Aisha, Islam, Pedophilia, Homophobia, Empire

The Prophet married Aisha, the daughter of Abu Bakr, the First Caliph, when she was six (6). The marriage was “consumed” when she was nine (9). The references to this in the Hadith are many. For example:

Sahih al-Bukhari states:

Narrated ‘Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

— Sahih al-Bukhari, 7:62:64

Islam Is The War Religion Par Excellence: Keeping The Sword Of Christianism, Forgetting The Love Talk, Promising Paradise To All And Any “Martyr”, No Question Asked

Islam Is The War Religion Par Excellence: Keeping The Sword Of Christianism, Forgetting The Love Talk, Promising Paradise To All And Any “Martyr”, No Question Asked

However, Aisha sincerely loved Muhammad, who endowed her with astounding freedom. Astounding, even in today’s world. Aisha was later outraged by the version of the Qur’an whom the Third Caliph, the dictator Uthman Ibn Affan, reigning over the world’s largest empire, imposed. Aisha was infuriated by the sexism in Uthman’s Qur’an. She went to war about sexism. Unfortunately, she lost the “Battle of the Camel”. Even more unfortunately, some of Ali’s men were on the other side during said battle, so the Shia don’t like her… Which means that they don’t like liberated women.

Confusingly, Aisha is viewed by others as “Mother of the believers”. There are as many Islam as possible interpretations, knowing all the facts we know. Some versions of Islam are delightful, modern, acceptable. Others, those which please oilmen and Wall Street operators, medieval princes and other plutocrats, most, are, most vile, cruel and disgusting. Unfortunately the latter versions, propped by trillions of dollars and propaganda control, are taking over.

If Islam is so relaxed about sex that women can be married on the battlefield (“Battlefield Brides”), or divorced by repeating “I divorce you” three times, what’s the big hang-up about homosexuality? Well, Muhammad engineered the Qur’an to encourage unprotected sex, in particular with captured girls, slave girls, “those who your right hand posses” (to quote the Qur’an). The Prophet’s idea was not just to treat women and girls better (they used to be killed readily), but also to make much more children. That was of course unsustainable, except if the Arabs made a giant empire, which was exactly Muhammad’s plan. The resulting birthrate explosion indeed fed the Arab population explosion which enabled the Arab army (with lots of luck and surprising tactics) to conquer the world’s largest empire in two decades.

So the pedophilia of Islam is related to its attitude relative to women, who were to become breeding machines, at the earliest possible age, and both are entangled with homophobia, which would have hindered demographics. And thus, conquest. This is why the Qur’an promises not just 72 virgins, but also “fresh and beautiful boys who are like pearls”… but only in paradise. The same situation happened with wine: originally, the Prophet authorized it. However the Prophet, PBUH, then discovered that drunk Jihadists did not win battles. So Muhammad outlawed wine… On Earth:

O you who believe! Strong drink and games of chance and idols and divine arrows are only an infamy of Satan’s handiwork. Leave it aside that you may succeed.
— Sura 5:90

However wine is intrinsically good, it was promised in paradise, something to drink with the “fresh boys who are like pearls“:

A similitude of the Garden which those who keep their duty (to Allah) are promised: Therein are rivers of water unpolluted … and rivers of wine delicious to the drinkers.
— Sura 47:15

Surely the pious will be in bliss … their thirst will be slaked with pure wine sealed.
— Sura 83:22,25

The Qur’an is, assuredly, most subtle, and definitively fun. And its apparent contradictions do not matter much: it has a sound internal logic designed to make Islam the mood and social organization which wins battles… mostly in the desert.

Patrice Ayme’

Tags: , , , , , ,

12 Responses to “Aisha, Islam, Pedophilia, Homophobia, Empire”

  1. ianmillerblog Says:

    In fairness, you can take the Bible to justify just about anything too. Those texts certainly lack self-consistency.

    • Gmax Says:

      Patrice explained, from quotes, in the preceding essay that the Qur’an quotes the BIBLE about HOMOPHOBIA. Islam is about the God of the BIBLE. It’s not a question of “fairness”, it is a fact

  2. Gmax Says:

    So it all holds together, Muslim pedophilia and homophobia, and conquest. And calling non Muslim parts the “House of War”. It is a case of hidden logic of war. Not of oppressed minorities

  3. Kevin Berger Says:


    Public prayers to occupy public space (and spot the dissenters?).

    Mind-numbing formalism (say, for the pre-prayers ablutions, or in the case of the Salafists, for just about everything, down to the most absurd) implicitly emphasizing deferring to arbitrary authority.

    Rigidly diving conducts and behaviours between forbidden, authorized, and obligatory, clean and unclean, making in-group behaviour a very codified and rigid thing.

    Setting definite identity markers separating the believer from the outsiders, in food habits above all, a very defining cultural feature if any.

    Emphasizing rote learning of the core doctrine, most often in a foreign language, and quasi-hypnotic recitations of said rote learning.

    Setting a long period of fasting, doubling as an outlet for otherwise accumulated pressure (cf. the origins of the word “ramdam”, or the usual fasting break “civil troubles”, to the point the French police for example is perfectly aware clashes and spontaneous public rampages will happen at the end of the fasting), as well as a way to spot and social-pressure the mild and the ones unwilling to go along.

    From the top of my head, no doubt one could get many more looking a bit deeper (the unmovable “involutive” nature, where the Eschaton is not to come, but at the “golden age” of the origins, and can be achieved individually or collectively only through the constant, sterile return to this origin point? The “you cannot marry our women unless you become one of us, but if your women marry us, they become ours”? Creating an artificial gender imbalance through a relative monopolization of women by older, richer men, so to keep the poorer, younger men on a war footing?), but you cannot get much more “religion” than that, as per your “bind together” etymology, and much more irremediably sectarian.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Madness from Brexiters offer another example of the madness of crowds, see today’s essay… Got to run, more later…

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Well, much of that is unlawful, and the law should be enforced. At this point clearly there is a crisis and law has to be used not just against plutocrats, but also on plutocrat-friendly religions. Both should be put under firm control. Using maximal coercion. BTW, rage against Muslims is clearly the main engine of Brexit.

      • Kevin Berger Says:

        Le problème étant que l’islam chimiquement pur, hors accommodement local et/ou historique pour en faire une religion supportable par l’humain lambda, est davantage un instrument à séparer les hommes entre “eux”, et “nous”, et à massifier les derniers contre les premiers. Une religion de caserne.
        Alors, quand Juppé évoque la nécessité de “réformer l’islam”, parce que “sinon, c’est la guerre civile en France ” (grosso modo), c’est une vaste fumisterie. Non seulement la France, telle qu’elle se présente, est incapable par dessein d’être un pays et une Nation, mais si en plus la solution hypothétique passe par la réforme de cette machine de guerre civilisationnelle…
        Le programme “Both should be put under firm control. Using maximal coercion.” demandera plus qu’une volonté politique, pour les Plutos comme pour leur chien d’attaque, mais bien un changement d”humeur, de “mood” comme vous dites. Je ne sais pas si cela se fera sans violence, peut-être, mais je suis au moins persuadé que cela ne se fera pas sans déchirements et sans souffrances, parce que tout le monde, chaque côté, devra abandonner beaucoup. Quel gâchis.

        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          “Islam” that is not a war machine, can exist, and has existed, and perhaps still exists. I knew it in Africa. In the desert, or in Western Black Africa. It was also fully compatible with the most modern modernity, including socialism. Now classifiers with agendas claim ain’t so, and brandish maps where Senegalese is identified with that of Egypt, etc… All lies plutocrats have made reality… This being said, Homo is made for struggling, it gives life meaning.

        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Considerer ma reponse a Ian Miller apres l’essai sur l’assassinat de Jo Cox, le 16 Juin…

  4. Kevin Berger Says:

    “So the pedophilia of Islam is related to its attitude relative to women, who were to become breeding machines, at the earliest possible age, and both are entangled with homophobia”

    Just curious, and that’s almost an idle question : what do you make of the apparent (and storied) strain of paedophilia and/or homosexuality among the Anglo Elites, especially the ones who were or still are to a large point, groomed to be imperial predators? And, on a larger scope, what I’ve came to perceive as a very toxic “masculinity” (aggression and insecurity, dominance & submission), that is for example rather discernible at the core of the US “conservatives” identities, but that seems to be a civilizationnal Anglo feature?
    As in, “it has a sound internal logic designed to make Anglo-Saxon supremacism the mood and social organization which wins battles… mostly in the (empire)”.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Statistics have shown not much more homosexuality in England than France. For the elite, well, clearly, it came from their schools, and for the same reason that Catholicism as a profession attracted pedophiles and homosexuals.
      The USA has apparently much more homosexuality, but that’s caused by the enforced separation of genders there. Any gender separation which generate some men who, as they view other men as women, are themselves more predatory… I would venture to say. Also as homosexuality was illegal, that made them extreme liars and schemers, thus perfect for the plutocratic empire…

      • Kevin Berger Says:

        My memory is leaking like a faulty sieve, but IIRC, the very elite of UK intelligence, the few who turned Nazi spying onto itself and fed Germany’s “Humint” manure all through the war, was made of a close-knit band of upper class public schools alumni – homosexual to a man; they kind of self-selected into that field of work, due to their habit of secrecy and living compartimentalised lives.
        And, still IIRC, their homosexuality paradoxically later allowed for blackmail by the cold war USSR services.
        So you certainly may have a point here.

        AS for the bit about the USA and homosexuality, maybe. It’s sure at least that the USA are the spring of the “gay” identity and subculture, an innovation (what you are) distinct from homosexuality (what you do) rather specific to them, and that makes the masculinity insecurities below even more amusing, since they often resolve themselves by projecting “gayness” onto others (say, Western Europeans).

        More broadly speaking, one can find some pretty weird issues and hang-ups about sexes relationship and/or gender identities, percolating through US-centric globish entertainment writ large… weirdness illustrated to the ridiculous by the various internet phenomenon that are the PUA, the MRA, the redpillers,… on one end of the spectrum, and the other-kins, furries, gender-fluid, even the dreaded SJW on the other – though the insecurities displayed by very mainstream boards, forums, news sites,.. commenter is pretty damning in its normalcy too.

        Lots of “issues” at play, overall, and I certainly do know about “issues” myself, from a country where a nipple accidentally shown on live-teevee is a “boobgate”, while being a sex worker (stripper) is common and socially acceptable enough to be the butt of common jokes.
        Anyway, we are drifting away from islam.

What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: