Hyderabad blasts : MIM district president makes Owaisi's dream come true

Courtesy  :Vivekajyoti blog

=======================
Time has come that we should call a spade a spade. Please do not fool and mislead the world by saying that terrorists have no religion. The fact is they are all devout Muslims and they believe in Jihad and their aim is to kill the infidels.
======================

A few weeks ago, Akbaruddin Owaisi bayed for the blood of Hindus.

A few days ago, Owaisi's dream was fulfilled by MIM district president Sayed Maqbool who rececced Dilsukhnagar to determine the suitability of carrying out the blasts, to avenge both Owaisi brothers' arrest last month. 

Please see the last line of this article below: "Maqbool was appointed as the Dharmabad district president of the AIMIM by Rauf."

http://www.rediff.com/

Hyderabad blasts: The man who recced Dilsukh Nagar

February 22, 2013 

Following the twin blasts in Hyderabad, the city police is in touch with their counterparts in New Delhi , who have conducted an investigation on several Indian Mujahideen [ Images ] operatives, alleged to be linked to the blasts. Vicky Nanjappa reports.

The police is interested in questioning one Zuber alias Maqbool, a resident of Nanded who was handpicked to carry out attacks in Hyderabad.

The Delhi police, who carried out several arrests last year had found during their investigation that the module controlled by brothers Riaz and Yasin Bhatkal had ordered that a survey of several areas in Hyderabad be carried out.

The areas that were to be surveyed included Dilsukh Nagar and Abids in Hyderabad. Zuber’s investigation report (who also goes by the alias of Syed Maqbool) reveals the IM plan to carry out an attack in Hyderabad.

The interrogation report:

Sustained interrogation of the accused arrested by us (the Delhi police) revealed that a person, namely, Sayed Maqbool aka Zuber, S/o Syed Haji, R/o Samtam Nagar, Near Madina Masjid, Dharmabad, Nanded, Maharashtra [ Images ] was in close association with them and together they planned to commit fiyadeen attacks on the Buddhist shrines in Bodh Gaya in Bihar, as retaliation to the alleged atrocities being committed upon Muslims in Myanmar.

Their plan had the approval and support of the Bhatkal brothers. Sayed Maqbool was arrested after great deal of efforts on October 23, 2012, from Hyderabad, where he had been hiding to evade his arrest.

Maqbool came in contact with Imran (another accused) through a common friend. The latter introduced Maqbool to Asad and Irfan. Maqbool taught them how to make a bomb by using urea, diesel and fire cracker powder at Asad's farmhouse in Aurangabad.

In April 2012, Imran introduced Maqbool to the Bhatkal brothers. Before the Pune serial blasts of August 1, 2012, Maqbool, Irfan, Imran and Asad had discussed their plan of carrying out a fidayeen attack on Buddhist shrines at Bodh Gaya, Bihar. Since the Bhatkals wanted to avenge the death of IM operative Qateel Siddiqui, they decided to carry out bomb blasts at Pune first.

About a month before Ramzan in 2012, Maqbool helped Imran in doing a recce of Dilkhush Nagar, Begum Bazar and Abids in Hyderabad on a motorcycle. This was done on the instructions of Riyaz.

Maqbool began his criminal career along with one Azam Gauri aka Aleem, a resident of Warangal, Andra Pradesh (killed in a police encounter in 2000).

His first criminal act was the murder of Krishna Moorthy (First Information Report No. 220/1999, u/ss. 302/120-B/34 Indian Penal Code read with sec. 25/27 Arms Act, PS Bodhan, District Nizamabad in which he has been convicted for life. However, he was released from jail in October 2009 after commutation of his sentence.

His next criminal act was the murder of one Devender (case FIR No. 195/1999, u/ss. 302/120-B/34 IPC read with ss. 25/27 Arms Act, PS CID, Andhra Pradesh), who had allegedly encroached on a Masjid land in Uppal, A.P.

Maqbool was also involved in the murder of Mahaveer Prasad (Case FIR No. 172/2000, u/ss. 302/34 read with s. 6 Explosive Substances Act, PS Afzal Ganj, Hyderabad City), a jeweller. Here the motive was robbery.

Maqbool was instrumental in the formation of the Indian Muslim Mohammadin Mujahidin -- a terrorist organisation -- at village Mancharia in 1999 along with Azam Gauri and Roshan Baig.

They worked under the garb of social reformists by showing that their objectives were:

(1) To stop dowry system in society;

(2) To fight against corruption;

(3) To stop pornographic films.

Azam Gauri had taught Maqbool how to prepare Improvised Explosive Devices, so that they can cause blasts in those theatres where blue films were being shown.

Maqbool alongwith others were involved in the following bomb blast cases:

• Bomb blast at Kaketiya Hotel, Lal Darwaza (FIR No. 01/2000, u/ss. 4/5 Explosive Substances Act, PS Moghalpura, District Hyderabad City)

• Blast at Sharda theatre (FIR No. 28/2000, u/ss. 307/120-B IPC read with ss. 3/4/5 Explosive Substances Act, PS Itwara, District Nanded.

• Blast in Lamba Theatre, Secunderabad (FIR No. 31/2000, u/s. 120-B IPC read with ss. 4/5/6 Explosive Substances Act, PS Begumpet, Secunderabad, Hyderabad City,

• Blast in the House of Azam Ghori while preparing IEDs. (FIR No.28/1998 u/s 307 IPC read with Sec. 3/4/5 Explosive Substances Act, PS Dharmabad, District Nanded.

Other cases in which he is involved are as below:-

• FIR No. 39/2000, u/ss. 120-B/153-A IPC, PS CID, Andhra Pradesh (a case of conspiracy).

• FIR No. 28/2000, u/s. 25 Arms Act, PS Dharmabad, District Nanded (recovery of fire arms only).

Maqbool is also close to Abdul Rauf, a resident of Shahidabad, and a leader of the All Indian Majlis Itehad-ul Muslimi, a political party, and one Nashruddin. Both Abdul Rauf and Nashruddin have been involved in Hiren Pandya murder case of 2003.

Maqbool was appointed as the Dharmabad district president of the AIMIM by Rauf.

Canning Hindus under Islamic Inferno. Hell bent Situation for Hindus in West Bengal.

Islamic Violence upon Hindus after murder of a Imam by unidentified persons. Hindu Persecution in Canning is being suppressed otherwise by secular media. 

Canning Town | South 24 Parganas, West Bengal | 20 Feb 2013:: Again  Islamic Jihad engulfed the  the unwarranted Hindus on Feb 19, while the whole situation of Canning put under inferno of Islamic brutality– the entire area chanced to  witness again the worst Hindu persecution in recent times and as at least four Hindu Villages viz. Naliakhali, Boyeramari, Herobhanga and Simultala were set on fire after plundering devastatingly and molesting Hindu women and girls and  the saga of thrashing Hindus is extending far and wide, strangulating the adjoining areas of Joynagar, Kultali, Basanti and Sandeshkhali as well, as the reports came in.

Nobody is willing to understand the actual communal situation of West Bengal under the ‘Parivartan Raj’ of TMC. One Muslim Maoulavi was murdered by some unknown persons. Nobody knows the clue. But Muslims attacked Hindu villages planfully and plundered the Hindu villages and put fire. Hindu women molested in a riot like situation. Muslim goons reached Canning from Rajabazar, Park Circus, Metaburz or Gardenreach of Kolkata City only to make a Jihad in Canning.Police and RAF took possession after Hindus lost everything. Nobody feels the reality. In a “Change Syndrome’ of Bengal, Bengali Hindus going to enter into a Carnage.  The dreadful face of Islam in Canning cannot be singularized out in the rise of Neo-Rajakars in  Bengal Politics. But, the political parties and the media are preaching a Secular sermon only to complete a total Islamization of West Bengal.

As per available report, the murder of an elderly villager by a gang of suspected robbers sparked large-scale violence in Canning subdivision on Tuesday morning. Fuelled by wild rumours spread by the Islamists in different mosques and anger against police for allegedly taking the case lightly, Muslim mob of thousands plundered four villages and burnt down more than 200 houses.

The administration has been shaken the most by reports that a section of Muslim attackers was ferried from Kolkata in trucks. They came from the Islamic Dens of Park Circus, Rajabazar, Metiaburz, Garden Reach (all Mini Pakistan in Kolkata).  This has been confirmed by intelligence officials, say sources. The situation is still tense and there is apprehension that the violence may spread to other parts of the district. Reinforcements have been rushed from neighbouring districts.

Watch: From the site of Hindu Devastation of Canning.

According to residents of Naliakhali village in Canning-I block, the victim was returning to his home in Basanti after a religious concert  (Islamic Jalsa) at Jamtala village late on Monday when he was accosted by a gang on Naliakhali Main Road. Ruhul Kuddus, a 49-year-old Muslim religious leader (Moulavi and an Imam of a Mosque in Park Circus area) was on a motorcycle with an aide when the goons fired, killing him and injuring the other person, Sirajul  Molla (45). Sirajul was admitted in Canning Sub-Divisional Hospital for treatment at first but transferred afterwards to CMCH, Kolkata as his condition turned critical.

As per a report published in Hindustan Times: “Police sources said Kuddus was carrying Rs. 11,50,000 on him which the attackers looted.” Other sources say that a huge amount of unaccounted money (mainly from some cheat funds like KWIL, VIVA, GREEN VALLEY etc. headed by Muslim businessmen) are being used for procuring un-licensed fire-arms and ammunition to carry on Jihad in entire West Bengal. But the appropriate agencies are reluctant to investigate the matters of tantamount Islamic warfare now speedily going in West Bengal under a political blessing of ruling Trinmool Congress.

Samir Sen, a bus driver, was the first to see the body around 4.25am on Tuesday. “Mine was the first bus to Canning from Golabari terminal around 3.50am. At Naliakhali, I found a man lying on the road and decided to check on him with conductor Biswanath Singh. We saw that he was dead. His clothes were soaked in blood and a motorcycle lay by the side of the road. Finding nobody else around, we left and reported the matter to the police in Canning. By then, some other bus drivers had also called police but the cops made no effort to arrive,” Sen said.

The injured aide had managed to reach a safe place and got in touch with friends and relatives. By first light, a large crowd had gathered on the spot and rumours started swirling around. Initially, police didn’t treat the matter seriously enough and sent a junior officer and two constables to remove the body. The crowd barricaded them. A few more policemen were sent, but by then the mob had swollen and a rumour had spread that the killers were from Naliakhali village. The mourners blocked roads and railway tracks.

“Police stood by and watched as thousands of men stormed our village around 10am,” said Biswajit Sardar, whose two-storied building was torched in the violence. Others alleged that most of the attackers were outsiders, who hurled bombs at houses, poured petrol and set them ablaze. “Whoever dared to protest was beaten up,” said villager Sanatan Adhikari. The rampage continued for three hours.

The Hindu villagers in Naliakhali say they had no clue about the murder. “It was only at dawn, when police arrived, that we came to know of the killing,” said Shaktipada Adhikari, an elderly villager whose house near the crime scene was reduced to ashes.

Only at the Kholakhali Baazar (P.S. Joynagar), medicine shop of Sachin Sardar and one saloon of another Hindu individual were attacked and despoiled and all these happened before the police stationed there – effete enough to protect Hindus in any case.

The  Islamic persecutions were spreading then with the help of armed outsiders with slogans of “Naraye Taqbir – Allah ho Akbar”.

Mamata Banerjee, Cheif Minister of West Bengal appealed a peace in Canning and West Bengal and described her ‘Muslim brothers as Peace Lovers”.

Even if Hindus managed to take some measures in self-defence only in few areas, the wild fire of Islamic onslaught is being witnessed in the vicinity – areas of Notunhati in Joynagar and Simultala in Basanti being the greatest victims. Road blockades by Islamists are going on in full might at several areas including Natunhat, Priyor More (P.S. Joynagar), Bhangankhali (P.S. Basanti), Boyarmari (P.S. Sandeshkhali). The wild attacks have extended to P.S. Sandeshkhali, District: 24 Paraganas (North) by now.

Kolkata – Basanti Road has been blocked at Boyarmari. Sanjay Singh, resident of Boyarmari and also CRPF jawan, posted at P.S. Goaltor, District: Medinipur has been beaten up at Boyarmari for refusing to get off from his cycle.

Police and administration have deputed a huge contingent of armed policemen, issued a red alert but it is getting more than impossible for them to contain the widespread violence. Police is running to and fro haplessly. The wrath of Islamic mob did not scared the Police contingents also. The Second Officer of Canning Police Station Sri Anup Kumar Ghosh was attacked by brick-bating and finally fell down due to head injury. Some Police Officials have been admitted to Canning Hospital in a critically injured situation. At least two police officers have been severely injured while two police vehicles have been burnt down.

Last but not least, a large number of motor vehicles carrying thousands of Muslims from Garden Reach, Metiabruz, Tilajla, Park Circus areas in Kolkata have been seen to proceed towards Joynagar. They are also heading towards Ghutiari Shariff by train phase wise still now.

To tackle the situation, rather guarding the Jihadists, the Chief Minister of West Bengal Miss. Mamtaz  Banu Arjee sent a State Delegation of TMC (Critiques say, Total Muslim Congress) comprising Firhad Hakim (Minister – Urban Development and Municipal Affairs), Mohammad Sufi (Minister – Waterways Transport), Giasuddin Molla (Minister – Minority Affairs), Javed Khan (Minister –  Fire Brigade), Haider Aziz Safi (Minister – Cooperative Dept.) and Abu Taher (Karmadhkshya of Civil Matters, South 24 Pgs Zilla Parishad). Anyway the local MP, Sri Tarun Kanti Mondal (SUCI) reached the spot and took a good initiative to distribute foods, tarpouline, medicine etc. to the victimized Hindu people of the affected areas.

Under a strategic Islamic design, Islamist aired various rumours in entire South Bengal. As an immediate effect Muslim fundamentalists tried to spread communalism in the areas of Kalna (Burdwan); Sarberia, Malancha, Ghatakpukur, Belegachi, Godra, Amraberia, Chadaneshwar, Bhoto Mollar Pole (all South 24 Pgs); Panskura (Purba Medinpur); Santragachi, Kona (Howrah), Bhangore, Barasat-Kadambgachi (North 24 Pgs) etc. and blocked the roads in some those areas, until police cleared the roads.

In this situations Hindus are put under a compulsion for a self defense,  while  police and political protections have been made a farce to them. When an unarmed police is failed to protect themselves in Kulpi and Canning Police station attacks or the blood of killed Late Tapas Chowdhury (SI, Special Branch, Kolkata Police, shot dead recently by a Muslim goon in Gardenreach area) is not fully soaked yet, Hindus must think of their own protection in every villages in West Bengal. Right to Live as Hindu is not Crime. But, allowing Hooliganism in the name of minority appeasement is obviously a crime on the part of an one-eyed TMC Govt in West Bengal.

 http://hinduexistence.org/

Declare Ram Setu a national monument

 Author:  Rajesh Singh

The Sethusamudram project is a white elephant which should be scrapped, to save Ram’s bridge 

The UPA Government’s sustained prevarication on the contentious Sethusamudram project appears to have run out of steam, with the Supreme Court seeking a straight response from the Government on whether ‘Ram Setu’ should be declared a national monument. “Take a decision whether or not to”, the court tersely told the Congress-led regime on March 29. Faced with this ultimatum, the Government has to now make its position clear, which will in turn decide whether the held-up controversial Sethusamudram project to open a new shipping route will be finally scrapped or realigned.

The court’s directive came in response to a petition filed by Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy who has sought ‘national monument’ status for the stone bridge said to have been built to enable Ram to enter Lanka to rescue Sita and slay Ravan.

The Supreme Court had halted work at Ram Setu in August 2007 on an application filed by Mr Swamy who argued that the project was rooted in “illegalities.” He had then told the court that the Government had neither considered other options nor done proper studies before clearing the project.
Ram Setu (or Adam’s Bridge) is a chain of limestone shoals that links Rameswaram in Tamil Nadu to Mannar in Sri Lanka. Various estimates place the length between 30 km and 48 km and up to three kilometres wide. It was discovered by NASA space missions including the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission in February 2000. The mission beamed photographs that clearly showed a bridge-like link in the region.
Pressured by the DMK which has backed the project as it believes that will shore up Tamil Nadu’s port economy (as also the party’s coffers) — the regional party had even taunted Hindus by wondering whether Ram had been a civil engineer to construct the bridge — the UPA regime has been dragging its feet on a possible realignment of the Sethusamudram route that would save the Ram Setu. For long, experts have demanding that the ship channel project itself be scrapped as it has become a white elephant. Meanwhile, the initial project cost spiralled from Rs 2400 crore in May 2005 to more than Rs 4500 crore when it was last estimated some two years ago. And it does not promise to stop at that, if a quick decision is not taken either way.
All this while, despite stiff opposition from various quarters to the project, the UPA clung on to its pet scheme and even sought sanction from the Cabinet Committee on Infrastructure and the Public Investments Board for the revised estimate. It had also hoped for a green signal from the Supreme Court and also from the Expert Committee it had set up to study a possible realignment of the sea canal route.
But, regardless of the mythological angle to the issue, several people have repeatedly questioned the financial viability of the Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project. They have pointed out that only nominal time and money would be saved — and that too by some vessels on certain routes — in taking the proposed route that the project would create to connect Palk Bay with the Gulf of Mannar between Sri Lanka and India. They say these minor savings would not be an incentive for ships to take the Sethusamudram lane, adding that the conclusions on the scheme’s feasibility in the Draft Project Report prepared by L & T-Ramboll Consulting Engineers was not based on ground realities.
Mr Swamy has throughout maintained that the project should be terminated. “It is completely flawed and a financial deadweight. It must be done away with. It is not just a question of realignment, the Sethusamudram project itself makes no business sense”, he stated. Mr Swamy said ports such as Tuticorin in Tamil Nadu could be developed into a container hub to enhance maritime business in the State. “The proposed canal can handle vessels with a maximum 30,000 dead weight tonnage. Most ships are above that and would not be able to use the route”, he had remarked.
According to a report by infrastructure economist Jacob John and published some time ago in a leading magazine, while ships coming from Europe and Africa are expected to comprise 70 per cent of the projected users of the proposed Sethusamudram route, their savings would be very low when compared to “coastal” vessels whose origin and destination are both Indian ports. Yet, the “non-coastal” ships with minimal savings will need to pay the same tariff as those whose savings are considerably larger. This would deter the non coastal vessels from taking the proposed canal route. Since the canal tariff is likely to comprise as much as 60 per cent of the project’s earnings, failure of non coastal ships to take the canal route would be disastrous for the corporation.
Mr John also pointed out that the time-saving projected by taking the canal route was not very significant for the non coastal ships. In his report, Mr John commented, “The repeated claims of the project that it will save up to 30 hours of shipping time, sounds suspiciously like a shoe sale that offers a discount of up to 50 per cent. Like the discount sale, where the offer is probably for a few items in the store, the savings of up to 30 hours are valid for just a single journey: Between Tuticorin and Chennai.”
Moreover, while the total distance that a vessel has to travel may get cut down by the proposed channel, the ship’s speed slackens on the route since the waters are shallower. For instance, Mr John calculated that, while a trip from a port in Africa to Kolkata through the existing route would be reduced to 3112 nautical miles by the proposed route as against the existing 3217 nautical miles now, it would actually take 3.5 hours more for a vessel by the new and shorter route.
Like Mr Swamy, who had then suggested developing Tuticorin port as a major container hub to boost marine trade in Tamil Nadu, Mr John too offered an alternative. He proposed that the Government simply offer “subsidies to all ships that reach the Indian east coast after going around Sri Lanka.” The subsidies, he added, could be funded from earnings that the Government may receive by placing the total project cost amount in a fixed deposit or investing it in some other financially sound project.
Another report titled, ‘Socio-economic Impact of Sethusamudram Project’, by Kannan Srinivasan of The Indian Institute of Information Technology and Management, Kerala, too concluded that the project’s economic gains were hard to identify. “It is difficult to see any economic benefit from the project immediately. Based on the data available, the economic feasibility is not established by the reports”, it stated.
Forced by the hue and cry over the manner in which it was handling the project, the UPA had in June 2008 appointed a panel headed by noted environmentalist R K Pachauri to study a realignment that would skip the Ram Setu, or Adam’s Bridge, region. But then nothing happened thereafter, prompting the apex court back in end-2009 to question the delay.

The options before the UPA Government are now two: Either it scraps the project or realigns the route. Since the project is all but dead, it might as well opt for the former, in the process saving itself from further fruitless expenditure and at the same time leaving believers of Ram Setu happy.

http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/item/51356-declare-ram-setu-a-national-monument.html

The Story of Kasim Razvi - Legends and Anecdotes of Hyderabad

The Story of Kasim Razvi
By Narendra Luther

Kasim Razvi was the one man for giving Hyderabad its only traumatic experience in its history. More than anybody else, he invited the ‘Police Action’ on Hyderabad.

Razvi hailed from Uttar Pradesh and became a lawyer in Latur in Osmanabad, a district of the Hyderabad State. He became a member of the Majlis-e- Ittehad-ul Mussalmeen of which Bahadur Yar Jung was the president. Razvi was a highly emotional person. Once when the Bahadur Yar Jung came to Latur to set up the Party office there, Razvi offered his house for that purpose and starting throwing out his furniture in the street to vacate it.

President of the Majlis

On the sudden and untimely death of Bahadur Yar Jung in 1946, Razvi succeeded him as President of the party. He imparted a sharp militancy to it and delivered highly provocative speeches. He exhorted Muslims to remember that they had conquered India by sword and that they were destined to rule.

When India became independent in 1947, Nizam tried to become an independent ruler. Razvi encouraged him in his ambition. He declared that the waters of the Bay of Bengal would wash his feet. He also bragged that the Nizam’s flag would flutter on the Red Fort at Delhi.

‘Razakars’

Razvi fanned communalism in a State, which was generally known for its communal harmony. He created a para- military force composed of volunteers called ‘razakars’. Every razakar had to take pledge that he would lay down his life for the leader and the party and he would fight to the last to maintain the Muslim hegemony in the State. The razakars were given military training and they were armed with sticks, swords, and some with guns. Razvi was the Field Marshal of the outfit and like his followers wore khaki uniform.

When after protracted negotiations, the Nizam and the Government of India decided to enter a Standstill Agreement in 1947, Razvi’s razakars prevented the members of the State delegation from leaving for Delhi to sign it. They also manhandled the Prime Minister and others. They spread a reign of terror in the State and Razvi issued severe threats to everyone who dared to oppose or even differed from him. A young journalist, Shoebullah Khan was murdered by razakars because he wrote in favour of State’s integration with India.

Razvi’s power grew and he and his people came to wield increasingly greater influence with the Nizam and the his government. The moderate Prime Minister, Sir Mirza Ismail was hounded out of the State. So was Nawab Chhatari who had returned to Hyderabad for a second term as Premier in 1947.

In January 1948, Razvi imposed a new government on the State. Mir Laik Ali was appointed its Prime Minister. The Muslims affected by the Partition riots were encourage to come to Hyderabad. Many harassed Hindu families left the state for the safety of India.

Police Action

The Government of India launched the ‘Police Action’ against Hyderabad on 13 September 1948. Four days later, the Nizam declared an unconditional surrender and General J.N. Choudhuri was appointed the military Governor of the State.
All ministers and some prominent leaders of the Ittehad including Razvi were taken into custody.

After detailed investigation, three criminal cases were filed against Razvi and six others: the Aland Murder Case; the Shoebullah Khan Murder Case; and the Bibinagar Dacoity Case. A special tribunal with three judges -- one Christian, one Muslim, and one Hindu was constituted to try the accused. Later, the Government withdrew the Aland Murder case for want of sufficient evidence. Askar Yar Jung, a former member of the State Judicial Committee was appointed the defense counsel along with some others to assist him. At the argument stage, Razvi asked for the removal of the counsels and argued his own case.


Jail for Razvi

On 10 September 1950 the Tribunal awarded Razvi seven years hard labour in the case of the Bibinagar Dacoity Case, and life sentence in the Shoebullah Khan Murder Case. On appeal in the High Court, the life sentence was quashed but the sentence for seven years hard labour was upheld. The Razkar supremo was sent to the Chanchalguda Jail in the city, put in fetters and asked to cut grass in the jail compound.

Zahid Ali Kamil was a young advocate and an admirer of Razvi. On his own admission, he used to smuggle messages to and from Razvi in the jail. A copy of Razvi’s strong letter written to Nehru, the Prime Minister of India was smuggled out. So was his threat to resort to hunger strike for the harsh treatment meted out to the razakars by the Government. To put a stop to that, the Government shifted Razvi to Yervada Jail in Pune in 1954. He served the rest of his term there.

Deserted by followers

Razvi was released on 11 September 1957. Kamil went to Pune and drove him to his house in Adikmet in his car. He summoned a meeting of the general body of the party. Only about forty of the 140 members responded to the invitation. At the meeting he invited leading members of the Party to take up the Presidentship of the party. No one came forward. Razvi was so disappointed that he declared that he was willing to offer the job to any male Muslim above the age of twelve! Finally, Abdul Wahid Owaisi was made the president of the Party. Now his son, Sultan Salahuddin Owaisi is the president of the party. Thereafter, at a press conference, he announced that having no future in India, he would be leaving for Pakistan.

Leaves for Pakistan

Having settled the issue of party presidentship, Razvi left for Pakistan on 18 September –exactly to the day of the completion of the Police Action nine years ago. Kamil flew with him up to Mumbai and then saw him off.

Razvi received no reception in Pakistan, not even support, or recognition. He set up his legal practice amongst the refuges from India in Karachi. He died at the age of sixty-seven on 15 January 1970, unwept and unwept in a land far distant from the one which he had dreamt about making an independent Islamic kingdom.

 http://narendralutherarchives.blogspot.in/2006/12/story-of-kasim-razvi.html

Love Thy Neighbor, if he is a Muslim – Islam and Morality

Mumin Salih

 The Muslims’ view of morality

Muslims’ understanding of morality can be summarized in one sentence: If you do not fear Allah, there is nothing that can stop you from committing any crime. Therefore, morality is the natural result of the the fear of Allah, which keeps people disciplined. Those who do not believe in Allah, and those who do not fear him, can commit any sin when the circumstances are right. Consequently, non Muslims are not moral and  would commit crimes if they can get away with it. They only fear the penalty of the man made law which is easy to evade, but who can evade Allah?

Muslims attribute all their family and social values to Islam. Ask any Muslim of any age or gender “why you do not steal” and you are almost guaranteed to get an answer like: because of the teachings of our religion. This conviction is so deeply rooted in the Muslims’ minds that most of them do not comprehend that morality can exist outside Islam.  Such views help to condition the Muslims’ minds to despise the others and reject them.

It is important for westerners to understand this way of Islamic thinking  because it explains many of the Muslims’ social behavior. For example, Muslim men who seek sexual pleasure, automatically assume that non Muslim women are easier prey because they lack the Islamic morality deterrence that protects Muslim women. Sadly, very often they prove their point.

With signs of western decadence all around them, it is difficult to prove to Muslims otherwise. A Muslim cleric in Australia once described western women as uncovered meat that invites predators. The cleric was actually speaking the Muslims’ minds in general. The dissolute western family contrasts with the strongly bonded Muslim family where all members support and care for each other. Respect to parents and the elderly and social commitment towards the immediate as well as distant relatives are basic duties accepted and expected by all. In a Muslim family, parents often do not have to worry about retirement and pension because they know they can count on their children, or other close relatives, for full social and financial support.

The fear of Allah is called “takwa”, which means “to avoid confrontation with Allah”. “Takwa” and “fear of Allah” are frequently used expressions in the Quran and in the Arab societies. Whenever the issue of morality comes up in disputes, the Arabs say: Don’t you fear Allah? which is a reminder to the other party that he is on a collision course with Allah.
In general, the concept of morality in Muslims’ minds is mainly about being good to family and abstinence from extra marital sex. Things like theft, lies and cheating, although still acknowledged as moral values, come at the very end of their morality lists.

The Arabs’ Morality before Islam

Islam is mainly a reflection of the the seventh century Arabs’ culture. After the Islamic conquests in Arabia and the subsequent subjugation of the entire peninsula, the Arabs continued to live with their pre Islamic traditions and culture, which were largely unaltered by the new religion. Actually, many of those traditions were automatically incorporated in Islam, being an Arabic religion. A significant part of pre Islamic poetry celebrated the Arabs virtues like generosity, honesty, bravery of men, loyalty to family and tribe as well as female chastity. The Arabs cherished those virtues before and after Islam and they still do to this day. In sessions where the the Jahiliya (pre Islamic) poetry is being discussed, the Arabs are happy to speak for hours, with evident pride, about their ancestors’ virtues only to claim that its all because of Mohammed if the discussion moves on to Islam!

By crediting Islam for their morality, Muslims of all breeds offend their ancestors, because they imply that their ancestors had no, or low, morality.

Islam did introduce some changes to the Arabs‘ morality, but they were changes to the worse. The following are only examples:

1) Adoption was normally considered an issue of high morality but was abolished by Mohammed for a selfish and evil purpose.

2) Family and tribal loyalty was redefined because of the Islamic teachings which ordered Muslims to disown, or kill, their own close relatives if they become critical to Islam. Abu Bakr’s son was still a pagan at the time of the battle of Badr and deliberately stayed away from his Muslim father to avoid killing him. In later years, the son reminded the father with the incident, Abu Bakr’s response was: ‘I would not have hesitated to kill you for the sake of Allah and his prophet!‘. Abu Bakr’s response says it all about the morality of the pagans versus the morality of Muslims.

3) Sins like cheating and lies were made relative; Muslims can cheat or lie to non Muslims if they think that is helpful to them. Muslims are frequently caught shoplifting in western supermarkets and department stores, because they believe that stealing from the infidels is not a crime, or not a big crime. For the same reason most rape crimes in the west are currently committed by Muslims who believe raping infidel women is not that bad, unless they carry HIV. Muslim men regularly lie to western girls and lure them to accept relationships or marriages to obtain financial gains or visas. Young Arabs are known to do this with the blessings of their religious families.

4) Equality is non existent under Islamic law as the non Muslims and slaves are treated as inferior subjects to Muslims.

And the list can go on..

Just like in today’s secular societies, the pre Islamic Arabs denounced theft because they believed theft was morally wrong. For the same reason they denounced lies, cheating and committing adultery. After adopting Islam, the Arabs still refrained from committing any of the above crimes but now for a different reason- the fear of Allah. Some may argue that we don’t have to worry about the reason because at the end of the day the sins were not committed. Far from true, the people who avoid sins because they believe they are wrong are people with high morality who would never commit those sins under any circumstances. On the other hand people who avoid sins because they fear Allah are people with no morality; they only abide by the rules and would commit sins once the rules relaxed. Muslims do not steal as long as the rules of Islam say “do not steal” but when a cleric issues a fatwa that stealing is permitted, for example stealing from the infidels, they would steal. When a cleric issues a fatwa to inflict harm on the infidels, burn their churches or commit other crimes, the Muslim masses would do it all because of the fear of Allah. Like soldiers, they wouldn’t even dare to question the wisdom or morality of their orders. But Muslims do not always need a fatwa. Being Muslims they know the general pattern and  usually can make a good guess.

The Islamic Etiquette

You cannot expect high morality in a religion where the prophet orders his followers not to start the greetings if they meet the non Muslims on the road. Even when the Christians start the greetings, Muslims are not supposed to respond in kind. There was a time , before the current Islamic resurgence, when the Muslim and Christian Arabs treated each other in civilized ways. Nowadays, both mosques and madrasas are working hard to teach, or remind, Muslims with the proper Islamic protocols in dealing with the others. Ideally, Muslims should, discretely, avoid handshakes with the others, you never know what those hands were doing a few minutes earlier. The Arab Christians try to be polite and nice to Muslims and greet them in the Islamic way “assalmu alaikum”, meaning peace be upon you. The Muslims‘ etiquette is NOT to respond in kind by saying  “waalaikum assalam” meaning: and peace be upon you. Instead they should say “wassalamu ala mani ittaba al huda” meaning peace be upon those who follow the right path, which is Islam. The Muslims‘ response is evil and insinuates a declaration that there can be no peace with those Christians. The Christians often do not understand what is behind the Muslims‘ response and just accept it as a greeting. I also noticed that Muslims apply this etiquette to the Internet. They often start their debate with ex Muslims by that evil greeting, only difference this time they get an equally harsh response.

Another aspect of the Muslims’ social etiquette is their reaction when they hear of the death of a Christian, who was a neighbor or colleague. Instead of the usual response in such circumstances, which is saying “Allah yerahimahu” meaning may Allah forgive his sins, Muslims are told to remain silent or express their personal sadness in other words. Behind this response from the Muslims is a belief that Allah will never forgive the Christians for what they have done!

Conclusion
In terms of morality, Islam is inferior to other cultures. It does not teach morality, it teaches obedience and forces its followers to abide by the rules of Allah, which do not always agree with morality as we know it. As long as the law of Islam happens to be in harmony with morality, Muslims are well-disciplined, but only like wild animals in a cage; once released they become like unstoppable  wild beasts.

Through a loud speaker from a nearby mosque, an Imam was heard explaining the necessity of Islam:

“ if there are no after life punishments for sins, then we all would be out committing all kinds of sins”

http://www.faithfreedom.org/?p=43494

How ‘Religious Defamation’ Laws Would Ban Islam

As the Islamic world, in the guise of the 57-member state Organization of Islamic Cooperation, continues to push for the enforcement of “religious defamation” laws in the international arena—theoretically developed to protect all religions from insult, but in reality made for Islam—one great irony is lost, especially on Muslims: if such laws would ban movies and cartoons that defame Islam, they would also, by logical extension, have to ban the religion of Islam itself—the only religion whose core texts actively defame other religions.

To understand this, consider what “defamation”means. Typical dictionary-definitions include “to blacken another’s reputation” and “false or unjustified injury of the good reputation of another, as by slander or libel.” In Muslim usage, defamation simply means anything that insults or offends Islamic sensibilities.

However, to gain traction among the international community, the OIC maintains that such laws should protect all religions from defamation, not just Islam.  Accordingly, the OIC is agreeing that any expression that “slanders” the religious sentiments of others should be banned.

What, then, do we do with Islam’s core religious texts—beginning with the Quran itself, which slanders, denigrates and blackens the reputation of other religions?  Consider Christianity alone: Quran 5:73 declares that “Infidels are they who say Allah is one of three,” a reference to the Christian Trinity; Quran 5:73 says “Infidels are they who say Allah is the Christ, [Jesus] son of Mary”; and Quran 9:30 complains that “the Christians say the Christ is the son of Allah … may Allah’s curse be upon them!”

Considering that the word infidel (or kafir) is one of Islam’s most derogatory terms, what if a Christian book or Western movie appeared declaring that “Infidels are they who say Muhammad is the prophet of God—may God’s curse be upon them”? If Muslims would consider that a great defamation against Islam—and they would, with the attendant rioting, murders, etc.—then by the same standard it must be admitted that the Quran defames Christians and Christianity.

Similarly, consider how the Christian Cross, venerated among millions, is depicted—is defamed—in Islam: according to canonical hadiths, when he returns, Jesus supposedly will destroy all crosses; and Muhammad, who never allowed the cross in his presence, ordered someone wearing a cross to “take off that piece of idolatry.”

What if Christian books or Western movies declared that the sacred things of Islam—say the Black Stone in the Ka’ba of Mecca—are “idolatry” and that Muhammad himself will return and destroy them?  If Muslims would consider that defamation against Islam—and they would, with all the attendant rioting, murders, etc.—then by the same standard it must be admitted that the hadith defames the Christian Cross.

Here is a particularly odious form of defamation against Christian sentiment, especially to the millions of Catholic and Orthodox Christians. According to Islam’s most authoritative Quranic exegetes, including the revered Ibn Kathir, Muhammad is in paradise married to and having sex with the Virgin Mary.

What if a Christian book or Western movie portrayed, say, Muhammad’s wife, Aisha the “Mother of Believers,” as being married to and having sex with a false prophet in heaven?  If Muslims would consider that a great defamation against Islam—and they would, with all the attendant rioting, murders, etc.—then by the same standard it must be admitted that Islam’s most authoritative Quranic exegetes defame the Virgin Mary.

Nor does such defamation of Christianity occur in Islam’s ancient texts only; modern day Muslim scholars and sheikhs agree that it is permissible to defame Christianity. Qatar-based “Islam Web” even issued a fatwa that legitimizes insulting Christianity.

Now consider the wording used by Muslim leaders calling on the U.N. to enforce religious defamation laws in response to the Muhammad film on YouTube, and how these expressions can easily be used against Islam:
The OIC “deplored… an offensive and derogatory film on the life of Prophet Muhammad” and “called on the producers to show respect to the religious sentiments held sacred by Muslims and those of other faiths.”

But what about the “offensive and derogatory” depictions of Christianity in Islam’s core texts? Are Muslims willing to expunge these from the Quran and hadith, “to show respect to the religious sentiments held sacred … by those of other faiths,” in this case, Christians?

Turkish Prime Minister Erodgan said the film “insults religions” (note the inclusive plural) and called for “international legal regulations against attacks on whatpeople [not just Muslims] deem sacred.”
Well, what about the fact that Islam “insults religions”—including Judaism and all polytheistic religions? Should the West call for “international legal regulations against attacks on what people deem sacred,” in the case of Christianity, regulations against Islam’s teachings which attack the sanctity of Christ’s divinity, the Cross, and Virgin Mary?

Even Saudi Arabia’s Grand Mufti—who a few months ago called for the destruction of all Christian churches in the Arabian Peninsula (first reported here)—is calling for a “global ban on insults targeting all” religious figures, while the Grand Imam of Egypt’s Al Azhar is calling for “a U.N. resolution outlawing ‘insulting symbols and sanctities of Islam’ and other religions.” Again, they, too, claim to be interested in banning insults to all religions, while ignoring the fact that their own religion is built atop insulting all other religions.
And surely this is the grandest irony of all: the “defamation” that Muslims complain about—and that prompts great violence and bloodshed around the world—revolves around things like movies and cartoons, which are made by individuals who represent only themselves; on the other hand, Islam itself, through its holiest and most authoritative texts, denigrates and condemns—in a word, defames—all other religions, not to mention calls for violence against them (e.g., Quran 9:29).

It is this issue, Islam’s perceived “divine” right to defame and destroy, that the international community should be addressing—not silly cartoons and films.

SOURCE: FPM

Raymond Ibrahim, a Shillman Fellow at the DHFC, is a widely published author on Islam, and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum. Join him as he explores the “Intersection”—the pivotal but ignored point where Islam and Christianity meet—including by examining the latest on Christian persecution, translating important Arabic news that never reaches the West, and much more.


http://www.faithfreedom.org/articles/op-ed/how-religious-defamation-laws-would-ban-islam/

Muhammad and His Wives

A critical look at Mohammed’s relations with his wives

Mumin Salih

 Introduction

Muslims are aware of Mohammed’s numerous marriages and of his Allah-given privileges to have more wives than the rest of them. They believe that all of those marriages were for good causes like improving relations with certain tribes or helping the women concerned. Muslims also believe that most of Mohammed’s wives were not virgins and too old to be sexually attractive. None of these claims is true; they are purely fabricated excuses not supported by the Quran, sira (Mohammed’s biography) or Islamic history. Until I prepared this article, I believed at least one of Mohammed’s wives was too old for him. I am afraid this claim by Muslims is another big lie; none of Mohammed’s wives was too old and many of them were described as the ‘most beautiful’ in their tribes.

To keep the article within reasonable size, I deliberately avoided discussing the important issue of pedophile and child marriage as related to Aysha, which is discussed elsewhere.  Also, for the same reason I did not delve into Mohammed’s marriage to Zainab to which I dedicated an article a few years ago.

The issue of virginity comes frequently when Muslims discuss Mohammed’s marriages. Mohammed had an obsession with virginity and brought up this issue frequently in the Quran and hadith. What I find striking is that today’s Muslims, who should have learned otherwise from their own experience, they also believe that virginity is essential for a perfect sexual pleasure, just like Mohammed did.

An essential massage in Islam, which is emphasized in the Quran,  is that Mohammed is a model that every Muslim should emulate. The irony is that most of his marriages lie outside Islamic sharia. What is the point of being a model to the others if they are not allowed to copy him? Mohammed’s marriages and his relations with his wives are largely outside sharia in what is called god given privileges that only apply to Mohammed! Learning about those marriages is obviously of no use to the rest of Muslims but they still occupy a substantial proportion of the Quran, hadith and sira.

How many wives?

There is no definite answer, a fact that says a lot about Mohammed’s history. To simplify the subject, this article is based on the information given by Ibn Katheer in his book Al Kamel, which is one of those reliable Islamic references that Muslims call “ummahat al kutub” (meaning mothers of the books). According to Ibn Katheer Mohammed had nine wives when he died but had far more in his life.

1.Khadija

Mohammed’s first wife was a very rich woman who employed Mohammed to look after her business. At the time of marriage she was forty years old while Mohammed was twenty five. Mohammed had eight children from Khadija; the boys died early while the girls survived.

Mohammed did not marry any other woman in Khadija’s life. The conditioned Islamic minds use this piece of information to prove that Mohammed’s marriages had nothing to do with his lust for women but were for religious and political reasons. Their conditioned minds do not grasp the fact that Khadija was in charge of the household and Mohammed was employed by her, it was only natural that he could not even think of having another wife.

The Shia dispute the claim that Mohammed had eight children from Khadija and argue that apart from Fatima, all the children were from previous marriages. Indeed, it is difficult to accept that Mohammed had eight children from Khadija, who was in her forties, but not a single child from all those beautiful young wives he had later.

None of Mohammed’s wives had any children and none of them ever had a miscarriage or even became pregnant. Also there is nothing in the Islamic history that describes, or refers to, a “pregnant” Khadija. Muslims are not inquisitive about this thought provoking area of Mohammed’s biography and if you open the subject they would say “Allah did not want the prophet to have sons” which ends the debate before it starts.
Mohammed had a child, Ibrahim, from Maria who was not his wife, but a sex-slave  given to him as a gift from Egypt. She was described as ‘white’ and beautiful and Mohammed was evidently attracted to her. Maria became pregnant soon after arriving to Medina. Mohammed assumed he was the father of the baby but his jubilation was spoiled by the rumors concerning a relationship between Maria and the guard who escorted her from Egypt. Without even investigating the matter, Mohammed ordered Ali to kill the guard. Ali happened to look at the guy as he climbed a tree and noticed he was castrated, so decided not to kill him.
It is not easy, even for a doctor, to tell if a person is castrated by looking at him while climbing a tree. 
Besides, castration is not that straightforward procedure with guaranteed success. That guard was with Maria for many weeks, all the way from Egypt to Medina, and it is common sense to assume that he had sex with her, probably many times, on the way. Mohammed’s decision to kill the guard reflects his lack of confidence in his fertility and the much acclaimed sexual prowess. This lack of confidence was also evident when  he brought the baby to Aysha, hoping that she may spot some resemblance between him and the baby. To Mohammed’s disappointment Aysha remarked that the baby did not look like him at all.

It is doubtful, to say the least, that Ibrahim was Mohammed’s son and considering the doubts surrounding Khadija’s children, it is likely that Mohammed had no biological children at all. This raises a question about Mohammed’s fertility and sexuality. Erectile dysfunction, with or without infertility, could not be ruled out. It would also explain why he released a verse to forbid Muslims from marrying his wives after his death; perhaps he wanted to keep his little secret between him and his wives. To the Arabs, even today, being impotent or infertile is damaging to a man’s image. Mohammed’s claim that he had  the sexual potency of forty men (1) is just too ridiculous to believe and could have been used to mask something else.

2. Sawda

Sawda is portrayed in modern books of Islamic history as an OLD woman, and is the one usually used to prove that “most” of Mohammed’s wives were old. Until I prepared this article, I had the impression that she was in her sixties, so it was a surprise to me to learn that she was only in her early thirties at the time of marriage. When Mohammed died at the age of 63 years, Sawda was only 46 years old. This finding is just another example of the Islamic deception.

After Sawda, Mohammed soon married his favorite wife, the nine years old Aysha, and became a leader in Medina. He probably regretted his marriage to Sawda and decided to divorce her on the basis she was ‘too old’ for him! On hearing that, Sawda was shocked and came to Mohammed in tears and begged him to keep her. They agreed on a deal that Mohammed keeps her on condition she gives up her nights to Aysha! To his sick mind, Mohammed considered thirty years too old for him but nine years was just right! We can only conclude that Mohammed enjoyed sex with the nine years old Aysha more than with his adult wife.
To silence any criticism, he released a verse of approval: Q. 4:128 (And if a woman fears from her husband contempt or evasion, there is no sin upon them if they make terms of settlement between them…)

3. Aysha

She was Abu Bakr’s daughter and was only six years when engaged to Mohammed. Wedding took place in Medina when she was nine years. When Mohammed died, Aysha was only a teenager of Eighteen years. Aysha was the only virgin of all Mohammed’s wives and she was very proud of it. Her virginity mattered to her and was considered by her as a reason why she was superior to the other wives. Obviously she learned from Mohammed, who too was obsessed with virginity, that virgins are the best (2), which explains why she narrated many hadiths that reflected her pride of her virginity. She claimed that Gabriel never visited Mohammed while in bed with any of the other wives because they were not pure, having slept with other men before Mohammed.

Muslims are proud that Islam is a religion of equality. In the Quran, Allah orders Muslims to treat their wives equally. If a man loves one of his wives more than the others, he should keep that love in his heart. Mohammed’s love to Aysha was no secret; every Muslim knew she was his favorite wife from the times of Medina to our time. How does that fit with Allah’s orders? How can Muslims abide by Allah’s rule to treat their wives equally and follow the example of Mohammed at the same time?

Aysha was the woman who narrated more hadiths than any other of mohammed’s wives. She was the source of those hadiths related to her sexual relation with Mohammed. Mohammed loved her more than the others but his death didn’t do her any justice as she had to spend her entire adult life in celibacy. Aysha had sex only as a child and once she reached adulthood she was widowed and prohibited, by a divine order, from ever getting married again.

Aysha had to live the rest of her life with the memories of being sexually abused as a child by an old man. Could that frustration explain some of her behavior like her fondness of those sexual hadiths?

4. Hafsa

She was Omar’s daughter. She died about fifty years after Mohammed, so she also must have been young at the time of marriage.

One day, Mohammed went to her house ( each of Mohammed’s wives had her own house and maids) while she was away visiting her parents. That day was Hafsa’s turn  to sleep with Mohammed. Hafsa was probably waiting for that day for a long time, considering the number of wives and concubines in Mohammed’s collection. Mohammed found nobody in the house except her maid, the beautiful ‘white’ Maria. Rather than waiting for his wife, Mohammed decided to have sex with the maid. Hafsa came back to find her husband in bed with beautiful Maria and went mad. She cried: “on my day and in my bed”. To calm her down, Mohammed promised not to have sex with Maria again, but Maria was too beautiful for Mohammed to keep his promise. As usual, the Quran came to the rescue with a verse that blamed Mohammed for accepting to abstain from Maria in order to keep his wives happy (Q. 66:1). In other words, the verse was a divine order to Mohammed to resume sex with his white beautiful maid.
The conditioned Muslims’ minds consider the above verse as a proof that the Quran was from Allah, not Mohammed. Their logic is how could Mohammed write a verse blaming himself! Those conditioned minds can not grasp the fact that the verse served Mohammed’s interests very well.

5. Um Salma

A widow of one of Mohammed’s followers. Apparently she was so attractive that leading Muslims like Abu Bakr and Omar proposed to her but she turned down all offers of marriage “because she would not find a man who was as good as her previous husband”. On hearing that, Mohammed decided to marry her because he was not only as good as her previous husband, but better! She must have been a young woman when she married Mohammed because she lived about fifty years after his death.

It looks like Mohammed was jealous of this woman’s love to her husband. In realistic terms, this woman was forced to love Mohammed and marry him and forced to admit that he was a better man than her deceased husband.

Mohammed made it an essential requirement of the Islamic faith that Muslims must love him more than they love their children, parents or themselves and the entire mankind put together. Without this degree of love, a Muslims’s faith would be fake. Those verses(3) and hadiths (4)(5)  that emphasize this mandatory love are the ones usually quoted by Imams in mosques to charge the Muslims masses to go to the streets to defend Mohammed against “offending” free speech.

Never in the history of mankind a leader succeeded to force his love on every one of his subjects except Mohammed. Thanks to the religion of submission, Mohammed did it and got away with it for fourteen hundred years!!

6. Zainab Bint Jahsh

She was Mohammed’s daughter in law, before he abolished adoption.

7. Juwayryia Bint Al Harith

The wife of the leader of the Jewish tribe Bani Al Mutalaq. Her husband was killed in the battle and Mohammed married her a few days later. Her story is a reminder of Safyia’s story (see below)
.
8. Safiya Bint Huyai

If everything else in Islam is good and Mohammed was otherwise perfect, the story of Mohammed’s marriage to this woman, on its own, is more than enough to make anyone leave Islam and conclude that Mohammed was a dangerous and psychopathic gang leader.

Mohammed invaded Khayber, the living place of the Jewish tribe of Bani Nadeer,  at dawn and set fire to the tents and palm trees. Burning palm trees was considered evil practice and was generally unacceptable in Arabia, but Allah revealed a verse explaining to the Arabs that what Mohammed did was OK. The tribe was defeated quickly and badly. Most men were massacred and the leader of the tribe, Kenana, was arrested, tortured and killed as per Mohammed’s orders. When the battle was over, one of the Muslims asked Mohammed to allow him to take a woman, safyia, as a slave for himself, to which Mohammed agreed. Other Muslims became jealous and told Mohammed that the woman was actually the wife of Kenana and was very beautiful. Mohammed ordered his men to bring the woman to him and once he looked at her, he immediately covered her with his garment, indicating that he decided to have her. Later that day, Mohammed freed her and married her.

Safyia, together with another woman, were lead to Mohammed by Bilal. On the way, the the scene of the massacre was too much for the other woman to control herself and she cried loudly. Mohammed ordered his men to ‘take that evil woman away’. When Mohammed saw the beauty of Safyia he suddenly became civilized and looked at Bilal and  said: “What Bilal, is there no mercy in your heart?” blaming him for letting the women see the corpses! Without repentance or sense of shame, the Muslim scholars described the captured woman, who cried at the sight of the corpses, as evil but added PBUH after Mohammed’s name!
Safyia realized her fate as she lost her tribe and all power. When Mohammed offered her marriage she had to accept as the other option was slavery. Widows are required to wait over four months before getting married again, but Mohammed, the man with privileges, didn’t have to abide by his own rules and ordered the marriage that same night. Safyia was too traumatized to sleep with Mohammed that night, having lost her husband, brother and all the men of her tribe. The wedding was postponed for a few days to allow her time to recover from her shock.

After such a blood bath no human, or animal, would enjoy or even consider having sex, let alone with a woman who just witnessed the massacre of her entire family. Only severely deranged psychopaths do that and only dumb blind followers with dead conscience  justify it.

It wasn’t only Mohammed who was cruel to Safyia because modern Muslims are just as bad. They do not dispute any of the above details, but they claim they were evidence of Mohammed’s kindness because he elevated Safyia’s status from slave to  wife!! They also claim that Mohammed’s marriage to his Jewish wives was a good gesture that was supposed improve his relations with the Jews!

After virtually annihilating the tribes during the day, Mohammed and his followers had sex with the traumatized  Jewish widows to improve relations with Jews!
Only a Muslim minds can reach that level of “reasoning”.

9. Zainab Bint Khuzyma

10. Um Habiba

She was the widow of one of Mohammed’s followers who emigrated to Ethiopia and then converted to christianity. She died during the Umayyad’s dynasty, so she must have been a young girl at the time of marriage.

11. Maymuna

12. A woman from Bani Kilab

13. Ghaziya

This woman was advised by Mohammed’s other wives to say “I seek refuge with Allah from you” as he starts the foreplay. Mohammed divorced her immediately.

14. Asmaa Bin Numan

Mohammed discovered that she had white spots on her body, which he didn’t like. He divorced her immediately.

How kind and how civilized!

15. Bint Zabian

16. Kateela

Mohammed became ill and died without a chance to sleep with her. She apostatized  after his death!

17. Fatima Bint Sara’

18. Khawla Bint Huzayl

19. Layla Bint Khateem

Conclusion:
There is obvious lack of details about some of Mohammed’s wives. There are no records about some of them except for their names, while others’ names have been completely missing. It is fair to assume that some wives were dropped completely from the memory of history.

To be fair to the Muslim historians, the subject was not that simple. Mohammed had wives that he kept, wives that he divorced, women to whom he was engaged but never married, women that he married but never had the chance to have sex with. He also had women who offered themselves to him free of charge. These offers were a god given rights to Mohammed, but not other Muslims. In addition to this Mohammed had maids and sex slaves, like Maria, who often counted as a wife by many Muslims but she was not.
With such a complexity, probably Mohammed himself would have trouble in telling which of those women would be included under wives, right hand possessions or offered to him and what would be the grand total of his true wives.

———————————————————————-

References:

(1) Al Jami Al Kabeer by Sayuti 272

gabriel brought me a bowl, I ate from it and was given the sexual potency of 40 men

(2) Q.9:24

(3) Bukhari Volume 001, Book 002, Hadith Number 014.

Narated By Anas : The Prophet said “None of you will have faith till he loves me more than his father, his children and all mankind.”

(4) Bukhari Volume 008, Book 078, Hadith Number 628.1

“No, by Him in Whose Hand my soul is, (you will not have complete faith) till I am dearer to you than your own self.”

(5) Al Maugni by Al makdisi  468/7

“I recommend for you the virgins”

http://www.faithfreedom.org/articles/women-in-islam/muhammad-and-his-wifes/