ISIS member publicly executes his own mother in Syria for apostasy. Her specific crime? Urging her son to leave ISIS, with the extra jab of telling him that the coalition would kill all ISIS members. And evidently, if one of the reports is correct, his father had followed Mohamed's pedophile example.
quote
An ISIS fighter has executed his own mother before a public audience, an expat Syrian rights group said.
The 20-year-old killed his mother in the Syrian city of Raqqa, ISIS' de facto capital, as hundreds looked on near the post office where she worked, said the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.
ISIS had accused her of apostasy after her son turned her in, the activists said. She allegedly had been "inciting her son to leave the Islamic State." She wanted to escape with him and told him "that the coalition will kill all members of the organization."
The observatory reported that the victim was in her 40s. The activist group Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently reported that she was 35.
Done a lot of careful research into the age of Mo's youngest wife? From what I remember when I was posting about it, there were a range of answers, and on the high end, her age at marriage would have made her the equivalent of a female high school senior or first year college student of today.
There are also the accounts that say that the marriage was formalized when Aisha was still a child, but that he waited some years before they had at it.
Fast forwarding some roughly 1400 years, how much do we really have to go on, about the ages and histories of the mother and son at the center of this relatively brief news report from the caliphate?
Let's not have a rush to judgement.
This could turn out to be just another commonplace, run-of-the-mill son executes mother incident, without any underage marriage or underage pregnancy having ever been part of the family history.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-09-2016).]
Done a lot of careful research into the age of Mo's youngest wife? From what I remember when I was posting about it, there were a range of answers, and on the high end, her age at marriage would have made her the equivalent of a female high school senior or first year college student of today.
There are also the accounts that say that the marriage was formalized when Aisha was still a child, but that he waited some years before they had at it.
Fast forwarding some roughly 1400 years, how much do we really have to go on, about the ages and histories of the mother and son at the center of this relatively brief news report from the caliphate?
Let's not have a rush to judgement.
This could turn out to be just another commonplace, run-of-the-mill son executes mother incident, without any underage marriage or underage pregnancy having ever been part of the family history.
Even for you that's a stretch in apologetics. Is Barry giving lessons now ?
HEY, new Muslim icon...... Pedo Bear.
1400 years of progress in action.
[This message has been edited by MidEngineManiac (edited 01-09-2016).]
There are two things about that photograph that stand out when I consider whether it implicates the Prophet of Islam in an underage marriage: 1. It shows a scene that transpired in Gaza, not Medina. 2. It's a photograph.
I defy anyone to identify Muhammad Sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa Sallam (PBUH) from that lineup of grooms in the photograph.
There are two things about that photograph that stand out when I consider whether it implicates the Prophet of Islam in an underage marriage: 1. It shows a scene that transpired in Gaza, not Medina. 2. It's a photograph.
I defy anyone to identify Muhammad Sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa Sallam (PBUH) from that lineup of grooms in the photograph.
I am positive that he's not in that photograph.
Who cares.
[This message has been edited by pokeyfiero (edited 01-09-2016).]
There are two things about that photograph that stand out when I consider whether it implicates the Prophet of Islam in an underage marriage: 1. It shows a scene that transpired in Gaza, not Medina. 2. It's a photograph.
I defy anyone to identify Muhammad Sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa Sallam (PBUH) from that lineup of grooms in the photograph.
I am positive that he's not in that photograph.
I don't see anything in this picture that implicates Hitler in the genocide of the holocaust either. Just a lot of troops. No stinkin' Hitler to be found. And just an innocent German youth rally 1938--don't mean nuthin..I'm sure a few years later they were all in universty studyng liberal arts. Click to show
Or not. (but no, Hitler isn't in this 1944 picture either--just members of the Einsatzgruppen so ol' Adolf gets a bye. caption="Immediately after the war and for many decades thereafter, various German veterans’ organizations falsely denied that the combat arm of the SS had anything at all to do with atrocities known to have been carried out by their organizational cousins in the dreaded Einsatzgruppen."
Denial is such a wonderful thing...
I defy anyone to point out Adolf Hitler in the following picture:
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-09-2016).]
This could turn out to be just another commonplace, run-of-the-mill son executes mother incident, without any underage marriage or underage pregnancy having ever been part of the family history.
And the Oscar for biggest load of goes to ....
al-rinselberg!!!
As part of your prize and to express our undying praise and respect for your thoughtful contributions, you will be awarded a year's supply of SPAM!! With Bacon.
According to the proverbial "one" Hasaan Rafique, and I quote:
There is a lot of misunderstanding in the Muslim world regarding the age of Hazrat Aisha at the time of her marriage to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). This misunderstanding has often led to the belief that child marriage is permissible in Islam; and still remains one of the favourite points used by many non-Muslims to create skepticism against the religion of Islam.
The popularly believed notion is that Hazrat Aisha was 6 years old when her Nikah was performed in Mekkah; and 9 years old when she moved in to live with the Prophet (PBUH).
However, an in-depth study of historical facts and authentic Hadith (texts) actually reveals that this information can not be true, and Hazrat Aisha was at least 16-19 years old when she was married to the Prophet.
On par with yours--word of mouth from a most likely unreliable source or 2 that has a decidedly biased reason to try to influence beliefs away from long held beliefs.
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-09-2016).]
Ya sure ya read that right? I wouldn't want rinselberg to feel like Miss Columbia....
Who else could it be but PFF's own Sideshow Bob? You realize he's just using us to perfect his routine. He'll take it on tour once his improv is more polished.
A clarification to one of my previous sentences, if you would:
"This could turn out to be just another commonplace, run-of-the-mill son executes mother incident, where Islamist indoctrination and allegiance on the part of the son was the key motivation for the murder, but without any underage marriage or underage pregnancy having ever been part of the immediate family history."
Can you rule out the possibility that the murderer was not this woman's biological son, but was born to one of the father's previous wives, or other wives, or someone with whom the man had an illicit affair?
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-09-2016).]
No, can you prove any of those alternatives? This could be the night the asteroid crashes thru my roof and kills me dead in my bed. Probably won't, but there is always those 2 remote chances. Slim and none.
The mother is now dead. (I assume you think I should say "alleged" mother) I'm pretty sure ISIS isn't going to bother doing any DNA testing to prove paternal/maternal/offspring relation, so you're free to hypothesize as you wish. Let me help you. The son's real biological father is Barack Obama, and his biological mother is actually . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .
Princess/General Leia Organa.
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-09-2016).]
According to the proverbial "one" Hasaan Rafique, and I y Hadith
I have not tried to "vett" Hasaan Rafique's credibility as a source.
What's "your" evidence?
Native name(Arabic): عائشةBorn‘Ā’ishah bint Abī Bakr c. 613/614 CE
Mecca, Hejaz, Arabia (present-day Saudi Arabia)
DiedJuly 16, 678 (aged 64)
Medina, Hejaz, Arabia (present-day Saudi Arabia)
Resting placeJannat al-Baqi, Medina, Hejaz, Arabia (present-day Saudi Arabia)ReligionIslamSpouse(s)Muhammad (m. 619 – June 8, 632)Parent(s)Abu Bakr (father) Umm Ruman (mother)Military careerBattles/wars
First Fitna
Battle of the Camel
‘Ā’ishah bint Abī Bakr (613/614 – 678 CE;[1]Arabic: عائشة transliteration: ‘Ā’ishah [ʕaːʔiʃa], also transcribed as A'ishah, Aisyah, Ayesha,A'isha, Aishat, Aishah, or Aisha /ˈɑːiːˌʃɑː/[2]) was one of Muhammad's wives.[3] In Islamic writings, her name is thus often prefixed by the title "Mother of the Believers" (Arabic: أمّ المؤمنين umm al-mu'min), per the description of Muhammad's wives in the Qur'an.[4][5][6]
Aisha had an important role in early Islamic history, both during Muhammad's life and after his death. In Sunni tradition, Aisha is thought to be scholarly and inquisitive. She contributed to the spread of Muhammad's message and served the Muslim community for 44 years after his death.[7] She is also known for narrating 2210 hadiths,[8] not just on matters related to the Prophet's private life, but also on topics such as inheritance,pilgrimage, and eschatology.[9] Her intellect and knowledge in various subjects, including poetry and medicine, were highly praised by early luminaries such as al-Zuhri and her student Urwa ibn al-Zubayr.[9]
Her father, Abu Bakr, became the first caliphto succeed Muhammad, and after two years was succeeded by Umar. During the time of the third caliph Uthman, Aisha had a leading part in the opposition that grew against him, though she did not agree either with those responsible for his assassination nor with the party of Ali.[10] During the reign of Ali, she wanted to avenge Uthman's death, which she attempted to do in the Battle of the Camel. She participated in the battle by giving speeches and leading troops on the back of her camel. She ended up losing the battle, but her involvement and determination left a lasting impression.[6] Afterwards, she lived quietly in Medina for more than twenty years, took no part in politics, and became reconciled to Ali and did not opposeMu'awiya.[10]
The majority of traditional hadith sources state that Aisha was married to Muhammad at the age of six or seven, but she stayed in her parents' home until the age of nine, or ten according to Ibn Hisham,[11] when the marriage was consummated with Muhammad, then 53, in Medina.[12][13][14]
My opinion is that a 50 year old man that marries a 7 year old girl is a pervert. Rinse, do you dispute this? Even if they did not "get it on" till she was 17, he would have been in his 60's, does that sound better? No, still a pervert. In the best case scenerio she was 17 when he was 53, that is a 36 year difference, should this be seen as normal? Is it OK? Is it degrading? Is it perverted?
Keep in mind that muhamid only lived to about 60-63. So let the math do the work.
She served the muslum community for 44 years after muhamids death. That puts her at about 20 years old when he died, IF you do not count the 20 years of quite time she did. She died at 64, just a little older than muhamid.
[This message has been edited by Rickady88GT (edited 01-10-2016).]
Originally posted by Rickady88GT: My opinion is that a 50 year old man that marries a 7 year old girl is a pervert. [Rinse, do you dispute this?]
Even if they did not "get it on" till she was 17, he would have been in his 60's, does that sound better? No, still a pervert. In the best case scenerio she was 17 when he was 53, that is a 36 year difference, should this be seen as normal? Is it OK? Is it degrading? Is it perverted?
Keep in mind that muhamid only lived to about 60-63. So let the math do the work. She served the muslum community for 44 years after muhamids death. That puts her at about 20 years old when he died, if you do not count the 20 years of quite time [?] that she did. She died at 64, just a little older than muhamid.
Rick (in his previous post) duplicated the first few paragraphs. Wikipedia provides more, including many links and references. Here's a bit more from the same Wikipedia page that I would like to put on display--two meaty para's and two short ones--with certain sentences and phrases that I have marked in boldface for greater emphasis:
In modern times, Pakistani writer Muhammad Ali of the Ahmadiyya minority sect of Islam, challenged the Sahih al-Bukhari. He acknowledged that Aisha was young as the traditional sources claim; but argued that instead a new interpretation of the Hadith compiled by Mishkat al-Masabih, Wali-ud-Din Muhammad ibn Abdullah Al-Khatib, could indicate that Aisha would have been nineteen years old around the time of her marriage.[25] However, the hadith compiled by Mishkat al-Masabih is not a Ṣaḥīḥ (صَحِيْح) hadith, and its authenticity is considered doubtful by many scholars such as al-Tabrizi.[26][27] Sadakat Kadri points out that the recording of Aisha's age by Ibn Sa'd and Bukhari (though the hadith was Sahih) came a couple of centuries after the Prophet's death.[28] Muhammad Niknam Arabshahi, an Iranian Islamic scholar and historian, also considers six different approaches in his book called Tarikh Sahih Islam to find Aisha'a age at marriage and here is his conclusion:
According to these sources, we can conclude that Aisha was much older than what she claimed and narrated in some hadith... and she was 17 or 19 years old when she got engaged and she would be 20 or 22 when she had sex.[29]
Child marriage was not uncommon in many places at the time, Arabia included. It often served political purposes, and Aisha's marriage to Muhammad would have had a political connotation.[24]
Aisha's age at the time she was married to Muhammad has been of interest since the earliest days of Islam, and references to her age by early historians are frequent.[11] American historian Denise Spellberg has reviewed Islamic literature on Aisha's virginity, age at marriage and age when the marriage was consummated and speculates that Aisha's youth might have been exaggerated to exclude any doubt about her virginity.[11] Spellberg states, "Aisha's age is a major pre-occupation in Ibn Sa'd where her marriage varies between six and seven; nine seems constant as her age at the marriage's consummation." She notes one exception in Ibn Hisham's biography of the Prophet, which suggests the age of consummation may have been when Aisha was age 10, summarizing her review with the note that "these specific references to the bride's age reinforce Aisha's pre-menarcheal status and, implicitly, her virginity. They also suggest the variability of Aisha's age in the historical record."[11] Early Muslims regarded Aisha's youth as demonstrating her virginity and therefore her suitability as a bride of Muhammad. This issue of her virginity was of great importance to those who supported Aisha's position in the debate of the succession to Muhammad. These supporters considered that as Muhammad's only virgin wife, Aisha was divinely intended for him, and therefore the most credible regarding the debate.[30]Click to show
I call any Muslim who uses the stories about Aisha's age as a way to encourage or excuse the practice of Muslim men marrying or otherwise misusing underage** females (let alone males) a PERVERT.
**underage females, using the definition of "underage" as generally understood and legally codified across the United States.
Here's some "Islam 101" that is based on my readings:
The Prophet Mohammed was (and remains) unique among men in that he was selected for the role of Allah's messenger: the man who (using his companions as scribes) would create the first written record of Islam's most foundational writing--the Qur'an--after knowing it by revelation from the angel Gabriel.
The Prophet Mohammed was infallible with respect to Islamic doctrine. Anything that is attributed to Mohammed as an Islamic imperative or as guidance for Muslims cannot be faulted, changed or nullified.
The Prophet Mohammed was otherwise--on anything other than the Islamic doctrine that is his unique legacy among men--not infallible.
To my mind, this frames an inescapable question for those who say that Islam teaches the permissibility for Muslim men to marry underage females; to wit:
Is it "Islamic" for a Muslim man of today to marry an underage female on the evidence (such as it is, and given the vagaries of this evidence as already presented) that this is exactly what Mohammed did? In other words, was Aisha's age at marriage--as interpreted from the Qur'an and other accepted writings--a matter of Islamic doctrine, in terms of what is permissible for Muslisms in the contemporary world? Or was Aisha's age at marriage merely a biographical "tidbit" from Mohammed's life that is "good to know", but not a matter of Islamic doctrine?
If Aisha's age at marriage does not fall under the "revealed as doctrine" category, then I believe that contemporary Muslims are under an Islamic obligation to adhere to one of two beliefs about it: Either Mohammed was mistaken in a non-doctrinal matter when he married Aisha at her age of six and began cohabitation with her at her age of nine; or--and more plausibly--that this was acceptable for Muslims during the historical times and places of Mohammed's life, but it is not acceptable for Muslims of today.
If Aisha's age at marriage does not fall under the "revealed as doctrine" category, then I believe that any Muslims in today's world who would use the story of Aisha as their doctrine for supporting the permissibility of child marriages are not following Islam. I believe that they are transgressing against Islam.
Can anyone here say with knowledge that Aisha's age at marriage does (or does not) fall under the "revealed as Islamic doctrine" category? That's not a rhetorical question. If anyone can say that with knowledge, please lay it out for discussion here, and reveal the basis--the epistemology--that underpins "your" statement.
If "you" could do that, I would consider it in the way that I read that Dennis Rodman would ask a favor of Kim Jong-un. I would consider it a "solid".
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-12-2016).]
A recent opinion based on more acceptable mores and conventions to make things look less shocking than they actually would be otherwise. A toast-- to Revisionist History.
How many centuries after this prophet's death have passed regarding this Pakistani's opinion? He should be careful when bringing 'time passed' into an issue, less someone apply the same unflattering connotation to him..
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-12-2016).]
"This could turn out to be just another commonplace, run-of-the-mill son executes mother incident, where Islamist indoctrination and allegiance on the part of the son was the key motivation for the murder, ...
Can you rule out the possibility that the murderer was not this woman's biological son, but was born to one of the father's previous wives, or other wives, or someone with whom the man had an illicit affair?
If so it would just be another commonplace execution of someones mother, where Islamist indoctrination and allegiance on the part of the son was the key motivation for the murder...
Originally posted by rinselberg: Can anyone here say with knowledge that Aisha's age at marriage does (or does not) fall under the "revealed as Islamic doctrine" category? That's not a rhetorical question. If anyone can say that with knowledge, please lay it out for discussion here,
It's really irrelevant to the fact that the dude murdered someone in the name of Islam. Whose mom, whose kid, ages, who okayed marriage, kind of a separate problem.
Anything that is not Islamic doctrine as revealed to the Prophet by the angel Gabriel is fair game (within the "rulebook" of Islam) for revision.
Who can answer the question that was asked at the very end of my previous post?
ISIS and Boco Haram, each an Islamic group numbering in the thousands if not more, have already answered that question.
quote
BERLIN — The UN’s human rights chief said Wednesday his office has received reports that Boko Haram fighters retreating from advancing military forces in Nigeria murdered women and girls they had taken as “wives,” along with other captives.
Can anyone here say with knowledge that Aisha's age at marriage does (or does not) fall under the "revealed as Islamic doctrine" category? That's not a rhetorical question. If anyone can say that with knowledge, please lay it out for discussion here, and reveal the basis--the epistemology--that underpins "your" statement.
If "you" could do that, I would consider it in the way that I read that Dennis Rodman would ask a favor of Kim Jong-un. I would consider it a "solid".
I been thinking about your question. Admittedly most of that thought has been what your hang up is but I'm done thinking about it now.
Who gives a flying **** through a rolling doughnut.
My concerns are actuality. What is really happening now. Makes no difference even if it is real or perceived at this point. Right now Islam is so out of touch and perverted and protected that I have lost interest in the whys and the hows.
At this point I see the situation has progressed to having only one solution without all out murderous and uncivilized behavior I think it would have happened here already but for the pussification of America has actually kept things from lighting up.
If a good Muslim isn't actively putting down a bad Muslim then they will be effectively get get down by someone else. This is the best outcome the world could realistically hope for even though it just isn't going to happen.
It is past the dialog,education and understanding point.
Eradication of Islam will be the battle cry for the next 100 years.
Originally posted by 2.5: If so it would just be another commonplace execution of someones mother, where Islamist indoctrination and allegiance on the part of the son was the key motivation for the murder...
Yes. I used the word-ology of "commonplace" and "run-of-the-mill" in this context for the purpose of creating irony.
quote
Originally posted by 2.5: It's really irrelevant to the fact that the dude murdered someone in the name of Islam. Whose mom, whose kid, [what were their] ages, who okayed [the] marriage, kind of a separate problem.
Yes. But these secondary or separate problem(s) were part of the Original Post from maryjane. That is why I wanted to create irony. I think the Original Post is kind of like saying "Abdullah is a cold-blooded murderer who even killed his own mother. And by the way, he also has lousy taste in selecting his casual shirts."
I wanted to use irony to express my reaction to what I perceive as the cognitive dissonance that is inherent to the Original Post.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-12-2016).]
Originally posted by rinselberg: I think the Original Post is kind of like saying "Abdullah is a cold-blooded murderer who even killed his own mother. And by the way, he also has lousy taste in selecting his casual shirts."
I wanted to use irony to express my reaction to what I perceive as the cognitive dissonance that is inherent to the Original Post.
He did not kill in the name of fashion. That is an entirely different group of leftists.
Ali al-Saqr uses social media to issue a statement of a few paragraphs, asserting that he did not kill his mother.
Reality of the fake news about ISIS fighter killing his mother
In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
God Almighty says:
"O you who have believed, if there comes to you an unrighteous person with news, you should verify it, lest you harm a people out of ignorance and become, over what you have done, regretful." [Surat al-Hujurat, verse 6] The prophet (peace be upon him) said: "It’s enough of a lie for a person to narrate everything they hear."
I hereby say: The fabricated news shared by the media/press -that I executed my mother- is a baseless lie, I was shocked when I heard it on the TV.
If I was the one who has killed his mother, I'd boldly tell. Why? Because someone who is willing to do such a thing, won't be embarrassed to admit it.
But it's not surprising that the anti-Islam media is telling lies all the time.
Al-Arabiya broadcasted a report on me, accusing me of killing my mother, I was sleeping during that time.. Where's their evidence? Do they even have any? Where did I kill my mother and how? And was her encouraging me to leave the Islamic State (if she ever did that) an enough reason (in Sharia law) to kill her or to make Takfir on her? Who was the *reliable source* of these lies? and how did you, O' criminals, share the news without verification? It just proves your enmity and hatred for Islam & Muslim.
And here and now, I renew my ba'yah to the Islamic State, so die in your rage!
My name: Ali bin Uqbah bin Shaheen bin Usud al-Saqr. City: Tabqa. Birth year: 1993 My mother's name: Leena Abdul-Hamid. Not Leena al-Qasim!
This may look like a lame excuse for a "thread bump", but actually, I am putting this thread back on the first page of the O/T topics list, in case someone who has a formal education in the foundations of Islam would like to review this discussion and comment on the posts about Muslim #1 and his youngest wife, Aisha, and how contemporary Muslims think about that part of their foundational texts. Someone from Al-Azhar (or any other reputable Islamic institution) who was using a search engine and stumbled upon this forum and has become a "lurker"..?
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-14-2016).]
Yes. But these secondary or separate problem(s) were part of the Original Post from maryjane. That is why I wanted to create irony. I think the Original Post is kind of like saying "Abdullah is a cold-blooded murderer who even killed his own mother. And by the way, he also has lousy taste in selecting his casual shirts."
I wanted to use irony to express my reaction to what I perceive as the cognitive dissonance that is inherent to the Original Post.
I see, but your defense is only to the age, marriage, possibilities that thery were not related. The article seems to state he killed her for urging himto leave ISIS, telling him that the coalition would kill all ISIS members. This infers that she was a person who cared about his life, so the point seems to remain. The overall point that the dude murdered someone in the name of Islam, still remains.
Now as you say below, they claim the story is a lie, can we verify this? No. :
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg: article:
"...anti-Islam media is telling lies all the time.
Al-Arabiya broadcasted a report on me, accusing me of killing my mother, I was sleeping during that time.. Where's their evidence?... [ more rhetoric..and then ]
"And here and now, I renew my ba'yah to the Islamic State, so die in your rage!"
Bay'ah in Islamic terminology, is an oath of allegiance to a leader.
So he verifies allegiance with ISIS. Rinselburg, is ISIS ok, are they good? Does agreeing with what they do make this man a non criminal? Does ISIS also claim the things that they do claim to be doing, now as things they deny doing too? Becuase if he killed his mom or not, if he stands with ISIS he deserves crimainal execution. Or are you saying all the news of what ISIS does is faked, their own propaganda?
[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 01-14-2016).]
I have zero interest in trying to defend or excuse this guy from the crime of murdering his own mother, or from the crime of aligning himself with ISIS. If anything I have posted has been interpreted in that way--interpreted as sympathetic or apologist on my part, for either this particular Muslim or his motives-- then I did not make myself clear.
The only interesting part of this discussion, in my view, are the posts from various forum members about the age of Aisha (the last wife that Mohammed married, and the youngest) and what contemporary Muslims think about this aspect of their foundational Islamic literature and lore.
I wanted to bump the thread to see if there might be any further discussion about this. Perhaps from any of those who have been in the habit of calling out the (very) late Mohammed as a "pedophile", and connecting this idea with the recurring news reports from around the world of teenage or pre-adolescent females being matched up with older men in arranged marriages, among the global Muslim demographic (and sometimes other non-Muslim demographics).
But I do think it is not totally a lame excuse for a thread bump, but somewhat newsworthy, that the guy who allegedly killed his mother because of his allegiance to ISIS has posted a statement on social media to assert that he did not kill his mother, and also affirming his allegiance to ISIS.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-14-2016).]
I wanted to bump the thread to see if there might be any further discussion about this. Perhaps from any of those who have been in the habit of calling out the (very) late Mohammed as a "pedophile", and connecting this idea with the recurring news reports from around the world of teenage or pre-adolescent females being matched up with older men in arranged marriages, among the global Muslim demographic (and sometimes other non-Muslim demographics).
Seems like that would be a simple question to ask or to submit an argument against those claims.
goes to .... 
to Revisionist History.
