The German government and media told citizens to "go easy on the fireworks" on New Year's eve because it might "scare traumatized refugees". As you can see, migrants don't seem to have much of a problem with loud noises.
After reading about how an Islamic state member, or supporter Walid Salih, may have participated in the unexpected and unprecedented number of sexual assaults committed in the city of Cologne, it got me thinking. If the Caliphate could possibly produce an Islamic-inspired justification (literally theocratic in nature) for such an aberrant assault on civil liberties.
I was truly shocked at how simple, that I would find it would turn out be.
After the NYE mass assaults against women in several European cities, the German Federal Criminal Police Office, BKA, now say that the Arab "rape game" Taharrush has established itself in Europe.
It suggests that there may, in fact, be a reason that in western secular societies women can walk freely, and for the most part unmolested on city streets, and why it is a rare thing in submitted (Islamic) societies.
ISIS supporter Walid Salihi, believed to be in his late teens or early 20s, was arrested in 2014 in Cologne for sexually abusing women in a night club.
Salihi is said to have 'rubbed the behinds of females' and touched their 'intimate parts,' according to a German police report.
A friend of Salihi was arrested after the Cologne mass attacks, where hundreds of women were sexually assaulted, leading to suspicion that he may have been part of the mob on New Years Eve before travelling to France, Bild newspaper reports.
A little further along in the article, it's mentioned he was at the time, residing near the scene of the assaults.
German authorities have confirmed the Salihi lived in a centre for asylum seekers in Recklinghausen, some 60 miles north of Cologne, where police found he used seven aliases.
'We don't know who the man really is,' said Uwe Jacob
First some background on verse 33:59 and subsequent verses 60, 61, 62 ,which were revealed after the Hijrah, or shortly after the followers of the prophet had emigrated to a town (Medina) that had yet to experience Islam (submission) first hand. And well before Mohammad became the unquestioned theocratic dictator of Medina, as well as the entire Arabian peninsula within his lifetime.
This was the Hijrah – anglicized as Hegira – usually, but inaccurately, translated as “Flight” – from which the Muslim era is dated. In fact, the Hijrah was not a flight but a carefully planned migration which marks not only a break in history – the beginning of the Islamic era- but also, for Muhammad and the Muslims, a new way of life. Henceforth, the organizational principle of the community was not to be mere blood kinship, but the greater brotherhood of all Muslims.
The Westphalian concept of the sovereignty of nation states did not exist at that time in the Arabian Peninsula.(or any place else) It was your personal submission to the prophet, that made you a member of the community (Ummah).
While at first Mohammad, accompanied by his companions, were invited among the inhabitants of Medina and warmly welcomed, yet after a short time span some members of the non-Muslim community, existing previous to the emigrants arrival as the indigenous peoples (Jews) of the area, quickly started questioning the wisdom of that decision.
Other inhabitants, centered around Abdullah bin Ubayy, grew a furious and ever increasing hostility toward Mohammad and his devotees as Mohammad tries asserting a divine power over the community, believers and non-believer alike. Directly leading to the caravan raiding of the tribes of Mecca which was to commence unsuccessfully at first, within a year of arrival of the prophet and his companions. And then, later on, managing to successfully steal, pillage, murdering and kidnapping those who had yet to submit to the authority of Mohammad shortly thereafter.
Rape came later in revelation as Mohammad's power increased exponentially, and the number of believers increased incrementally after successful raids carried out on the caravans of the merchants of Mecca. Once a significant number of female captives became available by raids, they were quite literally "made physically available" to those who had participated in the raids or conflicts, directly leading to their being brought into captivity.
This was a time of great turmoil within the early Ummah, as some Muslims questioned the wisdom and direction of the prophet. It's more than a little bit probable, that at least some non-Muslims, those still residing there, and witness to the actions of Mohammad, would more likely than not, be a little bit "freaked out" over the sudden unexpected turn of events. Because when the prophet first arrived in Medina, this "struggle" (Jihad) of his, that Mohammad was about to undertake had yet to be revealed.
For confirmation of these assertions of facts, please read Sirat Rasoul Allah by Ibn Ishaq. The earliest biography of Mohammad in existence.
Now the series of verses in question. Can they be read as a compulsion or suggestion to sexually assault women?
(59. O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their Jalabib over their bodies. That will be better that they should be known so as not to be annoyed.And Allah is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.) (60. If the hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease, and those who spread false news among the people in Al-Madinah stop not, We shall certainly let you overpower them, then they will not be able to stay in it as your neighbors but a little while.) (61. Accursed, they shall be seized wherever found, and killed with a (terrible) slaughter.) (62. That was the way of Allah in the case of those who passed away of old, and you will not find any change in the way of Allah.)
The tafsir of Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi informs me that the verse refers to needed social reform, and how it was implemented by the prophet .
In verse 59 the third step for social reform was taken. All the Muslim women were commanded that they should come out well covered with the outer garments and covering their faces whenever they came out of their houses for a genuine need.
After this till the end of the Surah the hypocrites and other foolish and mean people have been rebuked for the propaganda that they were carrying on at that time against Islam and the Muslims.
A brief summary of the events surrounding revelation can be found in the tafsir of Ibn Kathir verse 33:60.
Then Allah issues a warning to the hypocrites, those who make an outward display of faith while concealing their disbelief,
﴿وَالَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِم مَّرَضٌ﴾
(those in whose hearts is a disease,)
In verse 9:125 the disease is defined as not having a belief in Allah.
`Ikrimah and others said that this refers to adulterers in this instance.
﴿وَالْمُرْجِفُونَ فِى الْمَدِينَةِ﴾
(and those who spread false news among the people in Al-Madinah) means, those who say that the enemy has come and war has started, which is a lie and a fabrication.
In reality .. war had come with Mohammad. But the truth is Ghibah or "backstabbing" in Islamic theocratic discourse .
"(It is when you mention something about your brother that he dislikes. ) It was asked, "But what if what I say about my brother is true'' He said,
«إِنْ كَانَ فِيهِ مَا تَقُولُ فَقَدِ اغْتَبْتَهُ، وَإِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ فِيهِ مَا تَقُولُ فَقَدْ بَهَتَّه»
(If it is true, then you have committed backbiting (Ghibah) about him, and if it is not true, then you have slandered him.) This was also recorded by At-Tirmidhi, who said, "Hasan Sahih".
Unless they give up these actions and return to the truth,
(We shall certainly let you overpower them,) `Ali bin Abi Talhah reported that Ibn `Abbas said, "We will give you power over them.'' Qatadah said: "We will incite you against them.'' As-Suddi said: "We will inform you about them.''
﴿ثُمَّ لاَ يُجَاوِرُونَكَ فِيهَآ﴾
(then they will not be able to stay in it) means, in Al-Madinah,
(but a little while. Accursed...) `this describes their state while they are in Al-Madinah for this short time before they are expelled and sent far away.'
﴿أَيْنَمَا ثُقِفُواْ أُخِذُواْ﴾
(they shall be seized wherever found,) means, `they will be attacked, because they are so weak and so few,'
(and killed with a (terrible) slaughter.) Then Allah says:
﴿سُنَّةَ اللَّهِ فِى الَّذِينَ خَلَوْاْ مِن قَبْلُ﴾
(That was the way of Allah in the case of those who passed away of old,) meaning, this is how Allah dealt with the hypocrites when they persisted in hypocrisy and disbelief and did not give it up; He incited the believers against them and caused them to prevail over them.
﴿وَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّةِ اللَّهِ تَبْدِيلاً﴾
(and you will not find any change in the way of Allah.) means, the way in which Allah deals with this does not alter or change.
Thirty or more translation of verse 33:59 can be found here.
"a ayyuha alnnabiyyu qul li-azwajika wabanatika wanisa-i almu/mineena yudneena AAalayhinna min jalabeebihinna thalika adna an yuAArafna fala yu/thayna wakana Allahu ghafooran raheeman"
(59. O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their Jalabib over their bodies. That will be better that they should be known so as not to be annoyed. And Allah is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.)
The seventeenth word of the linked verse is yu/thayna or (Spelling) yu'dhayna
Welcome to the Quranic Arabic Corpus, an annotated linguistic resource which shows the Arabic grammar, syntax and morphology for each word in the Holy Quran. Click on an Arabic word below to see details of the word's grammar, or to suggest a correction
V – 3rd person feminine plural passive imperfect verb, subjunctive mood PRON – subject pronoun
فعل مضارع مبني للمجهول منصوب والنون ضمير متصل في محل رفع نائب فاعل (33:59:16) falā
CONJ – prefixed conjunction fa (and) NEG – negative particle
الفاء عاطفة حرف نفي (33:59:17) yu'dhayna
V – 3rd person feminine plural (form IV) passive imperfect verb, subjunctive mood PRON – subject pronoun فعل مضارع مبني للمجهول منصوب والنون ضمير متصل في محل رفع نائب فاعل
The literal translation of the word is harmed, but other words are used as well in various translations. I have linked some below.
The "they" that the verse references, are believing women or Muslims.
"They should be known and not harmed"....... by outward signs or displays of piety.
Yusuf Ali (Orig. 1938) - O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad): that is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested. And God is Oft- Forgi ving, Most Merciful.
Dr. Laleh Bakhtiar - O Prophet! Say to thy spouses (f) and thy daughters and the females, ones who believe to draw closer their (f) outer garments over themselves (f). That is more fitting so that they (f) be recognized and not be maligned. And God had been Forgiving, Compassionate.
Wahiduddin Khan - O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and wives of the believers that they should draw over themselves some of their outer garments [when in public], so as to be recognized and not harmed. God is most forgiving and most merciful.
T.B.Irving - 0 Prophet, tell your wives and daughters, and believers´ wives as well, to draw their cloaks close around themselves. That is more appropriate so they may be recognized and not molested. God is Forgiving, Merciful.
[Al-Muntakhab] - O you the Prophet: Tell your wives and your daughters and all Muslim women to dress in flowing outer garments which cover them over. This makes it less likely to be identified and be assaulted. And Allah has always been Ghafurun and Rahimun.
Submissive women (Muslims are those who submit) are not to be assaulted, molested, or harmed if self-identification is confirmed by Islamically approved garb or outward signs of piety .
Suggesting that woman who have not submitted or are improperly submitted are fair game? While not as clear as I would prefer to make this point, it surely could be read in that way. It would take no great leap of linguistic gymnastics to read it that way.
Here Allah tells His Messenger to command the believing women -- especially his wives and daughters, because of their position of honor -- to draw their Jilbabs over their bodies, so that they will be distinct in their appearance from the women of the Jahiliyyah and from slave women. The Jilbab is a Rida', worn over the Khimar. This was the view of Ibn Mas`ud, `Ubaydah, Qatadah, Al-Hasan Al-Basri, Sa`id bin Jubayr, Ibrahim An-Nakha`i, `Ata' Al-Khurasani and others. It is like the Izar used today. Al-Jawhari said: "The Jilbab is the outer wrapper. `Ali bin Abi Talhah reported that Ibn `Abbas said that Allah commanded the believing women, when they went out of their houses for some need, to cover their faces from above their heads with the Jilbab, leaving only one eye showing. Muhammad bin Sirin said, "I asked `Ubaydah As-Salmani about the Ayah:
﴿يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِن جَلَـبِيبِهِنَّ﴾(to draw their Jalabib over their bodies.) He covered his face and head, with just his left eye showing.''
﴿ذلِكَ أَدْنَى أَن يُعْرَفْنَ فَلاَ يُؤْذَيْنَ
(That will be better that they should be known so as not to be annoyed. ) means, if they do that, it will be known that they are free, and that they are not servants or whores.
Servants and whores would have had no expectation of personal security in seventh century Arabia at that time.
Then, there is this to consider.
I don't know a bloody thing about German politics, but I do love their fucking Beer once in a while.
Meaning, it's highly likely that the average German would have even stronger feeling toward his or her favorite beer than I do mine (Bud). Making conflict with any temperance movement a certainty, and politically problematic to say the least. But hey, who's to say Germans can't give prohibition a better go of it than Americans did in the last century.
In America, it was caused by a coalition of Progressives and religious fundamentalists.
Do such groups exist now in Germany today within the political spectrum?
Drinks (Kitab Al-Ashribah)
Dawud :: Book 26 : Hadith 3675
Narrated Daylam al-Himyari:
I asked the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and said: Apostle of Allah! we live in a cold land in which we do heavy work and we make a liquor from wheat to get strength from if for our work and to stand the cold of our country. He asked: Is it intoxicating? I replied: Yes. He said: You must avoid it. I said: The people will not abandon it. He said: If they do not abandon it, fight with them.
“People commonly think of prohibition as a conservative movement—not at all,” historian William Leuchtenburg remarks during the five-hour documentary. “It was a movement that was embraced by progressives.”
The documentary emphasizes the interchangeability between the suffragists and prohibitionists. It doesn’t quite capture how the dry cause ran with the current of the progressive era rather than against it. Crusades to save the world with democracy, to save future generations through eugenics, and to save the slum through social-gospel missionaries echoed prohibition’s redemptive rhetoric to rescue the drunk. It is a wonder that people so obsessed with their fellow man’s imperfections actually fell for visions of human perfectibility.
The arduous process of changing the Constitution makes it impossible for any idea to be ratified as an amendment without support transcending faction. Progressives weren’t the only actors cast in the prohibitionist drama. But they played the starring role.
The muckrakers writing for McClure’s and Colliers averted their downward gaze from Big Oil and Big Railroads towards Big Booze, with Upton Sinclair’s The Wet Parade seeking to caricature liquor interests the way The Jungle had undermined Chicago meatpackers. The Wobblies, countering most of organized labor, pushed prohibition. So did The Masses, the journal of the supposedly gay and carefree Greenwich Village Left. Its hard-Left successor, The New Masses, peddled prohibitionist literature. Dry articles in The New Republic and The Nation exponentially outnumbered wet ones. Proponents of the Social Gospel, such as Jane Addams and the Federal Council of Churches, might have jailed an early 20th-century Jesus had he dared turn water into wine.
Woodrow Wilson’s secretary of the navy banned booze aboard ships. Wilson’s Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan, the populist rock star who famously implored Democrats to ditch the gold standard, refused to serve booze at diplomatic functions (perhaps helping to explain the subsequent diplomatic breakdown). He later even suggested revoking the passports of Americans who imbibed abroad. Although Bryan’s boss vetoed the Volstead Act, he signed the law making the District of Columbia dry.
More unequivocal on the question were the capital “P” Progressives, whose state parties endorsed national prohibition in Michigan, Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, North Dakota, Utah, Oklahoma, Georgia, New Mexico, Vermont, Maine, and points beyond. “The Progressive Party,” its Ohio affiliate boasted in 1914, “is the only political party this year that stands for State and Nation-wide Prohibition.”