News & Politics

Rant

Ahmadinejad's Imam: Raping Prisoners OK

Posted 29 months ago|23 comments|3,435 views
Written by
Rudi Stettner
 Moderator
Meet Mesbah Yazdi, spiritual guide for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. If you have any illusions about his brand of Islam being a puritanical rejection of western decadence, you need to update your information. According to Arutz Sheva, all is permitted to jailers in punishing and interrogating opponents of the Iranian regime. Arutz Sheva reports as follows on the Islamic legal pronouncements of Imam Yazdi.


"Asked if a confession obtained "by applying psychological, emotional and physical pressure" was "valid and considered credible according to Islam," Mesbah-Yazdi replied: "Getting a confession from any person who is against the Velayat-e Faqih ("Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists", or the regime of Iran's mullahs) is permissible under any condition." The ayatollah gave the identical answer when asked about confessions obtained through drugging the prisoner with opiates or addictive substances.

"Can an interrogator rape the prisoner in order to obtain a confession?" was the follow-up question posed to the Islamic cleric.
Mesbah-Yazdi answered: "The necessary precaution is for the interrogator to perform a ritual washing first and say prayers while raping the prisoner."

The article, which is disturbingly explicit, specified which acts are permissable. The imam specifically permitted the rape of both male and female prisoners. Not only did he permit such methods. He additionally classified the rape of a prisoner as a meritorious act, comparing it in "holiness" to the haj. ( The pilgrimage to Mecca), stating as follows.

"If the judgment for the [female] prisoner is execution, then rape before execution brings the interrogator a spiritual reward equivalent to making the mandated Haj pilgrimage [to Mecca], but if there is no execution decreed, then the reward would be equivalent to making a pilgrimage to [the Shi'ite holy city of] Karbala."

Mesbah Yazdi has little use for any sort of democracy or even public accountability. "The National", an English language newspaper from Abu Dhabi reports as follows about Yazdi's views on electoral democracy and religious pluralism.



"He was quoted as saying in the daily Aftab-e-Yazd in 2002: “Who are the majority of people who vote: a bunch of hooligans who drink vodka and are paid to vote. Whatever they say cannot become the law of the country and Islam.” The cleric is known for his sensationalist sound bites. Championing his fundamentalist views, he once told Friday prayer worshippers: “If someone tells you he has a new interpretation of Islam, sock him in the mouth.”

Yazdi was not an early supporter of the Islamic revolution. He published and preached legally under the Shah. The National reports as follows of the chameleonic proclivities of the imam.

"The ayatollah’s critics point out that while many founders of the Islamic Revolution spent years in the Shah’s jails during the 1960s and 1970s for their political activism, he did not struggle against the US-backed monarch’s regime. Ayatollah Mesbah-Yazdi’s supporters counter that, rather than fighting the Shah’s rule, he chose to enlighten Iranian youths with books from his “In the Right Path” publishing house. It was only after the 1979 Islamic Revolution that he became prominent among hardliners as one of their most articulate and extreme ideologues."


Other Iranian clergy members are busy denying and downplaying human rights abuses in Iran. But when Ahmadinejad's personal spiritual advisor not only condones but advocates the rape of political prisoners and classifies it as a holy religious deed, it is clear that the reality on the ground is grim.

There is no doubt that Iranians continue to suffer brutal repression. There is no doubt that they continue to struggle. We should not deny the Iranian people the encouragement of knowing that the world is watching.

Slavoj Zizek, writing in the London Review of Books described as follows the psychological transformation that seems to be taking place in Iranian society


"When an authoritarian regime approaches its final crisis, but before its actual collapse, a mysterious rupture often takes place. All of a sudden, people know the game is up: they simply cease to be afraid. It isn’t just that the regime loses its legitimacy: its exercise of power is now perceived as a panic reaction, a gesture of impotence."

Iran is a nation of ethnic diversity, with only 51% of its people classified as ethnic Iranians. Considered in combination with widespread discontent following the theft of the June 12 election, it is not likely that public dissent can be brutalised out of existence.

The Iranian clergy will destroy any respect it enjoys in Iranian society by attempting to affix the name of Allah to rape, sodomy and other acts of brutality. The god that was created in Mesbah Yazdi's writings is an idol and a false god. There is little doubt that this idol in an imam's garb will be soon destroyed.

There is not much America can do other than to voice its outrage and concern. It would be helpful if President Obama, who has voiced an unprecedented sympathy for Islam would speak up about the grim situation in Iran. Silence in the face of injustice is disgraceful. We must not be silent.

Reprinted with permission from Magdeburgerjoe.com
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
29 months ago: Looks like Cheney and Mesbah-Yazdi belong in the same ball park when it comes to defending the torture of prisoners, but as to the most egregious allegations (e.g. rape), you're quoting from from Arutz Sheva - that's kind of like quoting from the Trinity Broadcasting Network or CBN. Got a less biased and and/or more credible source?
Rudi Stettner
Rudi Stettner
 Moderator
29 months ago: Try this link.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=562_1250614361

Iranian human rights groups are providing detailed reports. Israeli radio has about 6 million listeners in Iran, some of whom actually call in. The Farsi language sevice has gotten high marks for accuracy

I am also providing some Iranian links.

http://www.iran-bulletin.org/women/RAPE.html


http://www.aljadid.net/reviews/0942tarabishi.html


http://www.rferl.org/content/New_PrisonRape_Allegations_In_Iran_Bring_Practice_To_Light/1808311.html

Following is an Iranian human rights site.


http://www.iranrights.org/
TheLegendTomWing
TheLegendTomWing
 Administrator
Philadelphia, PA
29 months ago: very sad, very very sad.
29 months ago: And these would be the people who holler loudest and longest over the embarrassment caused to a terrorist suspect by their guards, just embarrassment, not physical injury. These are the type people who whole heartedly believe in the philosophy of “Do as I say, not as I do” and “I’m better than you so I can do whatever I want”.

Someday the real believers in Islam will come forward and denounce these people for what they are, until they do, it will be classified as a religion of terror, a supporter of debauchery, a two-faced sham. I hate hypocritical religious people.
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
29 months ago: Sixholdens,

...Someday the real believers in Islam will come forward and denounce these people..

They already do (see link below) but it seems that Christian evangelical fundamenlits and certain other religionists never want to acknowledge that because they're peddling their own religion, and of course they typically ignore the blood soaked history of Christian states by saying they weren't really Christians. It's kind of Pot? Kettle? deal. See:

http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php
Rudi Stettner
Rudi Stettner
 Moderator
29 months ago: I'm interested in behavior, not theology. You are right about the past history of Christianity. I follow the rule of marriage counseling. Describe the behavior. When the imams invoke Islam to support their sick behavior, I write that up as well.Name calling is superfluous. The Iranians want to present one image in the west and another within Iran. By exposing the face of the regime in Iran, it forces them to live with the disgust their behavior provokes. Additionally, the American stories do leak back into Iran. I stay out of theological arguments. I just want to see decent people reach a ripe old age and die of natural causes.
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
29 months ago: Rudi, I was only commenting to the incorrect statement by sixholdens that Muslims aren't denouncing those who did evil in the name of Islam. It's similar to my "Pastor Wants Obama Dead" post, and Christians responded by denouncing the Pastor with comments like, "He does not represent true, Bible-believing Christians."
29 months ago: Mark, As a general rule...... Muslims ARE NOT denouncing those who did/do evil in the name of Islam. A few do, not enough to make a concerted effort. Not near enough to change the opinion of those who do not follow that religion and no where near enough to sway the mindset of the devout.

My statement stands as a correct overall view of the Muslims/Islamist religion until there is a consensus within that religion that the radicals must be exposed and stopped BY MEMBERS OF THAT RELIGION. Until they are willing to police their own ranks and put a stop to the senseless slaughter, they will always be suspect.

For those of the Islamic faith that believe in true peace between peoples and work to attain better relations with other faiths, you have my support. To those who think I am an infidel and should be slaughtered, I have something for you too.
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
29 months ago: Six,

Now you've changed your tune; first you said you you wanted real believers to come forward, and I showed you that's already the case. Now you're saying it's not enough, and you throw out empty assertions like few or most.

I've traveled to and through Muslim countries by myself and not being a Muslim, I should of been killed on the spot as an infidel based on your paranoid delusion that that radicals are in the majority.

As for 'policing' goes, that's another red herring you're throwing out; there's Iranians the world over and in Iran itself who'd love nothing more than to overthrow the despots current in power but easier said than done. Also, what do you mean members of a religion being stopped? If some kook spews and practices hate in the name of Jesus, you as a member of the Christian religion (assuming you are), are going to personally stop them.

Up until 1964, African Americans didn't even have basic civil rights in America; plenty of so called Christians did a lot of nothing for a very long time or even supported the despicable Jim Crow laws.
29 months ago: My tune is still the same. You showcase a rarity and try to make it sound like a worldwide effort of all Muslims. I just have to watch TV and I see are country after country, full of demonstrators shouting “down with Americans, death to Americans, Kill the Jews, Kill the Infidels, Kill everyone not a believer in Islam”. Sure there are a few Islamic believers that are doing something to change the way others see their faith, but they are the exception not the rule. Twisting my meaning will not make it true. You didn’t “show” anything of consequence, next time find 1000 different instances of that type and you will impress me, I can find thousand upon thousand of the type I speak of, it’s like a daily ritual for them, burn the American flag, burn the president in effigy, post anti-American, anti-Jew slogans. Do you get the depth of my “tune” now?

I have no paranoid delusion about what the radicals would have done to you had you given them the chance. Sure you or I or anyone can travel the world over and not be killed first time out. Now explain why others have. Explain why there are travel restrictions in most of the countries where Islamic radicals are in control. Tell me why so many people are killed simply for being of another faith in these countries. Tell me why the propaganda published by these people explicitly DEMANDS our deaths. I’m going to chalk up your survival as luck, that or you were working for a company hired by them or were doing something that aided their people.

The only thing fishy about policing themselves is that it is not dependent upon any nationality as you would seem to think it needs to be. Iranians may have been the main nation in the rant above but as for Muslims, they are just a small part of the whole and when I spoke of policing themselves, I was hoping the entire “Body of Islam” would be a part of it.

29 months ago: I meant exactly what I said. Radical members of Islam should be STOPPED by other believers from doing anything that brings negative world or local attention to their faith. That means that when a believer finds out that his fanatic brother, literally and figuratively, is planning on blowing up the market place or an American (or other nations) convoy, or church, synagogue, house of worship, religious relic or place or any other act that is terroristic in nature, they should do everything in their power to prevent it, even if it means calling the cops.

I did not say nor did I hint at, nor did I suggest that someone should be prevented from practicing their religion in the manner that they desire. BUT if that “manner they desire” means that they are going to infringe upon my or any other persons rights, you know, like the right to life, then they need to be stopped, their error pointed out to them and if they learn from their mistake, allowed to go on about their business. IF they do not learn and correct their error, then sterner measures will need to be taken.

Never “assume” I am of any or not of any religion. Just assume I have values.
29 months ago: What a waste of words. The United States probably has the shortest history of discrimination of any nation or area of this planet, yet anytime slavery or white vs. black comes up, it is only America that ever did anything wrong. How long have they had slavery in the Middle East? Africa? Europe? How many CENTURIES did they practice it BEFORE the US was even begun? How many countries in the Middle East and Africa STILL PRACTICE SLAVERY? Don’t bother with the “They passed laws against it” line of defense, I can find references to active slavery all over the internet, and it’s not just in the US. AMERICANS DID NOT INVENT SLAVERY. AMERICANS DID NOT INVENT CIVIL RIGHTS ABUSE. Unless you want to blame us for bringing civil rights to everyone’s attention, if you do then you can say we invented civil rights because before that they didn’t exist.

I will say this about slavery. When practiced as a way of life and not a way of race discrimination, slavery can be a good thing. The slave is taken care of, the owner gains something from the slaves work and the slaves value to the owner increases as long as there is mutual respect. I’m not advocating a return to slavery, but I won’t deny its value as a way of life. Same as other methods of government, each has a value, a good side, but there are also the bad things that must be acknowledged and dealt with for all to prosper.
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
29 months ago: ..slavery can be a good thing..

I'll disagree without further comment.
29 months ago: Nobody even imagines that the story about Ayatullah Misbah's statements was a fabrication. Nobody thinks about what motivation there could be for the voice of the Israeli settler movement, Arutz Sheva, to fabricate such a story.
29 months ago: http://enduringamerica.com/2009/09/04/iran-satire-becomes-news-ahmadinejads-ayatollah-and-prisoner-rape/
29 months ago: Sanjab, so we were duped. The reason no one imagines that such a story could be fabricated is because there are so many TRUE stories of Islamic/Muslim brutality that can not be denied or glossed over. Sure it might just be the fanatics doing it all but when so many interviews and printed stories carry the statements of devout followers of Islam that specifically state that they have no problem murdering and raping and brutalizing a non-believer, what are we supposed to think? That only the fanatics are capable of such acts? That only the fanatics would make such statements? You are not going to gloss over the truth with merely one or a few stories of bad humor gone worldwide. There are way to many videos of believers/fanatics sawing off peoples heads (they can’t even cut off a head properly) and other acts of pure cruelty.

What I mean by cutting off a head properly is that it should be done in one, quick stroke, not sawing, not two or three, ONE STROKE. To fail in this simple task shows how incompetent that these people are, or maybe it just shows how cruel they really are….
29 months ago: Mark, sorry to hear that you cannot offer some valid opinion on slavery. Maybe you should research it and not just stop at the popular opinion/definition of the institution of slavery. I too had a firm belief that all forms of it were wrong, until I studied it.

We are all slaves to something or someone. Be it our wives, husbands, children, friends, relatives, neighbors, jobs, toys, hobbies, money, food, get the idea?

I have no difficulties separating slavery from discrimination by race and maybe that is where you have your problem, you think that only blacks were enslaved and only in America. Hate to bust your bubble but slavery is a very old institution, it existed long before the Bible was even an inkling in mans mind. Long before the Egyptians built the pyramids; it dates back to the earliest written records and before that. Man has always enslaved his fellows, he has always enslaved beasts of burden and whatever he can use to improved his lot in life.

Be a man, or woman, make a comment on my post. Tell me how wrong I am, if you can.
29 months ago: Rudi, what's your take on the fabricated story?
29 months ago: I search for "rape" "torture" "prisoner" on the Wiki page for Mohammad-Taqi Mesbah-Yazdi and got no hits so the comment about it being "enshrined on Wiki" on the page Sanjab posted (http://enduringamerica.com/2009/09/04/iran-satire-becomes-news-ahmadinejads-ayatollah-and-prisoner-rape/) is a bit dated.
Rudi Stettner
Rudi Stettner
 Moderator
29 months ago: It sounds like a piece that was written as "Satire" got picked up as aa real story. This is a pity becouse of the widely reported instances of sexual abuse in Iranian jails by guards. A slipup like this distracts from real abuses going on. In the future, i will trace Israel National News stories to their source and verify the primary source. There are other Israeli sources that are very reliable. It seems that Israel national news slipped up on this one. I don't blame them for believing the worst of the Iranian regime. But they still should check their facts. Lives are at stake.
29 months ago: In the meantime, it seems like the ayatollah was slandered. Don't we believe that false accusations are sinful, even against ayatollahs?
29 months ago: First you would have to believe in the concept of sin and since that is not a concept that comes naturally to a human, it is learned, it would be better to leave it out as justification for NOT doing something.

There might be some basis for a case for libel but not slander and since we are talking about someone who represents a religion that is known worldwide to be cruel and unforgiving, the likelihood of him saying or thinking such things is there, maybe not about prisoners but Americans and Jews.

As I've said before, until the entire Islamic nation rises up and opposes those who think killing or otherwise harming un-believers, this religion will be considered a curse upon the world. Once they rid themselves of terrorist and the mentality that they are the only religion that can exists, I have no use for them as a whole, individually it is just like any other relationship, you have to earn my trust.

WiKi partial definition: In common law jurisdictions, slander refers to a malicious, false and defamatory spoken statement or report, while libel refers to any other form of communication such as written words or images.
29 months ago: Thank you for straightening me out on the difference between slander and libel!
On the concept of sin, it may be a concept that is learned, but it seems to have a basis in human nature, since most cultures have a concept of offense or violation, and in the monotheistic religions, the concept of offense against God is to be found in all of them.
As for Islam being a religion that is known worldwide to be cruel and unforgiving, well, certainly most Muslims do not see it that way, and most places in which people of other religions come into daily contact in friendly relations with Muslims there is a better view of Islam. Indeed, I'd wager that if polls were taken, the majority of people in the world would not agree that Islam is cruel and unforgiving. But even if most people did think otherwise, what relevance does this have to the libel against the ayatullah? Does the likelihood that someone has evil thoughts (which could also be disputed) justify accusations of evil statements to a person?
As to the Muslims of the world rising up to oppose the fanatics in their midst, what would you think if some Arab took the view that America is a curse on the world until the American nation rises up and opposes those who think that it is ok to imprison or torture non-Americans suspected of terrorism? Your view seems no less fanatical.
If the post is libel, shouldn't it be taken down? From a Christian point of view, wouldn't it be a sin not to?

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.