western assertions regarding Islam

[Travis]

Are western assertions regarding Islam and violence valid?
Travis TIU

Western assumptions about Islam predominately revolve around Islam's use of violence to obtain political objectives. The potency of these claims do not come from research that can be quantified or checked, but rather from personal anecdotes that confirm to a presupposed image of the Islamic world. In addition the phenomena of 'Global terrorism' and the claim that Islam is used as an ideological base to justify acts of violence against the 'innocent' has been the centre of much analysis both in academia and the media. This has resulted in the assumption that Islam is used to justify acts of violence against non-combatants for the purposes of political gain (terrorism). Furthermore this notion has been widely condemned as immoral and as an act contrary to western democratic thought and practice. However, ignoring the accuracy of such claims against Islam for a moment, the evidence suggests that such an act, terrorism, is not unique to 'Islamic' residence groups but rather has been predominately used by western nations. According to the dominant theory of international relations realism moral norms should be suspended in pursuit of national interests. This concept is termed as 'ethics of responsibility' which '...involves the weighing up of consequences and the realization that positive outcomes may result from amoral actions (Baylis and Smith 2005 pg 773)'.  In a similar manner Mearsheimer and Walt (2007) argue that 'The United states has overthrown a few democratic governments in the past and has supported numerous dictators when doing so was thought to advance U.S. interests' (pg 87 2007).
The manifestation of this principal can be demonstrated in the tactics of war employed by the allied forces during World War Two. The British were responsible for initiating the policy of targeting civilian populations during air raids (Taylor 1991 pg 16). The aerial attack alone against Hamburg in 1943 yielded the first 'fire-storm' in history and killed in the region of 50000 civilians, whose main cause of death was burning and asphyxiation (Irving 1985). Therefore, if ethics and morals can be suspended in pursuit of political objectives according to western theory and practice, what basis remains for condemning opposing ideologies that, allegedly, employ similar tactics?

It is often argued that Islam is similar to the western thought and theory, and allows the killing of non-combatants for political gain, the following verses are often presented as proof, 'then kill them wherever you find them (9:5)' and 'And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out... (2:191). However, the context of these verses is often ignored to present Islam in a negative manner.  For example the verse proceeding verse 2:191 clearly indicates the command is directed at combatants, 'And fight in the Way of Allâh those who fight you, but transgress not the limits...(2:90)'. Also according to Islamic jurisprudence there is a clear distinction made between combatants and non-combatants. For example the following verses demonstrate this notion,

'Allâh does not forbid you to deal justly and kindly with those who fought not against you on account of religion and did not drive you out of your homes. Verily, Allâh loves those who deal with equity.  It is only as regards those who fought against you on account of religion, and have driven you out of your homes, and helped to drive you out, that Allâh forbids you to befriend them. And whosoever will befriend them, then such are the Zâlimûn (wrong-doers those who disobey Allâh) (60:8-9).

Furthermore, ibn Kathir (2000), a classical scholar of Islam, argues that the verses that are often quoted to suggest Islam allows the killing of non-combatants are restricted to combatants. He suggests that these verses were revealed with regards to fighting combatants (2000 pg V1 pg 527).



References:
Baylis, J. and Smith, S. (2005) The Globalisation of world politics: An introduction to international relations. New York: Oxford University Press.

Irving D. (1985) The destruction of Dresden. London: Papermac

Kathir i, (2000) Tafsir ibn Kathir (abridged). Riyadh: Darrussalam

Landes, D. (1998) The wealth and poverty of nations. London: Abacus

Mearsheimer, J and Walt, S. (2007) The Israel lobby and US foreign policy. London: Penguin

[Negentropic]

The 'Allied Forces,' 'Us & Them," etc. etc. Yet another guy refusing to stand on principle as soon as 'countries' and collectives and groups enter the picture. If fundamentalist Islam or what Allah declared clashes with human rights or individual inalienable rights, then how can it possibly be moral?  Two wrongs don't make a right.  If you're against Americans and Israelis killing innocent individuals in war then you should be against repressive regimes doing the same with reigns of terror in their own countries.  American soliders being soul-less killing machine robots in Islamic countries does not nullify the fact that imprisoning or fining people money and damages for theft is a hundred times more just and human than cutting their limbs off or that divorcing your wife for adultery (when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women) if so you choose is a thousand times, a million times more just than lashing her 100 times and then burying her in the ground to her neck and stoning her to death with small stones!!!  


Western assertions?  No more like proven facts and believe me the Western powers have always promoted any backwards tendencies in Muslim countries because they always need a good scary enemy and what more perfect enemy than one whose laws are diametrically opposed to those followed in the West:



Ahmedinejad says they have no gays in Iran

[youtube:2u5mxj4g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_3RUwAJ_MI[/youtube]2u5mxj4g]

that's because they scare them shitless back in the closet and if they catch gays engaging in homosexuality, they hang them.  If a woman commits adultery, she might get 4 years in prison just for starters, mandatory 99 lashes and then buried up to her neck in the ground and publicly stoned to death with small stones, sometimes even in a  soccer stadium where everyone gets to join in on the fun.


Porn actress stoned to death in Iran Prison

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?sf=3&click_id=3&art_id=qw990444181879B265&set_id=1

here's one of the latest adultery cases. She's been in prison since 2006 and they've already lashed her 99 times, but they're still considering whether they should stone her or hang her:  

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/07/09/iranian-woman-will-not-be-stoned-may-still-be-killed.html


you see the hypocritical assholes have realized that 'stoning' is bad public relations for them but still can't get past their own barbaric fundamentalist Islamic law that condemns the adulterer to death.

http://www.iran-e-azad.org/stoning/women.html

http://www.iran-e-azad.org/stoning/khatami.html



Stoning to Death in Iran:
A Crime Against Humanity
Carried Out By the Mullahs' Regime  
________________________________________
Stoning women to death in Iran
 A Special Case Study
The stoning of women is one of the more savage, and revealing aspects of the mullahs' rule in Iran. This vicious punishment of women is without precedent in Iran's recent history. Since the inception of the mullahs' rule, hundreds of women of various ages have been and continue to be stoned to death throughout Iran.  

What makes this hideous crime even more abhorrent is that it is carried out under the name of Islam. The Quran and the Prophet of Islam despised such behavior. On the contrary, in the Quran and the Prophet's traditions, such barbarism is denounced. The Prophet did his utmost to eradicate backward traditions, including stoning, which victimized women.  

The authorities of the Islamic Republic have attempted to explain away stoning in Iran, as noted in the report by the U.N. Special Representative on Iran, as something that takes place only in remote and culturally backward areas. Actually, stoning and other cruel punishments are used by the regime to extend their reign of terror, while internationally Tehran tries to deny responsibility. It must be noted that:  

1- The responsibility for any inhuman punishment, regardless of where it takes place, lies with the judiciary and the state,  

2- Stoning and other cruel punishments taking place in the Islamic Republic of Iran are not a matter of individual discretion; rather, they are defined by the law of the land, and such sentences are issued based on these laws.  

The penalty for adultery under Article 83 of the penal code, called the Law of Hodoud is flogging (100 lashes of the whip) for unmarried male and female offenders. Married offenders may be punished by stoning regardless of their gender, but the method laid down for a man involves his burial up to his waist, and for a woman up to her neck (article 102). The law provides that if a person who is to be stoned manages to escape, he or she will be allowed to go free. Since it is easier for a man to escape, this discrimination literally becomes a matter of life and death.  

Interestingly, Article 6 (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Iran has ratified, states: "Sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious crimes in accordance with the law in force at the time of the commission of the crime." Offenses for which the Law of Hodoud provides the death penalty do not involve murder or serious bodily harm, constituting the "most serious crimes".  

Article 104 of the Law of Hodoud provides that the stones should not be so large that a person dies after being hit with two of them, nor so small as to be defined as pebbles, but must cause severe injury. This makes it clear that the purpose of stoning is to inflict grievous pain on the victim, in a process leading to his or her slow death.  
 

3- All execution orders and verdicts of stoning must be upheld by the supreme court in Tehran irrespective of where they were issued. Therefore, the regime's justification is absurd.  

- The video is a documentary recording of four individuals being stoned in one of the security centers in Tehran in the presence of high ranking officials of the regime's judiciary. The video tape, smuggled out of the country by the Mojahedin, shows the representative of the prosecutor reading out the verdicts. He declares that the verdicts were issued by Ali Razini, the head of Judicial Organization of the Military Forces. Razini can be seen in the video tape, and throws the first stone. The prosecutor of military forces, Niazi, is also present. Razini is currently the head of Tehran's Justice Department and also heads the "Special Clerical Court."  

Anecdotes of this brutal process reveal ever more of cruelty. The regime's authorities usually force the victim's family members, including children, to watch the stoning to death of their loved one, and in some instances, when the woman miraculously managed to escape, contrary to the regime's own law, she was recaptured and either stoned again or killed on the spot.  

On August 10, 1994, in the city of Arak, a woman was sentenced to death by stoning. According to the ruling of the religious judge, her husband and two children were forced to attend the execution. The woman urged her husband to take the children away, but to no avail. A truck full of stones was brought in to be used during the stoning. In the middle of the stoning, although her eyes had been gouged out, the victim was able to escape from the ditch and started running away, but the regime's guards recaptured her and shot her to death.  

In October 1989 in the city of Qom, a woman who was being stoned managed to pull herself out of the hole, only to be forced back into it and stoned to death. In justifying the murder, Qom's Chief Religious Judge, Mullah Karimi, elaborated to Ressalat newspaper on October 30, 1989: "Generally speaking, legal and religious decrees on someone condemned to stoning call for her stoning if her guilt was proven on the basis of witnesses' testimonies. Even if she were to escape in the middle of the administration of the sentence, she must be returned and stoned to death."  

On July 13, 1997, Kayhan reported that Changiz Rahimi was sentenced to death, stoning and payment of fine for committing murder and adultery.  

On October 26, 1997, six individuals were stoned in Sari, the provincial capital of Mazandaran. This was reported by Salaam daily and international news agencies. The names of the victims were given as Fatemeh Danesh, Masoumeh Eini, Marzieh Fallah, Ali Mokhtarpour, Parviz Hasanzadeh and Kheirollah Javanmard.  

AFP, December 7, 1994:  

Hamshahri reported that a woman and a man were recently stoned to death in Ramhormouz on murder and adultery charges.  

AFP, November 16, 1994  

Abrar reported on Wednesday that three Iranians including a woman were stoned in the city of Sari (northern Iran), after being found guilty of adultery and rape by the Islamic court.  

AFP, 11 November 1995, quoting Jomhouri Islami reported that a man was stoned in the city of Hamedan.  

AFP, June 8, 1996  

Hamshahri reported on Saturday that a man and a women were stoned in the city of Oroumieh on murder and adultery charges. Shahin Soltan-Moradi had murdered her husband with the help of her lover, Mohammad Ali Hemmati in November 1994.  

On July 14, 1995, Amnesty International reported that two women by the names of Saba Abdali, 30, and Zeinab Heidary, 38, were faced with stoning in the city of Ilam Gharb.  

On December 7, 1994, Reuters quoted a state-controlled newspaper report by Hamshahri, on a married woman who was stoned to death in the city of Ramhormouz, southwestern Iran.  

Ressalat, March 1, 1994, read: "A woman was stoned to death in the city of Qom."  

Kayhan of February 1, 1994, reported that a woman named Mina Kolvat was stoned to death in Tehran for having immoral relations with her cousin.  

The U.N. Special Representative on the human rights situation in Iran reported to the U.N. General Assembly in 1993: "On November 1, 1992, a woman named Fatima Bani was stoned to death in Isfahan."  

Abrar reported on November 5, 1991 that a woman charged with immoral relations was stoned in the city of Qom.  

According to Kayhan, August 21, 1991, a woman charged with adultery by the name of Kobra was sentenced to 70 lashes and stoning. The verdict was carried out in the presence of local people and district officials.  

Jomhouri Islami wrote on March 11, 1991, that in Rasht (northern Iran), "Bamani Fekri, child of Mohammad-Issa, guilty of complicity in first-degree murder, adultery and incineration of the victim's body; was sentenced to stoning, retribution, blinding of both eyes and payment of 100 gold dinars. After the announcement of the verdict, she committed suicide in prison."  

Ressalat reported on January 16, 1990, that a woman was stoned to death in the city of Bandar Anzali (northern Iran).  

Ettela'at reported on January 5, 1990: "Two women were stoned publicly on Wednesday in the northern city of Lahijan."  

Jomhouri Islami, January 2, 1990: "Two women were stoned in the city of Langrood (northern Iran)."  

Kayhan wrote on July 31, 1989: "Six women were stoned to death publicly in Kermanshah on charges of adultery and moral corruption."  

Kayhan, April 17, 1989, quoted the Religious judge and head of the Fars and Bushehr Justice Department as sentencing 10 women to stoning to death on prostitution charges which were immediately carried out.  

Tehran radio, reported on March 6, 1989 that a women was stoned in Karaj for committing adultery."  

Kayhan, October 4, 1986, reported that a 25-year-old woman named Nosrat was stoned to death in the city of Qom. She died after an hour of continuos stoning.  

On April 17, 1986 a woman was stoned to death in the city of Qom. Prior to being stoned, she was whipped in public.  

In July 1980, four women were simultaneously stoned to death in the city of Kerman.  

It must be noted that the cases of stoning in small towns and cities were not included here.  

The brutality is not limited to stoning. For example, in late May 1990, in the city of Neyshabour (northeastern Iran), a woman charged with adultery was thrown off a 10-story building. The execution was carried out in public, and the victim died on impact.  

The regime's duplicity when it comes to publicizing the news of such Byzantine atrocities, is very telling. Inside Iran, they are trumpeted with great fanfare, but when it comes to the international arena, officials brazenly deny their methods. In an interview with Le Figaro on September 10, 1994, Rafsanjani was asked, "Are women accused of adultery stoned in Iran?" He replied: "No, no such thing exists in Iran. This has been fabricated to damage us."  

In his April 1998 trip to France and Sweden, Ata'ollah Mohajerani, the Minister of Culture and Islamic Guidance and Khatami's government spokesman, who is regarded to be a moderate figure, discussed several matters. His positions openly contradicted what he says in Iran and the actions of the government. When asked about his views about stoning, Mohajerani refrained from making an unequivocal statement of support for this inhuman practice. Upon returning to Iran, however, he said explicitly that he does not oppose stoning but believes that efforts should be made to stop the dissemination of the news of stoning and filming the scenes.  
It is therefore clear that the question is not whether stoning should be carried out or not, but it about where and how stoning should be implemented.

In her first interview with a foreign publication, Massoumeh Ebtekar, who was appointed as vice-president by Khatami, tried to avoid stating her views on stoning. Only later in the interview did she admit to its occurrence in general terms, but qualified her remark by saying it occurs only in remote places.  

Indeed, stoning is indispensable to the clerics efforts to intimidate and terrorize the Iranian public. During Friday prayers, in May of 1998,  in the provincial capital of Kermanshah (the largest city in western Iran), Mullah Zarandi had the following to say about the need to carry out stoning: "The security forces have to show more presence in the society. In order to set an example for others, the judiciary should also bring some of those eligible to one of the city squares and amputate their hands. They should also have a series of stoning. I promise that the society will be rectified."


MSMD's hero before the Islamic Revolution forced that permanent beard on his ass:








Ahmedinejad speaking at the ceremony marking the anniversary of the deah of CIA / Mossad Puppet Ayatollah Khomeini



ANYTHING about Persia (Iran) in just 10 minutes. Watch it!

[youtube:2u5mxj4g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R25VS3Vs9iw[/youtube]2u5mxj4g]

[youtube:2u5mxj4g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ed6oLhyyxBI[/youtube]2u5mxj4g]

[youtube:2u5mxj4g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQgZ3oLp_WY[/youtube]2u5mxj4g]


Khomeini Demands Shah from the U.S. for Release of Hostages

[youtube:2u5mxj4g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxUsv1SdrZY[/youtube]2u5mxj4g]

Khomeini threatens to cut all their hands off:

[youtube:2u5mxj4g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8O4xrjMLPc[/youtube]2u5mxj4g]

[youtube:2u5mxj4g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxMGpBIIiqI[/youtube]2u5mxj4g]


Watch this until the end if you wanna see how bat-shit crazy these mullahs are
[youtube:2u5mxj4g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61EUwfR26oI[/youtube]2u5mxj4g]

Khomeini's Ass Kissing Ceremony

[youtube:2u5mxj4g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OA8f0gpcbnk[/youtube]2u5mxj4g]



you might also be interested in my humble attempt to explain to Mr. Yiddy Yoda MSMD why Eustace Mullins was correct in designating Iran as yet another example of controlled opposition:

viewtopic.php?f=40&t=11822&start=60





family vacation photo



Moroccan Taxi

[Travis]

Typical deviant Jew tactic. Why don't you attempt to tackle my points rather than just 'copying and pasting' some anti Iran rhetoric. I am not talking about Iran I am talking about Islam. Furthermore, Iran is not an Islamic state as it does govern by Islamic law in its entirety. You know nothing about Islam, you are a ignorant person spreading ignorance. For example, you said 'when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'. This is a complete liar. What is the source of this claim? If you are not a liar reference your assertion.

You have made an idiot of yourself on post one. All you are able to do is copy and paste anti-Iran rhetoric that has nothing to do with my essay. Try and read and write for yourself.

[Travis]

Typical deviant Jew tactic. Why don't you attempt to tackle my points rather than just 'copying and pasting' some anti Iran rhetoric. I am not talking about Iran I am talking about Islam. Furthermore, Iran is not an Islamic state as it does govern by Islamic law in its entirety. You know nothing about Islam, you are an ignorant person spreading ignorance. For example, you said 'when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'. This is a complete liar. What is the source of this claim? If you claim not to be a liar reference your assertion.

You have made an idiot of yourself on post one. All you are able to do is copy and paste anti-Iran rhetoric that has nothing to do with my essay. Try and read and write for yourself.

[Travis]

Bump:
Negentropic I am calling you out! I repeat,

You know nothing about Islam, you are an ignorant person spreading ignorance. For example, you said 'when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'. This is a complete liar. What is the source of this claim? If you claim not to be a liar reference your assertion.

[rmstock]

The fight we are witnessing is between Sunni Islam versus Shia Islam :

Sunni Muslims make up the majority (85%) of Muslims all over the world. Significant populations of Shia Muslims can be found in Iran and Iraq, and large minority communities in Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, and Lebanon.

Could it be that the Iraq and Iran Muslims are the real deal, and that the Arab Oil Countries with its Sunni Muslims
are total westernized and spoiled, defying Islam according Sunni traditions? Or even worse, as many have suspected,
that Sunni Muslims have a hidden secret sect within, following the cabbalistic Shabbatism, which Antelman called sufism.

Just like we saw with Judaism, with Torah Jews versus Talmudic Jews, we have Caballah Sufism versus Shiah Islam, being the pure religion and tradition according Mohammed the Prophet.

Robert M. Stockmann
---
Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE
Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist
crashrecovery.org  mailto:stock@stokkie.net">stock@stokkie.net

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

Secret History of the English Occupation of Egypt
 By Wilfrid Scawen Blunt

This book was written by a Rothschild agent in 1895. Worth a look at how Egyptian Nationalism was frustrated by England.

[Travis]

Bump:
Negentropic I am calling you out! Support your claim you lying coward! I repeat,

You know nothing about Islam, you are an ignorant person spreading ignorance. For example, you said 'when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'. This is a complete liar. What is the source of this claim? If you claim not to be a liar reference your assertion.

[MonkeySeeMonkeyDo]

Bump:
Negentropic I am calling you out! Support your claim you lying coward! I repeat,

You know nothing about Islam, you are an ignorant person spreading ignorance. For example, you said 'when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'. This is a complete liar. What is the source of this claim? If you claim not to be a liar reference your assertion.

Negentropics horror stories about Islam, the stonings, be-headings, burying women alive for adultery, hanging gay people, etc, kinda remind me of the shrunken heads, soap and lampshades Holoco$t propaganda. It's no different than the Yank invented horror stories about Saddam and how he had nukes in his closet, golden toilets, and pulling up to his political events in pink Rolls Royce's. Saddam was obviously wealthy and took advantage of his power, but since when do Americans care about a leader helping or looking out for the best interests of his people when they routinely overthrow gov'ts trying to do just that and install puppet military dictators that allow american corporations to loot & plunder free countries. It's the worst fuckin hypocrisy you'll ever see. The Yanks and Yids are always making up insidious lies about their enemies and targets.

Whether there is some truth to these accusations about barbarism in Islam is yet to be discovered. What I know for sure is that not a single Western government, or media organization-- particularly Yank/Yid owned publications -- can possibly be trusted with accurate information about Islam, or what is occurring in Muslim countries. 95% of it is most likely propaganda. A non-Muslim Yank going on tv and telling us the horrors of Islam and what it's all about, is like having a Jew going on TV to tell us about Christianity or a Christian going on TV to lecture us about Hinduism. It's a joke and a half.

[Travis]

The rhetoric regarding Islam and barbarism  is just anti Islamic propaganda. My essay demonstrates that there is no legitimate base for such claims. Western nations  have accused Islam of being violent when they are the most violent nations in history, the historical record demonstrates this; the western world has legalized the killing of civilians for political objectives e.g. the bombing of Hamburg, Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Negentropic claims are symbolic of the lies and disinformation thrown at Islam, when challenged they just fall apart. For example, Negentropic made the claim that 'when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'. This is a complete lie and when I challenged him  he was unable to produce any evidence to support his claim.

Regarding Iran, I am not a supporter nor do I consider Iran to be an Islamic state, but I must add that those in the western world that jump and scream regarding Iran's alleged human rights violations resemble a doctor who treats a patient's pimple while ignoring his facial cancer.

[MonkeySeeMonkeyDo]

The rhetoric regarding Islam and barbarism  is just anti Islamic propaganda. My essay demonstrates that there is no legitimate base for such claims. Western nations  have accused Islam of being violent when they are the most violent nations in history, the historical record demonstrates this; the western world has legalized the killing of civilians for political objectives e.g. the bombing of Hamburg, Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Yeah it's the worst hypocrisy in the world. Any westerner accusing another culture of "being violent" is MENTALLY ILL in my opinion. To overlook the monstrosity of western governments, present and historical, and then criticize someone else for their "alleged" violent actions is schizophrenic and delusional.

Negentropic claims are symbolic of the lies and disinformation thrown at Islam, when challenged they just fall apart. For example, Negentropic made the claim that 'when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'. This is a complete lie and when I challenged him  he was unable to produce any evidence to support his claim.

Yes, I have a feeling negentropic gets his "info" about Islam from Commentary Magazine, The Weekly Standard, and other Jewish/Zionist/Yank/Neo-Con rags.

Negentropic also claims that Islamic societies cut off the limbs of people caught stealing. This reminds me of the Hollywood cartoons & movies that would always depict the Arabs as barbaric and violent who would cut off your hands if you stole an apple from him. It's not a surprise that a racist Jew is behind every one of these movies, and it's no surprise that this idiot Negentropic eats this shit up like a fat kid eats his cake.

[youtube:3h9u9eho]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko_N4BcaIPY[/youtube]3h9u9eho]

[MonkeySeeMonkeyDo]

If you're against Americans and Israelis killing innocent individuals in war then you should be against repressive regimes doing the same with reigns of terror in their own countries.

Tell us about this "reign of terror" the current Iranian regime has perpetrated on its own population. Oh, that's right, there is none. Previously you actually praised the tyrant who ACTUALLY perpetrated a reign of terror on Iranians, the Shah, becuz he allowed gay bars. :lol:
Why don't you speak ill of Saudi Arabia which is home to the real nutjob Islamics called "Wahhabis" where Sharia Law is active? Oh, the US supports this country though and don't seem to be concerned about the human rights abuses there or the tyrannical behavior of the House of Saud, but for some strange reason are concerned with human rights abuses in Iran? I guess I can't expect any better from schizo americans.

American soliders being soul-less killing machine robots in Islamic countries does not nullify the fact that imprisoning or fining people money and damages for theft is a hundred times more just and human than cutting their limbs off or that divorcing your wife for adultery (when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women) if so you choose is a thousand times, a million times more just than lashing her 100 times and then burying her in the ground to her neck and stoning her to death with small stones!!!  

This whole paragraph is mentally ill. Half of it is probably not even remotely accurate. But let's assume what you say about these Islamic punishments for certain behaviors is true. You actually feel that this is worth more of your time discussing than the GENOCIDES being carried out by your government? And u, an arrogant and mentally ill 'American', want to chat about "human rights"? Ur country has vanished millions of humans off the face of the earth who didn't even have a chance to exercise the rights they did have or the possibility of achieving more rights in the future. Your tax dollars helped facilitate these crimes. How do you sleep at night?

[Negentropic]

Typical deviant Jew tactic. Why don't you attempt to tackle my points rather than just 'copying and pasting' some anti Iran rhetoric. I am not talking about Iran I am talking about Islam. Furthermore, Iran is not an Islamic state as it does govern by Islamic law in its entirety. You know nothing about Islam, you are an ignorant person spreading ignorance. For example, you said 'when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'. This is a complete liar. What is the source of this claim? If you claim not to be a liar reference your assertion.

You have made an idiot of yourself on post one. All you are able to do is copy and paste anti-Iran rhetoric that has nothing to do with my essay. Try and read and write for yourself.

First let's count the cute little insults this guy directed at me when I directed none, not a single one,  at him only at his holy idol Mr. sadist Ahmedinejacket pig-shit, a man who supports laws that lash women 100 times then bury them in the ground up to their waists or necks and stone them to death for the unspeakable crime of adultery!!

1. Deviant Jew
2. Ignorant
3. Liar
4. Idiot

Typical deviant Jew tactic.

deviant Jew tactic?  Does that mean you're calling me a Jew and a pervert or just my wonderful tactics you love so much?  You know I could call you names too, so behave yourself young man!  

If you do not support Ahmedinejacket and his pig-shit governement then why should you be offended if I call him some names that he deserves?  I could call you "the Ayatollah's Kike Travis" or any number of silly names but I'm not like you, an ad hominem attack specialist, and I have nothing personal against you, so I won't.  

Why don't you attempt to tackle my points rather than just 'copying and pasting' some anti Iran rhetoric

Tackle your points?  Are you borrowing metaphors from American football now? You infidel !!!   :lol:  WHAT GODDAMN POINTS?   You haven't made any !!!   I already addressed your first post but you won't watch any of those groovy Ayatollah videos.    

just 'copying & pasting'?  Hey, at least I copy & paste and know what to copy & paste to really piss you off.  Isn't it funny you're too lazy to even do that to defend your pro-Ahmedinejad position ? !


anti-Iran rhetoric?  More like proven fact. None of the things I posted about stonings in Iran are disputed. They try to hide it from the west but everyone knows it goes on all the time, it's written in their law.  I'm not anti-Iran by the way, I am pro-Iran and anti-Ahemdinejad-Ayatollah-pig-shit, woman-hating, sadistic dictatorships & reigns of terror.

I am not talking about Iran I am talking about Islam. Furthermore, Iran is not an Islamic state as it does govern by Islamic law in its entirety.

You're not talking about Iran?  Why are you avoiding the topic?  It just so happens that I was friggin talking about Iran and fundamentalist Islam not all Islam.  The Shah was a muslim too you know, just not a fundamentalist. I don't support the Shah either but almost 100% of Iranians agree that life under the Shah was a thousand times better than the Islamic dictatorship.

As long as your type of Islam (whatever it is)  isn't for lashings, canings, stoning men & women for adultery and cutting people's hands of for stealing and the death penalty for homosexuality then I'm all for it. If your type of  Islam still supports these Sharia laws only in a different so-called more moderate ways  than Ahmedinejackasshole's Iran then it's still wrong. How can you have a moderate 'capital punishment' or lashing for adultery?  The punishment does not fit the crime.  Any Muslim that supports 'honor killings' and such over their daughter having sex with a non-Muslim can go fuck himself.

So if Iran is not a true Islamic state then fine, I never said Ahmedinejad's regime was a  TRUE anything, except maybe a TRUE ASSLOAD OF DOG & PIG SHIT, why don't you post some articles and videos of some of your great  Islamic Utopias? Actually it doesn't have to be a utopia, just somewhere that TRUE Islamic law is practiced and women are not abused as second-class citizens.

REMEMBER, NO PLACE THAT HAS THE DEATH PENALTY FOR ADULTERY OR HOMOSEXUALITY QUALIFIES. Comprende?

a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'

For example, you said 'when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'. This is a complete liar.

This is a complete liar? I'm not a chair! .  :lol: What kind of English is that? (and he's calling me ignorant ) Did you mean a complete lie?  or maybe this guy is a complete liar?  Not a lie at all, never mind a 'complete liar,'   just slightly incorrect, for which I offer my sincere and humble apologies to Mr. Ahmedinejad-lover, actually more like an editing mistake

you can have as many as four wives (more like slaves) at a time which is POLYGAMY last time I checked.  There are some conditions such as not being a broke motherfucker and the women agreeing, check below, but it's still male-chauvinist POLYGAMY.  If you commit adultery though you get lashed and you die by slow torture of stoning in Iran and Sharia law countries.  The man can have as many as four wives but has to be able to take care of them. None of the women can have even one extra-marital affair or commit one act of adultery without dying a painful and slow death.  That's some peaceful religion, huh?




PUNISHMENT FOR NON-MARITAL SEX IN ISLAM

Examples of convictions under Sharia law


http://www.religioustolerance.org/isl_adul1.htm


http://www.islamology.org/Overview/Wome ... 0Islam.htm



Here's the 'fair' version from an Islamic site:

Polygamy in Islam *  

Polygamy (plurality of wives) is one of the controversial questions in the family system of Islam. The following are a few points worth of consideration in an effort to clarify the wisdom of polygamy and when it can be used:

 
Introduction
 
 Islam has emphasized that taking advantage of the permission of polygamy is conditional on the observance of several factors and circumstances -as it will be explained later. If the man lacks those material and moral conditions, or he is not competent enough to satisfy all of them, then he will not be eligible to take more than one wife. Also, Islam has emphasized that the basic objective of healthy marital life comes from mutual love and benevolence between the husband and the wife which normally can be found in the form of regular marriage - monogamy. Preservation of that cordiality, stability, and purity in the family life can be seen clearly in the Quranic doctrines as well as in the tradition of the prophet (p.b.u.h):

Quran says:
 "And among His Signs is this, that He created for you mates from among yourselves, that ye may dwell in tranquility with them, and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts): verily in that are Signs for those who reflect."(Quran 30: 21)"
" live with them ( wife or wives) on a footing of kindness and equity" (Quran 4:19)
"And women (wives) shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise." (Quran 2:28)

 Prophet Muhammad (P.B.U.H.) said:
"The best man among you is the best with his wife".

"The best of your women are those: Who are loving and kindly; who look after their chastity; Who are not arrogant or disobedient to their husbands; Who are faithful to their husband in their absence."

Imam Ali (A.S.) said:
"By your chastity protect your wife from casting an evil eye on others stealthily and entertaining an idea of sin".
"Be kind to your wife and treat her well. Kindness will change her for the better, will keep her satisfied and will preserve her health and beauty".
 
Is there a perfect Solution?

As a realistic religion that legislates real solutions for humanity, Islam avoided any utopian doctrine. In many of its laws, Islam keeps in mind the flexibility of the law and the realistic factors and circumstances. A law can not be 100% good for every person, groups, culture, or country. However, Islam considers the over all values and gaining. If the advantages of a law overcome its disadvantages, then that law would be legislated and vise versa.  This concept is driven from Quran: "They ask thee concerning wine and gambling. Say: "In them is great harm (sin) and some benefits for people; but the harm (sin) is greater than the benefits (2:219)."  
 
Polygamy, like any other law, has its disadvantages and advantages on both the husband and the wife. But do those advantages overweigh the disadvantages?
Let the following brief study judge that:
I)                   Polygamy before Islam

 Polygamy existed before the advent of Islam among several civilizations and religions. All that Islam has done is restricted it and make more organized and civilized.
 In his book, History of Civilization (vol.1 p.61), Will Durant says:
The clerics in the Middle Ages thought that polygamy was an innovation of the Prophet of Islam. But that is not the case. As we have seen, it has been practiced in most societies before Islam.
 Among the history lots of stories were narrated about men who cheated on their wives or got married with more than one. Take an example from the bible: some people accuse prophets and make them look sinful just not to say they had more than one wife. Isn't that Abraham (peace be up on him) was married Sarah and from her he had Isaac and simultaneously he was married to his made and had from her Ishmael?
The following are some phrases from the bible
"After he left Hebron, David took more concubines and wives in Jerusalem, and more sons and daughters were born to him."
2 Samuel 5:13
"He (Solomon) had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines..."
1 Kings 11:3
"And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.
Genesis 4:19
"If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the first-born son be hers that was hated: then it shall be, when he maketh..."
Deuteronomy 21:15
"if he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall her not diminish."
Exodus 21:10

The point here is not to say that monogamy never been practiced or not applicable. However, it is just a wondering that how come the legalized polygamy in Islam is inferior to the unlimited clandestine adultery in other religions and civilizations.
 
 
II)                Polygamy and the wife acceptance:

 

a)   What if a woman does not accept polygamy

First of all, marriage in one of its phases is a legal contract between the wife and the husband. Both partners have the right to add any condition that they think it will help them to protect their future life. So, if a woman thinks polygamy is against her interest, then she has the full right to announce her objection during the marriage contract as a condition and a right for a valid contract or else it will be nullified. Based on that, the husband has to commit to that condition or he would have no right to keep her as a wife if she decides to get divorced and was approved by the Islamic court, especially if divorcing the husband is controlled by the wife.


b)   What if the wife's condition is disregarded?

Like in any other law, a person might misuse the law to seek his/her interest. If a husband, who previously has committed in the marriage contract not to marry another woman, decides to have a second wife, then his current wife has the right to ask for divorce and raise that issue to the Islamic court. But is it fair that the only thing the wife can do is to ask for divorce in this matter.


Is that Fair?

Answering that question is not simple since each case has its own circumstances. First of all, the question would be; why is the husband thinking about another wife, especially when both partners have agreed to dysfunction polygamy in their marriage life. In this case and before divorcing, a social worker assigned by the Islamic Court has to study the case and judges it. For instance, may be the husband wants children and his current wife is barren but yet he still loves her and wants to keep her as a wife in addition to his new one. Furthermore, if the wife is the one who is controlling the divorce process -not the husband- then she can divorce her husband if that avails her.    Overall, Same question would be asked. As an American is it fair that I can divorce my wife or she can divorce me at any time.


 
III)             Polygamy could be a Natural and social need?


What if:
-         There are some men by nature need more than one wife and their wives have no problem with polygamy.
-         Monogamy is not just a theory and is thoroughly practiced, so no more men were allowed to cheat on their wives. Do you think for that group of people- who never naturally get satisfied by one wife- Monogamy is a solution and is sufficient?
-         There are women who have no problem in marrying a man already having a wife especially if a marriage is in their interest.
-         The majority of society are women keeping in mind that:
o       Marriage age of puberty mostly begins earlier in girls than in boys.
o       The power of proliferation of women ceases at a certain age, after which pregnancy is very rare case, whereas there is no such fixed age for men.
In this case where no enough men, do we tell those women just disregard your emotion and desire or just abuse yourself through unlawful acts like being Homosexual.
 
IV)             Homosexuality but not Polygamy!
It is so ironic that several western countries and some American states legalizing homosexuality under the excuses of genetic and psychological problems or nature, but yet disregarding vehemently any excuse for polygamy.
 Keep in mind that in Homosexuality, a homo is destroying the structure of family by emphasizing strongly and exclusively on his/her lust and disregarding other bonds and factors that could create a continuation of a peaceful tranquil society. In addition to that, Homosexuality makes a person's live under the emergency of lust and desire which starts growing infinitely and calls for desire saturation at any time or any where jeopardizing the pure ordinary relation between any two people.
While in polygamy, the person is restricting him self to more responsibilities and commitments since he has to be just with his wives and treat them co-equally in everything: money, living, emotion, etc. By that, he is just establishing a bigger family and limiting him self to a clear honest accepted relation.

 
 
 
V)                Polygamy and its Preconditions in Islam

 
Islam allows polygamy on some condition and here are some of them:
a-                  The wife(s) has no objection about polygamy during or before the marriage contract. And if the husband disregards that, the wife has the right to raise that to the Islamic court.
b-                 Equitable treatment for all the wives
c-                  Number of wives not to exceed four.


 
VI)             Major disadvantages of Polygamy:

 
The following are the major disadvantages of polygamy from the Wife Perspective:

 
A.     Less time with the husband; since his spared time is now shared between two or more wives
B.     Less attention
C.     Jealousy and unshared love; since the woman likes to have full attention and full unshared love from her partner.
D.    Family malfunctioning and Chaos since husband spends less time with the children i.e. less discipline and guiding.
E.     Less money saved or given to the wife and children since money should be shared co-equally with the other family.
F.      Population problems that burden the society since both wives (may be more) are going to have children.
G.    Unfairness and discrimination; since the husband can have more than one partner while the wife should marry only and exclusively one.


But are the above disadvantages are exclusively because of polygamy, or they can be found in monogamy as well. And can any of those disadvantages considered a big obstacle if compared to the advantages of conditional pure polygamy.
The following explain each disadvantage as a case and analyze it to show whether each one is worth it to be considered a case to overweigh the advantage of polygamy.
Over all, the reader has to keep in mind that purity, honesty, justice, and doing good are one of the major attributes that Islam calls for. Therefore, any relation or behavior that is committed by the husband or the wife and it does not fall with in those categories, it would be considered a big sin and inhumane act i.e. a major disadvantages:
 "Allah commands justice, the doing of good, and liberality to kith and kin, and He forbids all shameful deeds, and injustice and rebellion: He instructs you, that ye may receive admonition" (Quran 16:90)
1.      Case "A": spending less time with the wife might be because of other factors too. For instance, the husband's job is based on overtime or even it requires lots traveling per year. So, do we say that he is not allowed to get married because there is certain time he is not sharing it with his wife or his children. Therefore, if a person is rich enough, rather than spending his time at work and traveling from one country to another, he can spends that time with another wife in a more aptly and equally controlled way. Keep in mind that, if a husband has more than one wife, he has to spend his time with his wives coequally.  
2.      Case "B": Less attention to the wife might occur because of other reasons too. If the husband is so much occupied by his job, business, or studying for sure his wife will not get adequate attention. And if she does get some attention and caring it will not meet her expectations. In this matter, Should we tell those kinds of husbands to divorce their wives or not to get married if there have not been married yet. Nevertheless, the wife should understand her husband circumstances. She should bare with him the side affect of marrying another wife since she did not from the beginning had objected about the idea of polygamy and made a condition in her marriage contract.
3.      Case "C":  That is right and the emotion of woman and her interest should be highly considered by the husband. However, if the conditions of polygamy are satisfied and the husband's desire is above normal then what would be the solution. Should he just go a head and cheat on his wife with women that usually hang out with any guy. And by that he will be transferring diseases, committing adultery, and threatening the family stability. Especially when cheating on the wife becomes habitual with any lady that clicks on his emotion.
4.      Case "D": Family malfunctioning is a wide general problem and is not exclusively a result of polygamy. Moreover, it is because of unwise decisions and acts regardless of the size of the family. A person might find a disordered family though it just consists of: husband, wife, and one child. But, all of its members are conveniently ignorant and irresponsible.
5.      Case "E": Applying that case in the family is a disaster. And, its argument is so weak because what if there is a big family. Or, what if that family consists of more than 5 or 6 members does. Should the wife start aborting lives to control the budget of the family? Even in the case of using lawful birth control ways, it would be forbidden in Islam if they are used because of the fear of poverty. The Muslim, above all, has to rely on God, in any aspect of life , because God is the one that bestowed upon him/her before any one else, and because of His bestowing and wisdom you have the tools and abilities to make money: "Kill not your children for fear of want (poverty): We shall provide sustenance for them as well as for you. Verily the killing of them is a great sin" Quran 17:31.Therefore, that case is a big deal for those who really weigh things based on money and materialism but it is not so with pious people if the money where coequally and wisely shared. Nevertheless, money is not everything. The husband who is rich now might be poor tomorrow. And the husband whose job is very good today might be jobless one day. But Moreover, the Muslim, above all, has to rely on God, when he is involved in any thing, because God is the one that bestowed upon him/her before any one else, and because of His bestowing and wisdom you have the tools and ability to make money: "Kill not your children for fear of want (poverty): We shall provide sustenance for them as well as for you. Verily the killing of them is a great sin" Quran 17:31.
 
6.      Case "F": That argument could be used in any big family even if it falls under the Monogamy practice. Organizing the population is fine with Islam as long as no abortion is involved even in the early the development phases when the fetus still in like fertilized egg or zygote. So, a husband who has two families with acceptable number of kids rather than having big family with numerous numbers of children will not threat population.
7.      Case "G": That might sound a fair complain and objection but if we research it and analyze it, it would not be that valid and practical. It is just a utopian objection that is driven by emotional reaction.
First, because Islam considers the husband as the main supervisor in the family though the wife has it important supervisory role: "Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Quran 4. 34" It is the husband's responsibility to find a job, work hard, make money, make the life of his wife and family comfortable and if the wife is working, the money that she makes will be her exclusively and has the full right not to spend it on the husband. Also, while men emotionally -and even physiologically- more rigid and they are more prepared for hard circumstances and environment women usually are more emotional, benign, and sensitive. Such factors, in addition to some others, make the husband more reliable to be in the charge of supervisory.
Second, the wife is more toward one-to-one exclusive loving relation. Her complex emotions make her more comfortable in being dedicated to one person i.e. one husband; especially if she feels that her husband is the person that can offer her protection, love, honesty, and tranquility. And that might me the explanation why usually women are more jealous than men. They, generally speaking, go crazy if they feel or even see the husband looking or talking kindly to another woman.

Third and as described above, the wife-in general-considers emotion as a priority, and if she is getting full attention and love from the husband side, she will not feel comfortable in sharing her emotion with another man nor giving him her body since any physical contact should first pass through the gate of honest, valid emotion.  However, some women might not be that way, but as mentioned before the law goes with majority. If there are some special cases then they have to be reviewed by an Islamic Court for proper Islamic solution. On the other hand, the husband, especially in the long run of marriage, might give emotion less attention.  He, in general, would be more attracted and attached to physical beauty than emotion; since he sees in that attraction an ultimate satisfaction for his desire. That physiological behavior, which widely seen in men, becomes a threat on the relation with wife if it starts growing or becomes uncontrolled. Since, it will push the husband to have unlawful hidden affairs with other women causing less attention and caring on the wife side. In that situation, when the husband's sexual desire can not be saturated by just one woman - especially when his wife has pregnancy or menstrual related issues or not emotionally ready when he needs her, what would be the solution?
Fourth, assume the following the husband marries more than one wife and those wives each one of them marries additional husband then what about the children to whom they belong or to whom they listen.  And if the husband wants to apply his supervisory role, the wife of two husbands might end up of two contradicted statement .Also, who is going to spend on the family?  Overall, a family, like any other healthy organization, can not have two principals or supervisors. Can a person imagine a country directed by two presidents?
So theoretically it might sound good for the wife to have more than one husband, but since Islam considers the husband as the main supervisor of the family it would not be practical at all.

 

In general, Polygamy is not allowed if it will become a destructive behavior and carelessness. And the husband who is misusing it, he is basically misusing the law. In such case, the impious human is the problem not the law itself.
 

* By Ibraheem Serhan Amely


And here's the 'western progaganda' (according to you) that makes me a 'complete liar' in fucking England no less:

Muslim husbands with more than one wife to get extra benefits as ministers recognise polygamy

By JAMES SLACK

Last updated at 11:22 04 February 2008


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-512043/Muslim-husbands-wife-extra-benefits-ministers-recognise-polygamy.html#


Husbands living in a "harem" with multiple wives have been cleared to claim state benefits for all their different partners.
A Muslim man with four spouses - which is permitted under Islamic law - could receive £10,000 a year in income support alone.
He could also be entitled to more generous housing and council tax benefit, to reflect the fact his household needs a bigger property.
Scroll down for more...




Extra benefits: Muslim men with multiple wives can claim more for income support

Ministers have decided that, even though bigamy is a crime in Britain, polygamous marriages can be recognised formally by the state - provided they took place overseas, in countries where they are legal.

The outcome will chiefly benefit Muslim men with more than one wife.

Ministers estimate that up to a thousand polygamous partnerships exist in Britain, although they admit there is no exact record.

Potentially, the benefits bill for income support could reach £10m.

New guidelines on income support from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) state: "Where there is a valid polygamous marriage the claimant and one spouse will be paid the couple rate (£92.80).

"The amount payable for each additional spouse is presently £33.65."

Income support for all of the wives may be paid directly into the husband's bank account, if the family so choose.

Chris Grayling, the shadow work and pensions secretary, said that the decision was "completely unjustifiable".

He added: "You are not allowed to have multiple marriages in the UK, so to have a situation where the benefits system is treating people in different ways is totally unacceptable and will serve to undermine confidence in the system.

"This sets a precedent that will lead to more demands for the culture of other countries to be reflected in UK law and the benefits system."

Mr Grayling also accused the Government of trying to keep the ruling quiet because the topic is so controversial.

Corin Taylor, research director for the Taxpayers' Alliance, said: "British taxpayers are paying a record amount of tax so the Government has a duty to make sure that every penny is spent properly.

"Polygamy is not something which British law allows and therefore British taxpayers should not have to pay for extra benefits for second or third wives.

"If other countries sanction polygamy that is fine but the British taxpayer should not have to fund it."

Ministers launched a review of the benefit rules for polygamous marriages in November 2006, after it emerged that some families had benefited financially.

The review concluded in December last year with agreement that the extra benefits should continue to be paid. But the decision was not publicly announced.

Four departments - the Treasury, the DWP, HM Revenue and Customs, and the Home Office - were involved in the review, which concluded that recognising multiple marriages conducted overseas was 'the best possible' option. In Britain, bigamy is punishable by up to seven years in prison.

Islamic law permits men to have up to four wives at any one time - known as a harem - provided the husband spends equal amounts of time and money on each of them.

The DWP believes the number of people in polygamous marriages entering Britain has fallen since the 1988 Immigration Act, which makes it harder to bring more than one wife to the UK.

But, while a married man cannot obtain a spouse visa to bring a second wife into Britain, some multiple partners may be able to enter the country via other legal routes such as tourist visas, student visas or work permits.

Officials have also identified a potential loophole by which a man can divorce his wife under British law while continuing to live with her as his spouse under Islamic law, and obtain a spouse visa for a foreign woman who he can legally marry.

Immigration rules say entry clearance may not be withheld from a second wife where the husband has divorced his previous wife, and the divorce is thought to be one of convenience.

This is so, even if the husband is still living with the previous wife and to issue the entry clearance would lead to the formation of a polygamous household.

Muslim couples are only married in the eyes of the British state if they undergo a register office wedding as well as a Nikah, or religious ceremony.

Muslim groups say it is quite common for men here to undergo more than one Nikah with different wives. This does not count as bigamy since only the first marriage is legally recognised.

A DWP spokesman said: 'There are fewer than 1,000 polygamous marriages in the UK and only a small percentage of these are claiming social security benefit.

"We recently reviewed the rules regarding benefit payments to customers in a polygamous marriage, which conclude that the rules in place since 1987 provide the necessary safeguards to ensure there is no financial advantage for claimants in a valid polygamous marriage."


http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic-art/538793/92728/A-woman-in-the-predominantly-Muslim-city-of-Banda-Aceh




http://www.worldlawdirect.com/forum/human-rights/29189-indonesia-must-repeal-cruel-new-stoning-caning-law.html

A new Indonesian bylaw that endorses stoning to death for adultery and caning of up to 100 lashes for homosexuality should be repealed immediately, Amnesty International said on Thursday.

The local Islamic Criminal Code was passed by the Aceh Provincial House of Representatives on Monday. It forbids a number of acts including alcohol consumption, gambling, intimacy between unmarried couples, adultery and fornication, and homosexuality.

"The new criminal bylaw flies in the face of international human rights law as well as provisions of the Indonesian constitution," said Sam Zarifi, Amnesty International's Asia-Pacific director.

"Stoning to death is particularly cruel and constitutes torture, which is absolutely forbidden under all circumstances in international law."

Indonesia's central government has indicated that the law may contravene Indonesia's existing human rights protections under the country's constitution.

"We welcome the concerns expressed by different levels of the Indonesian government about these laws," Zarifi said. "But the proof is in the doing, and as long as these laws stay on the books they pose a serious threat to Indonesia's international human rights obligations."

Some of these provisions, particularly punishment by caning, are not new in Aceh and already violate international human rights standards on cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.

However, this is the first time that local legislators have included stoning to death (rajam) as a penalty for those who commit adultery. International human rights law and standards oppose the extension of the death penalty to new crimes.

Amnesty International has urged Aceh's newly elected legislature, due to take office in October, to repeal the law as matter of urgent priority.

Amnesty International has also called on the new legislature to ensure that all local regulations in Aceh are in full conformity with international human rights law and standards, and other human rights provisions set out in the Indonesian Constitution and in the 1999 Law on Human Rights.

The Indonesian government should ensure that the decentralization process and regional autonomy does not come at the expense of human rights.

Local Islamic Law was gradually put in place in Aceh from 1999-2000 through various autonomy packages. Caning was introduced a few years ago as a punishment meted out by Islamic courts for offences such as gambling, theft and adultery. At least 31 men and four women convicted of gambling were caned under local Islamic law in Aceh in 2005 and at least eight people (five men and three women) convicted for gambling or adultery

POLYGAMY UNVEILED IN QUEENS, NEW YORK

May 20th, 2009
by anyanwu35.






http://blsciblogs.baruch.cuny.edu/writingny/2009/05/20/polygamy-unveiled-in-queens-new-york/





http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/beliefs/sharia_1.shtml


All aspects of a Muslim's life are governed by Sharia. Sharia law comes from a combination of sources including the Qur'an (the Muslim holy book), the Hadith (sayings and conduct of the prophet Muhammad) and fatwas (the rulings of Islamic scholars).


Many people, including Muslims, misunderstand Sharia. It's often associated with the amputation of limbs, death by stoning, lashes and other medieval punishments. Because of this, it is sometimes thought of as draconian. Some people in the West view Sharia as archaic and unfair social ideas that are imposed upon people who live in Sharia-controlled countires.


Many Muslims, however, hold a different view. In the Islamic tradition Sharia is seen as something that nurtures humanity.  :lol: They see the Sharia not in the light of something primitive but as something divinely revealed. In a society where social problems are endemic, Sharia frees humanity to realise its individual potential.

[Negentropic]

http://gemsofislamism.tripod.com/khomeini_works.html

Why Should We Care About the Ayatollah Khomeini, What He Wrote or What He Said?

"The Imam", Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (1902-89), is noteworthy to history for essentially one reason, his leadership of the Iranian Revolution of 1979. As mentioned elsewhere on this site,

http://gemsofislamism.tripod.com/islamo-fascism.html

http://gemsofislamism.tripod.com/khomei ... _kept.html

one of the most dramatic and unexpected political events of the 20th Century was the Iranian Islamic Revolution: the overthrow of a modernizing, Westernizing Shah (monarch) of Iran, and his replacement with an anti-Western, revolutionary Islamist theocracy led by Khomeini.
For those who weren't around or weren't paying attention when it happened, the Revolution was an astonishing event, above all because
•  it lacked many the customary causes of revolution -- defeat at war (the Bolshevik Revolution), a serious financial crisis (French Revolution), peasant rebellion (Chinese Revolution), or a disgruntled military (Russian Revolution). [2A]
•  and so many average people (Iranians) were involved ("it appears to have been the most popular revolution in history" according to one scholar [3A])
•  it overthrew a regime with barrels of oil money at his disposal, protected by both a huge and feared security apparatus and a large army lavished with state-of-the-art equipment. A regime that political experts -- journalists, officials, diplomats -- would almost certainly have voted least likely of any throughout the world to be deposed; [4A]
•  the revolution progressed from strongly-worded open letters to the Shah by intellectuals calling for adherence to the constitution, (May 1977) to millions in the street and total economic paralysis from strikes (October 1978) in about a year and a half; and then in another four months (February 11 1979) to a declaration of neutrality by the military general staff (i.e. a declaration of surrender) in the face of takeovers of police armories, barracks and prisons by massive armed mobs to seize and distribute weapons. [5A]
•  it was the first modern revolution where other ideologies -- like nationalism and populism -- took a back seat to religion, in fact a back seat to theocracy, i.e. the principle of clerical rule by divine right. Islamism -- the revolution's (ultimate) ideology -- was until then unheard of, or at least considered by outsiders too antiquated and otherwise ill-equipped to inspire a revolution [6A]
The aftershocks of the revolution were many. In a matter of one or two years, the most populous and militarily powerful state in a region home to two-thirds of the world's proven reserves of oil, had been transformed from the "future Japan" or Germany of the Mideast, into an avowedly anti-American and culturally anti-Western state. Khomeini dubbed Iran's erstwhile ally the "Great Satan," and threw his support behind the seizure of the U.S. Embassy by a revolutionary group and the 444-day-long hostage-taking of its staff.
At the same time that Americans -- from the foreign policy elite to the man-in-the-street -- were aghast and angered, Islamists -- both Shi'a and Sunni -- were thrilled and energized by the revolution. If Iran could be taken over, what Muslim country couldn't be?! Assassinations, bombings, kidnappings and rebellions followed the revolution in the Muslim world, including
•  a two-week-long takeover of in Mecca of Islam's holiest mosque by a messianic sect, ending only after French military assistance and the deaths of hundreds of Saudi insurgents (1979),
•  the machine gunning of the pro-American Egyptian President during a military review by some of his own soldiers (1981),
•  the deaths of 10,000 to 25,000 following an Islamist rebellion and subsequent merciless crackdown in Syrian city of Hama (1982),
•  the bombing of the American Embassy and French and American barracks in Beirut, killing hundreds of peace-keeping troops (1983).
20+ years later, enthusiasm has abated both out and inside Iran. No other Muslim countries followed Iran's example and the Islamic Republic itself hasn't come close to meeting the goals of the revolution like self-sufficiency or an end to poverty.
(see: http://gemsofislamism.tripod.com/khomei ... _kept.html),
But the revolution lives on, still a powerful force to be reckoned with in Middle East politics. Though its supporters are no longer a majority they retain power, determined as ever, financing kindred Islamists in Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine and elsewhere. [7A]
________________________________________
The Ayatollah
Khomeini's importance to the revolution is hard to overstate. He was not just the unifying figure but its architect and emotional, spiritual touchstone. The crowds that gathered for his return from exile and for his funeral ten years later were some of the largest and most emotional in Iran's history. In between these events he ruled Iran. [8A])
A senior Shi'ite Muslim cleric (a "Grand Ayatollah"), Khomeini was from the beginning of his public life a devoted enemy of Iran's then ruler, the Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi and everything the Shah stood for: secularism and Westernization. It was Khomeini's 1963 arrest that provoked the first massive demonstrations against the Shah, and Khomeini who worked to inspire and lead clerical opposition to the Shah during his 14 years in exile.
________________________________________
Why This Page?
There is no shortage of books about Khomeini and his times. What this page endeavors to do is use Khomeini's own words (albeit translated) to tell the story of his ideas, his vision, and how he dealt with frustrations to implementing them. To do it without worrying about how not to bite the visa-providing-hand of the Iranian government, and without nostalgia or awe for the original popular enthusiasm and power of the Islamic Revolution. To put emphasis on what Khomeini said that most Iranians and outside observers were either unaware of or ignored, rather than Khomeini's life or why he became the leader of the revolution. Hopefully what you read will shed light on the person some (including the American Ambassador to the United Nations), thought was "some kind of saint." [9A]
Note on translations: All quotes by Khomeini are translated by others. Some are by supporters (Hamid Algar, the IRNA) or apologists (J. Borujerdi), others by detached academic scholars (Hamid Dabashi), unsympathetic professionals (Asghar Schirazi, the FBIS U.S. government agency), or outright professional foes of Khomeini (Iranians Amir Taheri and the members of the Homa Darabi Foundation). Surprisingly, you may find it's sometimes hard to tell the point of view of the translators without knowing it ahead of time!
________________________________________
Notes on "Intro"
[1A] Khomeini is credited with dozens of books, ( http://www.geocities.com/ahlulbayt14/khom.html lists 43 by him, and there is a 22 (16?) volume set of his letters and proclamations between 1964 and 1977 published in Sahifeh-ye Nur. (Introduction by Sayyid Ali Khamenei. 16 volumes. Tehran: Markaz-e Madarek-e Farhangi-ye Enqelab-e Islami, 1361/1982
(info from Theology of Discontent, The Ideological Foundations of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, by Hamid Dabashi, New York University Press, New York and London c1993, p.425, 581)
But the six listed here are the ones most frequently described by his biographers and commentators. So far as I can tell, four of these six -- Resaleh, Velayat-e Faqih, Velayat-e Faqih (The Regency of the Theologian), Jehad-e Akbar and Political Will and Testament -- have been translated into English.
________________________________________
[2A] Arjomand, Turban for the Crown, (1988), p.191
________________________________________
[3A] Massive size of the revolution:
it appears to have been the most popular revolution in history in the sense that at least ten percent of the Iranian population participated, compared to little more than one percent for the 1776 American, 1789 French, or 1918 Russian revolutions. ...
Numbers from Charles Kurzman, The Unthinkable Revolution in Iran, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004), p. 121, quoted in "Patterns of Discontent: Will History Repeat in Iran?" by Michael Rubin and Patrick Clawson, Middle East Review of International Affairs, March 2006
________________________________________
[4A] Abrahamian, Iran, 1982, p.496; Harney, Priest, 1998, p.2, 179 Marveling at the overthrow of the Shah, Abrahamian describes the regime as having seemed "as durable as the massive dams ... so firmly grounded that it was indestructible;" and Harney describes it as "invulnerable" and "seemingly invincible and well-armed"
________________________________________
[5A] Abrahamian, Iran, 1982, p.502, 513, 529
________________________________________
[6A] Kepel, Jihad, (2002) p.194
________________________________________
[7A] Aid by the Islamic Republic of Iran to Hezbollah in Lebanon:
... Hezbollah's political rhetoric has centred on calls for the destruction of the state of Israel. Its definition of Israeli occupation has also encompassed the idea that the whole of Palestine is occupied Muslim land and it has argued that Israel has no right to exist.
The party was long supported by Iran, which provided it with arms and money.

from: "Who are Hezbollah?" Thursday, 4 April, 2002, 11:04 GMT 12:04 UK http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1908671.stm
________________________________________
Palestinian groups:
Iran has decided to increase its financial aid to some organizations that oppose peace efforts in the Middle East. Iran has allocated a special budget for the support of some Palestinian groups who lost their sources of funding when the Soviet Union and the communist bloc collapsed, and when Libya stopped providing material support to the Palestinian organizations.
A source very close to the Revolutionary Guards said that the leader of the [Palestinian] Islamic Jihad movement, Ramadhan Shalah, had visited Iran last week heading a large delegation that included the Islamic Jihad leadership, Hamas representatives, and Ahmad Jibril, leader of the PFLP - General Command, to participate in a symposium held in Tehran in support of the Intifada.

from article 'Ali Nouri Zadeh Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), June 8, 2002.
translated in "Memri Special Dispatch Series - No. 387" http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page= ... ID=SP38702
________________________________________
Iraqi militia fighters:
Britain accused Iran's Revolutionary Guards on Wednesday of supplying weapons to Shi'ite militia in Iraq used to attack British troops. ... a splinter group from the militia of radical Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. ...
The attackers "were using technically advanced equipment that had previously been used by Lebanese Hezbollah, and they are linked with Iran. ....
Attacks in Iraq were carried out using armour-piercing explosives and infrared control mechanisms "which basically you would need specific expertise to use" and were similar to devices used by Hezbollah, the official said.
While Iran's government has publicly denied it supports Iraqi militia, "there was some suggestion that this could be elements of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard that were involved." ...

from: "Britain blames Iran for Iraq attacks on UK troops" 05 Oct 2005 15:22:10 GMT
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L05558689.htm
________________________________________
[8A]Khomeini's return to Iran: "men and women sobbed openly, the joy mixed with disbelief ... Even conservative estimates numbered the crowd at no less than three million." (from: In the Name of God : The Khomeini Decade by Robin Wright c1989, p.37)
________________________________________
[9A] "... in his first few months in power a majority of Iranian and foreign observers of the revolution were so enthusiastic about its authentic and popular basis that their judgments about Khomeini were coloured by wishful idealism. ... Clearly, both Ambassador Andrew Young, who thought of Khomeini has a kind of saint, and the State Department's Iran Country Director Henry Precht, who believed some American newspapers were misreading and exaggerating Khomeini's early writings, proved to be wrong." from: p.10 Iran Since the Revolution , by Sepehr Zabih, Johns Hopkins Press, 1982
________________________________________

Kashf al-Asrar

Khomeini's first book was Kashf al-Asrar, aka Secrets Unveiled, was published in 1942 "to little notice," while Khomeini was still a minor cleric. A short, unsigned book/pamphlet its ostensive theme was a defense of Shi'ism against theological attacks by its Islamic arch-rival the Wahhabi sect. Those who've written about Khomeini describe its actual theme as (variously): an attack on Iran's recently deposed ruler the militant anti-clerical modernizer Reza Shah, on the renegade Shi'a clergymen who had collaborated with the Shah, or on the "growing number of secular intellectuals" in Iran -- specifically a popular, influential writer by the name of Ahmad Kasravi. Kasravi was assassinated three years later by Fedayeen of Islam, an early Islamist terrorist group. According to Iranian journalist Amir Taheri, the assassins interpreted Khomeini's book as a fatwa (Islamic legal decree) calling for Kasravi's death. [1B]
________________________________________
Khomeini on Killing and Conquest
No complete English translation of the book/pamphlet has ever been published as far as I can tell, but Amir Taheri did translate a snippet of it where Khomeini explains the importance of war, violence and conquest for Muslims:
Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled and incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of [other] countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world.
But those who study Islamic Holy War will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world ... Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless.
Islam says: kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers]?
Islam say: Kill them [the non-Muslims], put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]. Does this mean sitting back until [non-Muslims] overcome us?
Islam says: kill in the service of Allah those who may want to kill you! Does this mean that we should surrender to the enemy?
Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for Holy Warriors!
There are hundreds of other ayat [Qur'anic verses] and ahadith urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all that mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim. [2B]
Some more nuggets from Kashf al-Asrar were translated for The Little Green Book, a book of Khomeini quotes published after the 1979 Islamic Revolution as a takeoff on "The Little Red Book" of legendary Chinese Communist leader Mao Tse Tung.
________________________________________
On the Danger of Music
We affirm that music engenders immorality, lust, and licentiousness, and stifles courage, valor, and the chivalrous spirit; it is forbidden by Quranic laws and must not be taught in the schools.[3B]
________________________________________
On the Danger of any Innovation in Islamic Law
If anyone, in the guise of pursuing Islamic justice, interprets the Law in a manner contrary to the divine will, he has committed the sin of innovation. Learned men are bound to condemn him or they will themselves be condemned. [4B]
________________________________________
On the Danger of "A Thousand Varieties of Corruption"
Khomeini supporter Hamid Algar translated four pages from Kashf al-Asrar [5B]. A tour de force of fury and self-pity, it rages against just about everything --
•  the government of the Shah's father, Reza Shah -- "idiotic and treacherous ... poisonous ... heinous... a gang to plunder the country," which allowed "women's going naked in the streets" (a reference to the Shah's father's banning of the traditional hijab covering of women's faces, not actual nudity) and the practice of "lechery, treachery, music, dancing, and a thousand other varieties of corruption."
•  The International Time Zone system, with its ridiculous requirement that different cities in the same zone to use the same time -- "what nightmare is this into which we are plunged?" [6B].
•  The Iranian people were not spared a tongue lashing either --
Wherever you go and whomever you encounter, from the street sweeper to the highest official, you will see nothing but disordered thoughts, confused ideas, contradictory opinions, self-interest, lechery, immodesty, criminality, treachery, and thousands of associated vices. [Islam and Revolution, p.171]
Surrounded by idiots and knaves, his wisdom unappreciated, Khomeini could only shake his head in exasperation.
There is much to be said, much that is weighing on my mind, but where are the ears to listen to me, where is the perception to understand me? [Islam and Revolution, p.173]
________________________________________
On Islamic Government (Version 1.0) -- Rule by Islamic Clerics Isn't Necessary, God's Law Is
Although Khomeini is furious with the Shah's regime, he specifically says,
"We do not say that government must be in the hands of the faqih [an Islamic jurist]; rather we say that government must be run in accordance with God's law ..."(p.170)
Elsewhere he asserts that the practical
power of the mujtaheds excludes the government and includes only simple matters such as legal rulings, religious judgments, and intervention to protect the property of minors and the weak. Even when rulers are oppressive and against the people, they [the mujtaheds] will not try to destroy the rulers. [7B]. [source: Kashf-i Asrar, (Secrets Revealed) (Tehran, n.d.) p.186]
This statement is noteworthy because it directly contradicts the idea Khomeini is most famous for -- that not only should the faqih govern, but that their suitability for ruling is obvious to
anyone who has come general awareness of the beliefs and ordinances of Islam, [Velayat-e Faqih, Hokumat-e-Eslami (Islamic Government), p.27]
and prevented from coming to pass only by
several centuries of malicious propaganda on the part of the imperialists. [8B].
________________________________________
Notes on "Kashf al-Asrar"
[1B] In Khomeini: Life of the Ayatollah (p.61), Baqer Moin says "the real target of Kasf al-Asrar was not Reza Shah but the renegade clergymen who in Khomeini's eyes had actively collaborated with" Reza Shah
Amir Taheri says Kashf al Asrar (Key to the Secrets)" written
to rebut criticism of Islam by a growing number of secular intellectuals. ... Khomeini's pamphlet was vitriolic both in sentiment and tone and amounted to a virtual death sentence on Kasravi. Without naming the guilty intellectual, Khomeini denounced all those who criticized Islam as mahdur ad-damm, meaning that their blood must be shed by the faithful. The pamphlet was almost totally ignored.
except for Fedayeen. Fedayeen of Islam member Hussein Emami, assassinated Ahmad Kasravi in 1945, He was promptly arrested and sentenced to death but pardoned after Shi'a clergy applied pressure on the Shah. (Taheri, p.101)
________________________________________
[2B] Qom 1986. (Originally published in Qom in 1942 and reprinted in Teheran in 1980 and 1983). Translated here by an Iranian journalist and Khomeini critic Amir Taheri, from: Holy Terror, London 1987, p.226-7.]
________________________________________
[3B] Little Green Book, p.12 (The Little Green Bookcontains quotations from Khomeini's three books: Mysteries unveiled, The Guardianship of the Jurist, The Explanation of Problems. Originally published in French as Les Principles Politiques, Philosphiques, Sociaux et Religieux de L'Ayatollah Khomeiny by Editions Libres-Hallier in 1979.)
________________________________________
[4B] Little Green Book, p.24
________________________________________
[5B] Islam and Revolution (1981) p.169-173, under the title "A Warning to the Nation."
________________________________________
[6B] Islam and Revolution, p.172
Note: prior to the International Time Zone system, every locality had its own time with 12 noon set to match the moment in that city when the sun was at highest point in the sky. This was natural for an era when travel was relatively slow and infrequent, but would have played havoc with railway timetables and general modern long-distance communications. In the decades after 1880 governments around the world replaced local time with 24 international time zones, each covering 15 degrees of the earth's latitude (with some exceptions for political boundaries).
That Khomeini could only understand this process as an example of foreigners' theft of the "reason, intelligence and all other senses" of Iranian modernizers, did not bode well for country he would come to rule.
________________________________________
[7B] Kashf-i Asrar, (Secrets Revealed) (Tehran, n.d.) p.186, quoted in Abrahamian, Iran Between Two Revolutions, (1982), p.476.
Full quote:
The mujtaheds have never rejected the system of government nor the independence of Islamic governments. Even when they have judged certain laws to be against God's regulations and particular government to be bad, still they have not opposed the system of government. Nor will they. Why not? Because a decayed government is better than none at all. Consequently, the [practical] power of the mujtaheds excludes the government and includes only simple matters such as legal rulings, religious judgments, and intervention to protect the property of minors and the weak. Even when rulers are oppressive and against the people, they [the mujtaheds] will not try to destroy the rulers.
In another of his books Ervand Abrahamian emphasises that in Kashf al-Asrar Khomeini
explicitly disavowed wanting to overthrow the throne and repeatedly reaffirmed his allegiance to monarchies in general and to `good monarchs` in particular. He argued that the Shi'i clergy had never opposed the state as such, even when governments had issued anti-Islamic orders, for `bad order was better than no order at all.` He emphasized that no cleric had ever claimed the right to rule ... [Abrahamian, Khomeinism (1993), p.20]
________________________________________
[8B] [Velayat-e Faqih, Hokumat-e-Eslami (Islamic Government), p.136]
So how does the man who translated Khomeini saying "We do not say that government must be in the hands of the faqih [an Islamic jurist]; rather we say that government must be run in accordance with God's law ..." (p.170), explains away this clash with Velayat-e Faqih? In his "Imam Khomeini's Brief Biography" http:www.khomeini.org/GatewayToHeaven/Information/imamsbiography.htm Algar explains that in Kashf al-Asrar Khomeini "stopped short"
of demanding the abolition of the monarchy, proposing instead that an assembly of competent mujtahids should choose `a just monarch who will not violate God's laws and will shun oppression and wrongdoing, who will not transgress against men's property, lives and honor.` Even this conditional legitimacy of monarchy was to last `only so long as a better system could not be established.` There can be no doubt that the `better system` already envisaged by Imam Khomeini in 1944 was vilayat-i faqih, which became the constitutional cornerstone of the Islamic Republic of Iran ..." [Khomeini quotes from p.186-7 of Kashf al-Asrar]
So did Khomeini refrain from really saying what he thought of monarchy in Kashf al-Asrar until the time for frontal attack on monarchy was more propitious? This theory is also problematic. If he was worried about royal retribution it didn't stop him from making bitter attacks on Reza Shah and in any case Khomeini's name did not appear on Kashf al-Asrar which was published unsigned. Further, the monarchy in Iran was decidedly weak when Kashf al-Asrar came out (1942) than when his plan for abolishing monarchy -- Velayat-e Faqih, Hokumat-e-Eslami (The Regency of the Theologian, Islamic Government) -- was first promoted (1970). It was World War II and the Russians and British had just invaded and occupied Iran. Reza Shah had been deposing just a few months earlier and replaced him with his inexperienced young son, the young crown prince (not yet Shah) Muhammad Reza. One of the low points of Pahlavi dynasty, it was a time when premiers like Ahmed Qavam arguably held as much or more power (see: Iran Between Two Revolutions by Ervand Abrahamian, Princeton University Press, 1982, pp.225-263)
________________________________________

Resaleh Towzih al-Masa'el

A decade or so following Kashf, Khomeini wrote a couple of major books on religion, (or more accurately religious law), these being part of the process of moving up the clerical ladder and establishing a reputation as a grand ayatollah. [1C]. One of the publications (Resaleh Towzih al-Masa'el, also Risaleh Towzih al Masa'il aka Questions Clarified), is available in English, translated by J. Borujerdi, with a foreword by Michael M. J. Fischer and Mehdi Abedi.[2C].
This book is a collection of (almost 2900) questions by, and answers for, pious traditional Shi'a on how to be good Muslims. Almost all of them (80%) are about personal behavior, ritual purity, or the five pillars of Islam, (rather than public issues like business, commerce, contracts, employment, politics, etc.). [3C]
________________________________________
Non-Muslim or non-traditionalist outsiders will probably find the answers (a.k.a. fatwas) vary in tone.
•   some seem to be straightforward religious advise, (e.g. who can go on hajj to Mecca, when can a body be exhumed from a grave).
•   some seem commonsense, but outside the realm of the sacred or spiritual, (e.g. wash your hands before eating, don't eat after you are full (#2637), don't eat anything "harmful" (#2630)).
•   some seem arbitrary, (wine is unclean, hashish is not (#111), don't cut bread with a knife or peel fruit (#2637), make sure any locust you eat has grown wings and can fly (#2632)).
•   many seem picayune to the point of obsessiveness, (wash a container 3X if contaminated by a dog, but 7X if by a pig (#150,152), when urinating or defecating don't squat in the direction of Mecca (#59) and be sure to follow these (surprisingly) detailed instructions ...
After urination, one must first wash the anus if it has been soiled by urine; then one must press three times with the middle finger and the base of the penis; then one must put his thumb on top of the penis and his index finger on the bottom and pull the skin forward three times as far as the circumcision ring; and after that three times squeeze the tip of the penis. (#72, (Resaleh p.42))
•   A few deal with situations or questions that don't make a whole lot of sense -
o   A body is allowed to exhumed from its grave for (among other reasons), if "they want to take out a living child from the belly of a buried pregnant woman." (#643.)
o   The traditional Muslim practice of establishing kinship relations through the breast feeding of a nursemaid requires that "the child drinks the milk of a woman who is alive. Thus it is useless to drink from the breast of a dead woman." (#2472)
o   It's okay to eat a piece of fish even if the remaining part of the fish "falls into the water [and is] still alive." (#2621)
•   .... still others sound like they make sense more as pre-scientific village folk wisdom than sacred truths,
o   Women who are descended from the Prophet Muhammad have menopause "after they finish sixty years of age .... Others who are not of Mohammed's descent enter menopause when they finish the age of fifty." (#435. (Resaleh p.54)
But whether straightforward or weird, not one of Khomeini's answers includes an explanations of WHY a rule must be followed, or why Khomeini answered the question the way he did. The closest Khomeini ever comes to offering an explanation is this run-on sentence in question #2633 on the danger of drinking alcoholic beverages.
Wine is the root of evils and the source of sins and whoever drinks wine loses his sanity and does not recognize God at that time and has no fear of committing any sin and has no respect for anyone and does not respect the rights of his close relatives and does not turn away from flagrant indecencies and the spirit of faith and piety exits from his body and a defective spirit of devilishness, which is distant from God's mercy, will remain in him and God and the angels and the prophets and the faithful will curse him and his prayer will not be accepted for 40 days and on the judgment day his face is black and his tongue is lolling out and his saliva is running over his chest, loudly crying of thirst.
Finally, readers may be surprised to learn is that almost all of Resaleh Towzih al-Masa'el was copied, not written by Khomeini. Resaleh Towzih al-Masa'el is a sort of template, the original having been written by the revered Ayatollah Sayyid Hossein Borujerdi a decade earlier. Borujerdi's book in turn was based on a turn-of-the-century text by Sayyid Kazem Yazdi's (d.1919) `Urwat al-wuthqa ("The Handle of Trust"), making Resaleh ... a relatively newfangled work by the standards of Shi'a clerics. Khomeini was one of many mujtahid clerics who published copies of the work with slight variations on the original,[4C] though which parts are Borujerdi's original fatwas and which are Khomeini's input is not explained.
(Note: in the citations below, the numbers refer to those found in J. Borujerdi's translation, the page numbers refer to the Little Green Book, whose translations are more readable.)
________________________________________
Khomeini on Cleanliness
More than a quarter of the questions in Resaleh (846 out of nearly 2900), talk about purity and impurity. Khomeini relates
•   how many times to wash a container contaminated by a dog (three times in "small water" (a quantity of water less than about 380 liters [5C]) after first rubbing it with dirt, #150);
•   how many times to wash a container "from which a pig has drunk fluid" (seven times "with small water as well as with Kor ("big water," i.e. greater than 380 liters) or running water," #152);
•   that dogs, pigs, non-Muslims, and blood from humans and other mammals are always impure; but that such things as fish ("even if found dead in the water"), pus from a wound, and "the hairs, bones, and teeth of dead animals" (aside from dogs and pigs) are pure (#88, #104)
•   Animals that eat human excrement are impure, but can be purified by keeping them from eating human excrement for certain number of days :
40 days for a camel,
20 days for cattle
10 days for sheep,
7 or 5 for a turkey and
3 for a chicken.
(#220 Resaleh Towzih al-Masa'el, (p.63))
•   that running water (from a stream or river) with excrement or urine in it is pure provided the "odor, color, or taste" hasn't been changed by the excrement or urine (#29, #30). If it has, it can purified by "running water of rainwater which falls directly into it, or rainwater driven into it by the wind, or carried to it by a drainpipe." (#53, (Resaleh p.66)
... but says not a word about purifying water by boiling or adding iodine. In fact soap is only mentioned in regards to how to clean IT (soap) once IT'S been contaminated. (#164, #165)
COMMENT: Should we care? After all these are religious definitions of cleanliness for religious rituals and duties. You want laws of religion you listen to a religious scholar. You want disease prevention or control you go to a public health worker ... right? Not quite.
•  As the translator of Resaleh Towzih al-Masa'el (J. Borujerdi) says, "the man or woman in the streets of Iran knows but one universe, i.e. religious, and therefore has only one code for the subject under discussion," which, he goes on to explain, is why he translates the religious term for "ritually pure" (pak) simply as "clean" [6C]) -- to the average Iranian (at least at the time) the two were the same. Iran and other Muslim countries being very poor there were few if any public health officials, nurses or physicians running around to poor villages spreading the world about disease prevention at the time this book was written. The village mullah or sheikh was THE only local learned authority, the man to go to for any question. If he (and books used in his place) had nothing to say about hygiene, germs, infection, disease, it was a serious matter.
•  Furthermore, Khomeini himself is adamant (as we will later see) that Muslims should know "but one universe." That Islam must not be just one of the compartments of a Muslim's life, but guidance to cover everything in a (true) Muslim's life
God, Exalted and Almighty, ... sent laws that astound us with their magnitude. He instituted laws and practices for all human affairs ... There is not a single topic in human life for which Islam has not provided instruction and established a norm.
That some Muslims were under the impression "that Islam consists of a few ordinances concerning menstruation and parturition" was only because of the success of "foreign agents" (secular Muslims) in planting lies. [Islam and Revolution : Writings and Declarations of Imam Khomeini, p.29-30]. How, then, could hygiene be worth worrying about, if an Islamic book on cleanliness didn't "provide instruction" on it?
________________________________________
More on Purification
If a person crushes a mosquito on his skin and cannot determine whether the blood there from is the insect's or his own, this blood is pure; but if the time between the bite and the death of the mosquito is so short that no such distinction can be made, the blood is impure. (#206, Resaleh, p.61)
What difference does it make? If it's the person's own blood, it's impure and the person must wash himself. If it's the mosquito's blood, there's no such need because it's an insect and their blood is not impure.
________________________________________
Khomeini on Urinating and Defecating
Urinating and defecating are forbidden in four places: blind alleys, except with the permission of those living along them; the property of a person who has not given permission to do so; places of worship, such as certain madrasas; graves of believers, unless one does so as an insult to them. (#64, (Resaleh p.40))
It is not necessary to wipe one's anus with three stones or three pieces of fabric: a single stone of single piece of fabric is enough. But if one wipes it with a bone, or any sacred object, such as for example, a paper having the name of God on it, one may not say his prayer while in this state. (#69, (Resaleh p.41))
________________________________________
On the Impurity and Inferior Status of non-Muslims
Writing in the book's foreword, Michael M. J. Fischer and Mehdi Abedi compare the status of non-Muslims to dalat or "untouchables" in India, and suggesting its grounded more in culture than theology.
There are eleven things which are impure: urine, excrement, sperm, bones, blood, dogs, pigs, non-Moslem men and women, wine, beer, and the sweat of the excrement-eating camel. (#83 (from Resaleh p.48))
Every part of the body of a non-Moslem individual is impure, even the hair on his hand and his body hair, his nails, and all the secretions of his body. (#107 (Resaleh p.51))
The impurity of the non-Muslims is serious enough to go into some detail about. If someone converts to Islam they "automatically" have "a pure body, and pure saliva, nasal secretions, and perspiration." All clear? Not quite. "As for converts' clothing, if it has been in contact with their sweating bodies before they became converted, it remains impure." (Resaleh #207-208)
The Non-Muslim's impurity also prevents them from being allowed to possess a copy of the Qur'an
One must avoid giving the Koran to an infidel; it is even recommended that it be forcibly taken away from him if he already has it in his hands. (#139 (Resaleh p.54))
-- which clashes with another Islamic tenant -- that every effort should be made to spread Islam -- "until" as Khomeini would say, "the cry `There is no God but God` resounds over the whole world," [7C] -- by persuade non-Muslims to convert ("revert") to Islam and other means.
Another restriction gives non-Muslims a major financial incentive to convert to Islam
A Moslem will inherit from an infidel but an infidel will not inherit from a Moslem even though he is the deceased's father or son. (#2783)
In current Islamic Republic of Iran where Khomeini's fatwa was made law, this is an issue of great concern to the non-Muslim minority. As Parviz Ravani, the Zoroastrian MP complained to journalist Robin Wright, [8C]
... if my child becomes a Muslim, then all my property will go to that child upon my death. None of my other children who didn't convert will stand to get anything. That extends even to my nephew. If he becomes a Muslim, then all my property would go to him, not my own children.`
________________________________________
More Khomeini on Music
As you might expect from someone who had condemned music for "engendering immorality, lust," etc. in his first book, Khomeini limits the use of radio and television forbidding the listening/viewing of "unlawful things such as broadcasts of songs and music" (#2889). Since these songs and music contaminate the airwaves,
I do not permit their selling and buying except for those who do not use them unlawfully at all and do not permit their non-religious use by others, either." (#2990)
________________________________________
On Marriage and the Duties of Spouses to Each Other
(Note: "Contracted permanently" refers to a regular marriage contract as opposed to a temporary one allowed by Shi'ite religious law.)
A woman who has been contracted permanently must not leave the house without the husband's permission and must surrender herself for any pleasure that he wants and must not prevent him from having intercourse with her without a religious excuse. And if she obeys the husband in these the provision of her food and clothing and dwelling and other appliances mentioned in books is obligatory for the husband and if he does not provide them he is indebted to the woman, whether or not he can afford them. (#2412)
So the woman's duty is to not refuse sex with her husband (or "any pleasure that he wants") without a religious excuse (couldn't find any list of such excuses), nor leave the house without his permission. In return he must provide the wife with food, clothing, and a place to live. In addition he must not abstain from having sex with her for longer than four months. (#2418) Interestingly, "servicing the house" is not included in a wife's duties (#2414).
________________________________________
On When a Woman Should Get Married
A woman should get married shortly after she's reached puberty, or better still, just before.
It is recommended that one hurries [sic] in giving husband to a daughter who has attained puberty, meaning that she is of the age of religious accountability. His Holiness, Sadegh [the 6th Imam] salutations to him, bade that it is one of a man's good fortunes that his daughter does not see menses in his own house. (#2459)
When is that? Nine years old. Khomeini reckons that if a girl has started menstruating, "she has finished the age of nine."
A girl who does not know whether or not she has finished nine years of age, when seeing blood which does not have the sign of menses, is not menstruating. And if [the blood] has the signs of menses and she is certain of its menstrual nature she is menstruating and it becomes evident that she has finished the age of nine. (#438)
________________________________________
On Fornication and Sodomy
Considering the strict and detailed laws on just about everything else, you might assume Khomeini would be especially disapproving on sexual sins. But his fatwas on them seem oddly matter-of-fact
During sexual intercourse, if the penis enters a woman's vagina or a man's anus, fully or only as far as the circumcision ring, both partners become impure, even if they have not reached puberty; they must consequently perform their ablutions. (#104 or #349, (Resaleh p.72))
Why a child's fornicating makes it less in need of purification afterwards is not explained! Nor is why the sodomites wouldn't be headed off to get their lashes in punishment rather than worrying about proper cleanliness for salat prayer!
If a person fornicates with one's paternal or maternal aunt before marrying their daughter, he can no longer marry them [i.e. marry their daughters, his cousins]. #2394
But on the other hand if the fornication happens after the marriage to the cousin is agreed upon ....
There is no concern in the [marriage] contract involving a person who marries his own cousin (paternal or maternal) and fornicates with their mother before having intercourse with them [his cousin]. [i.e. there's no question about being able to marry the cousin.] #2395
The same interest in strangely legalistic tangent on fornication goes when gay sex is involved. There are restrictions on who the sodomite may marry, but nothing said about punishment. ...
The mother and sister and daughter of a boy who performed sodomy are unlawful to the sodomite even if the doer and giver of sodomy are both minors. ... #2405
If he [the sodomite] marries the mother or sister or daughter of a person and then practices sodomy with that person, they do not become unlawful to him. #2406
The same restrictions apply to women from families "related" to the "boy who performed sodomy" as "as a result of suckling", (i.e. where a woman breast-fed a baby from the other family) #2482.
Bestiality also seems to get light treatment. Fatwas warn of that sodomized animals are impure (#86), should be "taken out of the city and sold elsewhere" if a horse or mule (#2631), or burnt if a cow, sheep or camel (#2632), and that the sodomizer has to clean themselves by ritual bathing (#351). But the only punishment mentioned for the sodomite is reimbursing the animal's owner if the animal is destroyed.
If they have intercourse with a cow and sheep and camel their [the animals] urine and dung becomes unclean and drinking their milk will also be unlawful and they [the animals] must be killed and burned without delay, and the person who had intercourse with them must pay money to the owner. Further, if he had intercourse with any beast its milk becomes unlawful. #2632.
Was intergenerational fornication and sodomy even between close relatives so common the fatwas were necessary to sort out restrictions on the different variations? Is that why Khomeini makes no mention of punishment for fornication? Had he given up on enforcing that and just hoped the fornicators were ritually clean for their prayers?
Or did Khomeini not talk about punishments because Islamic government was not in power and not in a position to enforce them?
________________________________________
Khomeini on Enjoining the Good and Forbidding the Evil
Traditionally Muslims are commanded not just to preach to others, but to command them to do what is good and not do what is evil - evil being both acts universally agreed to be crimes (larceny, rape, murder, etc), and religious sins (eating pork, drinking wine, ignoring fast during the holy months of Ramadan, etc.). Khomeini's guidelines on how to deal with sinners start with giving them a warning, then "refraining from conversing" with them, then "breaking all relations with the sinner" (#2807), and work their way up to "beating the sinner" #2823, and finally "wounding and slaying" them. (#2824) Bodily harm is only "acceptable" if "permitted by a fully qualified Expert," an expert meaning an expert in Islamic law such as the Ayatollah Khomeini.
________________________________________
On Slavery
The idea that slavery no longer exists in Islam not withstanding, the book's index lists eight questions and clarifications under the heading of slavery. (The book was originally published in 1961!) One (confusing) example concerns the importance of sellers being able to deliver their goods
... selling a horse which has escaped is incorrect, but if an escaped slave is sold together with something deliverable, like a carpet, that deal is correct even though the slave is never found. And in the case other than a slave it is difficult. #2090
________________________________________
Those concerned about any anti-Khomeini bias in the English edition, will be reassured by comments in the book's foreword. Khomeini's fatwas discriminating against non-Muslims (we are told) are part of the "defenses of Islam," which "meld easily into a defiance of colonial subjugation." Those "who in the early days of the 1978-79 Revolution sought to discredit Khomeini by citing from his Resaleh Towzih al-Masa'il minute rules having to do with how to purify oneself after bodily elimination, after sexual activity, or indeed what exactly constitutes such offenses as bestiality" (allegedly) made themselves ridiculous by "taking these debates to absurd lengths" and displaying "a complete lack of comprehension of the logic of the traditions composing the Risaleh Towzih al-Masa'il." (Resaleh p.xxviii)) [9C]
And indeed an attempt by at least one Khomeini opponent (Shoja-ud-din Shafa) to publicize Resaleh Towzih al-Masa'il fell flat, leaving Khomeini's popularity undiminished. [10C] Maybe that's the most remarkable thing about Resaleh Towzih al-Masa'il: Though it showed him preoccupied with issues more of interest to a medieval village mullah than a revolutionary leader (Khomeini wasn't a grad student when he "wrote" this book, but nearly 60), it did nothing to slow that mullah on the path leading to the take over a nation of 60 million and creation of a legend. A testament to the shrewdness of Khomeini and the haplessness of his royal opponent perhaps.
________________________________________
Notes on "Resaleh Towzih al-Masa'el"
[1C] Abrahamian, Khomeinism, p.10
________________________________________
[2C] Risaleh Towzih al-Masa'il, originally published in 1961, English translation published after the revolution in 1982 under the title:
An Unabridged Translation of Resaleh Towzih al-Masael by Ayatollah Sayyed Ruhollah Mousavi Khomeini, Translated by J. Borujerdi, with a Foreword by Michael M. J. Fischer and Mehdi Abedi, Westview Press/ Boulder and London, c1984
All page numbers referring to Resaleh in this section refer to this English translation.
More on the point of view of the authors of the forward to the English language edition of Risaleh Towzih al-Masa'il. Here is their ingeniously absurd defense of Khomeini's fatwas on the importance of subjugating non-Muslims:
Some of these rules, such as Khomeini's invocation of the `Codes of Omar`, are what Khomeini calls matters of honor (Problem #2834); That Muslims must be politically, economically, and symbolically dominant and not subordinate to non-Muslims. Some of these rules are also defenses of Islam, and meld easily into a defiance of colonial subjugation. Anything that contributes to political, economic and commercial dominance by non-Muslims is forbidden (Problems #2829-2934), and this includes dealing with puppets of the great powers, among which Khomeini primarily mentions Israel ... the buying and selling of televisions and radios (Problems #2889-90) (Resaleh p.xxiii)
i.e., the struggle against the unjust inequality of colonialism is furthered by making sure non-Muslims are denied equal rights.
________________________________________
[3C] Risaleh Towzih al-Masa'il -- Topics it dealt with:
Of the almost 2900 fatwas only the following go outside of purification, prayer, fasting, and alms-giving:
•  347 problems -- trade [buying and selling, prepaid deals, renting, share-cropping, tree-sharing, deputation, loans, drawing a draft, mortgage, guaranteeing]
•  145 problems -- marriage and divorce
•  50 problems -- enjoining good and forbidding evil (p.xxv-xxvi)
________________________________________
[4C]How Risaleh Towzih al-Masa'il was not an original work: from the introduction to Risaleh Towzih al-Masa'il:
The first Risaleh Towzih al-Masa'il (Explanatory treatise on questions of religion) was issued by the leading ayatollah of the 1950s, Ayatollah Sayyid Hossein Borujerdi (d 1960). It was compiled by Ali Asghar Karabaschi as a layman's abstraction from a turn of the century text, Sayyid Kazem Yazdi's (d.1919) `Urwat al-wuthqa ("The Handle of Trust"). In this form, it is thus a very new genre of book. Since the 1950s, every senior cleric with claims to being an ayatollah or marja-i taqlid, has issued a nearly identical Risaleh Towzih al-Masa'il. So identical are they, that at one point a volume was issued called Dah Hashiyeh ('Ten Commentaries`) which was the original Borujerdi test with footnotes explaining the minor difference in wording among the other Risaleh." ((Resaleh p.xvi)
________________________________________
[5C] Purification of water, how much is a Kor?
1. Kor; and that is a volume of water that fill at least a container measuring 3.5 spans in length, depth, and width, and which weighs at least 383.906 KGs. If it comes into contact with unclean substance, it remains clean unless its color, taste, or smell is changed. [http://www.ahl-ul-bait.org/english/Q&A/indexes.htm]
________________________________________
[6C]
The choice of certain English words for their Persian or Arabic counterparts needs justification, perhaps the most important ones being (clean) and (unclean) which were chosen for (pak) and (najes), respectively. The man or woman in the streets of Iran knows but one universe, i.e. religious, and therefore has only one code for the subject under discussion. .... The more educated ones may know of the two universes involved, i.e. religious and scientific, but use the same worlds when conducting a discourse in either universe, and are apt to employ scientific data to defend religious beliefs.

(from: J. Borujerdi writing Translator's note, p.xxxi, A Clarification of Questions : An Unabridged Translation of Resaleh Towzih al-Masael by Ayatollah Sayyed Ruhollah Mousavi Khomeini, Translated by J. Borujerdi)
________________________________________
[7C] Excerpt from Speeches and Messages of Imam Khomeini on the Unity of the Muslims, p.108
________________________________________
[8C] Wright, Robin. The Last Revolution c2000, p.216),
________________________________________
[9C] Point of view. Resaleh p.xxviii)
________________________________________
[10C] ibid. (Resaleh p.xxviii)
________________________________________

Tahrir al-Vasileh

Khomeini's other major book on religious law was Tahrir al-Vasileh, aka Tahrirolvasyleh, (Commentary on the Vehicle). The "Vehicle" it was commenting on was Vasileh tun-Nejat, (Vehicle of Salvation), by S. Abul-Hasan Isfahani. (Like Resaleh Towzih al-Masael, Tahrir al-Vasileh was based on another book.) Khomeini wrote it in Arabic "to get past Iranian censors" in 1965 while he was in exile in Bursa, Turkey.[1D]
Longer than Resaleh, it lists 4400 questions and with roughly twice as many of them covering "socio-political issues abandoned by his contemporaries, such as holy war and `ordering the good and forbidding the evil.`" Khomeini weighs in on economic issues, declaring that "the leader of the Muslim community, ... has the right to fix prices and generally interfere in the regulation of commerce" on behalf of "the interests of Islamic society." [2D] That notwithstanding, Tahrir al-Vasileh still has only has only a little over 1000 fatawa on questions directly or indirectly to public law.[3D] Nothing like enough to develop government policy (see below).
Curiously, though the makers of the English translation of Resaleh describe Tahrir al-Vasileh, "rather than his Resaleh Towzih al-Masael," as the book that "secured" Khomeini's "reputation in the early 1960s," [4D] Resaleh Towzih al-Masael was the book they translated.
They did include a few fatawa from Tahrir al-Vasileh, however, in their edition of Resaleh Towzih al-Masael. These deal with adherents of religions of the Book (ahl-e zemmeh).[5D]
________________________________________
Khomeini on Muslim Apostates --
the Different Definitions of, and Punishments for
1 - Apostasy is leaving Islam and accepting infidelity. One who turns from Islam to infidelity is called an apostate and that is of two kinds:
A) innate-apostate, and that is a person that one of his father or mother was Moslem when his seed was being jelled, and who embraced Islam following puberty and then left Islam.
B) National apostate, and that is a person whose father and mother were infidels when his seed was being jelled and he has expressed infidelity after puberty, and became an original infidel (kafar i aslee), then he embraced Islam and later has returned to infidelity; such as a person who originally was a Christian and became a Moslem and then returned to Christianity.[6D]
2 - Innate-apostate's [embracing of] Islam is apparently unacceptable and, if a man, his ruling is execution and, if a woman, she is condemned to prison for life and [with] beating when praying and straitening of livelihood, but her repenting is acceptable and she will freed if she repents
3 - A national apostate will be caused to repent and in case of refusing to repent will be executed. And it is preferable to give a 3 day reprieve and to execute him on the fourth day if he refused.
4 - Puberty, knowledge, volition and intention are credible in ruling on apostasy.
5 - The child of a Moslem or that of an apostate, whether national or innate, is considered Moslem before the father's apostasy, and therefore, if the child reached puberty and chose infidelity he will be asked to repent (and to return to Islam), else he will be executed.
6 - Apostasy is proven by the witnessing of two just men and by confession.[7D]
So to sum up:
•  an adult male who grew up Muslim and then converted to a non-Muslim religion, (an "innate-apostate") must become a Muslim again or be executed. An adult woman who converts to a non-Muslim religion has the choice of reconverting, or being imprisoned and beaten.
•  A non-Muslim who converted to Islam and then went back to their old faith (a "National apostate") gets the same, although they get a few days to think it over and repent.
•  Although the verbiage of Khomeini and/or his translator isn't completely clear, it appears Khomeini includes in his definition of apostates some people who NEVER professed the Islamic faith. These are people who grew up as a non-Muslim and remained so but whose father left Islam after they were born. (If a father is a Muslim, so are the children no matter how young.) Having "chosen infidelity" the offspring "will be asked to repent" and "executed" if they refuse.
(This may explain the reasoning behind the persecution of Baha'is in Iran by fundamentalist Shi'a. Those who grew up Baha'i and are not converts are still considered apostates because Baha'ism split off from Shi'a Islam so recently.)
________________________________________
Khomeini on the Rights of Non-Muslim or Women Victims
"Conditions of retaliation," i.e. under what conditions may a person be killed (executed) as punishment for the killing another:
.... (3) Equality in religion, therefore Moslem will not be retaliated for [killing an] infidel, unless a Moslem has a habit of killing infidels.[8D]
"Mulcts and Blood Money," a mulct being a penalty or fine, in this case for killing another person:
.... (3) The amount of mulct which has come in the table is for a Moslem man, but the mulct of a Moslem woman will be half of these amounts, i.e. 50 camels or 500 dinars
(4) A tributary's mulct is 8000 derhams [9D] and the mulct of their women is half of that of their men.[9.1D]
So again to summarize:
•  Capital punishment for the killing of a Muslim is acceptable, but not for the killing of a non-Muslim if the murderer is a Muslim ... unless that Muslim is a serial (non-Muslim) killer.
•  the fine for the premeditated killing of a Muslim man should be 10,000 derhams, 1000 dinars, or 100 camels.
•  8000 derhams, 800 dinars, or 80 camels for a non-Muslim man a.k.a. a "tributary," (i.e. a Jew, Christian, or Zoroastrians who "lives under the protection of Islam," i.e. under a Muslim government and pays tribute).
•  5000 derhams, 500 dinars, etc. for killing a Muslim woman.
•  4000 derhams, etc. for a non-Muslim woman.
(Note: "Equality in religion" means equality inside the different religions, not between the religions. All other things being equal, all Muslims who kill another Muslim are treated equally. Muslims who kill non-Muslims are treated equally, etc. ... Okay, it's not equality between genders inside the religion either. Khomeini must have thought that was too obvious to mention.)
________________________________________
On the "Poll Tax" Charged to Non-Muslims
Traditional Islam calls for a special tax on non-Muslims under control of Muslim, citing this aya from the Qur'an:
Fight those who believe not in God and the Last Day and do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden - such men as practise not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book - until they pay the tribute [Jizyah] out of hand and have been humbled. [9:29 as translated by A.J. Arberry]
Thus if
the followers of the tri-religions (Jewish, Christianity and Zoroastrian) ... undertake and guarantee the conditions of tribute, to be mentioned later, their religions will be recognized and an amount of poll tax (Jizyah) will be accepted from them.[10D]
As interpreted by Khomeini the tribute paid by non-Muslims is not necessarily a tax per individual non-Muslim, but can be a tax on pretty much anything -- people, land, income, "beasts of burden and trees and real estate, in any way he finds it expedient" -- set at any rate -- whatever the "Governor-General" decides, depending on the "expediencies of time and place and the situation at hand."
Other conditions of tribute may include thing like the "hosting" Muslim armies: providing food, housing, etc. (sounding quite a bit like what the American Revolutionaries complained the British forced them to do before the War of Independence!)
1 - There is no specific amount for poll tax, thus its amount depends on the views of Governor-General (Valee) and the expediencies of time and place and the situation at hand.
2 - Governor-General can lay this tax on per capita basis or on the lands or both. Further, he can impose the tax on beasts of burden and trees and real estate, in any way he finds it expedient.
3 - And the tax must be received according to what came in the tributary agreement.
4 - In addition to the poll tax other conditions, such as hosting Moslem military and others can be made, stipulating the length of time, like one day or three days. ...
"Tributary Conditions" also include 15 non-financial regulations on non-Muslims, varying from
•  reasonable:
(#7) "In case of committing crime they shall be subject to punishment or reproof according to Islamic law."
•  reasonable (if paranoid):
(#2) They must not "fight against Moslems or to help the idolators."
(#5) "they must not vex or annoy Moslems, such as stealing and spying."
•  not likely to be a problem: (12) "The Tributary People cannot reside in Hejaz," (the region of Mecca and Medina).
•  repressive enforcing of "humility" on the non-Muslims:
(#6) "They must not establish synagogues or ring church bells."
(#10) "Any building erected by the Tributary People must not stand higher than those of its neighboring Moslems."
(#15) "Infidels, whether tributary or non-tributary, do not have the right to promote their religions and publish their books in Islamic countries, or to invite the Moslems and Moslem children to their religions ..." [11D]
________________________________________
On Dealing with Modern Society. Khomeini's Fatawa on mostahdasat or "New Occurrences"
Another much briefer source of information on Tahrir al-Vasileh come from a critic of Khomeini and the Islamic Republic, Asghar Schirazi, in his book The Constitution of Iran.[12D]
Khomeini attempted to update shari'ah law with legal rulings on mostahdasat or "new occurrences" in Tahrir al-Vasileh. He included a grand total of 105 fatawa for the modern world:
•  10 on insurance,
•  6 on foreign exchange bureaux,
•  8 on paying indemnity,
•  12 on banks,
•  7 on lotteries,
•  10 on artificial insemination,
•  7 on autopsy and organ transplantation,
•  10 on sex change,
•  11 on radio, television, etc.,
•  18 on prayer and fasting in aeroplane or at the earth's poles, and
•  6 on outer space.

Schirazi complains that "what is striking ... is not only the limited range of subjects ... but also the brevity of their exploration of particular questions .... most of the solutions pertaining to `new matters` lack the kind of proof which religious law requires. ... In addition, the solutions are of a noticeably negative character." Lotteries and autopsies on Muslims are forbidden. So is most radio or television, and artificial insemination by anyone other than the husband of the woman.
When Khomeini does try to venture into "commercial law" his "new occurrences" bear no relation modern government regulations in the West that have been developed over centuries and cover thousands of pages. These fatawa aren't concerned with making sure the modern activities serve the public interest or even function properly, only that they follow traditional shari'ah. Exchange bureaux or banks are forbidden to charge interest, but nothing said about minimum reserve requirements to make sure withdrawals can be paid if there is a run on a bank. Khomeini declares it "permissible to take out an insurance policy" as long as it is "not contrary to the general principles regulating agreements in the shari'ah." Thus the insurer and policy holder must both be sane and above the age of consent, but that's about it. No other consumer protections or even regulations to guarantee the solvency of the insurer are mentioned. Not all that surprising perhaps because insurance is not "mentioned in the shari'ah," and "Islamic law is unfamiliar with insurance and has no formula for it amongst its usual contractual formulas, nor regulations to cover it."
Perhaps the most extreme example of the rigour and seriousness that Khomeini took in extending the shari'ah into the post-medieval world are his fatawa on outer space.
There is for example, the question of how to determine when a creature or a human being on another planet attains its majority. What does Islamic law have to offer as a solution to the question that would arise if children on another planet `develop into men within one year` [of their birth]? The answer is:
`There is no problem with establishing that they have attained their majority if their majority is manifest through ejaculation of sperm and the appearance of public hair.`
To the question of what the Islamic ordinan

[Negentropic]

Some Sayings of Ayatollah Khomeini

Ayatollah Khomeini:

A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However he
should not penetrate, sodomising the child is OK. If the man penetrates and
damages the child then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her
life. This girl, however does not count as one of his four permanent wives.
The man will not be eligible to marry the girls sister.

From Khomeini's book, "Tahrirolvasyleh", fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom,

Iran, 1990

Book Title Page/ Cover
Inside Cover of Book
Excerpt: Page [1]


It is better for a girl to marry in such a time when she would begin
menstruation at her husband's house rather than her father's home. Any
father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in
heaven.

From Khomeini's book, "Tahrirolvasyleh", fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom,
Iran, 1990 [Mohammad (founder of Islam) The Pedophile]

A man can have sex with animals such as sheep, cows, camels and so on.
However he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not
sell the meat to the people in his own village, however selling the meat to
the next door village should be fine.

From Khomeini's book, "Tahrirolvasyleh", fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom,
Iran, 1990

"If one commits the act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine and their excrement become impure, and even their milk may no longer be consumed. The animal must then be killed and as quickly as possible and burned."
The little green book, Sayings of Ayatollah Khomeini, Political, Phylosophica, Social and Religious with a special introduction by Clive Irving, ISBN number 0-553-14032-9, page 47

Comments: I am ashamed of being born and raised in Iran, a country where they built a
Mausoleum over his grave and had the greatest party for his 100th birthday.
Shame on such people.

Return to Dr. Darabi Foundation Home Page



http://www.xomba.com/ayatollah_khomeinis_religious_teachings_on_marriage_divorce_and_relationships

http://www.homa.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=56&Itemid=53

Ayatollah Khomeini's Religious Teachings on Marriage, Divorce and Relationships



"A woman may legally belong to a man in one of two ways; by continuing marriage or temporary marriage. In the former, the duration of the marriage need not be specified; in the latter, it must be stipulated, for example, that it is for a period of an hour, a day, a month, a year, or more."

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

"A father or a paternal grandfather has the right to marry off a child who is insane or has not reached puberty by acting as its representative. The child may not annul such a marriage after reaching puberty or regaining his sanity, unless the marriage is to his manifest disadvantage."

"Any girl who is of age, that is, capable of understanding what is in her own best interest, if she wishes to get married and is a virgin, must procure the authorization of her father or paternal grandfather. The permission of her mother or brother is not required."

"A marriage is annulled if a man finds that his wife is afflicted with one of the seven following disabilities: madness, leprosy, eczema, blindness, paralysis with aftereffects, malformation of the urinary and genital tracts or of the genital-tract and rectum through conjoining thereof, or vaginal malformation making Coitus impossible."

"If a wife finds out after marriage that her husband is suffering from mental illness, that he is a castrate, impotent, or has had his testicles excised, she may apply for annulment of her marriage."

"If a wife has her marriage annulled because her husband is unable to have sexual relations with her either vaginally or anally, he must pay her as damages one-half of her mehryeh (her price) specified in the marriage contract. If the husband or wife annuls the marriage for any of the above-mentioned reasons, the man owes nothing to the woman if they have had sexual relations together; if they have not, he must pay her the full amount of the dowry."

"A Moslem woman may not marry a non-Moslem man; nor may a Moslem man marry a non-Moslem woman in continuing marriage, but he may take a Jewish or Christian woman in temporary marriage."

"A woman who has contracted a continuing marriage does not have the right to go out of the house without her husband's permission; she must remain at his disposal for the fulfillment of any one of his desires, and may not refuse herself to him except for a religiously valid reason. If she is totally submissive to him, the husband must provide her with her food, clothing, and lodging, whether or not he has the means to do so."

"A woman who refuses herself to her husband is guilty, and may not demand from him food, clothing, lodging, or any later sexual relations; however, she retains the right to be paid damages if she is repudiated."

"If a man who has married a girl who has not reached puberty possesses her sexually before her ninth birthday, inflicting traumatisms upon her, he has no right to repeat such an act with her."

"A man who has contracted a continuing marriage may not leave his wife for so long a time as to allow her to question the validity of the marriage; however, he is not obligated to spend one night out of every four with her."

"A husband must have sexual relations with his wife at least once in every four months."

"A woman who has been temporarily married in exchange for a previously established dowry has no right to demand that her daily expenses be paid by her husband, even when she becomes pregnant."

"A temporary marriage, even though only one of convenience, is nevertheless legal."

"A man must not abstain from having sexual relations with his temporary wife for more than four months.

"If a father (or paternal grandfather) marries off his daughter (or granddaughter) in her absence without knowing for a certainty that she is alive, the marriage becomes null and void as soon as it is established that she was dead at the time of the marriage."

"To look upon the face and hair of a girl who has not reached puberty, if it is done without intention of enjoyment thereof, and if one is not afraid of succumbing to temptation, may be tolerated. It is however recommended that one not look upon her belly or thighs, which must remain covered."

"To look upon the faces and hands of Jewish or Christian women, if this is not done with intention of enjoyment thereof, and if one does not fear temptation, is tolerated."

"A woman must hide her body and her hair from the eyes of men. It is highly recommended that she also hide them from those of prepubic boys, if she suspects that they may look upon her with lust."

"If a man is called upon, for medical reasons, to look upon a woman other than his wife and to touch her body, he is permitted to do so,but if he can give such care by only looking at the body he must not touch it, and if he can give it by only touching, he must not look at it."

"A woman who becomes pregnant as a result of adultery must not have an abortion. If a man commits adultery with an unmarried woman, and subsequently marries her, the child born of that marriage will be a bastard unless the parents can be sure it was conceived after they were married."
"
A child born of an adulterous father is legitimate."

"The best person to breast-feed a newborn baby it its own mother. It is preferable that she not ask to be paid for such service, but that her husband pay her for it of his own free will. If the sum the mother asks for is greater than that charged by a wet nurse, the husband is free to take the child from its mother and turn it over to the wet nurse."

"A man who repudiates his wife must be of sound mind and past the age of puberty. He must do so of his own free will and without any constraint; therefore, if the formula for divorce is spoken in jest the marriage is not annulled."

"A woman temporarily married, say, for a month or a year, has her marriage automatically annulled at the end of that time, or at any other time when the husband releases her from the balance of her engagement. It is not necessary for this that there be any witnesses, or that the woman have had her period."

"A woman who has not yet reached the age of nine or a menopausal woman may remarry immediately after divorce, without waiting the hundred days that are otherwise required."

"A woman who has had her ninth birthday, or who has not yet entered menopause, must wait for three menstrual periods after her divorce before being allowed to remarry. If a woman who has not reached her ninth birthday or who has not entered menopause gets temporarily married, she must, at the end of the contract or when the husband has released her from part of it, wait two menstrual periods or forty-five days before marrying again."

"If the father or paternal grandfather of a boy has him marry a woman for a temporary marriage, he may prematurely cancel it in the boy's interest, even if the marriage was contracted before the boy reached the age of puberty. If, for example, a fourteen-year-old boy has been married off to a woman for a period of two years, they may return her freedom to the woman before this time has run its course; but a continuing marriage cannot be broken in this way."

"If a man repudiates his wife without informing her of it, and continues to meet her expenses for a period of, say, a year, and at the end of that time informs her that he got a divorce a year earlier and shows her proof of it, he may require that she return to him anything he has bought or given her during that time, provided that she has not used it up or consumed it, in which case he cannot demand its return."

"If a child dies within the mother's womb and it is a danger to her life to leave it there, it must be extracted in the easiest way possible; it can. if need be, cut into pieces; this should be done by the woman's husband or a midwife."

"A woman who wishes to pursue her studies toward the end of being able to earn her living through respectable work, and who has a male teacher, may do so if she keeps her face covered and has no contact with men; but if-that is inevitable, and religious and moral tenets are thus undermined, she must give up her studies. Girls and boys who attend coeducational classes in grammar schools, high schools, universities, or other teaching establishments, and who, in order to legalize such a situation, wish to contract a temporary marriage may do so without the permission of their fathers. The same applies if the boy and girl are in love but hesitate to ask for such permission."

For further education into the mindset of this man please go through this site!!!! If you retch don't blame me!!!!



http://www.homa.org/










It's a crime to be a woman in Iran

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/its-a-crime-to-be-a-woman-in-iran/article1643091/

Don't go to this page here unless you've got a strong stomach some of the pictures are really horrendous

http://www.arguewitheveryone.com/middle-east/137075-s-crime-woman-iran.html


This regime has taken so many lives. There's got to be a time when it stops'

Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, the Iranian mother who was convicted of adultery and sentenced to death by stoning, is still alive, for now – saved by an international outcry of revulsion against state barbarism. But the story isn't over. She's still on death row. Once the heat dies down, the regime may simply choose to hang her, instead.

"This regime has taken so many lives," says Maryam Namazie, an Iranian human-rights campaigner who now lives in London. "There's got to be a time when it stops."

The Tabriz prison where Sakineh is locked up contains 200 other death-row cases, according to Ms. Namazie. Thirty-five are women who face death by stoning. One is Maryam Baagherzaade, 25, who has been in jail for the past four years. Her execution has been postponed because she got pregnant while on a short leave from prison. The regime usually waits to kill pregnant women until after they've had their babies.

Then there's Azar Bagheri, 19. She was 14 when she was forced into an unwanted marriage. Her husband later pressed charges against her, claiming that she didn't love him and that she had had a relationship with another man. She was arrested, convicted of having sex out of wedlock, and sentenced to death by stoning when she was only 15. She has been subjected to mock stoning on two occasions – buried up to her chest and threatened with death unless she co-operated. The death-row inmates include children, adolescents and 18 people who've been sentenced to hang for homosexuality. Last week, a 16-year-old girl killed herself in her cell to escape hanging.

Even a suntan constitutes a crime against Islam. "The public expects us to act firmly and swiftly if we see any social misbehaviour by women, and men, who defy our Islamic values," Tehran's police chief, Hossein Sajedinia, announced in April. "In some areas of north Tehran, we can see many suntanned women and young girls who look like walking mannequins. We are not going to tolerate this situation and will first warn those found in this manner and then arrest and imprison them."

As Ms. Namazie puts it: "It's a crime to be a woman in Iran."

You might think the regime's habit of murdering women for imaginary crimes would earn it universal condemnation – especially from places such as the United Nations. You would be wrong. In April, Iran was given a seat on the UN Commission on the Status of Women, whose goal is "gender equality and the advancement of women." No one explained how stoning women to death advances gender equality. This is a moral inversion so twisted that it defies satire. If you still harbour any illusion that the UN is truly interested in the rights of women, please abandon it now.

Iran's ludicrous appointment was a consolation prize for its failure, despite fierce lobbying, to gain a seat on the UN Human Rights Council. That would not have been as bizarre as it sounds, given that its members include the rights-conscious nation of Saudi Arabia. The Human Rights Council is dominated by a bloc of Islamic and African states that refuse to condemn Iran for anything. Instead, the council spends most of its time denouncing Israel and the United States. "It's tragic," says Ms. Namazie, who fled Iran in 1980. "It's like asking apartheid South Africa to sit on the commission for racial equality."

Some Western feminist groups have been conspicuously silent on stoning and other quaint Iranian customs. They're so fearful of being tainted by Americans and neo-cons that they'd rather say nothing. The same is true of "moderate" Muslim groups in the West.

For years, the fight for Iranian women's rights has been led by a tireless group of advocates such as Ms. Namazie and Mina Ahadi, who now lives in Germany. Ms. Ahadi narrowly escaped death for campaigning against forced Islamic dress codes. (Her husband was executed.) "When we organize events worldwide, when we protest worldwide, and, in particular, when we contact European governments, and these governments put pressure on the Islamic regime in Iran, sometimes we have a chance," she told CNN.

The conviction of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani was based on false evidence, her lawyer and her two children insist. She already received 99 lashes. When their efforts to plead for her life proved fruitless, her son appealed to Western-based activists for help – a high-risk move that brought a summons to visit the police. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch took up the case. Women from Norway to Canada, including Indigo Books CEO Heather Reisman, launched Internet petitions. Ms. Reisman's petition, which she started 11 days ago, has already gathered more than 100,000 signatures. (You can find it at http://www.freesakineh.org.)

The Iranian regime strenuously depicts Western protests as an assault on Iran and Islamic values. So how much good do these petitions really do? Those who follow Iranian affairs say they do have an impact. Stoning is hugely unpopular inside Iran, and Iranians do not like their country to be portrayed as medievally barbaric. Support from outside also energizes those inside Iran who are struggling with the regime.

"The commotion that the Western media has started in connection with this case will not affect our judges' views," insisted one Iranian official. "The execution of Islamic religious laws on [such things as] death by stoning, hijab and inheritance has always faced their audacious animosity and, basically, any issue which hints of religious law is always opposed by them."

But thanks to the tireless efforts of women such as Maryam Namazie, Mina Ahadi, Shirin Ebadi and others, Sakineh is still alive. So long as it's a crime to be a woman in Iran, they're not going to stop. Neither should the rest of us.

live in hell's photostream

IRAN fundamentalism islamic regime cracks down on people for "un-Islamic" dress , hair and....


http://www.flickr.com/photos/11441115@N06/




"A girl looks on, as Iranian worshippers perform Friday prayer at the Tehran University campus, Iran."




Malaysia may organize an international conference on the issue of caning and whether it is an appropriate punishment for women under Islamic law.
http://www.impactlab.com/2010/02/27/malaysia-may-hold-international-conference-on-caning-muslim-women/

Muslim woman receiving public caning


Malaysia may organize an international conference on the issue of caning and whether it is an appropriate punishment for women under Islamic law. women's Minister Shahrizat Abdul Jalil said in a statement Tuesday that she would seek Cabinet approval to hold such a conference.
 

Prison authorities had caned three unmarried Muslim women this month after a Shariah, or Islamic, court in Kuala Lumpur found them guilty of having "sex out of wedlock."

Shahrizat said she plans to invite ministers from other Muslim-majority countries, academics and religious experts to exchange "ideas and experiences with regards to the implementation of Shariah law."

The three women who were caned reportedly had turned themselves in to Islamic authorities after becoming pregnant by their boyfriends. They defended the punishment, saying it gave them a chance to repent, according to local government-linked media.

The government, too, has insisted that caning serves a purpose and is not meant to physically harm the women. But women and other rights groups say caning Muslim women is cruel, degrading and discriminatory.

Authorities use a light rattan stick to hit women on their backs while they are fully clothed.

Caning men is common in Malaysia for such offenses as rape, drug trafficking and illegally staying in the country. The strokes with a thick rattan cane on bare buttocks inflict wounds and leave scars.

Civil law forbids caning women and children, but Malaysia has a two-tier justice system. Muslims, who make up 60% of the country's 28 million people, go to Shariah courts for personal matters, while civil courts judge non-Muslims, mostly ethnic Chinese and Indians.



16 year old girl killed by father for not wearing a hijab

[youtube:mpds4w9s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKvY580-8WI[/youtube]mpds4w9s]


A 16 Year Old Iranian Girl Executed by Islamic Police  accused of breaking Islamic chastity laws. This documentary takes you through her family's struggle to find justice, and the events leading to her state murder.

[youtube:mpds4w9s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jqQVqsOw4U[/youtube]mpds4w9s]
[youtube:mpds4w9s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTFRTAlavFQ[/youtube]mpds4w9s]
[youtube:mpds4w9s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYMNiSnlz_w[/youtube]mpds4w9s]
[youtube:mpds4w9s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0joZr2LlLo[/youtube]mpds4w9s]
[youtube:mpds4w9s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PYJHUniri0[/youtube]mpds4w9s]
[youtube:mpds4w9s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6J2jqKlNNXo[/youtube]mpds4w9s]



http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-04-18/news/20854597_1_saudi-arabia-saudi-religious-police-psychic

Saudi psychic may lose his life over TV show
Religion


April 18, 2010|By Scheherezade Faramarzi, Associated Press




Ali Sibat, center, with wife Samira Rahmoon, has been sentenced to death for practicing witchcraft.

Credit: Courtesy May Khansa
•   

•   
o   
o   
o   
o   
•   
o   


Al-Ain, Lebanon — Lebanese psychic Ali Sibat had just woken from an afternoon nap in a Saudi hotel when the telephone rang. A Saudi man asked if he could make a magical talisman for his sister who had marital problems. Sibat, in the kingdom on a pilgrimage, said he'd be happy to help.



As soon as he hung up, religious police stormed into his room and arrested him for practicing witchcraft. Now Sibat is on death row, sentenced to be beheaded.
His arrest in 2008 and sentencing the following year has devastated Sibat's family in the eastern Lebanese village of al-Ain, who have been struggling to win his release. Two weeks ago, they were hit by the news that his execution was scheduled for April 2.



His 19-year-old son went into a violent seizure from the shock and remains in a hospital. His 15-year-old daughter was thrown into depression and could not go to school. In the end, the execution did not take place, but the family remains in fear.
"It was a shock to all of us," Sibat's wife, Samira Rahmoon, 46, said. "We're all dying a slow death."


Saudi Arabia, which enforces a strict version of Islamic law, arrests dozens of people a year on sorcery charges, and the last known execution came in 2007 with the beheading of an Egyptian pharmacist, according to human rights groups. The charges are often vague - covering anything from fortune-telling to astrology to making charms and talismans believed to bring love, health or pregnancy. Saudi judges cite Quranic verses forbidding witchcraft, but such practices remain popular as a folk tradition.


In Sibat's case, the charges seem to center on a call-in talk show he hosted on a Lebanese satellite station where he would tell fortunes and give advice. His supporters point out that the show was aired from Lebanon, not Saudi Arabia. The Sibat family's lawyer in Lebanon, May Khansa, contends the call to Sibat's hotel room appears to have been a setup by Saudi religious police to incriminate him.
"Islam prohibits tricking people," Khansa said.


Sibat, 49, a devout Shiite Muslim and father of four, was a 20-year-old tailor when he proposed to Rahmoon, a Sunni Muslim from his home village of al-Ain. She said he became interested in astrology from the age of 15 and read many books on the subject.



He later worked as a truck driver until five years ago, when the Lebanese satellite channel Sheherezade hired him to do psychic readings three times a week for half an hour. In the show, titled "The Hidden," he would take in calls from viewers with problems and offer spiritual solutions, as telephone numbers scrolled across the screen for viewers to call in from Australia, France, Switzerland, Italy, Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria.


"There is a tree at the entrance to your house," he told a female caller in an episode from 2007. "Dig 30 centimeters deep at the base of the tree and you'll will find something. Pick it up and throw it in the water. Everything in your household will be fine from then on."



To another caller from Tunisia, whose daughter was ill, he said, "your daughter has been sick ever since she was born. Bathe her - her body must be clean and abluted - and then read the soura (Quranic verse) of al-Momenoon once." The caller says she doesn't know how to read. Anyone else will do, he responds, then lists three other souras that must be read over the daughter before her health improves.
Rahmoon seems unconvinced about her husband's powers, but insists he did nothing wrong. "I was OK with his new job. He didn't hurt anyone."



She stressed that he was a good Muslim, beginning his program by reading an Islamic verse that denies the powers of fortune-tellers and emphasizes that "no one knows the unknown but God."



Rahmoon said she has spoken to her husband only once since his arrest - about five months ago. He told her he was innocent and cried on the phone. She saw Saudi TV footage of him as he was escorted to jail with his hands and feet chained. "The sight of him was horrifying. He'd become thin as a stick."


"I'm angry. He's been wronged. The whole world should get on its feet and help him get freed. The Lebanese government should demand his release," she said, wiping tears with the corner of her yellow headscarf.


Sibat's case has brought sporadic media attention since his arrest. The report of his imminent execution two weeks ago brought a flare of calls in the Lebanese press for his release. Justice Minister Ibrahim Najjar said last week that he had urged the Saudi government not to carry out the execution.


Rahmoon said that she had talked to Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, who promised to help. "But nothing has happened," she said. Hariri, who holds Saudi citizenship as well as Lebanese, has close ties to Saudi Arabia's ruling family.

(C) San Francisco Chronicle 2010





Stoning in Iran


Stoning in Somalia




Iran: Executions rise sharply under Ahmadinejad

http://islamizationwatch.blogspot.com/2008/07/iran-executions-rise-sharply-under.html

When you run your own country - saying what you want goes with the territory. In hopes of one day rolling out the Iranian Islamic Revolution - first out to the 80% of the Muslims who are not waiting for the Maghdi - then out on to the world - the Iranian President has dreamt up 'Islamic human rights day'. Beyond belief is what it should be called.

Here's human rights Iranian style:

Beating women in the street for not wearing their scarf properly or for wearing the wrong colour scarf.


http://islamizationwatch.blogspot.com/2008/07/treat-muslims-better-britain-told-by-un.html

http://islamizationwatch.blogspot.com/2008_07_20_archive.html



Recently the 'crime' of apostasy from Islam has come up for consideration for the death penalty - according to the Iranian Parliament 1 million Iranians have converted to Christianity - that the was an exodus from Islam in that country - since most of the church services are held in secret - this figure is likely to be a lot higher - if Iran starts putting its Christians to death - it could be of genocidal proportions.Crimes of the savage islamic regime occupying Iran:

Assassination of Political Opponents

Report on the Islamic Republic's Terrorism abroad
Since the advent of the Islamic Republic in Iran, terrorist attempts have targeted exiled Iranians as well as citizens of other countries, condemned as heretics, around the world. These attacks were ordered by the Islamic government of Iran.

1. In July 1980, Shapour Bakhtiar escapes an assassination attempt in Paris, France. A French policeman and a neighbor are killed and one policeman is seriously injured.
2. In July 1980, Ali Tabatabai is killed in Washington D.C., United States.
3. In 1981, Shahriar Shafigh is killed in Paris, France.
4. In January 1982, Shahrokh Missaghi is killed in Manila, Philippines.
6. In June 1982, Shahram Mirani is fatally wounded in India.
7. In August 1982, Ahmad Zol-Anvar is fatally wounded in Karachi, Pakistan.
8. In September 1982, Abdolamir Rahdar is killed in India.
9. In 1982, Colonel Ahmad Hamed is killed in Istanbul, Turkey.
10. In February 1983, Esfandiar Rahimi is killed in Manila, Philippines.
11. In February 1984, Gholam-Ali Oveissi and his brother, Gholam-Hossein, are killed in Paris, France.
12. In August 1985, Behrouz Shahverdilou is killed in Istanbul, Turkey.
13. In December 1985, Hadi Aziz-Moradi is killed in Istanbul, Turkey.
14. In August 1986, Bijan Fazeli is killed in London, Great Britain.
15. In December 1986, Vali Mohammad Van is killed in Pakistan.
16. In January 1987, Ali-Akbar Mohammadi is killed in Hamburg, Germany.
17. In May 1987, Hamid Reza Chitgar disappears in Vienna, Austria and is found assassinated in July.
18. In July 1987, Faramarz-Aghaï and Ali-Reza Pourshafizadeh are killed and twenty-three persons are wounded in residences of Iranian refugees Karachi and Quetta, Pakistan.
19. In July 1987, Amir-Hossein Amir-Parviz is seriously wounded by the explosion of a bomb placed in his car in London, England.
20. In July 1987, Mohammad-Hassan Mansouri is shot dead in his house Istanbul, Turkey.
21. In August 1987, Ahmad Moradi-Talebi is killed in Geneva, Switzerland.
22. In October 1987, Mohammad-Ali Tavakoli-Nabavi and his youngest son, Noureddin, are killed in Wembley, Great Britain.
23. In October 1987, Abol-Hassan Modjtahed-Zadeh is kidnapped in Istanbul, Turkey.
24. In December 1988, an Iranian refugee is assassinated in front of the headquarters of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Karachi, Pakistan.
25. In June 1989, Ataollah Bay Ahmadi is killed in the Emirate of Dubai.
26. In July 1989, Abdol-Rahman Ghassemlou and Abdollah Ghaderi and Fazel Rassoul are killed in Vienna, Austria.
27. In August 1989, Gholam Keshavarz is killed in Cyprus.
28. In September 1989, Sadigh Kamangar is assassinated in the north of Iraq.
29. In September 1989, Hossein Keshavarz, victim of a terrorist attempt, is paralyzed for life.
30. In February 1990, Hadj Baloutch-Khan is killed by a terrorist commando in Pakistan.
31. In Mars 1990, Hossein Mir-Abedini is wounded by an armed commando in the airport of Istanbul, Turkey.
32. In April 1990, Kazem Radjavi is killed in Coppet, Switzerland.
33. In July 1990, Ali Kashefpour is kidnapped and killed in Turkey.
34. In September 1990, Efat Ghazi is killed in Sweden by a bomb intended for her husband.
35. In October 1990, Cyrus Elahi is killed in Paris, France.
36. In April 1991, Abdol-Rahman Boroumand is killed in Paris, France.
39. In July 1991, Ahad Agha is killed in Suleimanya, iraq.
40. In August 1991, Shapour Bakhtiar and Soroush Katibeh are killed in Suresnes, France.
41. In September 1991, Saïd Yazdan-Panah is fatally wounded in iraq.
42. In December 1991, Massoud Rajavi escapes a terrorist attempt in Baghdad, iraq.
43. In January 1992, Kamran Hedayati is wounded opening a letter bomb in Vastros, Sweden. He looses his sight and his hands.
44. In May 1992, Shapour Firouzi is killed in Iraq.
45. In July 1992, Kamran Mansour-Moghadam is killed in Suleymania, Iraq.
46. In August 1992, Fereydoun Farokhzad is killed in Bonn, Germany.
47. In September 1992, Sadegh Sharafkandi, Fatah Abdoli, Homayoun Ardalan and Nouri Dehkordi are killed in Berlin, Germany.
49. In February 1993, the fundamentalist terrorists in Turkey admit to have kidnapped and killed Ali-Akbar Ghorbani who had disappeared in June 1992 in Turkey.
50. In March 1993, Mohammad-Hossein Naghdi is killed in Rome, Italy.
51. In June 1993, Mohammad-Hassan Arbab is killed in Karachi, Pakistan
52. In October 1993, Turkish fundamentalists admit having tortured and killed for Iranian officials, Abbas Gholizadeh who was kidnapped in Istanbul, Turkey in December 1992.
54. In January, 1994, Taha Kermanj is killed in Corum, Turkey.
55. In August 1994, Ghafour Hamzei'i is killed in Baghdad, iraq.
56. In February 1996, Zahra Rajabi and Ali Moradi were killed in Istanbul, Turkey.
57. In March 1996, Ali Mollazadeh was killed in Karachi, Pakistan.
58. In May 1996, Reza Mazlouman ( Kourosh Aryamanesh) was killed in Paris, France.
Due to the lack of reliable information, this list of terrorist attempts is not exhaustive. Undoubtedly, since the advent of the Islamic Republic, the number of extra-judicial executions outside Iran, in particular in Pakistan, Turkey and Iraq is higher. Also, this report deliberately leaves out well known terrorist attacks ordered by Tehran, such as: the hostage crisis of the US embassy in Tehran in 1979; the kidnapping of British, American and French citizens in Lebanon by pro-Iranian Hezbollah; the explosive attack on the American and French military headquarters in Lebanon, which were publicly claimed by Mohsen Rafighdoust, then head of the Revolutionary Guards ; the wave of terrorist bombing in Paris in 1986, which resulted in the death of 13 persons and the wounding of hundreds of others; the death sentence against Salman Rushdie for writing The Satanic Verses; and the Dahran terrorist attempts that targeted the American military in Saudi Arabia.

Public Floggings  -  Graphic images
http://hammihan.20fr.com/flogging.html


Italy: Moroccan man slits throat of 18-yr-old daughter in 'honour killing'

http://islamizationwatch.blogspot.com/2009/09/italy-moroccan-man-slits-throat-of-18.html


The Quran on My Mind -

[youtube:mpds4w9s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhZ6DPDd-vg[/youtube]mpds4w9s]
[youtube:mpds4w9s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvS7q_hc6SU[/youtube]mpds4w9s]
[youtube:mpds4w9s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xygxEMwGcyQ[/youtube]mpds4w9s]


Pakistan: Senator vows to remain in country despite death threats after being fatwa-ed for a hug

http://islamizationwatch.blogspot.com/2008/07/pakistan-senator-vows-to-remain-in.html


When women are placed so low - they can be kicked back into their prehistoric place - by any one. The former Pakistani tourist minister - hugged her 74 year old Italian skydiving instructor after being excited about completing her first jump - safely. The Red Mosque Imam - likely the one who was caught escaping with his life – dressed in a women's burqa while all his followers were dying for Allah, including 100's of 11-14 year old girls inside the mad red mosque - this coward - who had anti tank missiles, mines and hand grenades in the mosque just outside of the Pakistani ministry of defence - issued a Ouija fatwa against the brave Nilofar Bakhtiar and has turned her life into a living hell ever since. As a shunned woman - at this time any man can walk up a kill her - the Pakistani government offers her no protection - even though her life has been repeatedly threatened. She may have to seek asylum!! They're looking to give her the Bhutto treatment.

Karachi, 21 July (AKI) - (by Syed Saleem Shahzad) - Pakistani Senator and former tourism minister Nilofar Bakhtiar told Adnkronos International (AKI) on Monday that she will not leave the country eventhough she has received death threats.

Bakhtiar, 47, said on Sunday she had received threats of "dire consequences" if she failed "to immediately leave the country along with her family."

The threats come more than a year after a cleric issued a fatwa against Bakhtiar for having been pictured hugging one of her parachute instructors in France.

She had embraced her elderly instructor after she completed a jump in March 2007 to raise money for victims of an earthquake that killed 73,000 people in Pakistan in October 2005.

Before and after

  "I come from a middle class background," Bakhtiar told AKI in a phone interview on Monday.

"Had I been from a feudal or capitalist background, would anybody dare to threaten me like this? But I tell you that I shall not leave the country and will face the situation," she said.

"I requested the federal interior ministry to provide me with the security but so far I have not been provided any security," she said.

Soon after newspapers published the photos of her hug last year, the then management of the radical Islamabad mosque, Lal Masjid (Red Mosque) issued a fatwa or religious edict against her.

The mosque's leader at the time, Maulana Abdul Aziz, also urged the government to sack her for having posed for the photograph which he had termed "obscene".

Aziz was arrested in July 2007 after security forces stormed the Lal Masjid compound to flush out Islamic militants. More than 100 people died in the fighting.

"Some media outlets are aiming to create a rift between me and the Lal Masjid administration," Baktiar told AKI.

After the controversy, Bakhtiar was not only sacked as as minister but was also removed as the president of the women's wing of the Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid or PML-Q.

Despite her repeated clarifications that the instructor was the same age as her father, she has not been forgiven.

After the 18 February parliamentary elections in Pakistan, Bakhtiar developed her forward block in the Senate against the PML-Q. The party failed to support her last year despite the party's claims of supporting women's rights.

[Travis]

That's a lot of copying and pasting, a quick search on the net exposes the source of you Jewish inspired view of Islam. Despite you long post you have failed in establishing your assertion! I am not interested in Iran or Khomeini, my discussion is in regards to Islam. You claimed that  'when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'. I asked you for the evidence for such a claim i.e. that a man can have as many wives as he wants, you have failed in producing evidence to support this lie. If you are going to level such assumptions at Islam you must produce evidence from Islam i.e. from the Qur'an or the hadith to support you claim, you have failed. All you have done is post anti Iranian propaganda that you nor I can validate. I am not a supporter of the Iranian regime, rather I am against it. Furthermore, you have used a Jewish tactic and attempted to turn the debate over Iran, when my easy was about western assumptions regarding Islam and violence not Iran. Would it be fair to define Christianity based on the actions of George Bush?

You deserve to be called an idiot and much worse because you are spreading lies, slander and misinformation.  All your posts demonstrate you know nothing about Islam. I ask again what books have you read regarding Islam, what websites do you get your information from regarding Islam?

I present tangible evidence to support my claims, where you throw mud, plenty of it, and hope something sticks.

Your tactics represent those of the Jews,

[youtube:2t5mjglx]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mi1ZNEjEarw[/youtube]2t5mjglx]

[MonkeySeeMonkeyDo]

Hey Negentropic,

if you think Iran is so bad then why don't you go get yourself a rifle and head over there?

Copy & paste that William Kristol approved b.s. all you like. It's not going to change anything. Your mental illness is not going to be cured by blaming all of your troubles on Iran you warmongering Yank coward. In Liberia they literally eat people on a regular basis. They make human flesh skewers and barbecue them, a little salt n' pepper and voila. They say it tastes like chicken. Why aren't you rallying against Liberia or some other despotic law-less African country? What's ur obsession with Iran, gay rights, and voracious support for adulterers? Maybe you should take these Iranian adulterers, Islamic gays, etc, you care so much about in as refugees and they can live with you on ur hippy compound. Literally, why are you wasting ur time here, you should be setting up ur organization to import Muslim homosexuals and adulterers. Why are you not doing this?

[youtube:1e17cbv1]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQSjyYRTDVM[/youtube]1e17cbv1]

[ahaze]

I think I understand the original posting's premise that Western political agendas portray Islam as an instigator of violence, when in fact Allah authorizes no such thing (although there does appear to be a question when it comes to combatant vs. non-combatant opposition).  Please correct me if I missed something in the original post, but the two points seem like two different conversations to me.

Rather, I find Negentropic's postings actually attempt to lend refinement to the initial premise by examining examples of violent figureheads of Islam (Ahmedinejad, Khomeni) sponsored by Western intelligence agencies (Mossad/CIA) and the garden varieties of civic violence these regimes engender.  This seems to make great progress along the line of thinking that Western interests propagate  violent perceptions of Islam.  And yet as the research roles, all of that research gets branded "anti-Islamic propaganda"?  How is exposing charlatans of Islam and investigating how they exploit the faith to enact violence "anti-Islamic"?  Following such thinking, we should be psyched Bush was born-again Christian and the PNAC enacts political agendas based on the book of Revelation.  

The alternative line of investigation - 'whether or not god-characters in spiritual stories actually order assassination of non-believers' - lacks a certain something for confronting problems at hand.

[superzebra]

an answer to all americans

[youtube:2eeetru3]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3m4klbEBI4[/youtube]2eeetru3]

[Ahmed]

Negentropic comes across like a stand up guy when he's talking movies but try and engage him on a serious issue, and it doesn't go quite as smoothly. Its not for me to say right now whose a shill and whose straight; but if his recent posts are anything to go by; all we seem to be getting is the old bait and switch for Hitler fans and regurgitated, 'Hasbra' approved diatribes against Islam, particularly the Talmudists chief tormenter (i.e. Iran).

You wrote some good posts when you first signed up negentropic, my guess is that the confusion began when some of us (myself included) mistook you 'Enola Gay' reference as celebratory instead of an ironic condemnation of the pilot's statements. And that coincided with your anti-Iranian rants / false statements about the Muslim faith.

Lets hope we can all return to a more sophisticated level of discourse (i.e. not putting pictures up of hardworking Arabs or North Africans with snide captions like 'Moroccan Taxi' etc) and get back to anti-Zionism, which happens to be the point of this forum last time I checked.

an answer to all americans

 :lol:  Russell Peters is a legend.

[Negentropic]

Not to belabor a point but this is what happens to you in Ahmedinejadwonderland when you decide to grow your hair even moderately long:

[youtube:27gbyc9h]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEOFLVwnkMQ[/youtube]27gbyc9h]


[youtube:27gbyc9h]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsrp5i_nfhQ[/youtube]27gbyc9h]

[MonkeySeeMonkeyDo]

Not to belabor a point but this is what happens to you in Ahmedinejadwonderland when you decide to grow your hair even moderately long:

[youtube:17zdq3t1]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEOFLVwnkMQ[/youtube]17zdq3t1]


[youtube:17zdq3t1]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsrp5i_nfhQ[/youtube]17zdq3t1]

And this is what happens to you when you decide to cross a border checkpoint in the United Snakes, "land of the free".

[youtube:17zdq3t1]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVMZUgmrJrk[/youtube]17zdq3t1]

Are you still claiming that the US is the shining example of human rights? Ever heard of the Patriot Act? Ruby Ridge? WACO? etc. Every institution in ur god-forsaken country is corrupted, every last one. There is nothing "legit" about America, it is the land of thieves, murderers, liars and usurpers. Blacks were treated as dogs up until about 50 years ago. After slaughtering most of the American Indians you stuffed the rest of them on reservations and casinos, and then claim to uphold civil rights. :lol:  It's a laughing stock.
Just becuz you live a cushy lifestyle with the  s in LA, and are free to do as you wish and are able to be a cross-dressing transvestite at your own discretion, doesn't mean ur country is a good example of anything.

In fact blacks were treated better in Nazi Germany than the US at that point in time.

[youtube:17zdq3t1]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypslbskP0s8[/youtube]17zdq3t1]

[MonkeySeeMonkeyDo]

Not to belabor a point but this is what happens to you in Ahmedinejadwonderland when you decide to grow your hair even moderately long:

[youtube:19e1vx53]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEOFLVwnkMQ[/youtube]19e1vx53]

This video is most likely fake. Why would the Iranian police allow somebody to film the whole thing so they could go put it out on the net and make Iranians look bad? I could see the CIA putting together propaganda videos like these to further demonize Iran. The CIA admitted to making fake bin laden videos, and a former CIA officer admitted to a plot where they were going to make a video of Saddam engaging in a homosexual act with a child. Literally they were going to try and make saddam look like a gay pedophile.

On the eve of the Iraq war, the CIA kicked around a rather odd idea: make a gay sex tape featuring a teenage boy and an ersatz Saddam Hussein.

"It would look like it was taken by a hidden camera," one former intelligence official tells SpyTalk. "Very grainy, like it was a secret videotaping of a sex session."

The notion was eventually nixed. But "the agency actually did make a video purporting to show Osama bin Laden and his cronies sitting around a campfire swigging bottles of liquor and savoring their conquests with boys," a CIA officer recalled. The actors were drawn from "some of us darker-skinned employees."

Hmmm... I wonder if that's how the rumor surfaced in the British press of al-Qaeda chiefs "raping young male converts to shame them into becoming suicide bombers."


Either way, it wasn't the only time American operatives attempted to use homoerotic tactics against its enemies in the Middle East. There were the nude human pyramids at Abu Ghraib. And before 9/11, the CIA tried to recruit a gay agent who could penetrate and compromise Al Qaeda's inner circle.

One would be tempted to say that such antics might be coming to an end, now that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is mercifully heading for history's ash heap. But agency spooks have been out of the closet for more than a decade. And yet, they still dreamed of shaming Saddam with gay sex.



Read More http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/05 ... z0v2dVxhcc

[Travis]

Not to belabor a point but this is what happens to you in Ahmedinejadwonderland when you decide to grow your hair even moderately long:

Bing! what you still doing here? How can you show your face here pumping the same irrelevant rhetoric after you have been exposed as a slanderous liar? Just to recap you claimed that  'when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'. Despite pages of copying and pasting you have failed to support your slanderous claim. At every point you keep referring to Iran, if you reread the topic title it does not mention Iran rather the focus is on western assumptions regarding Islam. In fact you have proven my main assertion that many of the western assertions regarding Islam are hypocritical and baseless  :clap: .

Islam has been demonized by the western world. The thrust of the arguments against Islam have in been in regards to allegations of Islam's use of violence , however, as my essay has demonstrated the western world is guilty of such allegations not Islam. The main point of these allegations are to divert attention from Islam's main message. Therefore, I ask people on this forum what do you think is the main belief of Islam, and how does this challenge the Jewish agenda to dominate the world?

[Negentropic]

Bing! what you still doing here? How can you show your face here pumping the same irrelevant rhetoric after you have been exposed as a slanderous liar? Just to recap you claimed that 'when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'. Despite pages of copying and pasting you have failed to support your slanderous claim. At every point you keep referring to Iran, if you reread the topic title it does not mention Iran rather the focus is on western assumptions regarding Islam. In fact you have proven my main assertion that many of the western assertions regarding Islam are hypocritical and baseless  .

Islam has been demonized by the western world. The thrust of the arguments against Islam have in been in regards to allegations of Islam's use of violence , however, as my essay has demonstrated the western world is guilty of such allegations not Islam. The main point of these allegations are to divert attention from Islam's main message. Therefore, I ask people on this forum what do you think is the main belief of Islam, and how does this challenge the Jewish agenda to dominate the world?

Ah shaddup          :lol:  I'm really getting sick of your lazy whining accusations about how nobody has responded to your pathetic little essay, Islam is just as responsible for its violence as the West. Hey at least the Westerners don't do to THEIR OWN POPULATIONS what the Muslim states do.  Show me one person who ever had their hands chopped off for stealing in Sweden or Denmark or England or the Great Satan, this century. You can't.

show my face,

you mean like this?  


Is that your fat butt there in white with the camera vacationing with your clan?  :lol:  :lol:  :clap:  :lol:  

That's not Iran by the way, they don't enforce burqas over there wise guy, that's one of your other not-truly-Islamic (according to you) territorial zones of lunacy.

Tell 'em all their taxi's waiting

 :lol:

I say fuck all shariah law.  Any body of laws that includes complete brutality towards indididuals the way Shariah law does can go fuck itself.


Can there be an Islamic state without Shariah law?  Not that I know of wise guy.  You say shariah law and Islam good, Iran bad misinterpreting representatives of Islam right? Well, there's plenty I posted that shows Shariah law is the goddamn problem.  You wanna shut your eyes to it go ahead but don't tell anyone else what to look at or not.  You wanna post boring one paragraph dismisals, go ahead but you don't tell me what to post and not to post. The only reason people even bothered to look at this post is because there's plenty of info here, for better or worse, for them to make up their own minds about, not because of your boring little essay.

You haven't even been on this forum for months but all of a sudden you show you up to protect the honor of your sacred Ahmedinejad being called what he deserves ?  And then say it's not Ahmedinejad you're defending? Well, this ain't no Islamic blog, pal! I'll show a lot more than a face, how's my middle finger, can you see it or should I turn it up?  Now go cry like a baby or better yet like one of your female slaves.




Your little essay hasn't demonstrated that the Western World is more than partially responsible for what happens in Iran or any other fundamentalist Islamic Shariah-Law country one jack-shit bit. All Muslims are responsible for it just as much as the Yanks when they go to Iraq and do the MSE's (Money Shitting Elites) dirty work.  I saw you compare Americans to feces on another post so do the same to Iran if you're honest, but you're nothing but a hypocrite. If Ahmedinejad & Khomeini & the their followers do the MSE"s dirty work in Iran then MUSLIMS are also responsible for their actions. Are you denying that Iran is a Shia Muslim state?  If you're saying they're not a TRUE Muslim state, tough shit,  the United States of today is not a TRUE capitalist or constitutionalist republic either, so eat it.



Exposed by who? By little angry Ahmedinajad-lover wanna-be islamic-dictator Travis trying his measly little best to CENSOR TIU posters the way he would love to censor the entire American and Western press?   I have no right to post videos and I haven't responded to his silly little original post calling me a "Deviant Jew" when I already answered personally plus provided a book's worth of evidence off the net to back up everything I said?  If you're too lazy to read my response then it's not my problem is it?

I'm a liar because of what? Because I said as many women instead of a limit of four?  Here's your answer from the previous post, whaddaya scared somebody might read it?  

For example, you said 'when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'. This is a complete liar.


This is a complete liar? I'm not a chair! .  What kind of English is that? (and he's calling me ignorant ) Did you mean a complete lie? or maybe this guy is a complete liar? Not a lie at all, never mind a 'complete liar,' just slightly incorrect, for which I offer my sincere and humble apologies to Mr. Ahmedinejad-lover, actually more like an editing mistake

you can have as many as four wives (more like slaves) at a time which is POLYGAMY last time I checked. There are some conditions such as not being a broke motherfucker and the women agreeing, check below, but it's still male-chauvinist POLYGAMY. If you commit adultery though you get lashed and you die by slow torture of stoning in Iran and Sharia law countries. The man can have as many as four wives but has to be able to take care of them. None of the women can have even one extra-marital affair or commit one act of adultery without dying a painful and slow death. That's some peaceful religion, huh?

He's trying to tell you how many wives (slaves) he has  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:



Let me guess all Western agents right?


Why should I myself write a book when volumes already exist eloquently argued and written all over the net? You still love Khomeni after reading the utterly disgusting quotes from things that he said in his own books?  I'm sure you ignored it to your liking. You might as well love Jeffrey Daumer and Pedophilia Incorporated. Yes or No?  Is Khomeini considered an Imam by fundamentalist Muslims, yes or no?  Did I condemn all Muslims?  NO,  only fundamentalist regimes like Ahedineshitfuck's Iran.  But you still claim that I do whatever I do to condemn all muslims, right? Which makes you what?  A LIAR?  hee hee ha ha . That's right a LIAR. So welcome to the Liar's Club Ahmedi-boy. So you call me a liar but then LIE again that I'm condemning all Islam when I already said I condemn fundamentalist opressive regimes based on religion. So now you're EXPOSED AS A LIAR.  





So whaddaya doing here you wanna-be little dictator? BING !!  Go over to your favorite fundamentalist Islamic shithole BING! and have a party with your Zionist-fighting controlled-opposition buddies.  Don't forget to can and whip some adulterers and homos while you're at it. BING!


False accusations huh?  Fake videos?  Same old story. When they can't deny something they deny the authenticity of the proof like they were lawyers in a court of law. Which part of the reports of stoning is not a fact?  Let's see you prove they are false reports. Are you saying all of these reports are made up?  Let's see you prove it.






Since Yiddy Yoda MSMD doesn't think anything can ever be possibly leaked into opposition hands by any dictatorial regime that's harmful to that regime like that kid getting his hair-burned on camera by those two Islamic Pasdar cocksuckers, let's educate the Canadian America-hater further with a few more FAKE VIDEOS :

Iranian woman jailed and raped for not wearing Hijab - interviewed in Sweden:
[youtube:3phvnlss]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbGYPMDgG4I[/youtube]3phvnlss]

Is that what you think women deserve, Travis? Let's hear some more BINGS for Islam and Jew this and Jew that. Go ahead make a fool of yourself and show yourself up. Not that you haven't already.  

[youtube:3phvnlss]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KZjiXCFFaw[/youtube]3phvnlss]

Muslim Beachwear:
[youtube:3phvnlss]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xK05WASZX-M[/youtube]3phvnlss]
Don't anyone pop a Boner looking at any ankles now or Travis will honor-kill you and the girl too


Iranian woman clashes with moral police (the hag-witch covered in black that gets her ass kicked and starts screaming for the Islamic hijab police; is that what you want all women to be Travis?  Your slave huh? ) in black:

[youtube:3phvnlss]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qh17-5LD9mY[/youtube]3phvnlss]

Iranian Women Abused For Not Following "Islamic Dress Code" (can you believe this shit?  So the Zionists will own his country if women wear their clothes wrong? Whoever defends this Ahmedinejackturd or anyone like him is just as guilty of taking the world closer to tyranny as whoever defends the Israeli apartheid.

[youtube:3phvnlss]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgXgpngHf60[/youtube]3phvnlss]

Two Evil Yanks from California Interview Iranian Metalheads in Tehran about Islam, among other things:
[youtube:3phvnlss]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cc3x26MvjmI[/youtube]3phvnlss]


Iranian Family Becomes Canadian for Freedom! (CBC National)  ha ha hee in MSMD Yiddy Yoda's country where he can't get rid of hate-laws but can rant all day about the Yids and Yanks that massacred everyone the commies couldn't finish:

Iranian Family Becomes Canadian for Freedom! (CBC National)  
[youtube:3phvnlss]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6QYliTjdIo[/youtube]3phvnlss]

candom factory iran, sexual education classes; how cute; there's even a western-style wedding in here shown behind closed doors where the chadors come off which proves yet again how much the Iranian people approve of the Islamic republic.  Fuck the Islamic Republic of Iran. When they're not fining and imprisoning people for dress codes and stoning them to death for adultery they give them condoms because they care so much about them? Get the fuck outta here:

[youtube:3phvnlss]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJEJCk7KL7Y[/youtube]3phvnlss]

Check out the Women of Islamic Iran's Police Force
[youtube:3phvnlss]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHgV9z8lBwY[/youtube]3phvnlss]

Check out the Women of Islamic Iran's Police Force

Iranian Women's Ninja Police
[youtube:3phvnlss]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7wd6ZfL59E[/youtube]3phvnlss]

Iranian women firefighters, equal to men!  Iranian race-car drivers! But women still have to sit in the back of the friggin bus. Also a piece on Iran the Nose-Job nation. Hmm. Nose Jobs? Of course they've got to make the most of what they can show!!
[youtube:3phvnlss]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zu2ZjuvURy4[/youtube]3phvnlss]



FUCK SHARIAH. Shariah will dominate nothing just like the Talmud or Christian Fundamentalism will dominate nothing. Shariah can get the fuck back into medieval history where it belongs.

http://islamicfinancenews.wordpress.com/2008/05/21/aaoifi-shariah-council-meeting-sharia-scholars-to-review-challenges/

And furthermore, FUCK ALL SHARIAH SCHOLARS and so-called experts in Islamic finance

http://islamicfinancenews.wordpress.com/shariah-specialists-in-islamic-finance/

Financing with no Usury and medieval shariah laws !!! What a friggin laugh!  It'a like a Marriage Made in paranoid woman-hating Heaven

If Kevin Barrett or Rafeeq and Pidcock or any other so-called Muslim  leaders of the 'truth' movement are for  any form of Shariah law then I would lose COMPLETE RESPECT for them immediately. And if they support Iran's extremist fundamentalist regime, then that would be BEYOND INEXCUSABLE and they can all go fuck-off too for all I care !  I've never heard them express anything but free-thinking well-thought-out pro-individualist opinions on everything but there never was, never will be and never can be any such thing as HUMAN RIGHTS without INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.

Put that in your burqa and smoke it!!!















http://deadhomersociety.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/two-bad-neighbors1.png?w=512&h=384


Gay Iranian Given 100 Lashes

Amir escaped Iran after the authorities threatened him with execution for being gay - but not before he was subjected to the barbarism of 100 lashes, which left his back covered in huge bloody welts.


http://billandkent.com/blog/2005/09/gay-iranian-given-100-lashes.html









Ask the Ayatollah of Shitholla and his representative Ahmedinajackfuck
A man can have sex with animals such as sheep, cows, camels and so on.
However he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not
sell the meat to the people in his own village, however selling the meat to
the next door village should be fine.
From Khomeini's book, "Tahrirolvasyleh", fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom,
Iran, 1990

"If one commits the act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine and their excrement become impure, and even their milk may no longer be consumed. The animal must then be killed and as quickly as possible and burned."
The little green book, Sayings of Ayatollah Khomeini, Political, Phylosophica, Social and Religious with a special introduction by Clive Irving, ISBN number 0-553-14032-9, page 47
Comments: I am ashamed of being born and raised in Iran, a country where they built a
Mausoleum over his grave and had the greatest party for his 100th birthday.
Shame on such people.
Return to Dr. Darabi Foundation Home Page







Ahmedinejad playing into demonization of Muslims by enforcing his regime caused this as much as Americans






Let's hear it some more for the 'GREAT SATAN' huh?




Close your eyes Travis you're not allowed to look at Muslim women in a bikini, Hijab fashions for you only


http://www.desiclub.com/community/culture/culture_article.cfm?id=277
http://www.zimbio.com/Arab+Culture/articles/4/Pakistani+Bikini

now keep tootin' your broken record again boy, I'm signing both you and MSMD-Yiddy-Yoda  up for Ahmedinejackturd's Great-Satan-Liberation army:





 :lol:  :lol:  :lol: :clap:  :clap:

[superzebra]

http://theuglytruth.podbean.com/2010/08/02/the-ugly-truth-podcast-august-3-2010/

every now listen to new mark glenn show

[Negentropic]

http://theuglytruth.podbean.com/2010/08/02/the-ugly-truth-podcast-august-3-2010/

every now listen to new mark glenn show

Yeah, right, Devvy kid and Jeff Rense both traitors? Why because Devvy doesn't like Islamic fundamentalists? And wasn't it Glenn who went on the Rense show many times?  Shit, Rense is 100% against any war on Iran and I am too, I just hate the Islamic regime and know that they're nothing but the same old story that is, controlled opposition, since the days of Khomeini, playing into the hands of the Western MSE (money shitting elites) on cue exactly as Mullins and later DBS pointed out.  Tourney split with Glenn too, so way to go dividing the twoof movement some more  :clap:  

[Travis]

Post as much filth and lies as you want, but it won't change the fact you have exposed yourself as a liar and a hateful idiot. Just to remind everyone you claimed that 'when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'. I asked you for the evidence for such a claim i.e. that a man can have as many wives as he wants, you have failed in producing evidence to support this lie. Rather you have just thrown more insults and lies.

Furthermore, let me ask you which nation race, religion or ideology has been responsible for shedding the most blood, support your answer with empirical evidence.

Let me throw a few events out there; WWI & WWII, the slave trade, the ethnic cleansing and genocide of the indigenous populations of North America and Australia, the bombing or Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the invasion of Iraq 2003 and Afghanistan 2001, the use of agent orange in Vietnam and the legalisation of the murder of unborn children, in the most wicked manner, at 6 months?

Your tactic is to hijack this thread with you anti Iran rhetoric, and divert attention from the main points in my essay. However, your profound ignorance and stupidity has supported my claims i.e. that the rhetoric surrounding accusations of Islam and violence are unfounded and that the most violent nations are those of the western world. You lose truth wins!

[Negentropic]

Actually Devy's problem is she'd much rather have this:





than this:




I don't blame her one bit. The second example can exist under the first if it chooses but the first cannot under the second, certainly not in any Islamic fundamentalist states.  

Islamic rule is just another form of collectivism like communism or mercantile capitalism. The only solution is a constitutional republic and free-market capitalism and extreme individualism.  That's right, extreme individualism. In fact, Ron Paul without the 9-11 bullshit and the PNAC ties would have been a perfect candidate, that's why it's such a tragedy that he seems to have been another case of controlled opposition limited hangout. America needs to be at the very least just like America was meant to be and was after Jackson. If America falls which it looks like it will, any hope of even what little freedom we still have left fall with it and the world falls, PERIOD.  Any re-establishment of freedom of any sort on any level whatsoever can only proceed along American principles already laid down in the constitution which protect the individual against the mob. That's the reality. Go watch the former KGB man like Bezmenov tell you himself :  

http://theinfounderground.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12167

[Travis]

Negentropic I repeat; post as much filth and lies as you want, but it won't change the fact you have exposed yourself as a liar and a hateful idiot. Just to remind everyone you claimed that 'when you as a man, under fundamentalist Islamic law have a right to as many wives as you can get, just no adultery with unmarried women'. I asked you for the evidence for such a claim i.e. that a man can have as many wives as he wants, you have failed in producing evidence to support this lie. Rather you have just thrown more insults and lies.

Furthermore, let me ask you which nation race, religion or ideology has been responsible for shedding the most blood, support your answer with empirical evidence.

Let me throw a few events out there; WWI & WWII, the slave trade, the ethnic cleansing and genocide of the indigenous populations of North America and Australia, the bombing or Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the invasion of Iraq 2003 and Afghanistan 2001, the use of agent orange in Vietnam and the legalisation of the murder of unborn children, in the most wicked manner, at 6 months?

Your tactic is to hijack this thread with you anti Iran rhetoric, and divert attention from the main points in my essay. However, your profound ignorance and stupidity has supported my claims i.e. that the rhetoric surrounding accusations of Islam and violence are unfounded and that the most violent nations are those of the western world. You lose truth wins!