Islam’s Saints

This week’s edition of Dymphna’s greatest hits is from the spring of 2006. Until I reread the piece this morning, I had forgotten about the case of Abdul Rahman, the Afghan man who faced death for converting to Christianity, and who probably would have been executed had it not been for pressure brought to bear by the U.S. government.

The links embedded in the original no longer work, and have been removed.

Islam’s Saints

by Dymphna
originally published on March 28, 2006

The Christian convert in Afghanistan who faced execution has been let go, at least for the moment. Because Afghanistan’s President is anxious to join the modern world, which has a secular rule of law, he was able to bring pressure to bear on the Sharia Court to let the religious prisoner go. And because he wants to bring his country into the 21st century, Karzai was open to the urging of world leaders who called him to intervene in this case.

Things will not go so well for the Sharia-shackled prisoners in Iran. The government there is deaf to any pleading, and in fact, is planning its executions in secret so as to fly under the radar of humanitarian groups who might seek to interfere. Here are two current cases:

The first is a 17-year-old young woman named Nazanin who was out walking with her niece and their respective boyfriends in March, 2005. The two girls were set upon by three men. When the men began stoning the girls, the boys ran away. Injured from the stones, the girls were dragged to the ground and Act II, the rape, began. Nazanin managed to get out a knife she carried to protect herself from attacks. She stabbed her rapist in the chest and he died from the wound. So, of course, Nazanin now faces execution for this act of self-defense. She was sentenced in January, 2006, though the date of execution isn’t certain.

The second case is an older woman, Fatemeh Haghighat-Pajooh, who murdered her “temporary husband” for his attempted rape of her daughter. The whole sick idea of “temporary marriage” is Sharia-speak for permitting adultery and prostitution, which would otherwise be punishable by execution. “Temporary marriages” can be of any duration, from a quick assignation at lunch, to many years’ duration. You can be married to one woman and still contract with another for a muta. This is largely a Shi’ite permutation, though Sunnis have been known to use it when convenient. Needless to say, built in to this corruption is a lack of protection for the “wife” of these arrangements:

Haghighat-Pajooh was originally scheduled for execution in 2002, however due to international pressure the execution was stayed. Once again however, the Islamic Republic of Iran’s high tribunal has reinstated the ruling and has every intention of seeing the execution through.

Her execution, is reportedly scheduled to take place by or before April 1st, which is the last day of the Persian New Year.

According to various received reports, the Islamic regime is planning to execute her quietly so that any pressure from the international human rights groups can be foiled. The Islamic regime, fearing any further protests and challenges by Iranian women, plans to use Haghighat-Pajooh’s case in order to strike more fear and intimidation in the hearts of Iranian women.

Remember those ugly public executions, devised to be as painful and slow as possible and to show the world Iran’s idea of law? The executions will remain the same, except now they will be done in secret and announced after the fact. Everyone understands now what Iran is, and besides, this secrecy will indeed serve to intimidate Iranian women.

Do you think any world leaders will personally contact Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to attempt to make a case for mercy? It would be like spitting into the wind.

Until Islam changes fundamentally its deep principles about the inferiority of women and non-Muslims, it will remain a backward and eventually doomed culture.

I have an idea, though, that might have some impact: each Muslim woman who is killed just because she is a woman ought to be canonized by the Western Christian church.

How does St. Nazanin sound?

10 thoughts on “Islam’s Saints

  1. Muslim women under sharia law get what they deserve. Church cannot, and should not, canonize a Muslim, male or female.

    Apparently some people in West believe these women have been powerless over the course of the events and they are not to blame for being a Muslima. Not true, women do have power. Around 1150 years ago in Amul, during one of the rebels against Islamic conquerors, not only The Immortals (people of Amul) killed all the Muslim hairy invaders but also women tied their convert men with rope, in their sleep, and dragged them to main square to be hung. That’s what a woman can do.

  2. It’s good to hear Dymphna’s voice again. She had a clear grasp of injustice and a way of cutting through all the PC niceties to get to the real issue—in this case, Islam.

    Rec from Iran, I can’t understand how you can say, “Muslim women under sharia law get what they deserve.” Do you really mean that these women in Dymphna’s essay, who were trying to defend themselves or their daughters from rape, deserve the death penalty? It’s possible, even likely, that many Muslim women have internalized the Sharia provisions which keep them in subjugation and so they seem complicit in their own fate. But the fact remains that there are countless examples of innocent females, some very young, being tortured or executed for violating this regressive code.

    • Thank you, Jen. Well put. These people who blame Moslems not for what they do, but for the misfortune of being born into a Moslem family, are an embarrassment to the counter-jihad movement.

      • You’re right, Liatris Spicata. I’m sure that for these unfortunate women the harsh realities of life as females under Sharia forced them to question their life-long Islamic way of life, although it had been inculcated in them since childhood.

      • Another lachrymose comrade who cannot explain the world without that mysterious “social class” thing.

    • Come on Jen, don’t read what I didn’t write. It’s very odd that you conclude like this “Do you really mean that these women in Dymphna’s essay, who were trying to defend themselves or their daughters from rape, deserve the death penalty?”

      I certainly don’t say they deserve death penalty for trying to defend themselves when violently threatened. They deserve what they get for not rising against Islam and not trying to end it’s rule. What do they think they will get if they go along with Islam? Any treatment better than that?

      • I can’t follow your thinking, although I’ve tried.

        You say, “they deserve what they get for not rising against Islam” but you say they don’t deserve the death penalty in the cases in question. Are these results not one and the same: ill-treatment for not rising against Islam, ill-treatment for being female in Islam? What exactly do you mean by “what they get”?

        If they had risen against Islam and tried to end its rule (How is this in any way conceivable, or remotely possible?) either they would have been successful and therefore no Sharia, no death penalty. Or, if unsuccessful they would have likely been killed, or more severely oppressed. Which scenario do you think more likely?

        Women like these who rise up against personal attacks, rape, and assault by Muslim men who dominate their lives are subject to punishment for their audacity. This is what Sharia metes out. In what way were they supposed to rise up against the hegemonic force of Islam itself when in many cases they are confined under threat of violence to their houses, routinely abused, denied education, married off as very young girls to become child-mothers? Not exactly the definition of a powerful stratum of society.

        Make no mistake, the individual women whom Dymphna describes are victims, regardless of how you view the collective failure of Muslim females over the past 1400 years to throw off their shackles.

        • Apparently in your view the diabolical Muslim men commit “rape and assault” (exactly your words) while angelic Muslima only suffers and suffers. This is far from reality. A Muslima may not rape and assault men, but she spies and reports others, takes part in rituals and will put Islam in the brain of next generations.

          Also I’m aware you didn;t get the message in the story of women in Amul some 12 centuries ago. That’s because you never traveled and do not understand the country. I am aware of the image in your mind (endless deserts, camels and so on). But this is not the correct image of the place. It’s green and beautiful and they are not of middle-eastern race or Muslims either. Those women really dragged Muslim men and hang them. Still today nobody can rape or assault a woman in the area. Be sure if such thing happens women will take their daggers and will have their collective revenge. This is largely caused by ethnic and cultural differences with the other areas of the country. I hope you won’t call me a racist, but that’s reality. There’s something wrong, something very wrong, with the culture of middle eastern human, male or female. They are the source of their own problems, male or female.

          • Hi Rec:

            I didn’t know you were a mind reader who can discern the images in my mind. But, I hope you registered the warranty on that crystal ball of yours—it’s obviously badly fogged up.

            You tell me that I’ve never travelled. That’s strange, I could have sworn that I’ve lived on three continents, one of which was Asia. I lived and worked in a “conservative” Turkish city, not that far from the border with Iran. Or was that all just a dream I had?Thanks for correcting my faulty mental image.

            I’d love to debate you (we might even agree on some points) but that won’t happen because we’d have to stick to the facts and leave out the personal innuendoes.

            Best regards,

  3. To travel across Western Europe and see sneering violent Muslims angry and out of place and time everywhere. What’s the plan ladies and losers?

Comments are closed.