-guessing of ‘Aishah’s life. If a book with a similar mix of speculation and inauthentic sources were written about someone of significance in the West, it certainly would not be sitting on scholarly bookshelves. It’s has long been established that Orientalists with a bone to pick with Islam liked to decide on the authenticity of a story based on their pre-conceived notions. If an inauthentic story seemed to belittle the Prophet of Islam, it became oft quoted. However, any authentic material that contradicted their theories was simply ignored. It’s analogous to writing a historical biography of Jesus and using quotations from apocryphal gospels to override the Canonical ones whenever whimsically deemed appropriate. This is how Orientalists and Christian missionaries have been treating Muhammad for centuries. For those who want to know more about this, please read our article Orientalism, Misinformation and Islam.
————————————————————————
SO WHAT’S THE VERDICT?
————————————————————————
Overcoming cultural bias or admitting your own double standards is not always easy. For some people, it takes years for them to admit that they’ve been hypocritical. Hopefully, the thoughts presented here will plant the seed of reflection in some people so that they may reflect on the truth. Admitting that there’s a problem is often half the battle, so before the reader heads off to make a final personal judgement on where they stand on this issue, I want to provide some more food for thought. Montgomery Watt, a long time scholar of Islam, had some choice words on how the West should judge Muhammad. I have never agreed with many of Watt’s conclusions about Islam, but I have always viewed him as one of the more open-minded and open-hearted Orientalist scholars. Possibly, this is because he was more of a promoter of understanding than a narrow-minded Christian missionary. Years of studying Islam brought Watt to this conclusion: “The other main allegations of moral defect in Muhammad are that he was treacherous and lustful . . . Sufficient has been said above about the interpretation of these events to show that the case against Muhammad is much weaker than is sometimes thought. The discussions of these allegations, however, raises a fundamental question. How are we to judge Muhammad ? By the standards of his own time and country ? Or by those of the most enlightened opinion in the West today? When the sources are closely scrutinized, it is clear that those of Muhammad’s actions which are disapproved by the modern West were not the object of the moral criticism of his contemporaries. They criticized some of his acts, but their motives were superstitious prejudice or fear of the consequences. If they criticized the events at Nakhlah, it was because they feared some punishment from the offended pagan gods or the worldly vengeance of the Meccans. If they were amazed at the mass execution of the Jews of the clan of Qurayzah, it was at the number and danger of the blood-feuds incurred. The marriage with Zaynab seemed incestuous, but this conception of incest was bound up with old practices belonging to a lower, communalistic level of familial institutions where a child’s paternity was not definitely known; and this lower level was in process being eliminated by Islam . . . From the standpoint of Muhammad’s time, then, the allegations of treachery and sensuality cannot be maintained. His contemporaries did not find him morally defective in any way. On the contrary, some of the acts criticized by the modern Westerner show that Muhammad’s standards were higher than those of his time. In his day and generation he was a social reformer, even a reformer in the sphere of morals. He created a new system of social security and a new family structure, both of which were a vast improvement on what went before. By taking what was best in the morality of the nomad and adapting it for settled communities, he established a religious and social framework for the life of many races of men. That is not the work of a traitor or ‘an old lecher’.”10
————————————————————————
FROM ABRAHAM TO “PICK-AND-CHOOSE / FEEL GOOD RELIGION”
————————————————————————
Everything that we have discussed above logically frees Muhammad from the unjust criticism that he has received (at least amongst those who can be intellectually honest and fair-minided). One point, however, still needs to be made a bit more clear. Even though we’ve mentioned it in passing, the hypocrisy and double standards of Christians who criticize Muhammad for his morality needs to be more thoroughly analysed and exposed.
Before moving on to an analysis of Biblical morality, I would like to offer some advice and encouraging words to my fellow Muslims.My main piece of advice is to not be discouraged by slanderous attacks on Islam or how it is distorted in the media. Certainly, we all hate to see such things occur, but in the “Information Age” which was brought about by a culture that (allegedly) places a supreme value on freedom of speech, there is not much that we can do to stop it. The flip side to this coin is the fact that the Truth of Islam is still out there and people are finding it. Yes, Islam is spreading in spite of these hypocritical methods that Christians and others are using to stop it. From the “moon god” lies of Robert Morey to the almost daily distortions in the media, Islam is still spreading in the West. Actually, the fact that those who make a career out of attacking Islam, such as Christian missionaries, have to resort to lies and distortions when they discuss Islam is a good sign. Certainly, if they discussed Islam as it was meant to be understood, they would only be hurting their own cause. When Islam is presented by non-Muslims in the West, usually matters of peripheral importance are addressed and criticised. The core beliefs of Islam, if discussed at all, are presented in a distorted manner. If Islam was just some ridiculous “Third World” religion with no appeal, they would not have to treat it this way.As a matter of fact, a great deal of the anti-Islamic literature that fills Christian bookstores (and the Internet) is not designed to convert Muslims, but to turn Westerners off to Islam. The people who write these lies are just trying to poison the minds of people so that they won’t be receptive to the message of Islam when they hear it.
Their methods, however, are failing. In Europe especially, the Christian religion is in a severe state of stagnation and people are looking for truth elsewhere. Christians have always been embarrassed by their almost complete inability to convert a notable Muslim to Christianity. Certainly, they have their converts that they hold up as examples, however all of them seem to have been only nominal Muslims (at best) when they converted. However, many notable Westerners have embraced Islam, recently as well as in the past. One of the most interesting things about this is many (if not all) of these people could be called “Searchers for the Truth”. By this I mean that they were the type of people who were spiritual, open-mined and read books on many subjects. They were not brainwashed simpletons who simply wanted to join an easy religion and the dominating culture of the time. They were people who knew a lot not only about religion, but about history, philosophy and other disciplines. Suffice it to say that the truth of Islam is out there, in spite of all the negative press that it gets today.The following is just one testimony that Islam is spreading in the West: “Unprecedented numbers of British people, nearly all of them women, are converting to Islam at a time of deep divisions within the Anglican and Catholic churches. The rate of conversions has prompted predictions that Islam will rapidly become an important religious force in this country . . . Within the next 20 years the number of British converts will equal or overtake the immigrant Muslim community that brought the faith here”, says Rose Kendrick, a religious education teacher at a Hull comprehensive and the author of a textbook guide to the Koran. She says: “Islam is as much a world faith as is Roman Catholicism. No one nationality claims it as its own”. Islam is also spreading fast on the continent and in America. (The Times , London, Tuesday, November 9th, 1993, Home-News page) Thanks be to God that many of us who are former “pew warmers” finally decided to go out and investigate what they try to spoon feed us from the pulpit and TV. Why does Islam succeed in attracting Christians and others? Because it’s the Clear Way of Abraham. No other religion today can honestly claim this! Islam isn’t just a “feel good” religion where they just tell you what you want to hear and read selected verses from the Bible.Most Christians today approach religion like they do Sunday brunch: they take what they like and leave what they don’t like. They have this attitude in spite of the fact that Abraham is held up in their Bible as a towering example of faith. Abraham , who was going to sacrifice his own son because Almighty God commanded it, certainly knew the basis of morality. It is clear in both the Bible and the Qur’an that Abraham knew that whatever God commands is the right thing to do. However, how many Christians today can say that they honestly believe that on all issues? How many of them have reflected on the moral ramifications of what is contained in their Bible? Seemingly, not even their learned apologists who attack Islam have reflected on it too deeply!
The question “What is our basis for morality?” is an easy one for those who follow the faith of Abraham—and that’s what Islam is. Islam is submission to the Will of Almighty God - “We hear and we obey”- the faith of our father Abraham. If it was good enough for Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad, then it’s good enough for me! It is this truth and this attitude that attracts people to Islam. The entire basis of Islam, which produces this attitude, is Unity—the Unity of Almighty God and the unity of mankind. To be sure, the message of Islam appeals to the very nature of man. No wonder it is spreading! A Christian theologion, relatively recently, observed:
“It is probable that early in the twenty-first century Islam will have become numerically the largest of the world religions” 11
Quite possibly, if you count only Sunni Muslims (which are at least 85% of Muslims), we are already the largest religion in the world when compared not to “Christians” as a whole, but to either the Orthodox, Roman Catholics or Protestants each separately.
————————————————————————
A CASE STUDY IN BIBLICAL MORALITY
————————————————————————
Now that we’ve taken an detailed look at an alleged moral difficulty in the life of Muhammad, for the sake of balance, let’s take a look at a moral difficulty in the Bible. We’ve already made statements above concerning the nature of Biblical morality, but many readers may be unaware of some of its “difficulties”. For better or for worse, in Sunday school they generally skip the verses which we are going to deal with below. However, these verses certainly are useful tools in putting intellectually honest Christians in the same “moral dilemma” that they think Muslims should be in due to Muhammad’s young marriage to ‘Aishah, may God be pleased with her.It should be kept in mind that the purpose of this discussion is the basis for morality, not the inspiration of the Bible (or lack thereof).For the purposes of this discussion, we accept the Bible “as is”. However, this should not be interpretted to mean that we are endorsing it as the “Word of God” in toto. On the other hand, it should not be interpreted to mean that we are attacking the “Word of God”, since we are discussing it simply because Christians consider it to be the “Word of God” (whatever their particular definition might be).
The portion of the Bible that we want to look at begins with the Book of Numbers, Chapter 31, verses 17 and 18. Here, Moses, following the Lord’s command, orders the Israelites to kill all the Midianite male children. The order continues with the following:
“. . . kill every woman who has known man by lying with him, but all the female children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.”
One can only guess how the Israelites determined who the virgins were. Most probably, they did it based on age and maturity, assuming that all of the female “children” who had not reached puberty were virgins. Keep in mind that this was done, according to the Bible, on God’s command to “Avenge the Israelites on the Midianites”.Later, God gives Moses instructions on how to divide up the booty, “whether persons, oxen, donkeys, sheeps or goats”. Based on this command, “thirty-two thousand persons in all, women who had not known a man by lying with him” were divided up. This was done so that the Israelite soldiers could have these young girls “for themselves”. I do not suspect that anyone reading this is either so naive or ignorant of King James English to not know what this means!
Moving along to another great example of Biblical morality, . . . in Deuteronomy 21:10-14 the Biblical “God of Love” gives the following command:
“When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the Lord thy God hath delivered them into thine hands and thoust has taken them captive, and seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and have a desire unto her, that though would have her to be thy wife, then though shalt bring her home to thine house . . . and after that you may go into her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife.But if though have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go”. This should serve as sufficient proof that the morality that is taught in the Bible often is not what Christians make it out to be. In spite of what they teach in Sunday school, the above mentioned verses demonstrate the following:
Almighty God, at least according to the Bible:
* Ordered innocent babies to be killed; and
* He allowed young women to be forced into sex against their will.
Before moving on, it should be noted that killing women and children in war is never permitted under Islamic Law (the actions of some ignorant Muslims around the world notwithstanding). Some Christians may take issue with the words “innocent babies” above, since they believe that even babies are tainted with “Original Sin”. However, this is not the topic of the discussion at hand. Suffice it to say that Biblical support for the Doctrine of Original Sin is contradictory at best. There are some verses that seem to support it, but there are others that seem to clearly deny it. One strike against “Original Sin”, besides the fact that it’s simply unjust, is the fact that the Jews—who read the Old Testament—never belived in it the way Chrisitnas do. But anyway . . . when faced with the problematic parts of the Old Testatment, Christians react in various ways. Many offer up the ill thoughtout “Well-That’s-in-the-Old-Testament” defense. In spite of the fact that they usually don’t brush the Old Testament aside so quickly when they are being shown alleged prophecies which match Jesus, a few other thoughts can be presented. Some of the things that make brushing aside the Old Tesament a bit more difficult (at least for Christians who want to remain intellectually honest) are: 1) the same God that “inspired” the Old Testament “inspired” the New Testament; 2) this same God is “unchanging” according to the Bible; 3) Jesus in the New Testament endorses the “Law and the prophets” (i.e. the Old Testament) in several places; and 4) without the Old Testament their is no basis for Christianity.
When put in this predicament, Christians, have one of two choices: 1) stop thinking about it and fall back on a liberal “pick-and-choose” religion that just makes them “feel good” but does not answer any of life’s more difficult questions; or 2) accept the (allegedly) Divinely Revealed morality of the Bible “as is”.
There are Christians out there who claim to accept the Divinely Revealed morality of the Bible. They understand what’s at stake and the issues at hand. If people are allowed to whimsically decide what is right and what is wrong, there would be chaos. Just as importantly, if people decide what is “God’s Word” and what is not His word based on their preconceived notions and “modern” sensibilities, nothing would be left of the Bible. As such, there are Christians who, in principle, say that killing babies is “moral” as long as God clearly commands it. For someone who understands the nature of Divinely Revealed morality, we would have to agree in principle but with certain reservations. As mentioned above, Almighty God—according to Islam—never commands the killing of innocent children.That is one “difficulty” that I am glad that Muslims don’t have to explain their way out of! Killing babies is okay as long as God commands it!?! So much for having Christians as baby-sitters!
The bottom line is that morality comes from Almighty God and from Him alone.However, if ones studies the Bible, it is plain to see that it is not a foundation for morality. The examples above are just a few that can be provided from both the Old and the New Testament. The people who promote “Biblical morality” pick and choose from the text as they please. Only in Islam can one with good conscience accept “the whole package” without ignorantly or hypocritically denying things that they don’t like. This is how true internal peace and balance are achieved. If one belongs to a religions without accepting everything in its scripture (real or alleged) one is not only bearing false witness againt themself but against God Himself. With all the false ideas in the modern age, it’s easy to be lead astray. The liberal Westeran morality that has now touched all corners of the globe is, culturally speaking, something like an eight-hundred pound gorilla. It’s very hard to stand in its way or speak out against it. However, being encouraged by others to follow “vain desires” has been an eternal problem for mankind, as Almighty God makes clear in the Qur’an:
“Say: ‘I will not follow your vain desires: if I did I would stray from the path and be not of the company of those who receive guidance.’”
Qur’an - Surah al-An’aam - 6:56
————————————————————————
GUIDEPOSTS TO BE THANKFUL FOR
————————————————————————
The Prophet Muhammad was a great example for all of humanity and peoples of different cultures (from “modern” Europeans to the aborigines of Australia). Not only was he a great Prophet and Messenger, but he was also a statesman, military leader, ruler, teacher, neighbor and friend. Family life was one of the most important areas where he was a great example, since he was both a husband and a father. Due to God’s wisdom, His last and final prophet experienced a wide array of marriages and family situations. Due to this, he is an example for people who are monogamous, for those who are polygamous, for those wishing to marry those older than themselves and for those wondering how early someone can rightfully marry. Muhammad reestablished the Religion of Abraham so that it would continue to the Last Day.
As Muslims, we should be thankful for these guideposts in our moral journey through life. Reflecting on them aids us in avoiding being led astray into “moral relativism”. This is a very dangerous thing, since it can lead to the worst of all sins—associating others with Almighty God in worship, belief and/or Lordship. By knowing the Prophet’s life we can see how to stay within the boundaries laid by Almighty God and stay on the Natural Religion of Islam which was made to suit the natural disposition (fitrah) of mankind. I pray that we, as Muslims, make Almighty God’s limits our limits, and that we are not influenced by other societies and cultures. If it was good enough for Abraham and Moses, then it’s good enough for me . . .
That’s the way I see it, but God knows best . . .
————————————————————————
FOOTNOTES
————————————————————————
1 W. Montgomery Watt, Muhammad at Medina, Oxford University Press, 1956.
2 “Rites and Ceremonies”, The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th Edition (1987), Volume 26, page 850.
3 Gerald Sigal, The Jew and the Christian Missionary, Ktav Publishing House,1981, page 28.
4 “Central Africa”, The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th Edition (1987), Volume 15, page 646. See also “Aboriginal Australia”, The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th Edition (1987), Volume 14, page 425. For additional references to the marriage customs in Biblical times, see Israel: Its Life and Culture, by Johannes Pedersen, Volume 1, page 60ff.
5 Herman H. Ploss, Max Bartels and Paul Bartels, Woman, Volume I, Lord & Bransby, 1988, page 563.
6 English-translation of Sahih Muslim, Volume 2, International Islamic Publishing House, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, page 715.
7 Theodor H. Vandevelde, Ideal Marriage : Its Physiology and Technique, Greenwood Publishing Group, 1980, p. 243.
8 Nabia Abbott, Aishah-The Beloved of Mohammed, Al-Saqi Books, London, 1985, page 7.
9 Karen Armstrong, Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet, Harper San Francisco, 1992, page 157.
10 W. Montgomery Watt, Muhammad: Prophet and Statesman, Oxford University Press, 1961, page 229.
11 John Hick, The Metaphor of God Incarnate, Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993, page 87.
July 16th, 2006 at 12:35 am
eee! I didn’t know you were a respected author!
Ahmad,
In other words, yeah Mohammad was a pedophile but since he was also a polygamist and Aisha was cool with everything, it was OK. Sounds like some
serious “moral relativism” to me.
Hmmmm….
In other news:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060715/ap_on_re_mi_ea/mideast_fighting_lebanon_1
More on the Gaza situation:
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-07-15T230823Z_01_L15828940_RTRUKOC_0_US-MIDEAST-GAZA.xml&src=rss
On an entirely different conflict, the UN comes down on North Korea - at least a little bit:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060715/ap_on_re_as/nkorea_missiles
July 16th, 2006 at 1:39 am
Ban that fucker’s IP, Sandmonkey? Please? He’ll destroy your blog with those 50 page copy pastes. You wait and see if he doesn’t. That’s what he’s trying to do, he knows nobody is going to read all that.
July 16th, 2006 at 1:45 am
why would your bring mohamed into this??? You critcize muslims for being uncivilized yet you disrespect their prophet? Your a big man. Disagreeing with with the actions of Hizballah and wishing for their elimination, by no means justifies your prejudices. I for one, am a firm supporter of Isreal and Maerica, but it makes me sick to see my Muslim firneds and their faith disrespected. You a tough guy coz you call Mohamed names? Does that make you inteligent? Does that help sway people to your cause? Gro up and get some respect. Is that the kinda person you want to be where you feel no remorse of attacking others religion? There is a problem with Islamic fundametalists but you are heling no one with your bigoteed comments about the Muslim prophet.
July 16th, 2006 at 2:16 am
Marwaheen is a Hizbollah stronghold, not new to the front. Eg.,.
“In January, Hizballah fighters fired on an Israeli military vehicle in South Lebanon after it crossed the international border in the town of Marwaheen in the western sector and killed an Israeli soldier”
But this from 2004 is really quite sad.
“The United States has served a stiff warning on Syria to halt its support of Hizbullah and urged Lebanon anew to deploy its regular army en masse along the border with Israel and end the Party of God’s effective control of the most volatile Arab front with the Jewish state.”
Very sad but it is very hard to not suspect that it was a Hizbollah evacuation and the kids were with them Clearly the IDF would be going after movements out of Marwaheen. Why do the terrorists do that, carry women and children as protection. If it was just an evacuation of ordinary folk it is very sad, but very poor judgement. Not that one deserves to die for poor judgement, but one shouldn’t be negligent either. Maybe the Lebanese Army could at least have the courage to negotiate with IDF and go in and pull these people out. Of course, could they be trusted. The commenter’s report of Lebanese Army firing at IDF would not be encouraging. Considering the Hizbollah dominance of the body politic it seems highly likely that they or their agents are in prominent positions in the army.
Has anyone a solution to the problem of women and children used as shields.
Lebanon needs to grow up. Too much of business as usual and as long as Hizbollah aids with my money making rather than impedes it we will pretend that Israel is someone else’s problem. Whatever our contribution to them being attacked. The powerful, those who could do something I target here, not folk.
And the more I learn about Lebanon the sadder I get. It seems not unreasonable to believe that all of the powerful families are corrupt and were in bed with Syria for money. And that it is still going on, and the drug manufacture in the Beka Valley and the money laundering and maybe the money counterfeiting. Hariri may have been assassinated in part for political reasons, but his death was also quite clearly partly a mafia type hit.
Reading these comments and others I am conscious of irritation with the whinging of the Arabs. They strike at the Israelis and then complain endlessly about how the big bully hurt them Cultural I guess, but on this thread the harmed innocents referred to are Lebanese or other Muslims, not one complaint about harmed Israelis.
July 16th, 2006 at 2:34 am
By the holy vigina of Our Lady Discordia - leave religion out of this. Of course it’s directly related (see Hizballah)… but by the sweet and slightly saggy tits of Eris, it has been discussed ad nauseum already all over the fucking internet.
S’not the time or the place. Please?
And I second that thought about Israel (thanks, whomever it was, and sorry for plagiarizing) - we’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t, for a whole bunch of reasons I just described in some detail in another post.
Noufa - may the Gods of your ancestors shelter and protect you, sis; and may all of Egypt finally hear what you’re saying.
July 16th, 2006 at 2:39 am
Ros - I have a theory about everyone ignoring dead Jews. I recon everyone just thinks “hey, they’ve been tortured and slaughtered en masse for thousands of years. Just a couple of generations ago one third of them was wiped out. So one more or one less dead kike? Who gives a fuck?”
Pheh, I say.
July 16th, 2006 at 2:46 am
Ahmed! what the hell was that copy and paste about? I read it and regret wasting my time doing so.
1) you admit that muslims are ignorant.
2) you’re only trying to justify a 54 year old man to molest a 6 year old child.
3) you then, compare morals with other religions in an attempt to again justify Mohammeds perverted actions on a little innocent girl.
The bottom line is that Mohammed Molested a 6 year old child by “Thighing” her: http://islamstrueface.blogspot.com/2005/07/more-on-pedopheliaand-thighing.html
I feel very sorry for Muslims. I think they are the first victims of Islam and the demented Mohammed.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/comics/comics.htm
July 16th, 2006 at 3:14 am
Noufa -
You are a wise and beautiful angel! You are also one seriously PISSED OFF Egyptian and I can’t blame you. Keep fighting the good fight!
July 16th, 2006 at 3:19 am
I completely agree! The current problem with the IDF are the collective idiots Olmert and Peretz. Whenever you have a right-wing government that tries to defend the country, the liberals go ape screaming that they don’t know what they’re doing and it’s all about negotiation. But, when the liberals get the helm and they don’t defend the country, situations like the kidnapping in the north and Gaza occur. By then, they are forced to do something and all hell breaks loose. When that happens with liberal governments, like this one, it’s just like a person who picks up a machine gun and starts uncontrollably spraying bullets and destruction in every direction without a strategy. They’re incompetent. Unfortunately, that’s what’s going on right now.
July 16th, 2006 at 3:30 am
“one less dead kike”
What the hell is a kike? I understand that it is a slur for jews, but where did it come from? I am not impressed with late 19th early 20th century ethnic slurs. They only have one syllable and most of them don’t make any sense to begin with.
Wop(no idea)
Mic(something to do with alchol, maybe?)
Kike(no clue)
Pollack(makes sense)
Kraut(something to do with food?)
gook(?)
nip(what?)
Spic(as in hispanic, but without a p and n?)
July 16th, 2006 at 3:31 am
without an a and n
July 16th, 2006 at 3:43 am
Actually ‘coon:
It isn’t “ad nauseum,” it is “ad nauseam.”
Sorry, no big deal, but I see this phrase misspelled more often than I see it spelled correctly these days and thought you might want to know.
The Lebanese whining extends to us Evil Amnesians.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060716/ap_on_re_mi_ea/un_lebanon_israel
About Americans:
“They were always supportive in the last 1 1/2 years, but when it comes to Israel it seems things change,” he said.
Yes Mahmoud, things do change. Like Israeli soldiers being killed and kidnapped by people in your government. That has a way of changing things.
Pissin’ Putin off (cool):
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060716/ap_on_re_eu/bush_putin;_ylt=Aj4r6TKjod6xktVcC5s8.g4UewgF;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b3JuZGZhBHNlYwM3MjE-
July 16th, 2006 at 4:03 am
Tommy - thanks, bro. I’ll try to remember it… but filthy old habits die hard
*hangs head in shame*
*noticed it’s someone else’s head*
*snigger*
July 16th, 2006 at 4:25 am
Tommy’s link re its the USA’s fault. That chap is the one who spoke of 60 martyrs. That langauge would tell me that he is not an ordinary Lebanese, sounds like a Hizbollah boy to me. Special representative though. If the Lebaneses government has a united position on ending this it is very hard to tell. After all Hizbollah boss has said that he doesn’t care about the cost to Lebanon so presumably a Hizbollah/government special rep mouthpiece feels the same.
And of course also got to keep the anti USA line out there, after all Iran’s aims have to be served most of all. While claiming some sort of special relationship for the last 1 and half years. It must be hard in the diplomatic service not to wallop guys like this. Or the idiots that treat them as dimkum!.
July 16th, 2006 at 4:43 am
SM - your comments about the Lebanese Army are not accurate. Read this from:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150886009932&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
“The attack was facilitated in part by the Lebanese Army, which apparently gave Hizbullah precise information relating to the Hanit - the same Lebanese Army that Israel, in its stated aims for this conflict, has said it insists on seeing deployed in the south as a barrier to a continued Hizbullah threat. With a protective force like that, one might ask, who needs enemies?”
So you may have complained that the IDF is attacking Leb army positions, but this does a good job explaining why. Apparently, the elements in the Leb army that are sympathetic to Hezboolah are actively helping them, which severely complicates things.
July 16th, 2006 at 5:15 am
Agree with you.
Making justification of immorality by comparing morals with other religions, but then claiming they’re absolute. Circular logic, very typical of ‘this’ religion. It should tell you why there’ll be no peace in ME very soon. And yes, I do believe one’s religion (or lack thereof) dictates the way one thinks.
Ahmed! what the hell was that copy and paste about? I read it and regret wasting my time doing so.
1) you admit that muslims are ignorant.
2) you’re only trying to justify a 54 year old man to molest a 6 year old child.
3) you then, compare morals with other religions in an attempt to again justify Mohammeds perverted actions on a little innocent girl.
July 16th, 2006 at 7:57 am
The problem with attacking Hezbollah is that the smaller weapons they have are pretty mobile and able to be hid behind any bush. Now, it is possible to hit all bushes in the south, but it is also possible to cut off the supplying routes.
The IDF chose the latter.
July 16th, 2006 at 8:04 am
@D.B. Shobrawy, I believe it is rather a ruined opportunity for Lebanon. The Lebanese army could stick together with the Israeli actions to kick Hezbollahs ass. Even though the prime minister of Lebanon said recently it would extend its governance to the south if Israel would stop bombing (as Peres said: nice words, but we need deeds), they could do more. But I guess that they are afraid to be dragged into a civil war and let this war Israel vs Hezbollah go on for ever. Hezbollah of course - suddenly and surprisingly patrtiotic - is calling on the Lebanese that their country is attacked and that Lebanon should go into war with Israel; not realising that its themselves who are the pain in the arse here.
July 16th, 2006 at 12:22 pm
> Has anyone a solution to the problem of women
> and children used as shields.
They didn’t only copy NAZI tactics and strategies, but also
their propaganda-style.
To be erased from time and space…
July 16th, 2006 at 12:39 pm
Spot on, Suzanne. There is also the important point of the most long-range Hizballah weapons being Grad missiles - small, portable and can be activated with a timer. These are stockpiled in the houses of various Hizballah members. And it is these stockpiles that IAF and Navy are trying to destroy in addition to cutting supply lines. So we get Evil Zionists ™ firing indiscriminately and for no reason but Evil Zionist ™ bloodlust into population centers.
July 16th, 2006 at 2:38 pm
Mike,
WOP = With Out Papers (Italian illegal immigrants)
Mic = The beginning of an Irish name ie: Mc Dougal
July 16th, 2006 at 6:56 pm
“…they have learned their lesson 100 fold for the last 146 years. God save them. Poor Lebanon ”
I’m not sure Lebanon ever could learn a lesson, even given a thousand years. They were almost handed freedom of choice (plus other freedoms) on a silver plate and they just took it and put it on a shelf because it was too hard to polish and protect. Well, guess what, freedom is only earned, kept and protected by blood.
Who’s blood, I guess is what the Lebanese have a problem with. Certainly not theirs, except for a very few.
Yea, they are being taught their lessons again, and it is terrible, not really fair and all of what SM says (almost). But evidently they are very slow learners, so hence the repeated lesson.
One more little thing. Everyone is dancing and fighting around the elephant that sits in the middle east (with it’s feet in other countries).
That is Islam.
Islam is the Muslims worse and most dangerous enemy. It literally is going to be the death of them.
Papa Ray
West Texas
USA
July 16th, 2006 at 7:50 pm
> Islam is the Muslims worse and most dangerous enemy.
As far as I know, they call themselves jews - the problem is
degenerated - blood-and-soil - judaism.
July 16th, 2006 at 8:15 pm
I am trying to trace eee’s coordinates to be handed to the Israeli Air Forces after the offensive on Hizbollah is finished.
Eee, if I were u ( yayks..), I’d start arranging my human shield, so that your martyrdom would at least be noted as yet another Israeli attrocity.
When will the apathetic west wake up and uproot the likes of you from it’s soil?… I guess only time will tell
July 16th, 2006 at 8:24 pm
eee doesn’t believe in God, so he won’t be a martyr. He’ll just be a dead guy
July 16th, 2006 at 8:34 pm
Former IDF Soldier -
The sooner the better, ve harei ze meshubah. Why are you an ex-soldier?
July 16th, 2006 at 8:37 pm
> I’d start arranging my human shield
But - oh defecating filthy master race - it’s common knowledge,
that you - the nation of beggars, thieves and murderers - use
human shields - especially when your degenerated lynchmob
- aka - the IDF starts its progroms in the Westbank or Gaza.
When did you - son of that famous nation - killed your last pal.
child? Ran out of blood for these tasty matzahs lately?
July 16th, 2006 at 8:38 pm
Swapping your recipes and blood ?
July 16th, 2006 at 8:49 pm
eee is located in Orlando, Florida. Barry University.
He’s the filthy Libyan who goes by the name Salam.
July 16th, 2006 at 9:24 pm
papa ray diddn’t you know lebanese were and are pheniciens, a merchand and peaceful population, they don’t do war, they assimilate invaders and that was what it might have been expected with part of hezbolla population, but some nations decided it is not possible
July 16th, 2006 at 9:33 pm
nomad, nobody has yet successfully assimilated a majority muslim population.
And Lebanon was not a major Muslim population 30 years ago. It was a Christian country. No more.
I wish I could believe what you say, about Lebanon’s prospects. But I haven’t seen it work out that way, anywhere that large numbers of muslims have settled. You seem to think France will be an exception to that rule. I think you are wrong. But I hope you are right.
July 16th, 2006 at 11:30 pm
To craig:
I seriously doubt that eee’s an atheist (such as myself). In any case, a dead guy will suffice too
To Racoon:
Why an ex-soldier? Because my 3 years of military service are over by now. I guess I chose that name as a response to the title calling us MORONS…
Haven’t been called for miluim yet, so I guess you can call it post-military euphoria or somin’….
Just to make it clear for eee; I served the Zionist cause very well, and the Palestinian baby’s death toll is in part my fault…
OOOPss, I did it again…
I’ve played with my gun,
You got shot in the head, oh baby baby…
to I’m Allah:
and thanks for the intel on his location. Florida - you’re next in line
Hey dude, I’m Jahovah. wanna be friends?
To eee:
I send my condolences..
July 16th, 2006 at 11:47 pm
> OOOPss, I did it again…
Why I’m not surprised?
There was a rumor, that Heydrich was of jewish descent -
even the beloved Fuhrer was suspected of that.
Well - only rumors.
At least Israel and its insane population demonstrate, that
there is no problem to be jewish - the blood-and-soil varia-
tion - and a Nazi.
And Nazism must definetely be removed from time and
space - no doubt..
July 17th, 2006 at 4:54 am
@eee, fyi self-hating jews do indeed exist. Why? You’re one of them?
July 17th, 2006 at 7:26 am
And Lebanon was not a major Muslim population 30 years ago. It was a Christian country. No more.
for the percentage, I have to check later on
anyways, pheniciens had all kind of religions, it dépended which nation had invaded them : assyrians, egyptians, cananeans, tribes of actual turkey, grecs, romans, christians, islam… may-be boudhism soon !
gaulois are known to work in same way , we absord our invaders (immigrants), miraculously they become french, french way of thinking !
(see german tribes vickings, and later, work poeple from brittany, italien, spanish portugese, magreb … black africa is not yet done : problem of fundamental culture not based on same kind of work
no count how long does that take, depend of the economy !
July 17th, 2006 at 3:00 pm
And Lebanon was not a major Muslim population 30 years ago. It was a Christian country. No more.
Religions :
60 % de musulmans (32 % de chiites, 21 % de sunnites, 7 % de druzes)
40 % de chrétiens (25 % de maronites, 7 % de grecs-orthodoxes, 5 % de grecs-catholiques, 4 % d’arméniens,…)
and that classification doen’t extrapole on the 17 or 18 varieties of communoties they include
July 17th, 2006 at 4:00 pm
Nomad, that must be an “estimate” because there hasn’t been census sine the 1930s in Lebanon. However, lets take that estimate as valid.
Subtract from the number of Palestinians and other muslims who have enterred Lebanon in the last 30 years (over 300,000 Palestinians enterred Lebanon between 1973 and 1975 alone!) and add the number of Christians who have LEFT Lebanon during the same time period, and I suspect you’ll find very different results from the current demographics. Lebanon is a very small country, and the influx of Palestinians combined with the exodus of Christians has a had a huge impact.
July 17th, 2006 at 4:07 pm
1980 aeras
July 17th, 2006 at 7:38 pm
> fyi self-hating jews do indeed exist. Why?
Another good demonstration of the insanity of contemporary
- wannabe (?) - judaism, that transformed into an degenerated
blood-and-soil cult - zionism.
Confined into its own tribal manichaen ethics - zionism does not
only reject any gentile criticism. It is also immune against critics of
those belonging to their tribe - claiming that a jew that rejects je-
wish supremacy must be sick, mentally ill - a “self-hater”.
Just another demonstration, that zionism cannot be debated.
It’s simply some kind of disease, an infection that destroys
the usually built in empathy for other human beings - the neces-
sary precondition for a sane society.
July 17th, 2006 at 7:48 pm
> the number of Palestinians and other muslims who have
> enterred Lebanon in the last 30 years (over 300,000
> Palestinians enterred Lebanon between 1973 and 1975 alone!)
But zionism is not a “jewish” disease.
Everybody can get infected by this plague, which also destroys
the ability to judge and evaluate reasonably.
This amnesian for example could know, that the Pal. did not sim-
ply “enter” Lebanon, but that they were expelled - first by the in-
sane master race, then by their stooge in Jordan.
In short - while zionism transforms jewish people into cynical mon-
sters, it transform the gentile into bigot idiots.
A diagnosis that alsp applies on the owner of this blog.
July 18th, 2006 at 3:44 pm
Haveil Havalim #78 YAWP!
Welcome to A Barbaric Yawp. This is where I blog. Hear me roar. YAWP!!!!!!
Now I ask you to join me on a tour of the Jewish/Israel blogosphere.
There is a lot of activity in the JBlogosphere and thanks to the interference of some of the less civil barb…
May 19th, 2007 at 8:13 am
[...] are a couple of solutions I found while surfing. Sandmonkey thinks the IDF has done the wrong thing, and Yael K offers a less messier (than mine) [...]
May 3rd, 2008 at 9:36 pm
your an ass for talking about the IDF like that.
They can easily take out lebanon sure, they have a very powerful army. BUT if they did that the whole world is going to hate israel even more than they already do. so shut the fuck up. I don’t know of any other army that treats their soldiers better, no other country would have done what israel had done for their soldiers.
October 10th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
great post hope to see some additional comments here