Archive for October 25th, 2011

October 25, 2011

Saudi Arabia: Child marriage, the Hadiths and the Islamophobia card

Saudi Arabia: Child marriage, the Hadiths and the Islamophobia card

Murad Makhmudov and Lee Jay Walker 

Modern Tokyo Times

Saudi Arabia continues to allow old men to marry young girls aged eight years old and upwards. The mantra by Muslims and converts to Islam, is that Islam equals morality and that Mohammed is a great role model but this depends on your interpretation of a good role model?  Therefore, with Saudi Arabia supporting Islamic Sharia law and believing that society should be based on what Mohammed did and stated in the Hadiths, it is clear that child marriage is sanctioned because Mohammed also married a child.

This reality is creating a problem for the Guardians of Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia. If this nation modernizes, then it may be seen to be pandering to Western morals and increasing the age of marriage will be challenged by conservative Sunni Islamic leaders in Saudi Arabia.

Ironically, the people who use the “Islamophobia card” are basically trying to prevent individuals speaking out against Islamic Sharia law. This is despite the fact that Islamic Sharia law and the Hadiths support pedophilia, killing homosexuals, killing apostates, chopping hands and feet off for petty crimes, stoning people to death for adultery, and other draconian laws. All these draconian measures are based on the life and sayings of Mohammed.

Therefore, if people are deemed to be “Islamophobic” for fighting against the brutal reality of many Islamic states which are based on hatred and supporting the abuse of children, apostates, homosexuals, and others; then in a world based on justice and morality the overwhelming majority of people should be deemed to be “Islamophobic.”

However, democratic nations, the mass media on a whole, international child advocates, and major institutions like the United Nations are not doing enough to fight against a legal system which clearly discriminates against non-Muslims and allows children to be married to old men.

More surprisingly is that major religious leaders, irrespective if they are Christian, Buddhist, or whatever, appear to be fearful of speaking out against this injustice. The political correct brigade and “trendy left” and “trendy liberals” appear to have “sold their soul” because if anyone speaks out against the brutal reality of Sharia Islamic law then they are deemed to be “Islamophobic.”

However, it is the political correct brigade, “trendy left” and “trendy liberals” who have joined forces with a legal system and a religion which supports pedophilia; killing homosexuals; supporting the notion that a female testimony is unequal in law; killing or victimizing apostates; and supporting a dhimmitude system which states that non-Muslims are unequal.

Not only this, it is only Islamic sources which are being used by individuals who fear the growing threat of Islamic Sharia law.  Despite this, freedom to counter the reality of Islamic Sharia law in nations like Saudi Arabia or rebuking the most draconian aspects of this legal system is being crushed by political correctness and moral relativism.

Therefore, despite a raped teenager being stoned to death in Somalia by Sunni Islamists; converts to Christianity being beheaded in Somalia; homosexuals being hanged in Iran; women facing being whipped in Saudi Arabia for not covering up; non-Muslim men facing the death penalty if marrying a Muslim female in several Islamic Sharia law based nations; old men marrying young girls in nations like Saudi Arabia and Yemen; people facing the death penalty in Pakistan for blasphemy; and so much more, including the unequal testimony of women and chopping hands and feet off; this hatred is being allowed because of the weakness of nations and the failure of people to confront this reality.

Turning back to Saudi Arabia, in an earlier article by Modern Tokyo Times it was stated that “On the one hand the Saudi Arabian legal system of Islamic law supports killing people for adultery and homosexuality. However, on the other hand it is deemed to be Islamic to marry a young child of 8 years of age or 9 years of age, irrespective if the male is 30 years old or 40 years old, or even older. Surely these morals are twisted?”

“Before focusing even more on the strange morals of the Saudi Arabian legal system it is vital to state why child marriages are allowed. This of course applies to Mohammed. “After all, when Mohammed, the prophet of Islam, was 49 years of age he married a 6 year old child called Aisha. When Aisha was 9 years old and Mohammed was 52 years old, he consummated the marriage.”

“Therefore, this sets a major problem for the conservative Islamic religious leaders in Saudi Arabia because they want to govern society by the laws of Islamic Sharia Law and the Hadiths. If they support increasing the age of marriage like the majority of mainly Muslim nations have done, then how does this fit in with the legal system being based on the teachings of Mohammed?”

This is a real problem for Saudi Arabia because the majority of Muslim nations have introduced laws which protect children by increasing the marriage age.  Also, more secularized Muslim majority nations have introduced reforms whereby the most draconian aspects of Sharia Islamic law have been rejected.

However, many conservative and radical Islamic organizations in the so-called Muslim world and within Western nations desire to re-introduce the most draconian aspects of Islamic Sharia law.

Turning back to Saudi Arabia and allowing old men to marry young girls then clearly this is based on the Hadiths. The following quotes are from highly acclaimed Islamic scholars and these Hadiths have been known since the early days of Islam.

“Narrated Aisha: The prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six. We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Harith Kharzraj” and it continues that “Unexpectedly Allah’s Messenger came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.” Sahih Al-Bukhari states in volume 5, 234

“Aisha reported: Allah’s Messenger married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house at the age of nine…..” Muslim, volume 2, 3309

“Narrated Aisha: that the prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old.” Al-Bukhari

Therefore, the Hadiths vindicate religious leaders and the kingdom’s Grand Mufti, Sheikh Abdul Aziz al-Sheikh, commented that “A girl aged 10 or 12 can be married. Those who think she’s too young are wrong and they are being unfair to her.” From an Islamic point of view and based on what Mohammed did, then the Grand Mufti is technically correct – however, how is this moral and why no reformation like in other faiths?

In an earlier article it was stated that “…a judge in Saudi Arabia justified the right of an 8 year-old child to marry a man of 47 years of age. Even after the mother signed a petition to demand the annulment of the marriage, the judge still refused because of the teachings of Islam. Therefore the judge, Sheikh Habib Abdallah al-Habib, refused openly to annul the marriage and in his eyes it is morally right to marry a child to an old man.”

In the modern world you still have seven Islamic Sharia law based nations where apostasy is punishable by death.  Also, in nations like Saudi Arabia men who are very old are allowed to marry young girls.  Therefore, it is time for nations like Saudi Arabia to be challenged and the same applies to societies which sanction child marriage to old men.

Also, in modern day Saudi Arabia many Muslim citizens are fed-up and ashamed by religious clerics and some brave human rights organizations in this nation desire change.  It is vital that their voice is heard and supported.

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-17/world/saudi.child.marriage_1_saudi-arabia-deeply-conservative-kingdom-top-saudi-cleric?_s=PM:WORLD

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-04-12/world/saudi.child.marriage_1_appeals-court-marriage-girl-s-mother?_s=PM:WORLD

http://moderntokyotimes.com please visit

October 25, 2011

Gaddafi killed and possibly tortured by the forces of the Revolution

Gaddafi killed and possibly tortured by the forces of the Revolution

Joachim de Villiers and Lee Jay Walker

Modern Tokyo Times

Reports and images coming out of Libya show that Muammar Gaddafi is dead and that his final moments on this earth were based on fear and mob justice. Apparently he was still alive when captured and according to Gabriel Gatehouse from the BBC in Sirte he comments that “I have spoken to the man who says that he captured him… he said he found him hiding in a hole in the centre.”

Other reports claim that he was shot in both legs and from being found in a hole to this, then it would appear that he was tortured, tormented, and shot.  The new Libya appears to be based on “mob justice” and the possible torture of the former leader of Libya leaves a sour taste, irrespective of the past deeds by Gaddafi.

Americans were disgusted when Islamists in Somalia dragged the bodies of dead American troops into the streets. However, today it was the forces of Western anti-Gaddafi loyalists who were dragging the body of an individual who had probably been tortured. This is the sad reality of “democracy in action” and both scenes are sickening but of course it must be stated that American troops in Somalia were innocent soldiers.

Democratic leaders in America, France, and the United Kingdom, feel vindicated in the overthrow of Gaddafi because of past brutal measures by this political leader. Also, with anti-Gaddafi forces killing Gaddafi then past deals can be “washed away” and this will be pleasing because nothing is ever that simple in international relations.

Gaddafi during his 42 year reign intervened in other nations and he was clearly anti-Berber.  Therefore, you will find very few tears for Gaddafi and political activists in the past have suffered at the hands of torture.

However, the systematic killing of Africans and the probable torture of Gaddafi in his final moments can’t be defended by anyone who supports democracy and liberty. This fact will be brushed under the carpet and Hague war crimes only apply to the enemies of people who are outside the Western elite group of nations.

This duplicity of law is what is staggering because international law doesn’t exist when it comes to morality.  Elites like Bill Clinton during his leadership could tacitly support Islamists entering Bosnia in order to kill Orthodox Christians. This covert policy was implemented and you had many ratlines linked to the Islamist Alija Izetbegovic. However, Bill Clinton could implement and turn a blind eye, without having to fear a war crime tribunal (only a court could state his innocence or guilt) and it is this arrogance which is creating a major problem.

The world of “good” and “evil” is often dictated by political elites and special groups which manipulate the mass media. Obviously, you will always have dissent and sometimes the mass media will rebuke political elites during military ventures. However, when political elites and the mass media work together, like in Bosnia and Kosovo, then the end-game is over irrespective of the complexity.

Gaddafi tortured during his last moments 

During the conflict in Libya the military balance was turned on its head once NATO became embroiled. After this, it was an uneven conflict and Gaddafi loyalists who were intent on fighting were basically “dead men walking.”

Massacres will have taken place on both sides because all civil wars are brutal but this wasn’t a real civil war because outside forces made sure that you would only have one conclusion.

In an earlier article by two correspondents for Modern Tokyo Times called Libya: killing black Africans in the name of the revolution and democracy, it was stated that “Reports for many months have stated that Libyan rebels have been killing and persecuting black Africans in Libya once areas came under their control.  The number of reports highlighting this continues to grow and many images have been shown which show Africans being mutilated and having their bodies abused and mocked by non-black African Libyans.  This disturbing fact mocks the notion of “good” versus “evil” because both sides have committed atrocities but for black Africans it is the rebels who they fear.”

“Also, reports have stated that African Libyans are also being victimized and suffering persecution.  Therefore, since large areas have fell to the National Transitional Council (NTC) both non-African Libyans and African Libyans fear for their safety.” 

The BBC, Deutsche Welle and other major media outlets backed up this disturbing and brutal reality. Therefore, while Gaddafi doesn’t deserve “tears” because of past misdeeds and meddling in other nations. This should not alter the fact that the brutal killings of black Africans and the probable torture of Gaddafi – means that the men of democracy and the revolution are tainted. Therefore, a clear and honest organization needs to investigate this brutal reality.

Simon Jenkins, The Guardian newspaper in England, commented that We may applaud the chance of freedom about to be granted to a lucky group of oppressed people, but that doesn’t justify the means by which it is achieved: in another fury of great-power aggression. The truth is that Gaddafi’s downfall, like his earlier propping up, will have been Britain’s doing. A new Libyan regime will be less legitimate and less secure as a result.”

The reign of Gaddafi is over and the wind of history may appear to be changing but given the opposition and the weak institutions of Libya, then a possible Islamic state may be in the making. Or worse you may have a failed state whereby chaos and other forces create mayhem and hostile anti-Western forces may try to spread their ideology in parts of modern day Libya. Thereby creating a failed state and given the power of radical Islam in Algeria, then this is a distinct possibility.

Alternatively, Libya may become a European Union beach-head in North Africa whereby a nation which is blessed with natural resources truly does blossom. At the moment nothing is clear but at least the Berbers can rest more freely and now it is hoped that international pressure will safeguard African immigrants and put this at the top of the agenda.

http://moderntokyotimes.com