Italian feminist and former far right-wing MP Daniela Santanche has sparked a controversy after calling the Prophet Mohammed a “a polygamist and paedophile” during a TV debate. Santanche appeared on a television programme aired on the commercial channel, Canale 5 with the president of Milan’s Islamic centre, Ali Abu Schwaima, on Sunday.
“Mohammed was a polygamist and a paedophile because he had nine wives, one of whom was only nine years old, that is a historical fact,” said Santanche.
A former MP for the post-fascist National Alliance party, Santanche now leads the far-right La Destra party.
Her remark incensed Schwaima and Muslims in the audience, who had been invited to take part in a debate on the contentious issue of placing crucifixes in Italian classrooms after last week’s ban by the European Court of Human Rights.
“Why don’t we talk about serious things, not about your disgusting comments,” he shouted at Santanche.
Santanche continued to shout back: “For us, Mohammed was a paedophile.”
“You’re just showing the ignorance of people like you who have no other arguments to use,” bellowed Schwaima, jabbing his finger at her.
He claimed the crucifix should not be removed from classrooms in Italy.
“For us, Christ was one of the five main prophets and we respect him, like the crucifix.”
But Santanche was not appeased by Schwaima’s remark.
“We will never listen to Mohammed, who was a polygamist and a paedophile,” screeched Santanche.
Studio ushers were seen physically restraining an irate, bearded member of the audience from lunging at her.
“I and my staff dissociate ourselves from these comments, which are offensive to Islam,” Domenica Cinque’s presenter, Barbara D’Urso, said in a statement issued after the programme.
A former MP for the post-fascist National Alliance party, Santanche ran for the lower house of parliament on the far-right La Destra list in last year’s general election.
But the party failed to reach the 4 percent threshold required for election to the parliament.
Santanche was last year among rightwing protesters who opposed the conversion of a former velodrome into a mosque in Milan.
She opposes Muslim women wearing the veil in Italy and has called for a referendum to reopen the country’s brothels.
Aisha was believed to be nine-years-old at the time of her marriage to Mohammed.
Child marriages such as Aisha’s were relatively common in Bedouin societies at the time of the prophet and remain so in countries such as Yemen and Saudi Arabia among others.
RELATED ARTICLES
- Italy Fines TikTok with 10 million euros over Repeatedly Exposing Children to Indecent Content
- EU conservative leaders Meet in Romania for Reelection and Victory lap
- Italy Blames Russia For Hamas Attacks On Israel
- Italian Health Minister Faces Murder Charges Over COVID-19 Vaccine Deaths
- Italian Court Rules Vaccine Mandates Unconstitutional: 'Fatal Side Effects Too Risky'
Loading ...
The hypocrisy of the feminist shows its evil teeth yet again. These evil old bitches use “child protection” propaganda to enact statutory rape laws so that they might stand a chance of finding a husband. If a 10 year old french girl can easily, and consensually, give birth without any ill consequences then why should it be forbidden if it happens to be with an older man who is more likely to be able to support the baby’s welfare with a job far more stable than that of a teenagers? Are 30 year old men more evil, manipulative, and abusive than sex crazed 13 year old men; HA! what hypocrisy. In high-school I am expected to consider all these girls as “hot stuff”, but as soon as I turn 18 I am suddenly supposed to consider these girls unattractive… WHAT! Hot is Hot; end of story!
The christian bible is no different regarding age of marriage. Love is love regardless of age, arranged or not.
Oh hey, I know some verses from the Koran:
“Slay the unbelievers wherever you catch them.” (2:291)
“Fight them, until there is no more dissent and religion is that of Allâh” (2:193)
“The vilest of animals in Allâh’s sight are those who disbelieve.” (8:55)
“I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks (beheading) and smite all their fingertips off them.” (8:12)
“Verily, the unbelievers are unclean.” (9:28)
It also says how you should not make friends with infidels in case you become ‘kufr’ and then there’s the sunnah which teaches evil female genital mutilation.
sheikyermami. com /2007/05/31/female-genital-mutilation-is-part-of-the-sunna-of-the-prophet/
As for marriage yes, a man can have 4 wives, but he can also have some temporary marriages and also get it on with his slave girls whether they want to or not. So I don’t really see it as marriage at all. She cannot divorce him, but he can say 3 times “I divorce you” and then he divorces her.
He should beat her if she doesn’t do as she’s told, but not so badly that he breaks her bones, and should not sleep with her when he beats her late in the day, but should let her recover first and rather use one of his other wives or slave girls.
(continued..)
Women who are raped need 4 male witnesses to testify on their behalf or they will be stoned for adultery.
We also know that TAQIYYAH, the principle of “holy deception” or “holy hypocrisy” which is used as part of jihad to DECEIVE INFIDELS. We also know that kitman refers to lying about your beliefs, like the Sunnis and Shi’ites in Iraq for example. So we don’t fall for your lies and deception. You must stay away from our countries; we know you only want to take them over and force shariah on the whole world.
We also know that the hijra, the immigration doctrine is nothing but a trojan horse and part of jihad and it is the way that mohammad conquered Mecca: he signed a peace treaty, then got his people to immigrate and increase their numbers and then attacked them when there were enough muslims.
We also know that if you don’t kill the horrible infidels and they want to stay alive, they must pay you JIZYA, which is basically like mafia protection money and is intended to humiliate and subdue infidels and to fund jihad.
See? Not all of us are stupid, some of us read it instead of burning it.
We’re onto you.
PS. The sunnah is made up of the sira and the hadith, which tells of mohammed’s life and along with the koran, this makes up the teachings of islam.
Verses 2:191-193 are speaking against those who are fighting Muslims: “And fight in God’s cause against those who wage war against you, but do not commit aggression-for, verily, God does not love aggressors.” [2:190].
You have also not quoted the whole 2:193 verse because it outrightly debunks you. Here is the verse in its entirety: “And fight them on until there is no more oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah. but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression.” [2:193], so the verse is speaking against those who fight Muslims to oppress them. If they stop their oppression then there will be no more fighting except against those who insist on oppression.
Verse 8:55 does not say animals. The word “daba” means anything that walks on earth.
Verse 8:12 talks about nonbelievers who were waging war on Muslims: “O you who believe! when you meet the Unbelievers in hostile array, never turn your backs to them.” [8:15]. They were also preventing Muslims from praying at the Sacred Mosque: “But what plea have they that Allah should not punish them, when they keep out from the sacred Mosque” [8:34]
Verse 9:28 is talking about the polytheists were broke the peace treaty with Muslims and betrayed them by declaring war on them: “How can there be a treaty with God and with His messenger for the idolaters save those with whom ye made a treaty at the Inviolable Place of Worship? So long as they are true to you, be true to them. Lo! God loveth those who keep their duty. How (can there be any treaty for the others) when, if they have the upper hand of you, they regard not pact nor honor in respect of you? They satisfy you with their mouths the while their hearts refuse. And most of them are wrong doers.” [9:7-8] and also: “And if they break their pledges after their treaty (hath been made with you) and assail your religion, then fight the heads of disbelief Lo! they have no binding oaths in order that they may desist. Will you not fight a folk who broke their solemn pledges, and purposed to drive out the messenger and did attack you first? What! Fear you them? Now God hath more right that ye should fear Him, if you are believers.” [9:12-13]
The Quran does not prevent Muslims from making friends with good nonbelievers. It does not prevent muslims from marrying them and being just and righteous with them: “This day are (all) good things made lawful for you. The food of those who have received the Scripture is lawful for you, and your food is lawful for them. And so are the virtuous women of the believers and the virtuous women of those who received the Scripture before you (lawful for you)” [5:5] and also: “God forbiddeth you not those who warred not against you on account of religion and drove you not out from your homes, that you should show them kindness and deal justly with them. Lo! God loveth the just dealers.” [60:8]
Female Genital mutilation is un-Islamic and not prescribed in the Quran.
Polygamy is strictly conditional in the Quran. It is meant for men to take care of the mothers of orphans. Moreover, the Quran gives women the chance to prevent their husbands from marrying even those mothers of the orphans. A woman can put a condition in her marriage contract that prevents her husband from marrying any other woman than her. That is what this stupid fascist woman does not know. The ignorant uneducated fascist says the Prophet married 9 women the last one of which was 9 years old! when those medieval forgeries actually say that he married 13 women!! But she is a very stupid fascist who does not even know what is written in those forgeries! And as for Aysha being 9 I refuted this several times in my previous comments.
Islam prevents slavery in 90:10-13. There existed many men and women slaves before Islam and these Islam treated equally with free people.
The Quran also prevents temporary marriage and always stresses that marriage should be built on love and continuity.
Women can divorce men if they wish. Divorce laws apply to both men and women. A man cannot divorce his woman by saying I divorce you 3 times. That is a popular myth. There are several laws that attempt to bring the husband and wife together before any divorce can take place.
Islam does not order men to beat their wives. That is another popular myth. The word “idrib” in 4:34 can mean to separate. The Quran also orders men to live with their women in kindness in 4:19.
1. She did not say a single correct thing at all. The “documentation” you talk about is a medieval forgery that was written after the death of Muhammad by 200 years. So the “documentation” has no authenticity whatsoever. Even that “documentation” does not say that he married 9 women, so she does not even know the number in that “documentation”! But as I said it is a worthless documentation that has no authenticity!
2. She is not well educated at all. Well educated people are not savage and speak in a civilized manner. They do not interrupt others and do not shout. They do not divert the discussion when they losing. That racist woman is a loser because the discussion was about the crucifixion of Jesus. When she lost the discussion there she turned to Muhammad’s “sexual life”. That is a sign of stupidity and uneducation.
3. She does not know anything about the Quran. Actually the Quran debunks her because it prohibits pedophilia and makes ploygamy strictly conditional and gives women the right to prevent their husbands from marrying on them. Did you notice that she did not quote one verse of the Quran? It is because she does not know, or pretends to know, anything about the Quran.
4. The savage person in the video was that stupid woman who was shouting and raising her voice because she could not defend the “crucifixion” of Jesus and interrupting others loudly and barbarically with off topic comments that show her ignorance and arrogance.
Everything she said is correct and all documentation sustain that. She is well educated and she knows the contain of Qu’ran. She say only the truth and it is not racism. who is not able to face the truth is not able to be civilised as those savages muslims in the video.
1. Muhammad did not marry Aysha when she was 9 years old. That’s a popular myth. This myth was authored 150 years after the death of Muhammad. It is not in the Quran. The Quran asks us to marry only when we reach a marriageable age in verse 4:6.
2. Again Muhammad was not polygamist.The story about his “9 wives” is a also a medieval forgery. There is no evidence for this in the Quran.
Santanch is known for her racist opinions and vulgar behaviour. She talks about Christianity and equality? Read the epistles of Paul and the Old Testament to know the status of Christian women. Why talk about Muhammad when the show was supposed to be talking about banning crucifixes in schools? She talks about pedophilia in KSA? How about pedophilia in Italy, the seat of the Vatican? This woman is known for her racist comments against homosexuals and minorities. She even tried to harass Muslims at Eiu Fetr! I take pride in the fact that she will never listen to Prophet Muhammad. Islam was never for vulgar, racist and uncivilized women like her.
You’re right. He didn’t marry her when she was 9. He married her when she was 6 and only consummated the marriage when she was 9. We call that paedophilia and statutory rape.
What about the sunnah?
For those who don’t know and understand TAQIYYAH, this is a good example.
He only says “Muhammad didn’t marry Ayisha when she was 9” in order to lead you to think that he wasn’t a paedophile. And he’s actually not lying, because he married her when she was 6, which is even worse. THIS IS THE ESSENCE OF ISLAMIC DECEPTION OF INFIDELS IN FIGHTING JIHAD.
I suppose Islam isn’t for women like her, it’s for women who will shut up, do as they’re told so they won’t get beaten and quietly allow themselves to be stoned to death.
It is also for women who don’t want to go anywhere on their own or don’t mind having their genitals cut out and who will walk around with only their eyes sticking out from veils; if they didn’t need to see where to go, their eyes would have to be covered too.
It is also for women who don’t mind getting raped, because a woman has no right to fight against rape. If a woman is raped, she needs 4 male witnesses to testify on her behalf, because a woman’s word is worthless in islamic shariah courts. Should she complain without having these witnesses, she will be accused of adultery and will be stoned to death, especially if she gets pregnant due to this horrible crime of rape.
So you see, we know quite a bit about islam actually.
1. “Taqiyyah” has no basis in the Quran.
2. As I said in my earlier comment, Aysha was neither 6 nor 9. The Quran in 4:6 says that we should marry when we reach a marriageable age.
3. Women who shut up and not allowed to question men are the Christian women. Read the epistles of Paul.
4. Stoning is a Biblical punishment, not a Quranic one. So is genital mutilation.
5. Muslim women can go wherever they want.
6. Veils are not a Quranic commandment. Christian nuns do cover their heads though and you seem to have no problem with that? Is not that discrimination?
7. Women who are raped do not need 4 witnesses to prove rape. That is for adultery. Proving rape can be done medically.
8. Women and men have equal testimonies in the Quran.
Unfortunately you do not know anything about Islam. You are as ignorant as this fascist who blabbers about pedophilia. The recent Christian scandals must surely have shut her up. You were just exposed to a demonized version of Islam.
Very convinient, anyone crticizes , ignore them, go back to the basic of book , which is nothing but lies.
She was neither 9 nor 6. The Quran in 4:6 says that we should marry when we reach a marriageable age. So there is no way that Aysha was a minor. And we do not know her age at the time. Some say she was 18, others say she was 46. We do not know.
Hadiths are medieval literature. They are inauthentic.
Funny how you call yourself “infidel” when it is originally a Biblical word to describe nonbelievers. :-D
Perhaps you need to read this –
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate/playboy.html
I read it, and it was a waste of time. Every single point in that article is false, and I mean every single one, from the first paragraph to the last one. He uses fake sources that were written after the death of the Prophet by 100+ years, and he even distorts some of those sources. He only cites the Quran four times:
1. (O Prophet! Say unto thy wives: If ye desire the world’s life and its adornment, come! I will content you and will release you with a fair release.) I see no bad treatment of women here, on the contrary, the Prophet wants to make them happy.
2. (O ye wives of the Prophet! Whosoever of you committeth manifest lewdness, the punishment for her will be doubled, and that is easy for Allah.)
Here the punishment for the wives of the Prophet is double that of other women because the wives of the Prophet should set an example to the women of the society.
3. (And when thou saidst unto him on whom Allah hath conferred favor and thou hast conferred favor: Keep thy wife to thyself, and fear Allah. And thou didst hide in thy mind that which Allah was to bring to light, and thou didst fear mankind whereas Allah had a better right that thou shouldst fear Him. So when Zeyd had performed the necessary formality (of divorce) from her, We gave her unto thee in marriage, so that (henceforth) there may be no sin for believers in respect of wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have performed the necessary formality (of release) from them. The commandment of Allah must be fulfilled.)
Notice how the Hindu liar did not quote the verse in full! It is because he knows that if he quoted it in full it would refute his lies. As you can see, the Prophet did not want to marry Zeyds wife. He was very shy of this marriage. And God made him marry her to abolish adoption. The verse says in Arabic (zawwajnakaha) which means companionship not (nakkahnakaha) which means marriage. It was a marriage on paper only and for a specific reason. There was no sexual intercourse in that (marrigae) and so accuse the Prophet of lust is nonsense.
4. (When the Prophet confided a fact unto one of his wives and when she afterward divulged it and Allah apprised him thereof, he made known (to her) part thereof and passed over part. And when he told it her she said: Who hath told thee? He said: The Knower, the Aware hath told me.)
This verse does not mention Maria or Safiya. It is a story between the Prophet and either Aysha or Zaynab. Actually the Prophet never married this Safiya or Maria. All these stories about the Prophet marrying 11 times, or marrying Aysha when she was 9 years old (I should this to be false in detail above), or being poisoned by a Jewish woman and dying after four years :lol: are nonsense and forgeries. They have no basis in the Quran whatsoever. They were invented 150+ years after the death of the Prophet for different reasons.
If you want to truly understand Islam then read only the Quran, preferably with a Muslim commentary on it. Do not read third rate, sectarian and hate-filled garbage on the internet.
Regards,
Sir, did the quran came in first of Mohd? How can Koran decide? Mohd wrote or rather dictated to one of his wife, didnt he? For god sake, use common sense, there are tens and thousands references from your own people who have described the relation in juicy manner like
Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88
Narrated ‘Ursa:
The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with ‘Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).
These are your own people, why dont you accept, everytime a question is thrown, you give reference of a book in whic Mohd is refered as answering ALLAH told me to do this and that….
I mean , look around you , how much misery and intolerance you ppl have created, do you ever contemplate?