Thursday, October 27, 2011

12-Year-Old Christian Gang-Raped by Muslims

42 comments:

Peter said...

This is horrible.

As a European I cannot understand why so many muslims immigrate to Europe instead of families like this one. It seems so wrong. Why are we helping muslims immigrate to our countries when they hate our way of life? Why don't we invite the non-muslims instead? Why don't we help families like this one?

simple_truth said...

These people will get what's coming to them in due time. They may be able to justify themselves to the law (Islamic) or religion (Islam) by appealing to non-Muslims being somehow less than Muslims and worthy of subjection; however, they will eventually have to justify this before God, who will not give them a pass on their evil. This is just outrageously wicked!

I do not doubt that this stuff goes on in Islamic dominated areas, especially those that are closer to the teachings of Mohammad and the Sunnah.

andy bell said...

Well, obviously these men were not muslims. They were mossad agents who were posing as muslims who orchestrated this "rape" in order to make muslims look bad.

Check your facts first, people.

Kneel said...

I pray that this young lady stays strong and that the men responsible for this are brought to justice and knowledge of their only hope: Jesus.

WhatsUpDoc said...

David this time you are a little behind the times. Here is one where a father refused to convert to Islam and as s result his 2 (TWO YEARS) daughter was raped. No action against the rapist and family is under threat from Muslims

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvjTKHHP6t0

Nakdimon said...

Islam is pure filth and I spit on Muhammad and his teachings with utter contempt!!!!

Radical Moderate said...

I can already hear Muslims like Osama Abdulla and 1milmeter.

It would start with the usual denials followed by...

"if this did happen then they were not Muslims... BUT" and it would be a BIG BUTT

"But, it is partialy her and her parents fault they let her out with out Hijab... If this was a Islamic country this never would of happend..."

Osama would of went on how he would "Skin his daughter, Mother, sister alive" if they went out with out the hijab and this ever happend to them...

valentin said...

I agree with Nakdimon, I spit on Muhammad and the filth that he started.

D335 said...

the fruit of Islam.
murder, rape, plundering and ALL justified by the religion.

Remember Lara Logan during the Hosni Mobarak fell from power?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmYk5qweXMU&feature=related

Radical Moderate said...

@David

Present and accounted for. Ready for Expose Muhammad Day.

WE know your up, you just approved a comment for D335. We are all waiting on Paltalk for you to post the Mohamed Video its FRIDAY MOHAMED DAY :)

Nicky said...

where are you on paltalk?

BOOTA SINGH said...

ALL PRAISE TO OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST,
Oh, again religion of peace has done anything, shame on this religion, his followers and his founder.
The founder of this religion was a lanti person (cursed person).
Peace.

jghjigh said...

14 Year old girl raped and burnt by Christian American

http://youtu.be/ROzr8AvqPR0

Samatar Mohamed said...

D335, Radical Moderate, Simple truth, Nakdimon

You all argue for consistency, but now you are being inconsistent. You all know that islam prohibits any such terrible actions yet you blame islam for this, not the muslims who did this terrible action. If a muslim apologist brought up actions by christians to disprove the bible, you would all say what a weak argument yet, when David brings up something muslims do, it is time to blame islam for this. Thanks Andy bell, for keeping an open mind.

SGM said...

I come from a muslim country where 97 percent of the population is moslems. These type of things like rape and kidnapping of Christian girls are among many horrible things Christians face everyday in Moslem countries. I have experienced first hand where I was refused to be served in the same dishes from which Moslems eat in a restaurant. Many food stands and restaurants have separate old beat up dirty dishes for Christians. If the owner comes to know that any of his customers is a Christian, they will use separate dishes. I was refused to have my hair cut at the barber shop. We have places where you can take dough to have (pita) bread made. If they come to know that you are Christian, they will not accept the dough since you have used your hands to make the dough and since Christians are considered infidel, they will not use that dough in the same oven (tandore) used for other moslem customers. Now a days, you don’t even have to say anything to offend a Moslem. If any Moslem does not like you or want to rape your daughter or sister, all they have to do is to say, you have blasphemed their (false) prophet. This gives them the right to do anything to Christians like burn their homes, beat them up, kill them or rape their women etc etc.
Westerners cant even imagine that these kind of things happen in Moslem countries let alone in this world where you can’t even have your hair cut because you are a Christian. And these things are getting worse and worse every day. Look around the world, Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan where you have Moslem majority, how other religions are treated.
And we come to west, and Moslem teach that it is a peaceful religion. What a joke. I believe, Taqqiya is at work in the west to its fullest. One has to see and experience himself to find out how corrupt and Satanic this religion is. There are many religions in this world and if I am not mistaken, this is the only religion which mentions Christian and Jews by name and goes so far to state that they are the worst of creatures and commands Moslems to fight anyone who is not a Moslem, sura 9:29. I am pretty sure that no other religion in this world has this kind of teaching.
BUT ALL GLORY AND HONOR AND PRAISE BE TO OUR SAVIOR AND REDEEMER JESUS CHRIST who protects and saves his people. My prayer for the girl in the video is that the Lord Jesus Christ gives her and her family comfort and save them from further harm from Moslems.

taomeano said...

@Radical Moderate:

what is the name of your room on Paltalk ?

Your response will be appreciated.

Fernando said...

Hi jghjigh...

do you really believe thate those persons who dis thate horrendous action were Christians? or are you justte following the misleading tittle off thate video?

more: can you presentte to us all any source from Christian core texts that supports this action? if you cannot do so, woulde you, then, agknoledge thate, in oposition to the situation described in this thread in connection to islam, it has nothing to do to Christianity?

tnaks in advance for your answer...

SGM said...

@ Samatar Mohamed

You say that, “You all know that islam prohibits any such terrible actions yet you blame islam for this, not the muslims who did this terrible action.”
Can you please explaine this verse in quran and tell me how Islam prohibits rape?
Sura 4:24, “Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess. thus hath Allah ordained (prohibitions) against you: except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property,― desiring chastity, not lust. Seeing that ye derive benefit from them give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, ye agree mutually (to vary it) there is no blame on you, and Allah is All-Knowing All-Wise.”

Tafsir Ibn Kathir:
Allah said, [وَالْمُحْصَنَـتُ مِنَ النِّسَآءِ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكْتَ أَيْمَـنُكُمْ]
(Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess.) The Ayah means, you are prohibited from marrying women who are already married,
[إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكْتَ أَيْمَـنُكُمْ]
(except those whom your right hands possess) except those whom you acquire through war, for you are allowed such women after making sure they are not pregnant. Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri said, "We captured some women from the area of Awtas who were already married, and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands. So, we asked the Prophet about this matter, and this Ayah was revealed, e
[وَالْمُحْصَنَـتُ مِنَ النِّسَآءِ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكْتَ أَيْمَـنُكُمْ]
(Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess). Consequently, we had sexual relations with these women.'' This is the wording collected by At-Tirmidhi An-Nasa'i, Ibn Jarir and Muslim in his Sahih. Allah's statement,
Now if Mohamad allowed his companions to rape women while their husbands were still alive, what is to stop Moslems to rape 2nd class citizens in Moslem majority countries? All Christians in Moslem majority countries are considered 2nd class citizens. Now I will agree with you that there may be times when people do things which their religion does not justify but to say that Islam does not allow raping women would be a blaspheme.

MalbecMemoirs said...

This is the part where we wait for Kim to have a response that in no way relates to this article or acknowledges this horrendous crime, yet pleads that Muslims are just misunderstood and that David is somehow twisting the Qur'an to suit his Islamophobic ideations.

3...2...1...

Samatar Mohamed said...

SGM

The sources in no way indicate that the slave women where against having sex with them. It is only rape when the slave women do not agree to having sex, and the sources doesn't indicate this, so you are misrepresenting. And if you are saying that having sex with your slave women is rape or even adultery, then Genesis 20:17 will show you otherwise. And it is funny how you did not bring up any hadith where the prophet himself says to treat slaves like brothers,to feed them out of what you eat, and dress them out of what you wear. So nice try SGM.

andy bell said...

Thanks Andy bell, for keeping an open mind.

I damn near fell off my chair in laughter.

Could someone explain to these people, the word "facetious"

hahahhahahahahah

Samatar Mohamed said...

Could someone explain to these people, the word "facetious"

LOL, you act as if you are some sort of superior being when you say "these people". I'm not an animal you know.

search 4 truth said...

Samater you are willfully ignorant and disgusting! Would your Mother, sisters, or daughters want to have sex with the men that just slaughtered some of your family and friends or you were captured with them and wanted to have sex in the presence of you? You disgust me! Where does it say they have to get permission?

These are examples of rape, adultery, kidnapping, ransoming and enslavement!

Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: (Sura 4:24) "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." (Abu Dawud 2150, also Muslim 3433)

"We went out with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter" (Sahih Muslim 3371)

Now lets look at what your scholars say!

search 4 truth said...

The scholars are unanimously agreed that it is permissible.

Ibn Qudaamah said:

There is no dispute (among the scholars) that it is permissible to take concubines and to have intercourse with one's slave woman, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts from illegal sexual acts).

Except from their wives or the (women slaves) whom their right hands possess for (then) they are not blameworthy.”

[al-Ma’aarij 70:29-30]

Maariyah al-Qibtiyyah was the umm walad (a slave woman who bore her master a child) of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and she was the mother of Ibraaheem, the son of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), of whom he said, “Her son set her free.” Haajar, the mother of Isma’eel (peace be upon him), was the concubine of Ibraaheem the close friend (khaleel) of the Most Merciful (peace be upon him). ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him) had a number of slave women who bore him children, to each of whom he left four hundred in his will. ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) had slave women who bore him children, as did many of the Sahaabah. ‘Ali ibn al-Husayn, al-Qaasim ibn Muhammad and Saalim ibn ‘Abd-Allaah were all born from slave mothers

Al-Mughni, 10/441

Al-Shaafa’i (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts from illegal sexual acts).

Except from their wives or the (women slaves) whom their right hands possess for (then) they are not blameworthy.”

[al-Ma’aarij 70:29-30]

The Book of Allaah indicates that the sexual relationships that are permitted are only of two types, either marriage or those (women slaves) whom one’s right hand possesses.

Al-Umm, 5/43.

The wife has no right to object to her husband owning female slaves or to his having intercourse with them.


Similarly a slave woman does not have the right to refuse her master’s requests unless she has a valid excuse. If she does that she is being disobedient and he has the right to discipline her in whatever manner he thinks is appropriate and is allowed in sharee’ah.

And Allaah knows best.

SGM said...

@ Samatar Mohamed

The source does not say that roses are red and violets are blue either. Here we go again with Moslem thinking. My friend, lets put aside our religion hats here for a moment and think logically. According to Ibn Kathir, “Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri said, "We captured some women from the area of Awtas who were already married, and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands.” Here we see that Moslem men CAPTURED some women who had families and husbands. First of all, which woman in her right mind would be so happy to be captured. Secondly, which woman would be dying to have sex with the man who had just taken her forcefully from her house. I hope you understand the word CAPTURE. Now let me give you the benefit of doubt and assume that all woman captured by these Moslem men were prostitutes and they were just waiting to be captured and dying to have sex while their husbands were still alive. But then again, the text doesn’t say that, does it.
Now Mr. Samatar, let me point your attention to the men who actually captured these women. They had the decency of being reluctant to have sex with these women, why, “and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands.” And what did Mohammad say, my dear friends, who cares if they have husbands, Allah has given you the right to have sex with them. So go ahead and enjoy..
Additionaly, let me apply your logic back to you. The source in no way indicate that the salve women agreed to having sex with them. So the point whether the women agreed or not is moot.
In regards to whether you would call it rape, no matter how much you sugar coat it, having sex with captured women in any decent culture is called rape. Obviously, a Moslem can not call it rape. How can he when Mohammad allowed it. If it wasn't, Moslems wont be doing it. Hellllooooo.
On adultery, this is what separate a Moslem from a Christian. In Christianity, sex out side of marriage is adultery whether it is done with or without consent. And what does Gen 20:17 has to do with anything. Gen 20:17 says, “So Abraham prayed unto God: and God healed Abimelech, and his wife, and his maidservants; and they bare children.”
I agree with you on hadith that might say something nice about slaves. But this proves that there is contradiction in your hadith and quran and religion. Having sex with your slave women is not treating them like brothers. Also, I am sure that Hitler has said some good things in his life but that does not make him a good person. You can point to a hadith that talks good things (in disguise), but at the same time you are forgetting the bigger picture of Islam, the DARK SIDE.
I hope that some day you will come to accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior. You won’t have to sugar coat anything to make it sweet. True Christianity is all sweet inside and outside because of the sweetness of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Its filled with love, because our God is love.

simple_truth said...

jghjigh said...

"14 Year old girl raped and burnt by Christian American"

Really?

Where does it say that the person was Christian? Did you listen to the video clip before you responded? Even in the comments section below the video, a person even mentioned that nowhere in the video does it say that the person was a Christian.

Even if this person was a Christian, there are no directives in scripture to rape or to kill; whereas, in Islam, such a case can be made to do so.

simple_truth said...

Samatar Mohamed said...

"You all argue for consistency, but now you are being inconsistent. You all know that islam prohibits any such terrible actions yet you blame islam for this, not the muslims who did this terrible action."

I agree with you about the blame if these people didn't do it based upon religious edicts. The question becomes whether those who acted were motivated by their religious texts and customs. It is possible that an adherent to any religion can go against its teachings; but, is this the case with things like raping by Muslim males?

Just to be clear, Islam doesn't teach directly that raping is OK; but, the implications are that it allows for enslavement of non-Muslims under war by which the women can be subjected to sex with Muslims males. I highly doubt that women who are captured by any means, whether by war, by kidnapping, or by any other means, will want to have a sexual relationship with their capturers. It just goes against human logic and dignity to think otherwise, especially when the sexual activity happens just minutes, hours, or days after captivity. Also throw in the fact that the woman may even be married, which creates an even worse picture-- rape + adultery, which Islam also is supposed to condemn. Just use your brains a bit; for, it should be easy to understand my point.

Furthermore, it would be rather difficult and awkward for a captive, especially a female, to refuse to obey or cooperate with her male capturer. Slaves are in a subordinate position and have no equal footing with Muslims to reject the Muslim male's demands. If forced, which is the most likely outcome in conditions of being captured, sexual encounters become rape. That is the simple definition of rape. Don't you see that?

"If a muslim apologist brought up actions by christians to disprove the bible, you would all say what a weak argument yet, when David brings up something muslims do, it is time to blame islam for this. Thanks Andy bell, for keeping an open mind."

We don't use raping by Muslim males to disprove Islam. We use these examples to show that such acts are able to be justified through Islam. You need to get that straight before you continue.

Like I said first, it all depends upon whether scripture allows for the action. In the case of the Christianity, the answer is no; but, in the case of the Islam, it is not so clear cut.

Radical Moderate said...

taomeano said...

I rarly have a room and rarly admin.

But you can find me in the Social Issuses section either in the Answering Christian room getting RED FUTED by muslims and Bounced or in a room called "Christains Pray for Muslims.

Samatar Mohamed said...

SGM

My point was to show you that slaves should be treated like brothers and not like property. Unlike the bible which says clearly that Slaves are the property of men. If a slave is property, then you can do anything you want with your property (like have sex with them), however, islam tells us to treat them fairly. And you said "The source in no way indicate that the salve women agreed to having sex with them." You may have heard of the term innocent until proven guilty, you cannot accuse people of rape when the sources do not show whether or not they did commit rape. Yet, you are saying that they undoubtedly did commit rape. Bring a hadith showing the prophet allowing rape. He allows consentual sex with she slaves. You should take off your christian hat for a second and be fair.

Samatar Mohamed said...

Search for truth

Thanks for bringing up verses from the hadith and quran which, show that scholars agree with having sex with she slaves, not raping she slaves. If you hear a report saying so and so had sex with so and so, would you assume it was rape, no you would assume it was consentual sex unless it states somewhere that it was rape. Again, I challenge you to find a authentic hadith and verse from the Quran allowing sex with someone who disagrees with the notion. I'll be waiting brother.

simple_truth said...

Samatar Mohamed said...

"The sources in no way indicate that the slave women where against having sex with them."

Where did the source say that it wasn't against having sex? It can be deduced by simple logic. Women who are captured are not likely to want to have consenting sex with those who captured them. Don't you agree with that? If not, then I highly question your moral disposition. Look at it this way. If someone took your daughter by force and had sex with her, what would you call it?

"It is only rape when the slave women do not agree to having sex, and the sources doesn't indicate this, so you are misrepresenting."

Since the slave is in a subordinate position and fears retaliation for not complying with her capturer, it is very difficult to support that she isn't going to agree in order to keep herself from getting harmed further. She does not have freedom to refuse without taking a gamble that she won't get punished for not complying. You should be able to understand that much, even without anyone having to tell you. There is always the pressure to do whatever to conform to the demands of your master unless your master guarantees you immunity from punishment if you refuse. How can one trust their master to do that in such as circumstance?

"And if you are saying that having sex with your slave women is rape or even adultery, then Genesis 20:17 will show you otherwise."

Yes, if it is under force, it is rape, regardless of whether the woman refuses it. If the woman can refuse without any repercussions and is open to sex, then it is not such an easy case to claim rape. Any time a woman is under some obligation to have sex and refuses, it goes into that classification of forced sex--rape.

The entire of Genesis doesn't bear out what you are trying to prove. First off, the last verse explains the verse you quoted with the following: Gen 20:18 For the LORD had fast closed up all the wombs of the house of Abimelech, because of Sarah Abraham's wife.

Sarah didn't have sex with Abimelech. It was Abimelech's household that was healed by Abraham's prayer. Conclusion: Abimelech's household bore children once the wombs of the women were opened by God. Note also that there was no forced sex, even if you want to argue that if Sarah had sex with Abimelech. The situation was very different. The earlier verses point out that Abraham had his wife Sarah to pretend to be his sister in order to escape harm while they in a Gerar, a land ruled by Abimelech, the king.

"And it is funny how you did not bring up any hadith where the prophet himself says to treat slaves like brothers,to feed them out of what you eat, and dress them out of what you wear. So nice try SGM."

However, that doesn't change the fact that captured women wouldn't want to have sex with those who captured them without fear of punishment if they don't comply with their master's requests, especially within a short time after captivity. Please stay on topic and not try to tell us how nice Mohammad was when he still allowed captive women to be open to sexual intercourse, even when their husbands were still alive. Did the husbands of those captives give the Muslims permission to have sex with them? Even if they did, it would not make matters much better since that would be adultery and coveting at the very least. Also consider that if the captured males didn't agree to let their wives have sex with the Muslim men, they would also likely suffer some negative consequence, including possibly being killed. The husbands would also be in a subordinate position and would probably comply with the request while fearing for their own lives. Just face it, both the husbands and wives were in no position to refuse, given the subordinate position they were in without some harmful consequences levied against them. Don't you see that much?

simple_truth said...

I just want to point out another example where Islamic text claims to forbid something that is actually legal but disguises it under Islamic subterfuge.

Adultery is outlawed in Islam; however, the definition of adultery is altered from normal meaning by the allowance of up to 4 wives by a single Muslim male. From the Islamic view, this is not adultery, but to the ordinary person, it is.

Islam permits fornication and coveting by allowing sexual relations with right hand possessions; however, Muslims don't see it this way since circumstances such as war change the status of captured women to allowable sexual subjects without penalty of sexual immorality.

Islam cloaks many things that it says that it is against under the disguise of expediency.

Conclusion: Islam claims to forbid adultery, but goes on to allow it by redefining the term to fit its agenda--expediency. Yes, Islam forbids adultery; but, the catch is that adultery is having more than four wives or having slaves (right hand possessions. In the process of establishing adulterous relationships, Islam also condones fornication and coveting.

Islam also claims to not kill innocent people; but, we can easily make a claim that any non-Muslim who does not become subjected to Islam is no longer an innocent person; therefore, war can be waged against such individuals resulting in their deaths. For Islam, this killing can be justified and would not be considered a killing of an innocent person; but for non-Muslims it is obviously the killing of an innocent. Again, it all depends upon definition for Muslims. It is very easy to find any number of conflicting hadiths to support a specific point of view. Just Mohammad's examples through speech and deeds alone is enough to create an opportunistic justification.

Bartimaeus said...

Allahu Akar

Blame the Jews Bleame the Christians and Never take responsiblity for yourself. But I blame Mohammed and the Quran wher Muslims justify this stuff

Camel Urine Anayone

ned said...

it is a fact and sad fact that in muslim countries there is no peace. these muslims live almost like animals, the recent example is what is happening in syria, egypt, yemen, sudan, afghanistan, pakistan, saudi arabia, iran and pick any. they immigrate to west and then struggle to make these countries like the one they are coming from. i do not know what is in their head; if they were happy back home then go home buddies why change west and then where will they go. Unless they accept Jesus they will stay like animals and it is so cause the way they cut throats and kill their fellow muslims and even worse for non muslims, they become comparable to barbarians. All this animal nature comes from the word of allah that leads them.

ned said...

@ Samatar Mohamed

you are well lubricated with deception taught by quran and therefore are hard to convince by logical or spiritual standards. I say all muslims go back to the dens they are coming from and stop trying to convert west into pig pens that muslims live when they truely follow their quran.

Joe Bradley said...

Andy Bell, just where did you get these "facts" that you admonish everyone else to check or have you deemed yourself to be the sole repository of this secret knowledge.

jghjigh, The video you cite does not mention the religion of the soldier. Have you been dipping into Andy Bell's repository of secret knowledge?

Samatar Mohamed, Why are the local police so eager to protect the perpetrators if these men were merely rogue Muslim criminals and thugs and this gang rape were not justified within the larger realm of Islam? You also state, "The sources in no way indicate that the slave women where against having sex with them. It is only rape when the slave women do not agree to having sex, and the sources doesn't indicate this, so you are misrepresenting."

The video doesn't seem to show that the girl was a willing participant to the multiple rapes. Perhaps you too have acquired secret knowledge from the exclusive repository of Andy Bell.

jghjigh said...

sorry for the previous video -
here are some new ones

Christian school principal (Mark Brown) Rapes 14 yrs old girl
http://youtu.be/H4dzOsnKUJc

Church Member accused for child molesting
http://youtu.be/v7ODNDqrcA0

Christian Priests & Nuns Raped & Abused Thousands of children
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ca7_1242937989

This videos does not represent all Christians in the world same goes for other muslim rape videos

god bless us all
peace :)

simple_truth said...

jghjigh said...

"sorry for the previous video -
here are some new ones"

I am not going to look at the new ones in part because you haven't even addressed our comments about the old one yet. How about stop posting and take a look at what we say first.

"This videos does not represent all Christians in the world same goes for other muslim rape videos"

This is your way of washing the hands of Muslims? As already stated, there is no scriptural basis for a Christian to rape anyone; for, he would be going against Christ; but, for a Muslim, there are plenty of scripture that allows such things. Even if Christians do it, that doesn't change what happened anyways. Deal with that.

Joe Bradley said...

jghjigh, did you take the time to notice something about the videos you cited??? The police actually took the charges seriously and did not attempt to ignore and downplay them. To the contrary, the police in the, decidedly, Islamic country ridiculed, excoriated and brow beat the Christian girl for being raped by an out-of-control male MUSLIM population. The victim became the criminal as per Sharia. How dare she be a Christian - off with her head!!!

ISLAM IS A DIRTY DIRTY BUSINESS.

Foolster41 said...

(pound on the keyboard):
You are being very dishonest, since whether or not Christians rape has NOTHING to do with muslim rapists.

Please address the ACTUAL arguments of whether or not Islam allows or promotes rape rather than bringing in irreverent red herring tu-quo que fallacies.

dillo45 said...

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 718:
Narrated Ibn Muhairiz:

I saw Abu Said and asked him about coitus interruptus. Abu Said said, "We went with Allah's Apostle, in the Ghazwa of Barli Al-Mustaliq and we captured some of the 'Arabs as captives, and the long separation from our wives was pressing us hard and we wanted to practice coitus interruptus. We asked Allah's Apostle (whether it was permissible). He said, "It is better for you not to do so. No soul, (that which Allah has) destined to exist, up to the Day of Resurrection, but will definitely come, into existence."

@Foolster41

Volume 5, Book 59, Number 637:
Narrated Buraida:

The Prophet sent 'Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus (of the booty) and I hated Ali, and 'Ali had taken a bath (after a sexual act with a slave-girl from the Khumus). I said to Khalid, "Don't you see this (i.e. Ali)?" When we reached the Prophet I mentioned that to him. He said, "O Buraida! Do you hate Ali?" I said, "Yes." He said, "Do you hate him, for he deserves more than that from the Khumus."

D335 said...

@Samatar Mohammed.
I dunno where you live, but it must be far far away from a muslim country.

I live in Indonesia, and you can B.S. all you want. The inconsitencies are YOURS to bear. You might get your feeling hurt from reading or learning more about what Islam did today or in the past.
But in no way, I feel, live and experience under Islam directly is anything closer to yours. You stated Islam believe not in such horrific crimes, that is your OWN interpretation or what you want to believe. Not the same deal what I know about Muslims here.

As I wrote this, there're muslim groups moving to get rid of church goers in GKI Yasmin, Bogor. The same church that is forced to close by the local muslim communities. The supreme court of Indonesia indeed stand on the side of the church, but what can we do? the rest of Indonesian muslims seem to SHUT their eyes, and let people get beaten up.
Even my own good muslim friends are not saying anything at all. Shut the TV is all they can do.