You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Terror Networks & Islam
Free Women Available Soon
2005-08-04
Question
in todays' world, slavery does not exist and also muslims are not winning wars against kufaar to capture their women. We do not find anything like this today. My second question is that I've heard from a mufti in Dars-e-Quran that if a man is poor and cannot afford the amount of mehr and also expenses of marriage then he should enter into nikah with a londi as nothing is required to pay her, but in case of ordinary girl, he has to pay. Please advise in this regard.

Answer
Allah Ta’ala is our Creator and is All-Wise. What even he has decreed for us is full of wisdom, whether our feeble minds can fathom it or not. We, as his servants, do not question Allah Ta’ala regarding His laws.

While at present slavery may not be in vogue, we are informed in the Ahaadith that many wars will occur before Qiyaamat, and there will be utility for these laws of Shari’ah in the future. Yes, in the Qur’aan, Allah Ta’ala has explained that if a man cannot afford to marry a free woman, he may marry a slavegirl.

And Allah Ta’ala Knows Best

Mufti Ebrahim Desai
Posted by:classer

#22  trailingwife said,

Look at the Yemenis and the Palestinians, the Pakistanis and the Sudanese: Yes, the babies are being born, but how many kill off one another before they have a chance to input into the production of the next generation?"

Not enough...

Thanks,
LC FOTSGreg

Posted by: LC FOTSGreg   2005-08-04 22:45  

#21  He's got it,

"...our feeble minds",

and then theys'a gonna fathom it, or not. Just call the bride a prostitute and be done with it. We got the message on all fronts by now.

MMmmm, blonde raisins.
Posted by: rhodesiafever   2005-08-04 20:39  

#20   #12 Free women! I am so there.

I ain't goen for this billywad, unless I can git moola for nothin too.
Posted by: Mamood Dire Straiti   2005-08-04 17:01  

#19  if you actually want to *eat* the pie she just made, after.

And it didn't take 'em long to decide,
That Earl had to die
Goodbye Earl
Those black-eyed peas
They tasted all right to me Earl
You're feelin' weak?
Why don't you lay down and sleep Earl?
Ain't it dark
Wrapped up in that tarp Earl?
Posted by: Steve   2005-08-04 16:40  

#18  I used "butcher knife" rhetorically. There have long been many ways for women to strike down men who oppress them. In ancient Rome, a particular plant was so often used to poison husbands that the authorities had to order every plant destroyed both within and far outside city limits. If nothing else, how easy is it to tyrannize a woman by ordering her to "get your fat ass into the kitchen and make me a pah!", if you actually want to *eat* the pie she just made, after.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2005-08-04 16:11  

#17  A lot of that Sharia crap would get thrown back in men's faces, and if they wanted to argue the point, a butcher's knife in the purse might say otherwise.

Which would result in tanker loads of stones being shipped to the Middle East to make up for the ones they used to stone the women.
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2005-08-04 14:23  

#16  you suppose that if we were to offer them Helen Thomas as an preview of a Kaffir woman they might forget the whole thing?
Posted by: Flomoger Croluger3636   2005-08-04 14:22  

#15  I'm thinking specifically of one of Mr. Wife's cousin's brother-in-law, whose wife got mad at him one night, sewed him into the bedsheet, and beat him to a pulp with a frying pan.

Hummm, I had a supervisor who told me a story like that once. She wouldn't have been one of those peaceful submissive asian ladies, would she?
Posted by: Steve   2005-08-04 14:03  

#14  VP Cheney could get his ducks in a row, then retire for "health reasons", partially true in that he would be laughing himself silly. The vote in the House would also be a blast, as long as republicans were threatened with grim death if they voted against her. Granted, the "black caucus" would vote against her, but any white democrat who did so would soon feel like he did a few rounds with Mike Tyson in his prime. Anyway, after Condi was VP, women all over the world would get a big pinch of assertiveness. A lot of that Sharia crap would get thrown back in men's faces, and if they wanted to argue the point, a butcher's knife in the purse might say otherwise. Hell, cultures all over the planet would go bananas, because, as a saying I have heard goes, "When women stand up, men sit down."
Posted by: Anonymoose   2005-08-04 13:59  

#13  'moose - VP Rice would drive all the people crazy we want to drive crazy... Ouch!
Posted by: BigEd   2005-08-04 12:20  

#12  Free women! I am so there.
Posted by: William Jefferson Clinton   2005-08-04 11:23  

#11  in todays' world, slavery doesnot exist and also muslims are not winning wars against kufaar to capture their women.

Tell that to the enslaved Sudanese, mufti-boy!
Posted by: BA   2005-08-04 10:53  

#10  Misogynistic Islam cannot exist without the compliance of women. But such compliance can only be bred in a vacuum. Women must be trained from birth to be subservient slaves, that it is the only way they can live. And they can never, ever be exposed to women living free lives, or they instantly learn that there is another way--and from then on are no longer "pure" slaves. Not only that, but they can now "infect" other women with the desire for freedom. For this reason, I hope against hope that Dick Cheney steps down at some point and the Vice Presidency is given to Condoleeza Rice. The effect would be a quiet and simultaneous revolution among women the world over. Multiplied by the fact that she is of darker skin that most Moslems, and thus women like her are looked down on even further than light skinned women.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2005-08-04 10:50  

#9  It's all about domination of the special boys over the girls and other boys. Slavery's on the end of the sliding scale of domination but the basic idea of control and repress in varying ways and degrees is a constant theme throughout. Nice people.
Posted by: MunkarKat   2005-08-04 10:14  

#8  Besides, despite what the Koran may or may not permit, we Western women do not enslave easily, and have been known to get our own back. (I'm thinking specifically of one of Mr. Wife's cousin's brother-in-law, whose wife got mad at him one night, sewed him into the bedsheet, and beat him to a pulp with a frying pan.)
Posted by: trailing wife   2005-08-04 09:54  

#7  Look at the Yemenis and the Palestinians, the Pakistanis and the Sudanese: Yes, the babies are being born, but how many kill off one another before they have a chance to input into the production of the next generation? Not to mention the imaginary million or so in the Palestinian population figures, and quite likely elsewhere. Save your shopping spree for another day, anonymous5089, and take a nice, long walk in the fresh air and sunshine to clear your head and settle your nerves. ;-)
Posted by: trailing wife   2005-08-04 09:49  

#6  You said it, Jennie.
Posted by: phil_b   2005-08-04 09:35  

#5  You guys are hilarious, especially classer with the title amended for we infidels!
You can see why we kaffir ladies are behind this war (on the Crusader side) 1000%--Life under the burka sux. Big Time.
Posted by: Jennie Taliaferro   2005-08-04 09:29  

#4  While at present slavery may not be in vogue, we are informed in the Ahaadith that many wars will occur before Qiyaamat, and there will be utility for these laws of Shari’ah in the future.

There really isn't much you can add to that.
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2005-08-04 09:24  

#3  When Al Moujahiroun website published their future islamic constitution for Europe, they expressely made references to slavery, the "rights" of slaves or slaveowners, etc, etc... I got that one somewhere.

Add the despisable contempt for wimmen and sexual repression that show in the islamic world (even I am not so bad, and God knows I'm a twisted, undersexed neurotic mommy's boy), and you've got one very bleak glimpse of the future, given that muslim share of the world population is going to greatly increase in the coming decades, with absolutely no islamic reformation in the making, and the West caught up in its own guilt-inducing multiculturalism and relativism.

There will be a large, unproductive part of Humanity which will deny most rights to one half of its population, in addition to any religious or ethnic minorities, and enforce the inherent inegalities beween believers of the Master Religion and others, and between free men and slaves.

This goes against everything the liberal tradition of the West holds dear. How can so called "liberals" (such an hijacked word in english) actually support this?

Let's hope the global WOT (and by that I mean the culture and ideas clash) will go well, because I don't want that comparatively younger and more populous muslim population to be expansionnist and aggressive.

Damn, that ruined my day, I'll go to ebay and buy some crap to cheer me up.
Posted by: anonymous5089   2005-08-04 09:19  

#2  While at present slavery may not be in vogue...

But you're working on it, aren't you, holy man?
Posted by: tu3031   2005-08-04 09:17  

#1  Get ya some nikah with a londi.
Posted by: bigjim-ky   2005-08-04 09:17  

00:00