B J Foster <bjfoster@yahoo.com.au> wrote in news:4793c069$0$5200
$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au:

Matt wrote:

B J Foster <bjfoster@yahoo.com.au> wrote in
news:4793b3df$0$10472$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au:

Mavisbeacon wrote:

"B J Foster" <bjfoster@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:4793059c$0$4471$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

Mavisbeacon wrote:

"B J Foster" <bjfoster@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:47927eca$0$18606$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

Mavisbeacon wrote:

...

Even if
these two say the same thing as Khomeini I can't see how that is
relevant. There are 1.8 billion Muslims in the world and it is

*not*

general practice for them to marry off their daughters at the age

of

nine regardless of what that fuckwit Khomeini says.

1. Sahih al-Bukhari 810-870 A.D. 256 A.H.
2. Sahih Muslim 817-875 A.D. 261 A.H
3. Sunan Abu Dawud 817-888/9 A.D. 275 A.H.
4. Tirmidhi 825-892 A.D. 209-279 A.H.
5. Sunan Nas'ai 830-915 A.D. 215-303 A.H.
6. Ibn-i-Majah 824-886/887 A.D. 273 A.H.
7. The Historian ibn Ishaq - died 767/773 A.D. 145/151 A.H. (says
Extreme youth)
8. The Historian al-Tabari - died 923 A.D.

1-6 and 8 SAYS NINE http://www.muslimhope.com/AishaNine.htm

You'll have to explain what you mean by "majority opinion". Did

all

1.8 billion Muslims vote? Or just the Mullahs? Who elected the
mullahs? What standing do they have? I'm afraid I'm not impressed

by

someone who calls himself the "Grand something of somewhere".

I already explained it . Go and read the above reference. "There

are

two basic categories of answers Muslims have for this: the majority
agree that these hadiths are reliable here, and a minority

disagree."

So you claim that the "majority opinion" accept these Hadiths? How

do

you know? Is it because Muslim group X goes to Mosque Y where hadith

H

is taught?

I'm afraid that doesn't cut it. 1.8 billion muslims simply DO NOT

send

their nine year old daughters off to be married.

So even if they accept a particular hadith, that doesn't prove that
they accept Khomeini's judgement on nine year olds and marriage.

That brings us back to the fatwa. You need to ask *your* mullah for
*his* judgement on the acceptable minimum age for sex. I understand
that the fatwa service comes with a service guarantee. i.e. You

*will*

get an answer.

I'm sure the pedophiles know which mullah to go to

Thanks for confirming that it's all mumbo-jumbo from witchdoctors

(1.8 billion muslims simply DO NOT send their nine year old daughters
off to be married)

Hasta la vista, Matty baby

Ya, you and your sock puppet David just take other posters words out of
context and clip away the parts you can't deal with.

B J Foster <bjfoster@yahoo.com.au> wrote in news:4793c069$0$5200
$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au:

Matt wrote:

B J Foster <bjfoster@yahoo.com.au> wrote in
news:4793b3df$0$10472$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au:

I already explained it . Go and read the above reference. "There

are

two basic categories of answers Muslims have for this: the majority
agree that these hadiths are reliable here, and a minority

disagree."

So you claim that the "majority opinion" accept these Hadiths? How

do

you know? Is it because Muslim group X goes to Mosque Y where hadith

H

is taught?

I'm afraid that doesn't cut it. 1.8 billion muslims simply DO NOT

send

their nine year old daughters off to be married.

So even if they accept a particular hadith, that doesn't prove that
they accept Khomeini's judgement on nine year olds and marriage.

That brings us back to the fatwa. You need to ask *your* mullah for
*his* judgement on the acceptable minimum age for sex. I understand
that the fatwa service comes with a service guarantee. i.e. You

*will*

get an answer.

I'm sure the pedophiles know which mullah to go to

Thanks for confirming that it's all mumbo-jumbo from witchdoctors

(1.8 billion muslims simply DO NOT send their nine year old daughters
off to be married)

Hasta la vista, Matty baby

Ya, you and your sock puppet David just take other posters words out of
context and clip away the parts you can't deal with.

In article <4793b3df$0$10472$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>,
bjfoster@yahoo.com.au writes...

And why should the Archbishop or Grand ayatollah NOT be elected? Who is
taking this for granted? Certainly not me. So who appoints these people
and according to what criteria?

Archbishops are elected when you look into it.

Ayatollahs are too in practical terms. They gain influence as Mullahs
when a lot of people believe them to give good advice. If they gain
enough influence they become Ayatollahs.

You are citing a belief by the Lahore movemen, look it up on wiki -
Sunni and Shia do not consier members of the Lahore movement to be true
Muslims.

Shia and Sunni strap bombs onto thier kids and sent them to Lahore
schools to blow up these infidels.

B J Foster <bjfoster@yahoo.com.au> wrote in
news:47927eca$0$18606$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au:

Mavisbeacon wrote:

"B J Foster" <bjfoster@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:4790fd90$0$24086$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

Mavisbeacon wrote:

[snip]

"We conclude from all the evidence cited above that Aisha (may
Allah be pleased with her) was nineteen years old when she joined
the Holy Prophet as his wife in the year 2 A.H., the nikah or
betrothal having taken place five years previously".
http://www.muslim.org/islam/aisha-age.htm

Where did he state that and did he also state the Majority opoinion
in

the

same post?

At the start of the thread:
"Why did Mohammed marry Aisha when she was only 6..."

Which is the accepted Majrity opinion in the Hadiths.

and then above, he posted a reference which argued:
"We conclude from all the evidence cited above that Aisha (may Allah
be pleased with her) was nineteen years old when she joined the Holy
Prophet as his wife in the year 2 A.H."

Which is a minoroty opinion and not accepted by most Sunnis.

You did an opinion poll did you?

You are citing a belief by the Lahore movemen, look it up on wiki -
Sunni and Shia do not consier members of the Lahore movement to be true
Muslims.

Shia and Sunni strap bombs onto thier kids and sent them to Lahore
schools to blow up these infidels.

If not, I suggest taking a sample not of mullahs but of mums of nine
year old girls. Got that? Okay.

Post the result here: ____

Oh - please do remember to keep the respondents anonymous. Don't
record any names and addresses aor anything like that.

[snip]

Which do you think states it is acceptable to have sex with a
nine

year

old?

Which between what alternatives?

The christian scriptures which had NO references to such practicves
or

the

Islamic ones which refer to the greatest of their Prophets doing
it?

I have never seen or heard of any such reference in Christian (or
Jewish) scripture.

So back to the question which scripture of which religion states it
is acceptable to have sex with a nine year old?

I have heard of it in the Koran, obviously, hence the question:

It isn't in the Koran! It is in the Hadiths. Hense the questions
about what is a sunni. I think y6ou are not keeping up with what I
have posted. You diodn't read it did you? But you have been given the
example ALSo of a Shia Cleric who outlines how such sex should be
performed.

Ask the
mullah, make him take a stand and then make him defend his position
with argument and facts.

A very strong line in Islam is that of it is in scripture of if
Mohammad did something than it is acceptable for anyone to do it.

Sure. So let's see how well that "strong line" stands up against
professional opinion about the psychological and physical damage done
to nine year olds.

This is in contrast to the aggressive confrontational approach taken
by 'Matt' (or whatever his name is) and will be more effective.

Confronting someone about their beliefs isn't immoral is it?

He is attributing the belief that marriage (and sex) with nine year
olds is acceptable to all Muslims because *one* Muslim (Khomeini) said
it was. This is patently false. Why do you have such a problem
understanding that you can't make assumptions about the beliefs of a
whole community based upon a handful of fuckwits within it.

It's all mumbo-jumbo written by witchdoctors and corrupted by
tribal customs for paternalistic tribesmen who regarded women and
kids as possessions.

That is you r opinion. I am asking you based not on opinion but the

actual

FACTS of recorded literature.

Recorded literature is recorded opinion

No it isnt but so what?

Don't be ridiculous. Do you sincerely believe that sex with nine old
girls is God's word? Do you really think that God didn't want women to
enter the priesthood?

These people made it up as they went along. They are tribal
witchdoctors - nothing more.

A scientific paper about an experiment is recorded literatire. It may
contain opinion but in the main it is about a FACT which you can test
to be true. Similaraly if a historian records something and another
who never met him recorded the same thing but with a differnt slant
it is difficult to claim some event didnt happen.

Precisely. If you want the genuine word of God, ask an historian -
don't ask a priest/mullah/rabbi.

My original proposal still stands:

<quote>
Perhaps we need a Muslim volunteer to ask the question and have a
judgement issued via fatwa.

This is your opportunity to ask the wise men (why men only?) of
Islam the question:
"WHAT IS THE MINIMUM AGE FOR MARRIAGE (SEX) IN ISLAM?"

Any volunteers? Please submit this question to your Imam and let
us

know

the response.

This is your opportunity to silence the bigots....
</quote>

that is a fair question.

And what will the response be?
1. Avoid the question; or
2. Acknowledge the Koran and defend that position; or
3. Start a riot

you would have to ask and see.

The key missing link is that these mullahs are unaccountable for
their actions. It is the same missing link with paedophile priests.

that isnt true!Many abusing priests are in prison . I am aware of one
who died in prison.

One?

They can sin away at will with no fear of punishment.

Thats rubbish! The comparisn isnt valid!

What about the hundreds of others? Estimates range from 5% to 15%

The church isn't responsible for attracting these animals to
conditions where they can sin with impunity but the church (church
leaders, that is) are absolutely responsible for not handing them over
to the police. One would think that the church would have a mission to
protect kids - the fact that they don't brings into question the whole
raison d'etre of the church.

In article <4790fd90$0$24086$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>,
bjfoster@yahoo.com.au writes...

At the start of the thread:
"Why did Mohammed marry Aisha when she was only 6..."

The answer to this question "Why did Mohammed marry Aisha" is obvious:
to formalise an alliance between Mohammed's people and the people of
Aisha's father's tribe. Arranged marriage has been used for political
purposes since pre-history and the practice continues today.

The answer to the question "Why did Mohammed marry Aisha when she was
only 6" is equally obvious: because that is when the political

was negotiated.

It should be noted that Aisha was already betrothed to someone else

the deal with Mohammed was done. The alliance with Mohammed's group

obviously more important than the original betrothal, so the first was
cancelled and the second went ahead with alacrity.

The alliance was obviously important to both tribes because the

and its consummation both occurred at the earliest opportunity.

Many people in western society think of marriage only in terms of
romantic love and sexual desire. In western culture many people find

difficult (or pretend to find it difficult) to understand marriage
outside this context.

The marriage between Mohammed and Aisha was clearly a political
arrangement between two tribes. In arrangements such as this, at the
time and place in question, the bride and groom had little or no

in the matter.

Marriage for political purposes is by no means restricted to the

world, or to ancient historical times. The last Queen of France, Marie
Antoinette, was married by proxy without ever having met her husband.

recently as 2003 a Romany princess was married in a Christian church

the age of 12 to cement a political alliance.

Consummation of political marriages is considered to be of vital
importance by everyone concerned. By that I do not only refer to the
bride and groom, but to the constituencies formally allied by the
marriage. Until consummation has occurred either party can have the
marriage, and consequently the alliance, annulled.

Consideration of marriage as a political vehicle generally does not go
down well with the propagandists, who prefer to concentrate on the
sexual issues. In a political marriage the sex is often considered a
tedious detail of protocol, like affixing the wax seal to a contract.

both cases, until the "deed" is done, the agreement is not

Ironically, the title of this thread is probably accurate. Something
that started out as a mere political arrangement between two tribes is
recorded to have blossomed into genuine love over time.

I couldn't give a stuff. People 'study' this garbage for years and form
beliefs or otherwise.

Me too. I would rather not give a stuff as well.
I would like nothing better than to live in peace, enjoying the fat of the
land.
But because down the ages Muslims have frequently imposed their ideology on
non-Muslims, I _DO_ give a stuff.

And sure there are people here who from a propaganda point of view never
wish to say anything positive about Muslims.
But I wish to see and understand Islam as it really is, and understand and
know whatever Muslims dont tell non-Muslims.
Because i am 100% certain that in the next 30 years, Europe will face
internal wars (and there will be wars elsewhere) where native Europeans wake
up to the fact that Muslims have never given up on trying to turn all of
Europe into an Islamic state.

Now if you dont care, you can go your sweet way, but personally I think the
West is worth preserving even if the idiotic politicians still have not
cottened on to the threat we face.
And like in the Terminator there is no bargaining or reasoning they will
never back down or go away, not until all land on Earth is Islamic and all
non-Muslims are ruled by Muslims.

So I will spend a lot of time on Islam simply to understand the threat to
the West better.

John Smith