Afghani mullah rapes ten-year-old girl; family wants to kill her

69

By Why Evolution Is True

There is no explicit statement in the Qur’an (I don’t know about the hadith) urging or sanctioning “honor killings,” but it’s now become a feature of Islamic culture, and has been justified on religious grounds (in Jordan, attempts to strengthen laws against honor killing were opposed and turned back by Muslim leaders for religious reasons).

Virtually every case  (I’ll add here “that I know of”) of “honor killing” is done by Muslims, and is committed against women, either for being raped (the excuses here are that a raped woman must have been a temptress, provoking the uncontrollable lust of men, or that a raped woman is no longer a virgin and thus not a candidate for marriage), for consorting with an apostate, for having extramarital or premarital sex, and so on. Often young members of the family, like boys, are assigned to do the deed, with the idea that they’d get off easier if they were young.

Such women (men, of course, aren’t often the subject of honor killings) are killed in a sick and perverted attempt to restore “honor” to the family defiled by, say, having one of its daughters raped. One would think that if you have to restore honor through violence (something that I do not favor, of course), you’d kill the rapist, or at least men involved in such episodes. But that rarely happens. That’s because it’s women’s sexuality that is supposedly besmirched, not the male’s; and that cult of “purity” also comes from religion.

Now, in Afghanistan, which has become increasingly more radical and misogynistic since the ultrareligious Taliban has made gains, comes one of the most odious cases of incipient honor killing I’ve heard of.

As The New York Times reported on July 19, a ten-year-old girl, weighing just 40 pounds and prepubescent, was raped by a mullah (a religiously educated Muslim man, usually with high standing). His name is Mohammad Amin.

The rape was so violent that it nearly killed the girl. The mullah has confessed, but said that he thought the girl was 17 (yeah, that explains why she weighed 40 pounds and had no secondary sexual characteristics), and has offered to marry her.  The girl was placed in an shelter for women to protect her, as her family threatened to “honor” kill her. But, and the idiocy continues, now the police have taken the girl out of the shelter and returned her to her family.  Unless somebody intervenes, she’s doomed to die—for the “crime” of being raped by a much older man. One can’t even use the excuse that she “tempted” him.

Here are some facts (these are direct quotes from the Times). It’s unbelievable that people can behave this way:

  • The girl’s own testimony, and medical evidence, supported a rape so violent that it caused a fistula, or a break in the wall between the vagina and rectum, according to the police and the official bill of indictment. She bled so profusely after the attack that she was at one point in danger of losing her life because of a delay in getting medical care.

  • The case has broader repercussions. The head of the Women for Afghan Women shelter here where the girl took refuge, Dr. Hassina Sarwari, was at one point driven into hiding by death threats from the girl’s family and other mullahs, who sought to play down the crime by arguing the girl was much older than 10. One militia commander sent Dr. Sarwari threatening texts and an ultimatum to return the girl to her family. The doctor said she now wanted to flee Afghanistan.
  • Most of the anger in Kunduz has been focused not on the mullah but on the women’s activists and the shelter, which is one of seven operated across Afghanistan by Women for Afghan Women, an Afghan-run charity that is heavily dependent on American aid, from both government and private donors.

 

Read more and watch a video about WAW here.

69 COMMENTS

  1. The following quote from the Koran seems to sanction “honour killings”: If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, take the evidence of four witnesses from amongst you. And if they testify against them; confine the guilty women in houses until death (Koran 4:15).

    • But that can’t be as I’ve heard muslim after muslim deny that there is any justification for the systemic mistreatment of women in the Koran or the Hadith. So you must have a defective book on your hands. Otherwise, they’d all be lying their asses off in support of a hateful misogynistic pogrom, but they wouldn’t do that. No, Glenn Greenwald (who is otherwise a brilliant and indispensable journalist) will happily explain that Islam is religion of peace and that pointing out things like this is just racism and somehow, it’s all Sam Harris’ fault.

    • If you think this is bad, what about this command of the Prophet found in their so-called holy book? Believers make war on the infidels who dwell around you. Deal firmly with them (Koran 9:123). There are over 100 similar verses in the Koran. Can you imagine the carnage if the Islamic theocrats in Iran, intoxicated by thoughts of paradise, ever get their hands on a nuclear weapon?

  2. Truly disgusting, matched only by the complicity/cowardice of the surrounding public not to voice their objections.

    When they say “religion of peace” they mean they intend to convert/kill everyone else to islam, then there will be peace.

    This story needs to pushed in front of the nose of every so-called moderate muslim, to offer them the chance to distance themselves from this evil scum. There is an understanding in islam that if the person says or does nothing in the face of such an atrocity, then it is presumed that they agree with the atrocity. Time to put that to the test.

  3. All “holy scriptures” are written in ways that people reading them can interprete the content (in contrast to science books!) So to find a justtification for nearly everything is a question of cleverness of the one interpreting the scripture. To convince the rest of the group of the truth of the interpretation in religious communities is mostly a matter of position in the hirarchy of the community. I discus this problem very often with a work mate who is muslim and I am an atheist. If I mention an example of inhuman behavior in the name of his god, his answer usually is the not a real msulim (Scottsmen) argument. Religion IS illminded!

    • Joe Wolsing Jul 24, 2014 at 2:54 pm

      All “holy scriptures” are written in ways that people reading them can interprete the content (in contrast to science books!) So to find a justtification for nearly everything is a question of cleverness of the one interpreting the scripture. To convince the rest of the group of the truth of the interpretation in religious communities is mostly a matter of position in the hirarchy of the community.

      Ah! The psychology of “interpretation”, and “reading” what the reader WANTS to see on the page!

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rorschach_test

      the Rorschach inkblot test, the Rorschach technique, or simply the inkblot test) is a psychological test in which subjects’ perceptions of inkblots are recorded and then analyzed using psychological interpretation, complex algorithms, or both. Some psychologists use this test to examine a person’s personality characteristics and emotional functioning. It has been employed to detect underlying thought disorder, especially in cases where patients are reluctant to describe their thinking processes openly.[4] The test is named after its creator, Swiss psychologist Hermann Rorschach.

      You can make test cards for yourself! Just fold a piece of paper in half and with some ink or paint poured between the sheets, press the halves together to make a symmetrical pattern. (Like the one on the link). Open the sheet up again and you or your friends can “read” the image to see what it represents.

      (It’s as easy as reading tea-leaves, or goat’s entrails! – but it tells you more about the reader than about the image! )

  4. Anything – literally anything – to protect the poor, helpless male in this ass-drip of a religion. Everything is the female’s fault. “My dick just sprang out of my robes when she walked by, the slut, so what was I supposed to do?!” “This knife I was using to clean my fingernails just happened to bury itself in my wife. She must have been an evil slut!” “My rifle just went off like a string of firecrackers when I got within range of that school full of girls; of course they’re nothing but Westernized whores!” It’s all the will of Allah! Apparently these idiots are too religion-besotted to realize how stupid, worthless, spineless and evil this makes the men look. A ten-year-old child has such sexual power that she can force a 60-year-old man to lose all control and rape her? What a flaming bunch of self-serving, shit-stained assholes.

    And what the bloody fuck is wrong with the parents? If this child was my daughter, I’d have to be forcibly restrained from hunting down the worthless pedophile shitbag who raped her, sawing off his filthy junk with a dull knife and choking him with it.

    Sorry about the language and violence, but this is just way too far beyond the pale for nice philosophical chit-chat.

  5. Unfortunately these cases are very frequent and the governments of these countries are giving up their responsibilities to protect their citizens. It is totally irrational that the very family of the girl is demanding her death and not the punishment of the Muslim cleric who raped her. I think there is a weariness among the public concerning these cases; it has been a long time since over 200 Nigerian girls were abducted by an Islamist organization and the Western press has ceased publishing the fate of these young people. We do not know whether they are still alive or whether they have been sold as slaves or forced to marry their kidnappers.

  6. I don’t like her prospects after being sent back home to live with her parents. I can envisage the sort of life she is going to have. In all probability they’ll regard their daughter as a shameless slut with little chance of finding a husband. She will be a burden on the family for the rest of her days in all likelihood, and I imagine she’ll be treated appallingly. Perhaps it may have been a better outcome for her, had she died from the loss of blood.

    Personally, I’d like to save every one of these victims. I’d like to be in a position to offer them refuge in a better country and provide them an education and a good start in life. It’s the feeling of helplessness that I find the most troubling.

  7. So he thought the girl was 17? Is rape of a 17 year old OK then? Koranic brutality and its justifications aside, shouldn’t he be arrested for rape alone, irrespective of the age of the victim? After years of Western intervention, all the training of their army, the police and all the other services we are back right where we started with that society. Religion really does poison everything. I’m disgusted to the core of my being.

  8. harry Jul 25, 2014 at 12:13 am
    So when do we start burning down the mosques?

    Building schools and education solves this problem in the long term. Violent knee jerk responses like yours will never do anything, except encourage violent knee jerk responses from people on the other side, with and identical psychological profile to you.

    • Violent knee jerk responses like yours will never do anything, except
      encourage violent knee jerk responses from people on the other side,
      with and identical psychological profile to you.

      If they had an ‘identical psycholostogical profile’ to harry, then (we can reasonably presume) they wouldn’t be trying to murder little girls for rape, and we wouldn’t have a problem.

      Kindly return your worthless strawman to the place from whence it came.

  9. [In reply to a comment removed by moderators]

    Israel and Palestinians, are busy following this idea, and throwing explosives at each other through the air. They are escalating the conflict and injuring lots of innocent bystanders, whose relatives and friends are then motivated to seek revenge! Of course both sides claim to follow the OT biblical teachings: <a href="http://biblehub.com/exodus/21-24.htm&quot; rel="nofollow">http://biblehub.com/exodus/21-24.htm</a&gt;
    > Exodus 21:25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise. Leviticus 24:20 fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. The one who has inflicted the injury must suffer the same injury. The "moral" aspect of this, was that if a rival tribe killed ONE of your people, you killed ONE of theirs – not the whole village! ….. But zionists don't seem to understand their own bible! That's how "interpretation blinkers" and "faith-thinking" work!

    • The “moral” aspect of this, was that if a rival tribe killed ONE of your people, you killed ONE of theirs – not the whole village!

      Not quite. The “moral aspect” of this was that the Israelite society as a whole had a rule which meant that the legal punishment for a crime was proportionate to the crime.

      • Alan Jul 25, 2014 at 5:41 am

        The “moral” aspect of this, was that if a rival tribe killed ONE of your people, you killed ONE of theirs – not the whole village!

        Not quite.

        ????????? – Both Israel and their neighbours lives as tribes.

        The “moral aspect” of this was that the Israelite society as a whole had a rule which meant that the legal punishment for a crime was proportionate.
        to the crime.

        That is what the quoted links stated – chapter and verse, – illustrated by the examples given – relating to disputes between both individuals and communities. My example stressed the proportionality of the response.

        I also made the point that both Islam and Israel claim to follow this from their holy books.

        • Hiya. Looking at Exodus 21 it seems to me that it is speaking of fights going on within a community, where a judge is appointed and decides the punishment for the crime, strong textrather than between communities. If we are to apply it beyond its immediate context, we need to make sure we apply it correctly, making any adjustments which are necessary.

          • Alan Jul 25, 2014 at 6:58 am

            Although roughly the same quote appears in various books of the bible, let’s keep it simple and to the point!

            It stated that punishments or retaliation, should be proportionate, and not escalated. This is a common theme with tribal peoples who try to live in peace with their neighbours.

  10. The poor girl. This is awful. Truly awful.

    I note from your linked site that you wrote, “And blame religion, too, for this is an endemic trait of Islam, though it’s also sometimes seen in non-Islamic cultures (I’m having a hard time finding cases of honor killings not involving Muslims, but citing one or two won’t disprove the relationship).”

    Would you mind expanding on this, please? Why “blame religion” in general?

    • Would you mind expanding on this, please? Why “blame religion” in
      general?

      Besause it only seems to happen in religious cultures. The more religious they are, the more it happens.

      (damm, The-Richard-Dawkins-foundation software – has again described me as, “old-toy-boy on Afghani mullah rapes ten-year-old girl; family wants to kill her”

      • Another way of putting it is to say that it seems to happen only in non-Western cultures or amongst people with dark hair or with two arms or.

        It does seem to happen only in religious cultures, but to describe it thus is sloppy. By implication it bungs in mad, evil Islamists with Quakers.

        To give a counter-example, gulags only seem to happen in atheistic communities or concentration camps only seem to happen in societies where Methodists are not in the majority. Both are true, but hardly tell the story in a balanced manner, do they.

        • Alan Jul 25, 2014 at 7:03 am

          It does seem to happen only in religious cultures, but to describe it thus is sloppy. By implication it bungs in mad, evil Islamists with Quakers.

          I see your diversionary side-tracking to irrelevance in lieu of evidence or substance, continues! If you have evidence of in which cultures it is more or less prevalent, please present it! Unsupported assertions of sloppiness – are well – sloppy!

          To give a counter-example, gulags only seem to happen in atheistic communities or concentration camps only seem to happen in societies where Methodists are not in the majority. Both are true, but hardly tell the story in a balanced manner, do they.

          Or coming back to reality:

          Gulags happened in anti-theist Stalinist ideologies,
          while concentration camps happened in Catholic Hitler’s fascist ideologies, and the Japanese God-Emperor’s ideology.

          And yes rape was committed with impunity in these places.

  11. You are raped by your father in law in Muzaffarnagar/India in 2005 but the sharia court will order you to marry your rapist! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imrana_rape_case

    Somehow, Indian legal system managed to award the rapist 10 year of prison. But what to expect from a religion whose prophet will motivate his army by offering the idiots 72 virgins POSTHUMOUSLY! It clearly shows how pious and just a mujahir’s life (and his jihad) is! Why stop here, did not the prophet and his team had sex with war-booty, regularly!

  12. In the beginning, Men made an ignorant mistake by saying “… And the lord God said, It’s not good that the man should be alone;…” and “… And the rib, which the lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.”
    Even though I don’t like generalizations, let’s throw away the idiocy of our Men ancestors wrote this trash spiritual guidance! Unlike religious dictators, Women are not household equipment but are THE BEGINNING OF LIFE. Religion is swallowing our advancements. [shit]

  13. Ignorance and prejudice are the explanation for ‘having a hard time finding non-Islamic honour killings’. Violence against those who are considered to have brought shame to the caste / community / family is a feature of traditional societies generally.

  14. All Abrahamic religions have at their origin, their core, a focus on blood, vengeance, intolerance, and patriarchal suppression of women. If you read the Old Testament, you can honestly draw but one conclusion. Yahweh loves blood and pronounces women unclean over and over again. It’s simply the truth. Look at fundamentalists of all the Abrahamic faiths and you find misogny, misanthropy, and xenophobia. Period. End of story. Game over.

    • All Abrahamic religions have at their origin, their core, a focus on blood, vengeance, intolerance, and patriarchal suppression of women.

      Would you please demonstrate that they have this “at their origin”.

      Yahweh loves blood and pronounces women unclean over and over again.

      Would you please show where this happens “over and over again”.

      Look at fundamentalists of all the Abrahamic faiths and you find misogny, misanthropy, and xenophobia.

      Which proves what? I see some pretty poor stuff looking at some fundamentalists on lots of things. Personally, I would think it more accurate to include looking at whether they are being consist in making their actions fit what their source tells them, e.g. is a Fundamentalist Christian being consistent if he/she is misogenistic, misanthropic and xenophobic. I know some Fundamentalist Christians who are the very opposite of that, so what we meant to draw from this?

      • Ok. Some fundamentalists, then. But read Leviticus 15 to find out how unclean women are. Girl children, by the way, make the mother unclean for twice as long as boy children do. God sanctions sex slavery for virgins captured in war. In the New Testament, women are forbidden to speak in church and wives must be subject to their husbands. And they have to cover their heads at all times. They should not wear jewelry. Paul says they should be limited to keeping house. Their main job is to bear children (think of the Duggars). For Yahweh’s bloody disposition, open the Bible, particularly the Old Testament, at random for maybe 20 times. You can’t miss it. He drowns everyone but Noah, his family, and a boatload of animals, prefers Abel’s bloody sacrifice to Cain’s agricultural offerings, ordains the cutting off of foreskins, tries to kill Moses at one point, has the Hebrews slaughter everyone and every living thing in various locations (and punishes them when they fail to do so), kills the firstborn of every animal and person in Egypt who does not put a mark of blood on the door, sends plagues, sends fiery serpents to kill people, has the earth swallow up some folks, kills some poor guy who tried to keep His Ark from tipping over, ordains the stoning of disobedient children, murders everyone in Sodom, plays that wonderful practical joke on Abraham and Issac, and has a man stoned to death for gathering firewood on the Sabbath. Enough? Just read the Bible.
        For a sample of what Christian fundamentalism can do to women, read “I Fired God,” by Jocelyn Zichterman.

        • Ok. Some fundamentalists, then.

          Excellent. Like some atheists built gulags.

          On the other stuff some at least seems to show quite a bit of misunderstanding. I’d be happy to discuss one or two of your choice at a time rather than respond to a(n unintended Gish Gallop). Is there anywhere to do it on this site these days (if you want to discuss them, of course)?

          • Thanks for the offer of discussion, Alan, but, to be honest, it wears me out to quibble about my “misunderstanding” of what is as plain as the texts to which I refer. I used to be a fundamentalist myself, and I twisted and contorted myself into logical absurdities to explain away the inconvenient truths of the Bible in order to render them inoffensive and palatable. If you can “understand” the Bible so that it doesn’t violate your moral conscience, then I wish you the best of luck. For me, the Bible is full of repulsive ethical teaching, contradictions, and flat out lies. To save both of us a lot of frustration and time, let’s just disagree and move on. Live long and prosper.

          • @ Andy – great comments and nice restraint. I usually don’t engage in these kinds of never ending conversations and negotiations (at least that’s what they seem like) because I tire very quickly of repeating myself, but I do enjoy the resultant rhetoric.

      • Alan Jul 25, 2014 at 9:04 am

        All Abrahamic religions have at their origin, their core, a focus on blood, vengeance, intolerance, and patriarchal suppression of women.

        Would you please demonstrate that they have this “at their origin”.

        Is it really so hard to read the bit of the quote you missed off?

        Andy Jul 25, 2014 at 8:44 am

        All Abrahamic religions have at their origin, their core, a focus on blood, vengeance, intolerance, and patriarchal suppression of women. If you read the Old Testament, you can honestly draw but one conclusion.

        Or the relevant passages of the OT?

        @ Andy

        You really should not need to explain or quote THE BIBLE to people who are Xtians and claim to ” the precepts of the book”, as a basis for their world view.

        However I recall this comment (with a clickable link at the end of it) from a certain poster!

        Having said that, there are significant numbers of Christians who don’t put much effort in and that is particularly bad if they then claim that the bible is the word of God. If they think it is, as I do, then it is surely right to put a bit of effort in in order to understand it properly. http://richarddawkins.net/2014/07/question-of-the-week-july-23-2014/#li-comment-148470

        • @ Alan4discussion, I find that most “apologists” for the Bible often attempt to divert attention from the points made against it by bringing up irrelevancies. On other occasions, they selectively claim metaphorical status for some of the inconsistencies and absurdities of the Word. Sometimes, in order to give false intellectual status to their “arguments,” they quote something clever from someone like C. S. Lewis rather than address the Scriptural problems at issue. Hence, after an exhange or two, I usually retire from the field, realizing that further discussion will result in a degenerating series of unproductive verbal salvos.

          • Andy Jul 25, 2014 at 2:23 pm

            @ Alan4discussion, I find that most “apologists” for the Bible often attempt to divert attention from the points made against it by bringing up irrelevancies.

            Yes it can be tedious, and unlikely to change views set in concrete, but I often think of the audience of lurkers who come here to see reasoned answers to questions which they may encounter.

  15. Certainly not “all” religions in every context are equally as abusive or barbaric. However, they are all a part of the tribal past and do nothing but prevent genuine progress and well being for all. Hitch was right, … religion poisons everything.

    • Hitch was right, … religion poisons everything.

      Really? Poisons atheism? Poisons going fishing? Poisons fish and chips? Poisons the setting up of hospices in the UK? Poisons the drop-in centre in our parish? Poisons the setting up of the Samaritans?

        • So not everything then. Happy to go with Hitchins using exaggeration/hyperbole to make a point as long as people don’t think he was speaking literally. Such people might have similar problems reading the early chapters of Genesis as well, I think.

          • The difference of course being the influence of the Bible (pervasive in many aspects of life) versus the influence of Hitch (though beloved by many, relatively inconsequential).

          • Which would of course be Andy’s point from above:

            I find that most “apologists” for the Bible often attempt to divert attention from the points made against it by bringing up irrelevancies. On other occasions, they selectively claim metaphorical status for some of the inconsistencies and absurdities of the Word.

            Predictable response, Alan E, if nothing else.

  16. Evil – just evil. These people do not have a shred of humanity in them – not an ounce. They are vain, conceited, selfish, paedophiles (raping a 10 year old puts the mad mullah in that category), would be murderers of the innocent. Come to think about it – it is just like their god and their prophet (regardless of which brand of faith they subscribe to).

  17. I am sick of the deliberate propaganda by the right wing in the United States that feminists/atheists/leftists “do not care” about the subjugation of women by Muslim extremists, as in the example of this poor girl, and that we do or say nothing about it. I have been countering such comments, which I suspect are made by paid shills, with links and facts. Before 9-11, conservatives in the United States were singing Islam’s praises due to its “traditions” and “morals.”

  18. Don’t forget that the Old Testament gives just as much justification for violence as does the Quran, and some of it doesn’t need much interpretation. Indeed, with what is going on in Gaza, the instruction to Moses by God to take possession of the Holy Land included the instruction to kill everyone then living there ‘even if they be babes’, is perhaps being followed literally today.

  19. I know that I am going to make myself un-popular by saying this but, How do we know that this story is true? Where is the evidence?

    The final link is the Washington Post where one needs to subscribe to read the story, Can anyone independently verify this story?

  20. I don’t know about the ruling on women getting raped in Islam but I know that in Islam, a Muslim may be killed for these reasons as evidenced by this quote from an Islam-related site.

    “The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) has explained to us the reasons for which it becomes permissible to shed this blood. He said: “It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim who bears witness that there is no god but Allaah and that I am the Messenger of Allaah except in three cases: a life for a life (murder), zina of one of who is previously-married (adultery), and the one who changes his religion and forsakes the jamaa’ah.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (6370) and Muslim (3175). From this it is clear that zina on the part of one who is married is one of the reasons that make it permissible to kill a person.”

    Add homosexuals there too. Evidence:

    “l-Tirmidhi (1456), Abu Dawood (4462)and Ibn Maajah (2561) narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.”. Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi.”

    “The Sahaabah were unanimously agreed on the execution of homosexuals, but they differed as to how they were to be executed. Some of them were of the view that they should be burned with fire, which was the view of ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) and also of Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him), as we shall see below. And some of them thought that they should be thrown down from a high place then have stones thrown at them. This was the view of Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him).”

    “Some of them thought that they should be stoned to death, which was narrated from both ‘Ali and Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with them).”

    So, yea. GO AHEAD AND SPREAD THE PEACE MUSLIMS!

Leave a Reply