Trigger warning:

This site may, in fact always will contain images and information likely to cause consternation, conniptions, distress, along with moderate to severe bedwetting among statists, wimps, wusses, politicians, lefties, green fascists, and creatures of the state who can't bear the thought of anything that disagrees with their jaded view of the world.

Aug 16, 2011

Muslims; Its not like He’s a pedophile or anything.

Those signed onto Gods Twitter account or Facebook page, who actually receive messages from Him, all understand one of the problems associated with living in Western society. Western legal systems are based on secularity, something Fred Nile and other bigots have long decried. Lawyers seldom attempt the ‘God made me do it’ defense, other than when angling for an insanity verdict.

Regrettably when it comes to laws designed to stifle opinion that ‘may offend’ some people, Islam somehow manages to squeeze into the ethnic aspect of them, which is nonsense. Islam is a religion, not an ethnic group, therefore criticism of it is the same as criticism of any other and is not racism, or hate speech.

Now a complaint of hate speech has been made against a radio presenter for mentioning things that are in the Koran:

THE radio presenter Michael Smith is being investigated by the media watchdog over his assertion that the prophet Muhammad ''married a nine-year-old and consummated it when she was 11.”

The Australian Communications and Media Authority confirmed in a letter dated July 21 that it was investigating the remarks by the 2UE afternoon host.

Adem Cetinay, a Muslim from Bossley Park, complained that Mr. Smith was inciting hatred against Muslims through his July 5 broadcast.

''By making this remark he is asserting that God's messenger is a pedophile. This is racist, it's stupid and it is not needed on air,'' he wrote to the station's program director, Peter Brennan. …
There is actually a factual inaccuracy in the statement made by Smith; It is fairly well known that the marriage took place when Aisha was six years old, and consummated when she was nine. What’s more it is in the written record, as pointed out by Andrew Bolt:
Bukhari:: Book 7 :: Vol. 62 :: Hadith 88

Narrated 'Ursa:
The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).
While throughout history, and in various cultures marriage was conducted at earlier ages than is currently done today, it is difficult to regard as normal the desire to marry a six year old, or the rest of this. Cultural differences aside, it is difficult to view such actions as anything other than pedophilia. This may offend some, but hell, we are entitled to view things from our own cultural perspective as well.

As a general rule it pays to bear in mind that while people who talk to God are not normlly a problem, be careful of those God talks to.


  1. Playing Devil's Advocate here, as I understand it whatever we think of it now it was fairly common in that society at the time, virginity being sufficiently important that the done thing was to be betrothed while the girl was a child and for consummation to happen before anyone else got the chance. This means Mo wasn't necessarily a nonce so much as typical of his culture. For all we know he didn't go near her again until she was older, and for that matter the consummation may have been faked - who can really say 1300+ years later?

    Secondly, even if he was a nonce and there was absolutely no doubt about it there's the whole sins of the father thing. We don't condemn contemporary Germans for marching under one of the world's greatest shits only two generations ago, so what the long dead founder of a religion did so many centuries ago is by the by. Of more interest is what practitioners of that religion do now, and we'd rightly look at them as individuals, some of whom will be nonces but most of whom will not.

    Thirdly, we should also remember that child brides weren't unheard of in Europe at the time an even much later, even as late as Henry VIII's marriage to Catherine Howard (she may have been as young as 13 and he at least 30 years older) and it'd be naive to think that a number were not deflowered rather earlier than we're comfortable with today. My gut feeling, for what it's worth, is Henry VIII was likely guilty of child rape by today's standards.

    Having said all that Adem Cetinay needs to understand that expressing an opinion isn't inciting anything, and that even if it was it would be allowed under free speech (if we had free speech). This is another one of those 'if it offends anyone it should not be allowed' ploys made under the assumption that a right to not be offended is desirable or even possible. The short answer I'd give to Adem Cetinay is that he always has the right of reply, but not the right to silence those who say things he doesn't like. If that's what he wants he might not be in the right country,

  2. Yes and he was at least fifty plus at the time She was 19 when he died at the age of 63

    wv farting ( LOL)

  3. Good points there, it just pisses me off that these pricks can demand our freedom of speech be curtailed in the interests of cultural diversity. Freedom to speak our minds is a central plank of Western culture and its about time that was respected.

    I thought I'd give them a bit of a serve with a bit of their own medicine, after all, revisionist historians, mostly from the left feel justified in judging historical figures by current standards that never existed in their lifetimes.

  4. Thay banned Fitna even though it was stuff from their own teachings set to music.

    You wonder if they have have problems with their culture being widely known

    But then again to them War is deceit.

  5. I remember it well. When Fitna came out it was a juggling act to keep a copy posted while Youtube did their best to keep it out.