Pakistan Taliban says “Cricket is responsible for turning youth away from Jihad”

[Business Standard] The Pakistani Taliban has reportedly rejected an offer by the government to play a match for peace, saying that cricket is responsible for ‘turning youth away from jihad’.Taliban Fighters

This comes after Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan offered to host a match with the militants to revive stalled peace talks in comments, which provoked derision on social media.

According to The Dawn, Pakistan‘s government entered into a formal dialogue with the Taliban earlier this month, but the process faltered after the militants executed 23 kidnapped soldiers.

Khan said that as he believed Taliban kept an interest in cricket, the peace talks can have a better result if the militant group plays a match for peace, although a Taliban spokesman said that his group will not play and insisted that Taliban is strongly against cricket.

Stating that the ‘secular people’ wants to distance the youth of the country from jihad and Islamic teachings through cricket, the spokesman further said that they are ready to open the deadlock in peace talks created by the government, although he added that the government is not sincere in peace talks.

Reaction to the minister’s suggestion that the Taliban could be tempted into talks through cricket was also overwhelmingly negative on Twitter, which is used mainly by the country’s English-speaking elite, the report added.

11 thoughts on “Pakistan Taliban says “Cricket is responsible for turning youth away from Jihad”


    “Startled Marines Find Afghan Men All Made Up to See Them,” by
    Chris Stephen ran in the national newspaper The Scotsman on May 24, 2002.

    Not even in reference to the more heavily Pashtun southern areas of Afghanistan, it read:

    In Baghram, British Marines returning from an operation deep in the Afghan mountains spoke last night of an alarming new threat—being propositioned by swarms of gay local farmers. An Arbroath Marine, James Fletcher, said: ‘They were more terrifying than the al-Qaeda. One bloke who had painted toenails was offering to paint ours. They go about hand in hand, mincing around the village.’ While the Marines failed to find any al-Qaeda during the seven-day Operation Condor, they were propositioned by dozens of men in villages the troops were ordered to search.

    Another interviewee in the article, a Marine in his 20’s, stated, “It was hell… Every village we went into we got a group of men wearing make-up coming up, stroking our hair and cheeks and making kissing noises.” Beyond reacting to the unusual sight of made-up men, which one can readily accept as a style unique to a different culture, these Marines appear to have no doubt that they were being sexually propositioned.

    One of the primary and obvious causes of this cultural tendency toward sexual expression between males is Pashtun society’s extremely limited access to women. Heterosexual relationships are only allowable within the bounds of marriage, and Pashtun honor demands that a man be able to demonstrate his ability to support a wife and family, as well as produce abundant wedding-gifts for the bride and her parents, before he is allowed to marry. Therefore, given the economic situation of most young Pashtun men and the current state of employment and agriculture within the Pashtun regions of Afghanistan, marriage becomes a nearly unattainable possibility for many.

    A controversial Los Angeles Times article highlighted this issue and featured an interview with a young Afgan man whose situation was typical of this circumstance:

    In his 29 years, Mohammed Daud has seen the faces of perhaps 200 women. A few dozen were family members. The rest were glimpses stolen when he should not have been looking and the women were caught without their face-shrouding burkas.

    “How can you fall in love with a girl if you can’t see her face?” he asks.

    Daud is unmarried and has sex only with men and boys. But he does not consider himself homosexual, at least not in the Western sense.

    “I like boys, but I like girls better,” he says. “It’s just that we can’t see the women to see if they are beautiful.
    But we can see the boys, and so we can tell which of them is beautiful.”

    Daud’s insistence that his behavior should not label him as homosexual is the next important point in understanding the nature of this dynamic, and opens the doors to a complex interrelationship between Islam and its cultural interpretations. Even men who practice homosexuality exclusively are not labeled by themselves or their counterparts as homosexual.






    • Lucky bin “Clever Satan”,

      Why do you like talking continuously of sodomy and wanking?? Are you a gay Catholic?

      Is that the reason you do NOT like Islam because it does not promulgate your Western gayship ideas?


        There is a serious problem we run into when we try to define “radical Islam.” What is “radical Islam?”

        First of all, nothing the radical Islamists say is outside the Quran and Hadith. The Quran and Hadith are the pillars of Islam, not only of radical Islam. That poses a serious problem. Because no Muslim body has ever stated that parts of the Quran and Hadith are now “outdated” or “irrelevant.” The Hadith, for instance, gives numerous instances of rape of female captives captured after defeating infidels, in the presence of Mohammed. Since Mohammed is considered the perfect person and example for all to follow by ALL of Islam, what does this mean? It means that ALL Muslims must find this practice agreeable, at least in principle, and therein lies the problem.


        There is an entire chapter in the Hadith on how to rape captured women without making them pregnant, so that their slave price does not fall (pregnant women fetch lower price).

        Remember, this was the fate of millions of Hindus who fell into Muslim hands.

        Book 008, Number 3371:
        Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him): 0 Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al-‘azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Mes- senger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.

        Book 008, Number 3377:
        Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported that mention was made of ‘azl in the presence of Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) whereupon he said: Why do you practise it? They said: There is a man whose wife has to suckle the child, and if that person has a sexual intercourse with her (she may conceive) which he does not like, and there is another person who has a slave-girl and he has a sexual intercourse with her, but he does not like her to have conception so that she may not become Umm Walad, whereupon he (the Holy Prophet) said: There is no harm if you do not do that, for that (the birth of the child) is something pre- ordained.

        People say “radical Islam” but what they mean is the radical verses in the Quran and Hadith. Radical by whose standards? Not by the standards of Islam, since these verses have been accepted without any controversy within Islam for centuries. These verses are not radical for Muslims, but they are radical by non-Muslim modern civilization.

        Take another example – the verse 4:34 in the Quran that says that wives who are disobedient must be beaten. “Radical Muslims” like the Taliban used to frequently quote this verse to justify their open violence against women. But this verse is in the Quran! It is not in a separate book called “Quran for radicals.” It is in the one and only Quran, and is equal to any other verse. So why is it radical? Because in today’s modern society, we do not find this practice acceptable.

        So it seems that the problem is that Islam is radical. It is not that there is a separate religion called “radical Islam”, but that the religion of Islam has many components that are considered radical/unacceptable/violent by modern societies.

        So what is the way out? My firm belief is that a reformation within Islam is needed. It won’t happen though until we obfuscate plain facts. The plain facts are that numerous verses in the Quran and Hadith say things which are simply unacceptable (and considered barbaric) by today’s society.
        Let us say it as it is, instead of pretending that there is a separate ideology called “radical Islam.” There isn’t. Nothing that Muslim terrorists say is outside the Quran and Hadith. As someone said – there are radical Muslims and moderate Muslims, but there is nothing called moderate Islam.
        Islam IS RADICAL. To make Islam moderate, we would have to expurgate many verses (and entire chapters, such as that on raping female captives without impregnating them, so that their slave price does not fall) from the Quran and Hadith. Are we prepared to ask moderate Muslims to do that?

        The other obfuscation is that some people are “hijacking Islam.” Who are they? Every single action Muslim terrorists have done is justified by the Quran and Hadith, and they have taken great pains to provide the verses that justify their actions. Not only that, for centuries, people like that were hailed as Ghazis (holy warriors) within Islam. It is not for nothing that in the Muslim world, a majority of people hail them as heroes. It is only when you are trying to hide from the scrutiny of the West that you say he has “hijacked Islam.”
        Muslim terrorists are merely persons who follow Islam to the word. They are, in many ways, true Muslims. In numerous Hadith, Muhammad says that the best Muslim is NOT one who fasts and prays, but who gets on his horse and fights against infidels (especially polytheists) for the spread of Islam.
        That is what Muslim terrorists are doing. What about the innocent women and children they kills? Guess what – the Hadith emphatically state that it is perfectly alright to kill the women and children of polytheists. Nothing Muslim terrorists do is outside the Quran and Hadith. They are NOT “radical” Muslims. They are merely a practicing Muslims!


        All 4 schools of Islam regard Hindus as polytheists and idolaters. This means every single verse in the Quran and Hadith which prescribes violence and death for polytheists and idolaters is applicable to Hindus. Let me cite the specific verses in the Hadith which talks about killing women and children of polytheists. One may verify these verses from the Hadith database, available here:

        Book 019, Number 4321:
        It is reported on the authority of Sa’b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them.

        Book 019, Number 4322:
        It is narrated by Sa’b b. Jaththama that he said (to the Holy Prophet): Messenger of Allah, we kill the children of the polytheists during the night raids. He said: They are from them.

        Book 019, Number 4323:
        Sa’b b. Jaththama has narrated that the Prophet (may peace be upon him) asked: What about the children of polytheists killed by the cavalry during the night raid? He said: They are from them.

        In each of these Hadith, Muhammad dismisses any ethical concerns about killing women and children in raids on polytheists by saying that “they are from them” (i.e. it is alright to kill them since they are also polytheists).

        Now why is this relevant today?
        Islam bases its ethics and morality entirely on one man – Muhammad. Everything he said, and he did, becomes the moral code. Islam rejects any ethics and morality that does not agree with the example set by Muhammad. Now, since he says in these ahadith that it is alright to kill the women and children of polytheists, it becomes the example for all Muslims to follow for all time. Obviously, this is a serious problem, especially for Hindus who are regarded as polytheists by all 4 schools of Islam. Never mind the truth here, which is that Hinduism is panentheistic; what matters is that Islamic law regards them as polytheists and therefore killing of Hindu women and children is permissible in Islamic law, in accordance with the quoted ahadith.
        Let us be honest about this – the problem is not a chimera called “radical Islam.” The problem is ISLAM. Islam, as it exists in the Quran and Hadith, is far too violent, intolerant, and yes, “radical”, to co-exist with modern society. The moment a Muslim starts following true Islam, he appears incredibly radical to us all, and we say “he is a radical Muslim” when all he is doing is following his religion!

        The ideology of Nazism led to the Holocaust. The ideology of Islam, and not “radical Islam”, led to what TIME magazine called “the greatest genocide since the holocaust” – the butchery of 2 million Hindus (and 1 million Muslims who were regarded as “contaminated by Hindu ideas”) in East Pakistan by the Pakistan army between 1970-71. Again, it is Islam, and not “radical Islam” whose teachings play a big role in the ongoing genocide and rape in Darfur. I will have a post on that shortly as well.

        Here is a sample chapter from Hadith Sahih Muslim, which talks about Muhammad’s desire to expel Jews and Christians from the Hijaz (which is the part of Arabia that contains Mecca and Medina and which was the extent of Muhammad’s power), as well as his expulsion of Jews from Medina. As you can see, he was quite intolerant of other religions, even Jews and Christians. As far as idolaters, the verdict is even more intolerant – simply kill them all (Quran 9:5).

        Book 019, Number 4364:

        It has been narrated on the authority of Ibn Umar that the Jews of Banu Nadir and Banu Quraizi fought against the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) who expelled Banu Nadir, and allowed Quraiza to stay on, and granted favour to them until they too fought against him. Then he killed their men, and distributed their women, children and properties among the Muslims, except that some of them had joined the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) who granted them security. They embraced Islam. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) turned out all the Jews of Medlina. Banu Qainuqa’ (the tribe of ‘Abdullah b. Salim) and the Jews of Banu Haritha and every other Jew who was in Medina.

        Book 019, Number 4366:

        It has been narrated by ‘Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.

        Now, this is the original Islamic blueprint for religious cleansing. It was the first time in Islam entire religions were wiped out from areas under Muslim control. This was done by Muhammad, and his example is the “gold standard” for all Muslims for all time. So is it surprising that where ever Islam gains hold, religious minorities are cleansed out. Remember Kashmir valley in 1989? One fine day, flyers appeared all over the valley asking the Kashmiri Hindus to leave or be killed. And by the way, the flyers also said “leave your women behind.” Again, this aspect of Islamic warfare (Jihad) upon infidels is following Muhammad’s example and teachings, which say that women of infidels are nothing more than “war booty” (maal-e-ghanimat) for the enjoyment of Muslims. There are entire chapters in the Hadith that deal with capture and rape of infidel women, such as this one where Muhammad is asked whether his Muslim soldiers should use coitus interruptus while raping these captured women. Please understand that this is all in the religion of Islam. If it shocks you that a religious book should have an entire chapter devoted to the use of coitus interruptus while raping captured infidel women, it should!


        Islam consecrated religious cleansing when Muhammad killed/forcibly converted all the polytheist Arabs, and expelled/killed the Jews and Christians. Islam consecrated the capture and rape of infidel women when Muhammad asked his followers to do this. There are Hadith where Muhammad even takes “first pick” among the captured women (one famous example is Safiya, a beautiful woman who Muhammad took for himself and bedded on the same night he had murdered her husband and brother in war). Since Muhammad’s example is normative for all Muslims for all time, this behavior has to be repeated by Muslims everywhere. And we can see that Muslims have followed this example in various places such as Kashmir, from where almost half a million Hindus were expelled in 1989. In 1971, 2 million Hindus were killed, 10 million Hindus were driven out of Bangladesh, and the Pakistani army ran “rape camps” with Hindu women. The extent of genocide and mass rape compelled TIME magazine to describe it as “the greatest genocide since the Holocaust of Jews by the Nazis..”.

        Now here is some news: All of these atrocities simply follow the example of Muhammad as recorded in the Hadith. If you read the Hadith you will see for yourself that nothing that was done in 1971 to Hindus in Bangladesh, or in 1989 to Hindus in Kashmir is against Islam. On the contrary, it is exactly as per the diktats of the Hadith.

        Politicians will not tell you this. Dishonest “intellectuals” will not tell you this. But Hindus need to know this so it does not happen again. Hiding the ideology behind Islam’s murder is like hiding the ideology of the Nazis from the Jews. It is criminal.

        What would we call people who tried to hide the murderous ideology of Nazism, and tried to attribute the Holocaust to other causes? We would call them “abettors in Nazi genocide.”

        Similarly, I call those who are trying to hide the true teachings of Islam abettors in Islamic genocides. Please, let us stop this intellectual cowardice and call it as it is.

        How many more must die to Jihad till we finally call it Jihad?

        Till we finally say “Yes, it is Islam that is causing all this violence?”

        Please say it today, and be on the side of truth.

        • “Larry Silverstein”, aren’t you the same namesake of the guy who was in charge of the Trade Centers, during 911? How come there were only, in total, 213 passengers in super boeings of 4 American airlines on that fateful day?

          Anyway, you said : “what matters is that Islamic law regards them as polytheists and therefore killing of Hindu women and children is permissible in Islamic law”. You have LIED!!!

          Who is this “WE” you have been talking will stop Islam…you Catholic poop?



            Moral Evaluations of the Marriage of the Prophet with Ayesha



            This is a fact demonstrated by a great number of hadithes and is now practiced all ove Mohammedan countries. There is no controversy in that. There has never been until now that some of the Muslims have come in contact with western values and are ashamed to admit that their Prophet could commit such an
            indecency. They deny the facts and have made it a controversy. The majority of Muslims still have no problem with the young age of the Ayesha and they ridicule these Modern day “moral relativists” who are twisting the truth to please the morality of the westerners.


            Only a few years ago a Sheikh in Saudi Arabia issued a fatwa that any one who said the Earth is round is Kafir. Obviously this did not go very far but he started a controversy. So what is your opinion about the shape of the Earth? Would you stay out of it because it is a controversial issue? How about the evolution? There are many Muslims as well as Jews and Christians who do not agree with the theory of evolution. They believe in the Biblical and Quranic stories of Adam and Eave and the creation. This is a big controversy. Are you going to stay away from it? Is it a none-issue for you? Almost everything under the Sun is a controversial issue. From death penalty to hunting, from spending money for space exploration to aiding the poor countries, everything is a controversy. Even the very subject of religion is a controversial issue. So you cannot walk away from responsibility when you are faced with controversies.

            I agree that morality is relative and we should not judge the ancient people’s morality with our modern morality.



            And surely thou hast sublime morals
            (Surat Al-Qalam 68:4).

            Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar
            (Surat Al-Ahzab 33:21).

            Muslims believe that the Koran is the eternal word/laws of god to acts as a divine guidance for mankind about how to live a moral, righteous life. Prophet Muhammad, the highest perfection of human life and the prototype of the most wonderful human conduct in Islamic belief, emulated the guidance of Allah perfectly.


            Obviously we all cringe when we think of pedophilia and acknowledge that it is a shameful act of immorality. But during the time of Muhammad, and even today in some Islamic countries, marrying a 9-year-old child was not immoral. In fact Aisha was given to Muhammad with the consent of her parents and no one raised an eyebrow. The question is, if having SEXUAL INTERCOURSE with a nine year old child was not deemed bad and therefore was not considered immoral, was it ok? Not everything that a society accepts as moral is right. Having sex with a minor may not have been immoral for Arabs 1400 years ago, but it is now, as it was then, unethical.

            Moralities are defined by circumstances, but ethics transcend time and space. They are rooted in logics.Morality can vary from culture to culture, from time to time and from person to person. Who is to determine what is moral and what is not?

            Having sex with a minor may not have been immoral for Muhammad and his contemporaries in that uncivilized culture, but it was ethically wrong. If Muhammad was a messenger of God or an honorable man, as he made his Allah to proclaim him thus, he should have known that what he was doing was dishonorable and unethical.

            Although it is true that in the past people married at very young age. And it is also true that occasionally wealthy old men married very young girls. We have to realize that these people acted on their culture. We do not condemn them for they did not know better. What they did was the norm. But we do condemn those cultures.

            However, we cannot forgive with the same amnesty those who claimed to be the standard of rectitude amongst mankind. If average people could not distinguish the right from the wrong, the messengers of God, if they were from God, should have known better. If their claim was true, if their knowledge was divine, if they were inspired, they should not have followed the tradition of their people but should have set the example.

            Muhammad followed the morality of his people. But that morality was ethically wrong. He claimed to be the best human and the last messenger of God. According to him God has said to people all he wanted to say in Quran and his religion is complete. There is no more guidance to come and his examples and his teachings are all we need to know and follow for eternity. Yet what he did and said, under the light of modern values prove to be very wrong.

            Now we realize that we cannot live by his examples any more, nor can we practice his teachings. Our morality has changed. We would certainly put a man in jail if he wanted to follow the Sunnah of the Muhammad in this day and age and “marry” a 9-year-old child. We would not allow someone to take people as slaves, trade in slavery or have them as Muhammad did.

            If we cannot follow the morality of Muhammad any more, if what he said and did do not fit in this modern day, why do we need Muhammad? What part of his teachings should we accept and what part should we discard? Who will determine that? This is an important question. If we give ourselves the freedom to
            pick and choose the teachings that most suit our personality we should give the same freedom to others?

            Suppose you believe that marriage to a minor should be outlawed, or you do not feel that polygyny is suited any more for this day and age. Suppose you disagree with slavery, male or female circumcision, beating of the wives and do not believe in Jihad any more. You prefer to concentrate on other parts of Islam that you like, e.g. Salat, Zikat, Haj, etc.

            This is your choice. But can you deny other Muslims whose choices are distinct from yours? How could you stop a Muslim who wants to follow those teachings of Islam that you consider outdated? By what authority can you dissuade one who wants to spread Islam by Jihad, like Muhammad did? How can you prohibit him not to assault sexually a 9-year-old child by marrying her? What would you say to a Muslim who wishes to
            marry up to four wives and decides to punish them by beating them if they are disobedient, as the Prophet instructed him to do? If you use logic in picking the teachings that are best, you are saying that logic is superior to revelation and therefore you are subscribing to the freethinker’s way of thinking not Muhammad’s.

            Many Islamic countries have realized that true Islam is impractical. Very few of them can practice it faithfully;
            they all have modified it to certain extent and have incorporated secularism into their laws to make life
            bearable. Those that do follow Islam are hells on Earth.

            Interestingly the civility and the progress of these countries are proportionate to the level of their
            secularization. In the Middle Ages, when religion had plunged Europe into the dark ages, Islamic countries were progressive and prosperous. This was possible because of the tolerance of the rulers of those days, their independence from the Mosque and their disinterest to implement Islam.

            Ar-Razi, one of the greatest minds of Islamic world, attacked religion in general and Islam in particular with a force unthinkable in this day. He wrote:

            “The prophets-these billy goats with long beards, cannot claim any intellectual or spiritual superiority. These billy goats pretend to come with a message from God, all the while exhausting themselves in spouting their lies, and imposing on the masses blind obedience to the “words of the master.” The
            miracles of the prophets are impostures, based on trickery, or the stories regarding them are lies. The falseness of what all the prophets say is evident in the fact that they contradict one another: one affirms what the other denies, and yet each claims to be the sole depository of the truth; thus the New Testament contradicts the Torah, the Koran the New Testament. As for the Koran, it is but an assorted mixture of “absurd and inconsistent fables,” which has ridiculously been judged inimitable, when, in fact, its language, style, and its much vaunted “eloquence” are far from being faultless. Custom, tradition, and intellectual
            laziness lead men to follow their religious leaders blindly. Religions have been the sole cause of the bloody wars that have ravaged mankind. Religions have also been resolutely hostile to philosophical speculation and to scientific research. The so-called holy scriptures are worthless and have done more harm than good, whereas the “writings of the ancients like Plato, Aristotle, Euclid, and Hippocrates have rendered much greater service to humanity.”

            This kind of criticism of Islam today, would carry the death sentence. Can any intellectual speak so freely against Islam calling the prophets “Billy Goats” as Ar-Razi called them disdainfully in these days and live?

            Does the fatwa against Salman Rushdie ring a bell? It is clear that in those days of the golden age of Islam, Islamic countries enjoyed a freedom and a level of secularization that has since been disappeared. And along with that, the glory of Islamic world also has ebbed. Islam can be used as an index of barbarity
            and backwardness.

            The more a country applies Islam, the more uncivilized and uncultured it becomes.

            I have no doubt that if Islam was eliminated completely, Mohammedans woulde regain the past glory of those secular days and even surpass it. There is no reason to believe that the black-eyed hairy race of Middle East is inferior to the blue-eyed soft-skinned Europeans. The number of Middle Eastern scientists, academics and scholars in the West is an indication that given the opportunity Mohammedans are no less intelligent than any other race.

            The reason that they are backward, uncivilized and barbaric in their native countries is because Islam has taken away their dignity, humanity and intelligence. Islam has brainwashed them, and like a drug has damaged the minds of their people.


    Human Terrain Team (HTT) AF-6
    Research Update and Findings


    The Human Terrain Team AF-6, assigned to the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Battalion and co-located with British forces in Lashkar Gah, has been requested by these forces to provide insight on Pashtun cultural traditions regarding male sexuality for reasons of enhanced baseline cultural understanding for improved interaction as well as any IO applicability.


    Because of the extremely sensitive nature of this investigation, traditional HTT techniques involving a directed research plan and series of interviews executed to generate, test, and confirm hypotheses are not feasible. Direct questioning of Pashtun male interviewees on the subject is further hindered by the female gender of the social scientist writing. Instead, findings here will be based upon field observations and interviews responses by Pashtun men which were revealing regarding the topic, although discovered through the lines of questioning of other investigations. As sexuality is an essential building block of all human interaction and culture, these incidences of insight have been abundant, even couched in other research goals.

    Secondary interviewees who have had extensive relevant interaction have been debriefed
    regarding their experiences. These include public health officers and medics who have treated a number of Pashtun men for sexual conditions, and other service members involved, like HTT, in relationship-building and interpersonal interaction.

    Extensive open-source journalistic and academic writings on the subject have been additionally consulted, some involving directly quoted answers from Pashtun interviewees. References are included for further examination.1

    Key Observations
    A culturally-contrived homosexuality (significantly not termed as such by its practitioners) appears to affect a far greater population base then some researchers would
    argue is attributable to natural inclination.

    1 Nevertheless, this work remains an informal paper written in a deployed field environment with the limited open-source resources available and without access to an academic library. The Human Terrain System’s Research Reach-back Center (RRC) may have additional resources on the topic.

    Some of its root causes lie in the severe segregation of women, the prohibitive cost of
    marriage within Pashtun tribal codes, and the depressed economic situation into which
    young Pashtun men are placed.

    • Other root causes include a long-standing cultural tradition in which boys are appreciated for physical beauty and apprenticed to older men for their sexual initiation.2 The fallout of this pattern of behavior over generations has a profound impact on Pashtun society and culture.

    • Homosexuality is strictly prohibited in Islam, but cultural interpretations of Islamic
    teaching prevalent in Pashtun areas of southern Afghanistan tacitly condone it in comparison to heterosexual relationships in several contexts.

    • Pashtun men are freer with companionship, affection, emotional and artistic expression, and the trust bred of familiarity with other men. They often lack the experience of these aspects of life with women.

    • This usurping of the female role may contribute to the alienation of women over
    generations, and their eventual relegation to extreme segregation and abuse.


    Military cultural awareness training for Afghanistan often emphasizes that the effeminate
    characteristics of male Pashtun interaction are to be considered “normal” and no indicator of a prevalence of homosexuality. This training is intended to prevent servicemembers from reacting with typically western shock or aversion to such displays. However, slightly more in-depth research points to the presence of a culturally-dependent homosexuality appearing to affect a far greater population base then some researchers would argue is attributable to natural inclination.

    To dismiss the existence of this dynamic out of desire to avoid western discomfort is to risk failing to comprehend an essential social force underlying Pashtun culture—one with a variety of potential implications upon the efficacy and applicability of ISAF efforts and on the long-term future of Afghan society.

    2 While researchers may argue whether this can rightly be termed abusive when seen through a lens from within the culture, it is not arguable that it involves a great imbalance of power and/or authority to the disadvantage of the boy involved. (For information regarding the sexual exploitation of boys as part of Taliban and private militia indoctrination of pre-teen fighters, see the New York Times article by Craig Smith regarding “Warlords and Pedophilia” and the Reuters article “Afghan Boy Dancers Sexually Abused by Former Warlords”—both referenced in “Further Reading.”)

    HTT is often approached for advice by US and British servicemembers who report
    encounters with men displaying apparently homosexual tenancies. These servicemembers are frequently confused in the interpretation of this behavior. The British newspaper article below may be written with an attempt at humor, yet the Marines quoted typify the reaction often seen in service members upon their initial encounters with Pashtun males. As HTT has observed with frequency while on patrols in Helmand and Kandahar provinces, these men are outwardly affectionate toward both one another and male ISAF members, are extremely gentle in their demeanor and touch, and have often taken great care in embellishing their personal appearance with fingernails dyed red, hair and beards hennaed in careful patterns, and eyes very occasionally subtly outlined.

    The article titled “Startled Marines Find Afghan Men All Made Up to See Them,” by
    Chris Stephen ran in the national newspaper The Scotsman on May 24, 2002. Not even in
    reference to the more heavily Pashtun southern areas of Afghanistan, it read:

    In Baghram, British Marines returning from an operation deep in the Afghan mountains spoke last night of an alarming new threat—being propositioned by swarms of gay local farmers. An Arbroath Marine, James Fletcher, said: ‘They were more terrifying than the al-Qaeda. One bloke who had painted toenails was offering to paint ours. They go about hand in hand, mincing around the village.’ While the Marines failed to find any al-Qaeda during the seven-day Operation Condor, they were propositioned by dozens of men in villages the troops were ordered to search.

    Another interviewee in the article, a Marine in his 20’s, stated, “It was hell… Every village we went into we got a group of men wearing make-up coming up, stroking our hair and cheeks and making kissing noises.” Beyond reacting to the unusual sight of made-up men, which one can readily accept as a style unique to a different culture, these Marines appear to have no doubt that they were being sexually propositioned.

    One of the primary and obvious causes of this cultural tendency toward sexual expression
    between males is Pashtun society’s extremely limited access to women. Heterosexual relationships are only allowable within the bounds of marriage, and Pashtun honor demands that a man be able to demonstrate his ability to support a wife and family, as well as produce abundant wedding-gifts for the bride and her parents, before he is allowed to marry. Therefore, given the economic situation of most young Pashtun men and the current state of employment and agriculture within the Pashtun regions of Afghanistan, marriage becomes a nearly unattainable possibility for many.

    A controversial Los Angeles Times article highlighted this issue and featured an interview with a young Afgan man whose situation was typical of this circumstance:
    In his 29 years, Mohammed Daud has seen the faces of perhaps 200 women. A few dozen were family members. The rest were glimpses stolen when he should not have been looking and the women were caught without their face-shrouding burkas. “How can you fall in love with a girl if you can’t see her face?” he asks.
    Daud is unmarried and has sex only with men and boys. But he does not consider
    himself homosexual, at least not in the Western sense. “I like boys, but I like girls
    better,” he says. “It’s just that we can’t see the women to see if they are beautiful.
    But we can see the boys, and so we can tell which of them is beautiful.”3

    Daud’s insistence that his behavior should not label him as homosexual is the next
    important point in understanding the nature of this dynamic, and opens the doors to a complex interrelationship between Islam and its cultural interpretations. Even men who practice homosexuality exclusively are not labeled by themselves or their counterparts as homosexual.

    3 Maura Reynolds, “Kandahar’s Lightly Veiled Homosexual Habits” (Los Angeles Times, 3 April 2002).

    To identify as such is to admit an enormous sin in Islam—one punishable by death under the Taliban and one that would result in severe tribal and familial ostracization today.4 However, it appears to be the label, not the action or the preference, that poses the greatest problem.
    In the context of rural southern Afghanistan, the relationship between Islam (here defined
    as the teachings of Prophet Mohammed as expressed in the Koran) and what is believed about Islam by the local faithful can contain vast differences. This is in great part due to a barrier in language and education. Not generally able to understand Arabic, the language of the Koran which is not to be translated, the Muslim faithful of southern Afghanistan rely on the teaching and interpretation of local Mullahs to inform them of what the Koran says. The more rural the area, the far less likely it becomes that even the Mullah himself understands Arabic5 and the more likely that what is taught is based upon local cultural tradition, independent of Islam itself.

    Homosexuality is strictly prohibited in Islam, but cultural interpretations of Islamic teaching prevalent in the area tacitly condone it in comparison to heterosexual relationships.

    A typical expression, echoed by a number of authors and interviewees, is that homosexuality is indeed prohibited within Islam, warranting great shame and condemnation.
    However, homosexuality is then narrowly and specifically defined as the love of another man.
    Loving a man would therefore be unacceptable and a major sin within this cultural interpretation

    4 A punishment of death for individuals publicly labeled as homosexuals remains a possibility even now, outside of Taliban rule, if enforced by extremist family or tribe members. Familiar recent news highlighted the situation of the young Afghan actor who portrayed a victim of male-upon-male rape in the film The Kite Runner. He had
    to be removed from the country due to death threats.

    5 Reading and understanding Koranic Arabic are two very different things. Muslims around the world, regardless of their linguistic background, are educated in religious schools to be able to read and recite the Arabic of the Koran. That is, they are taught to recognize, pronounce, and memorize the words in order. However, even this education does not teach students the meanings of the Arabic words they memorize. Students who do not natively speak Arabic, like those of Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, etc., remain dependent on teachers to interpret what is written for them, and these interpretations vary greatly dependent on the culture and agenda of the teachers.
    of Islam, but using another man for sexual gratification would be regarded as a foible6—
    undesirable but far preferable to sex with a ineligible woman, which in the context of Pashtun honor, would likely result in issues of revenge and honor killings. These killings are a Pashtun, not Islamic requirement, although the two tend to become inexorably bound in the minds of rural villagers.7 Similarly, the social circumstance that has made women foreign and unavailable (excessive veiling, segregation, and exclusion from public life) is generally also attributed to Islam in Pashtun communities, but is in itself a cultural construct, passed and exaggerated through local tradition.

    Another example of cultural misinterpretations of Islamic tenants, bent to support
    homosexuality over heterosexuality, comes from a U.S. Army medic completing a year-long tour in a rural area of Kandahar province.8 She and her male colleagues were approached by a local gentleman seeking advice on how his wife could become pregnant. When it was explained to him what was necessary, he reacted with disgust and asked “How could one feel desire to be with a woman, who God has made unclean, when one could be with a man, who is clean? Surely this must be wrong.”

    The religious basis for his statement lies in the Islamic regulation that women are ritually
    unclean for participation in prayer while on their monthly cycle. In the Koran, his tenant does not extend to imply that women are unclean or unapproachable otherwise. However, local cultural interpretations have created the passionately if erroneously held belief that women are

    6 Here a religion that prioritizes love and the fair treatment of others is turned on its head and made to condemn love as the greater sin but to tolerate the selfish use and potential abuse of another person as a pecadillo.
    7 From HTT interview dated 28 June 2009, regarding the relationship between Pashtunwali and Islam.
    8 From HTT interview dated 30 May 2009. Because of the nature of the details later revealed, the interviewee’s name, specific location, and unit details are withheld to protect the anonymity of DoD employee patients.
    Further details are available from HTT upon request.


    physically undesirable. Interestingly, the Koran specifies a number of physical circumstances under which a man can be rendered ritually unclean, but none of these are extended to the belief that he is unclean or undesirable in general. Therefore, it seems possible that such interpretations of Islam are at some point picked and chosen to support already-held beliefs or tendencies.

    Interestingly, the same medics treated an outbreak of gonorrhea among the local national interpreters on their camp. Approximately 12 of the nearly 20 young male interpreters present in the camp had contracted the disease, and most had done so anally. This is a merely anecdotal observation and far too small of a sample size to make any generalizations regarding the actual prevalence of homosexual activity region-wide.9 However, given the difficulty in procuring such data, it may serve as some indicator.10
    Of greatest interest here, however, is the way the men reacted to the education offered
    them so as to avoid the disease in the future. They insisted that they could not have caught the disease sexually because they were not homosexuals—important evidence of the rejection of the label regardless of the actual activities in which a man engages. Instead, they concluded that it was the result of mixing green and black tea, which became a running joke throughout the camp.
    They also continued to return for treatment after re-contracting the condition, having not believed

    9 Another medical professional’s estimate of homosexual prevalence is featured in Reynolds’ Los Angeles Times article (op. cit.). It reads:
    It’s not only religious authorities who describe homosexual sex as common among the Pashtuns. Dr. Mohammed Nasem Zafar, a professor at Kandahar Medical College, estimates that about 50% of the city’s male residents have sex with men or boys at some point in their lives. He says the prime age at which boys are attractive to men is from 12 to 16–before their beards grow in. The adolescents sometimes develop medical problems, which he sees in his practice, such as sexually transmitted diseases and sphincter incontinence. So far, the doctor said, AIDS does not seem to be a problem in Afghanistan, probably because the country is so isolated.
    10 These men were also openly observed to simultaneously share the same cots within their sleeping quarters, and did not appear to feel the need to hide or disguise this fact. Again, it appears to be only the label of homosexuality that causes them discomfort.


    or heeded the instruction they received.
    However, beyond the issues of poverty, segregation, and tacit cultural approval which
    apparently contribute to the prevalence of consensual sex among adult men, there seem to be darker underlying dynamics additionally at play. To begin illustrating these, HTT turns to a field experience in which a principle interviewee was a boy in his very early teens. His circumstance, combined with the nonverbal reaction of his adult male companions to the women interviewers present, was revealing regarding the social and cultural factors underlying the exchange. The following is quoted directly from HTT field notes of the incident:

    Upon arrival at Camp Leatherneck in Helmand province, HTT was initially limited in its ability to conduct research with foot patrols and therefore sought to engage Afghan truck drivers who came on to the base for general atmospheric information. For the most part, such drivers are staunch allies who take enormous risks, as it is publicly evident that they assist American and Coalition Forces, and they frequently face reprisals from insurgent fighters.
    Also to be noted is the fact that truck drivers are highly cosmopolitan in comparison to most rural Afghan populations, as they have seen and traveled within many regions, to include western-influenced metropolitan areas. It should be anticipated that they would be therefore less likely to display local Pashtun resistance to the open and public presence of women.
    On day one, HTT met only a group of four or five truck drivers, all of whom were from Helmand, living approximately 50 miles away from the camp. The most striking interviewee was a boy, about 12-14 years old, traveling with a group of older men. He spoke English beautifully, Dari beautifully, Pashto with apparent fluency, and when asked about other languages he knew, said he also spoke Urdu.11 This was an absolutely brilliant child.

    Asked why he was traveling with the other men, they identified him as their ‘little mechanic’ and said he could repair any problems they had on the road.
    This added greatly to the already very strong impression of the intelligence of
    this child. The boy told HTT that he was traveling with his brother, an older truck driver, and that their truck had been hit by an insurgent rocket on their way in. (He

    11 These linguistic abilities were confirmed by a fluent Dari speaker who was an HTT member at the time.


    was proud to point out the location of impact.) The referenced brother was not present. The boy also explained that while their time on the road could be shortened, they take a circuitous route to the FOB, lasting about 10 days, in an attempt to throw off or avoid Taliban attacks.

    I was deeply impressed with the boy, yet experienced a sense of wariness from
    the men who combined looks of distaste among themselves with slightly-too slow
    requisite politeness toward the two female HTT members present. They had no such apparent problem with the male Human Terrain Analyst or Team Leader. The latter of the two approached in a U.S. Military uniform.12

    Therefore, the reaction of the interviewees appeared to be an issue regarding
    females, rather than an issue regarding Americans or the American Military.
    Nevertheless, I left the interview uplifted thinking that the future of Afghanistan
    was in the hands of brilliant, brave children like this.13

    This incident was later re-examined in conversation with a group of American
    interviewees who together and individually spoke with many, many years experience working directly with the culture in country.14 They reminded me that one of the country’s favorite sayings is “women are for children, boys are for pleasure.” One the interviewees shared stories of how groups of men, i.e. shepherding parties, would always travel with one boy “for fun.”

    Sadly, the talented young mechanic came immediately to mind. HTT produced a picture of him with the group of drivers, and the interviewees were quite confident that their worst suspicions were correct. One interviewee then told the story of a time he found a 14-year-old boy quite literally in the hands of a group of Afghan security guards under his command. He physically fought the guards to free the boy and drove him back to Kabul, hours away, returning him home to his family, from whom he had apparently been forcibly taken in order to travel with the guards.

    12 Further regarding appearances for future reference, both female HTT members were well-covered in their attire, including long sleeves and pant legs. My own hair was covered with a scarf, while my female colleague’s hair was worn long and down. This may or may not have affected matters, as the men present regarded us both with equal apparent distaste.

    13 From HTT personal field notes dated 5 May 2009.

    14 HTT interview dated 11 May 2009 conducted at Kandahar Airfield, with former USPI employees. Their previous experience included providing security for the building of the Ring Road over the many years of its construction, and working and living with locally-hired Afghan security details for highly extended periods.

    While in many areas of southern Afghanistan such treatment of boys appears to be shrouded in some sense of secrecy, in Kandahar it constitutes an openly celebrated cultural tradition. Kandahar’s long artistic and poetic tradition idolizes the pre-pubescent “beardless boy” as the icon of physical beauty. 19th-century British authors report their observations of Pashtun fighters singing poetic “odes of their longing for young boys.”15 The Los Angeles Times author cited earlier notes this tradition as alive and well in very recent literature:

    A popular poem by Syed Abdul Khaliq Agha, who died last year, notes Kandahar’s special reputation. ‘Kandahar has beautiful halekon,’ the poem goes.

    They have black eyes and white cheeks.16
    Further, even the newly re-emerging musical nightlife of southern Afghan cities idolizes
    immature. While these performers themselves may be quite innocent, the reputation of their availability to patrons of the establishments at which they perform is difficult to

    Known frequently as halekon, ashna, or bacha bereesh,18 “beautiful” beardless boys are coveted, almost as possessions, by men of status and position for sexual relationships. Further, the more attractive or talented the boy is deemed, the more his presence elevates the status of his patron. In the article “Afghan Boy Dancers Sexually Abused by Former Warlords,” various interviewees state the following:19

    ‘Everyone tries to have the best, most handsome and good-looking boy,’ said a

    15 Smith, Craig. Op cit.
    16 Reynolds, Maura. Op cit.
    17 Nick Meo, “The Boy Singers of Kabul” (Moby Capital Updates, 12 April 2005).
    18 The titles translate roughly as “gorgeous youths,” “boy loves,” and “boys without beards.”
    19 Anonymous, “Afghan Boy Dancers Sexually Abused by Former Warlords” (Reuters News Service, 18 Nov
    2007). Interestingly, this article features the phenomenon as it takes place in several other areas of Afghanistan.


    former mujahideen commander, who declined to be named.
    ‘Sometimes we gather and make our boys dance and whoever wins, his boy will
    be the best boy.’ Former mujahideen commanders hold such parties in and around
    Pul-e Khumri about once a week.
    ‘Having a boy has become a custom for us. Whoever wants to show off, should have a boy,’ said Enayatullah, a 42-year-old landowner in Baghlan province.
    A key feature of this relationship, slightly different form the homosexuality practiced by men with other grown men who have limited access to women addressed earlier, is its more coercive nature rooted in an imbalance of power (economic, rank-associated, status/age-associated, etc.) between the parties involved. According to one observer:
    An apparent distinction seems evident in this particular Kandahar variation… The dating and courtship appears more coercive, more opportunistic and seems to take advantage of younger guys who almost have no other choice than to accept the money or gifts from bigger and more powerful ‘commanders’ whose bit of authority is bestowed by their gang-member status, their guns and the shattered legal/police system. 20

    Even where the halekon tradition is not “celebrated” per se, it appears to underlie a
    number of Pashtun social structures, most notably the recruitment of very young “soldiers” by commanders of paramilitary groups. (This is so much true even today, that current law prohibits “beardless boys” living in Afghan military and police stations.21) This in turn fits under the traditional warrior ethos which defines the role of men within Pashtun culture. This dynamic played a major role in the functioning of the warlord culture that preceded the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan.

    20 Dr. Richard Ammon, a clinical psychologist who maintains an internet database on worldwide homosexual culture at, posted an interview containing this quotation. The article is titled “Interview with Michael Luongo on his return from ‘gay Afghanistan'” and was posted in July of 2004. Micheal Luongo is in turn a recognized researcher of gay culture in non-western societies and author of the book Gay Travels in the Muslim World. Both the interview and the book are referenced in “Further Reading.”
    21 Smith, Craig, op. cit. Also noted in the Wikipedia article at and the Sodomy Laws Database, edited by Bob Summersgill, at

    By some accounts, the first incident that brought Mullah Omar and the Taliban to
    prominence in the eyes of the Pashtun people actually involved a dispute between two warlords over a particularly attractive halekon. This dispute took the pedophilia of the warlords to such an extreme that the locals themselves were repulsed and happy to embrace a force of reform. Tim Reid, in The Times of London writes:
    In the summer of 1994, a few months before the Taliban took control of the city,
    two commanders confronted each other over a young boy whom they both wanted
    to sodomize. In the ensuing fight civilians were killed. Omar’s group freed the
    boy and appeals began flooding in for Omar to help in other disputes. By
    November, Omar and his Taliban were Kandahar’s new rulers. Despite the
    Taliban’s disdain for women, and the bizarre penchant of many for eyeliner, Omar
    immediately suppressed homosexuality.22

    Perhaps “repressed” homosexuality would be a more apt statement, as the cultural tendency has not disappeared. However, open displays of homosexuality, in which the label of homosexuality could not be denied, became publicly punishable by crude executions under the Taliban. Now, in the absence of this possibility, the underlying cultural traditions appear to be returning to visible life with greater freedom.

    Now that Taliban rule is over in Mullah Omar’s former southern stronghold, it is not only televisions, kites and razors which have begun to emerge. Visible again, too, are men with their ‘ashna’, or beloveds: young boys they have groomed for sex. Kandahar’s Pashtuns have been notorious for their homosexuality for centuries, particularly their fondness for naive young boys. Before the Taliban arrived in 1994, the streets were filled with teenagers and their sugar daddies, flaunting their relationship. It is called the homosexual capital of south Asia.
    Such is the Pashtun obsession with sodomy – locals tell you that birds fly over the city using only one wing, the other covering their posterior – that the rape of young boys by warlords was one of the key factors in Mullah Omar mobilizing the Taliban.23

    However, the Taliban should not be viewed as free of the culture and tradition of

    22 Tim Reid, “Kandahar Comes out of the Closet” (The Times of London, 12 January 2002).
    23 Ibid.


    homosexuality of the Pashtun world of which it is a part. Writers have argued that even within the Taliban, the tradition of halekon and the isolation of boys from the influence of family while they are assumed into the identity of a fighting group in which they are also sexually objectified and abused, is precisely what occurred with prevalence behind the walls of the madrasas. The now-iconic Los Angeles Times article on the issue states:
    …many accuse the Taliban of hypocrisy on the issue of homosexuality. ‘The Taliban had halekon, but they kept it secret,” says one anti-Taliban commander, who is rumored to keep two halekon. ‘They hid their halekon in their madrasas,’ or religious schools.24
    Whatever the source, there is frequently the risk that Pashtun boys will face a set of experiences that mold their beliefs regarding sexuality as adults in ways that are ultimately damaging, both to themselves and to Afghan society. It appears that this set of experiences becomes cyclical, affecting generations, and that his cycle that has existed long enough to affect the underpinnings of Afghan culture itself.
    From these findings, a model of this cycle might be ventured. It seems the cycle begins in isolation from the experience of women’s companionship and the replacement of such
    companionship with men. Significantly, in the case of Taliban madrasas, many boys spend their formative years without even the influence of motherhood in their lives.25 Women are foreign, and categorized by religious teachers as, at best, unclean or undesirable.26 It is then probable that the male companionship that a boy has known takes a sinister turn, in the form of the expression of pedophilia from the men that surround him. Such abuse would most likely result in a sense of outrage or anger, but anger that can not possibly be directed at the only source of companionship

    24 Reynolds, Maura, op. cit.
    25 This is often due to orphanhood or family separation because of refugee circumstances.
    26 At worst, women are categorized by such leaders as associated with evil—not unlike many Christian teachings over the years, emphasizing Eve’s role in man’s downfall.


    and emotional support a boy knows, and on which he remains dependent. This anger may very
    well be then directed at the foreign object—women—resulting in the misogyny typical of
    Pashtun Islamism. Men and boys therefore remain the object of affection and security for these boys as they grow into men themselves, and the cycle is repeated.
    The fallout from this cycle affects both genders, and could possibly be a part of what leads to violence against women and women’s suppression in Pashtun culture. If women are no longer the source of companionship or sexual desire, they become increasingly and threateningly foreign. Two initial findings add to the cycle of male isolation from women. One, put forward by the Provincial Reconstruction Team in Farah Province,27 who conducted regular round-table discussions with local women, is that boys, even when raised in the home, are separated from their mothers’ care around the age of 7 and are considered the charge of their fathers.
    Another, more complex phenomena, highlighted in the Los Angeles Times article as well as the Reuters article28 and others, is that men who take on a halekon often attempt to integrate the boy into their families by marrying him to a daughter when the boy is no longer young enough to play the “beardless” role. This maintains the love relationship between the father and son-in-law which inevitably makes difficult the establishment of a normal relationship with the wife. The once-halekon becomes a father with his new wife, and then begins to seek a teenage

    27 Taken from the non-published notes of the “Women’s Engagement Binder” available at the PRT, and followed up upon by interview with former discussion leaders. USAID has taken leadership on the women’s development front in Farah province, and can provide further information on request. The specific notes, titled “Women’s
    Development Ideas,” state:
    Though Islamic law stipulates rights to women, in the countryside it ranks behind customary/tribal law which is extremely harsh to women (think village honor code). Add Afghan superstitions and women take the brunt of it. A final influence is the community—for example once a boy reaches the age of 7, he is taken away from his mother and raised by his father. Mothers in law do not help in this process and are generally quite harsh to the younger ladies in a house.
    28 Reynolds, Maura. op cit. Anonymous author for Reuters, op. cit.


    boy with whom he can play the “bearded” role. The children born to this father inevitably
    register the nature of their mother’s marginalized role. When to this is added the further isolation that occurs when boys are groomed for the halekon role by fighting groups or madrasas, it becomes almost unimaginable that boys would learn to form a normal and familiar attachment to a woman.29

    Talibs and halekon of fighters and other powerful men, when kept from the one
    universally nurturing experience of women—their mothers—are left with no way to relate to females whatsoever, and therefore no way to counter the negative labels assigned to women. While these men are excessively mild toward each other, the opposite side to the coin is a tendency to aggression toward women. HTT can again cite anecdotal but personal field experience which typified the way in which the behavior patterns of men, gentle toward one another, can turn quite opposite toward women, and the way these behaviors are imitated and transmitted to the next generation of men. The following took place on patrol in the Maywand district of Kandahar province:

    29 This state of affairs perhaps made most evident in the words of the halekon themselves, featured in the article “Afghan Boy Dancers Sexually Abused by Former Warlords” cited in “Further Reading.”
    ‘I was only 14-years-old when a former Uzbek commander forced me to have sex with him,’ said Shir Mohammad in Sar-e Pol province. ‘Later, I quit my family and became his secretary. I have been with him for 10 years, I am now grown up, but he still loves me and I sleep with him.’
    Ahmad Jawad, aged 17, has been with a wealthy landowner for the past two years.
    ‘I am used to it. I love my lord. I love to dance and act like a woman and play with my owner,’ he said.
    Asked what he would do when he got older, he said: ‘Once I grow up, I will be an owner and I will have my own boys.’
    But Shir Mohammad, at 24, was already getting too old to be a dancing boy. ‘I am grown up now and do not have the beauty of former years. So, I proposed to marry my lord’s daughter and he has agreed to it.’

    Upon exiting the Mullah’s compound, I was confronted with an irate neighbor—a man in middle-age, clean and apparently relatively wealthy in appearance… He expressed his horror that I, a woman, was present with the patrol. He would not make eye contact with me or shake my hand, but instead only referred to me with angry gestures. I maintained a respectful distance while he sat nearby to engage the men of the patrol.

    When formally addressing the men, his demeanor changed. He shook hands with each, with every display of gentleness and respect. The traditional first handshake between Pashtun men grips only the first joints of the fingers, and he used this with each, along with much bowing. It was explained to him that I was present in order that men would not enter a compound where women might be seen, and he was significantly appeased…
    After this conversation, as the group said their goodbyes and began to move away, the neighbor approached me and extended his hand. I took this to be an invitation to a handshake, offered now that he understood that I was there out of respect for the traditions of his culture rather than in an attempt to disrupt them. When I offered my hand, he took it in a crushing grip and with unexpected strength bent my wrist back into a painful joint lock.

    I ultimately wrenched myself from his grip, and as I sought to rejoin my patrol, I was mobbed by the village boys, who I had previously showered with gifts of candy and school necessities, led by the neighbor’s oldest son. This boy appeared to be approximately 11 years old. Grabbing my arm, he attempted to practice the same maneuver his father had demonstrated, to the delight and cheers of the younger boys.

    The noise of the children caught the attention of our American interpreter, who returned and scolded them for their behavior. He attempted to shame them by asking “is this the way you would behave at home?” The oldest boy proudly answered that it was, indicating that his mother and sisters were treated with the same violence and disdain. While the encounter with the father hurt my wrist, the encounter with his sons broke my heart.30
    In conclusion, due to both cultural restrictions and generational cycles of certain
    experiences, Pashtun men are freer with companionship, affection, emotional expression, and the trust bred of familiarity with other men. They often lack the experience of these aspects of life with women. This usurping of the female role may contribute to the alienation of women over

    30 From HTT Personal Field Notes dated 15 May 2009.


    generations, and their eventual relegation to extreme segregation and abuse. If ever the cycle of abuse is to be broken and the Pashtun culture heal itself from its wounds, which continue to fester in patterns of violence and conflict, the role of women as mothers and companions may be key.


    • Anonymous. “Afghan Boy Dancers Sexually Abused by Former Warlords.” Reuters
    News Service 18 Nov 2007.

    • Ammon, Dr. Richard. “Interview with Michael Luongo on his Return from ‘Gay
    Afghanistan’.” Gay Afghanistan, After the Taliban: Homosexuality as Tradition. Updated
    2004. 29 July 2009.

    • Baer, Brian James. “Kandahar: Closely watched Pashtuns—A Critique of Western
    Journalists’ Reporting Bias About ‘Gay Kandahar’.” Gay and Lesbian Review March-
    April 2003.

    • Chibbaro, Lou. “New Afghan Rulers Better for Gays?” The Washington Blade 21
    December 2001.

    • Foster, Peter. “Afghan Tribesman Faces Death for Wedding to Teenage Boy.” Sydney
    Morning Herald 07 October 2007.

    • Luongo, Michael T. Gay Travels in the Muslim World. Binghamton, NY: Harrington
    Park Press, 13 June 2007.

    • Meo, Nick. “The Boy Singers of Kabul.” Moby Capital Updates 12 April 2005.

    • Murray, Steven O. and Will Roscoe. Islamic Homosexualities: Culture History and
    Literature. New York, NY: NYU Press, 01 February 1997.

    • Reid, Tim. “Kandahar Comes out of the Closet.” The Times of London 12 January 2002.

    • Reynolds, Maura. “Kandahar’s Lightly Veiled Homosexual Habits.” The Los Angeles
    Times 03 April 2002.

    • Smith, Craig. “Shhh… It’s an Open Secret – Warlords and Pedophilia.” The New York
    Times 21 February 2002.

    • Steven, Chris. “Startled Marines find Afghan Men all Made Up to See Them.” The
    Scotsman 24 May 2002.

    • Summersgill, Bob, compiler. “Afghanistan Sodomy Laws.” The Sodomy Laws
    Database. Updated 2008. 29 July 2009.

    • Various contributors. “Gay Rights in Afghanistan.” Updated 2008. 29
    July 2009.

    The reason a devout Muslim manwhore will hump male anythings, babies, kids, camels, goats, chairs, etc. with/without a slave-whore contract is that one of the ahadith about Mohammed below concerns the issue as to whether or not Muslimity condemns homosexuality, and the concensus of expert Muslimic authority is that this hadith proves that Muslimity DOES NOT condemn it, but, in point of fact – ADVOCATES IT.

    A Muslim man fell in love with this 4 year old girl. The guy decided to take the girl and speak to his father for approval, and then inshallah, get married. But when the father saw her, he was smitten by her, so much so that he told the guy “she is no good for you, so I will take her off your hands and I will marry her.” The guy in disbelief, started arguing with his father about who will marry the girl. Seeing no end to the argument, they both decided to take the matter to the local Imam so that he can sort out this problem and judge between them to see who is fit to marry her.

    So the father and son were discussing their problems with the Imam and they then introduced the girl to the Imam. The Imam, once he saw her lost his way of dealing justly and he told the father and son that she is no good for both of them, and that he will marry her to take her off their hands! So now the Imam, the son and the father were arguing about who will marry the girl, and once again, there was no end in sight to the argument. The Imam then suggested that they take the matter to the Amir so that he can deal justly in this matter between them.

    So the four set out to meet the Amir, and when they finally reached him they told him what was wrong, and when he saw the girl, he was also smitten, so much so that he told the three men who wanted to marry her that she is no good for them and that he will take her off their hands and get married to her! They then all started to argue about who will marry this girl.

    The girl seeing this was fed up with the arguing so she suggested something to all four of them. She said that she will run and run and run, and whoever can CATCH her will then be able to marry her. So all of them heard this and they deemed it to be an excellent solution to their arguing and problem.

    So the girl started running, and running, and running around in a circle , and then the four men began to run after her.

    The girl was so small that she disappeared into a cloud of dust.

    So happened they were all running in this circle around Mohammed’s tent.

    Mohammed came out to see what the commotion was all about.

    Reexited after retrieving his axe.

    On the way back in was heard beseeching the heavens….

    “Get off your ass, Allah. Got four faggots on the way.”

    It’s been a swirling controversy,,,

    Whether or not Muslimity condemns homosexuality depends on what exactly Allah was to get off his ass FOR

    Muslimic authority asserts that to send ’em on to hell Allah WOULD NOT have to get off his ass. Being omnipotent, Allah was perfectly capable of sending ’em on to hell sitting on his ass.

    So why did Mohammed order Allah off his ass.

    Must’ve been for something else.

    What was that something else?

    Which brings forth another Muslimic myth busted by this hadith.

    Allah LIKES pork.

    or at least being porked.
    Re: Sodomy and Sufism in Afghanistan
    by Wootah » Sun Mar 27, 2011 12:35 pm … 1F2Q9H.DTL

  3. So what? Taliban don’t represent Islam. Even Wahhabi and Deobandi scholars have gave fatwas against suicide bombings.

    • Pakistan campaigners say lift YouTube ban after US orders removal of anti-Islam film! (ndtv)

      Pakistani Internet campaigners said Thursday there was no excuse for the government to maintain its ban on YouTube, after a US court ordered the removal of an anti-Islam film.

      The video-sharing website has been blocked in Pakistan since September 2012 over its failure to take down the “Innocence of Muslims” movie that sparked furious protests around the world.

      A US appeals court on Wednesday ordered Google, which owns YouTube, to remove the film after a lawsuit brought by an actress who says she was tricked into appearing in it.

      Pakistani technology think-tank Bytes for All said that with the removal of the crude movie, regarded as highly blasphemous by many Muslims, the government had no reason to maintain the ban.

      “We think that now the government of Pakistan has been left with no excuse to continue blocking access to YouTube,” Shahzad Ahmed from Bytes for All told AFP.

      “But the ban on YouTube has got more to do with the government’s desires and efforts to impose censorship, content filtering and moral policing and we are fighting against them in court through a constitutional petition.”

      There was no immediate response from the government.

      Religion in Pakistan, where 97 percent of the population are Muslims, is a very sensitive topic and perceived insults to the faith can spark violent reactions.

      The American-made “Innocence of Muslims”, which depicted the Prophet Mohammed as a thuggish deviant, triggered protests across Pakistan that left more than 20 people dead.

      Free-speech campaigners in Pakistan have complained of creeping censorship in the name of protecting religion or preventing obscenity.

      In November 2011 the telecommunications authority tried to ban nearly 1,700 “obscene” words from text messages, which included innocuous terms such as “lotion”, “athlete’s foot” and “idiot”.

      In 2010 Pakistan shut down Facebook for nearly two weeks over alleged blasphemy. It continues to restrict hundreds of online links.



      We are honoured & privileged to be the followers of the Holy Prophet and his household – the Ahlul Bayt. There are many myths, lies and exaggerations about the Shia. This blog is here to discuss these issues and to open peoples hearts and minds.
      Wednesday, 12 January 2011


      The story of Ashura and the great sacrifice made by Imam Hussain (a.s.) to save the religion of Islam was a classic tale of good versus evil. Imam Hussain (a.s) lost the battle but definitely won the war. The evil in these events was personified by Yazid ibn Muawiya (may Allah curse him), a man who was simply a despicable human, let alone a so-called Muslim.

      His reign as “caliph” was short but painful. In his first year of rule he commanded his forces to kill the grandson of the Holy Prophet, along with his family and friends and in the second year he attacked the Holy Kaa’ba and set fire to it. He was a power-hungry, selfish and arrogant man but tracing through history, he was not the real brains behind the attempt to destroy Islam, the real brains was his father – Muawiya ibn Abu Sufyan. Of the trio of the founding Umayyad fathers, Abu Sufyan, Muawiya and Yazid, Muawiya is the most significant, the most influential and most cunning.

      Sunnis lay a lot of credit on Muawiya’s door. They have a lot invested in him. They don’t really take note of Abu Sufyan and condemn the actions of Yazid, on the whole (apart from fools like Dr. Zakir Naik). Muawiya on the other hand is treated with a lot of respect. They call him Hazrat Muawiya – rasiallahu-anhu (may Allah be pleased with him) amongst other respectful titles. He has been bizarrely sanctified by the Ahle Sunnah over the centuries, his reputation has been shrouded in myths, legends and propaganda.

      The Ahle Sunnah like to give him three main claims to fame. Firstly, he was a great companion of the Holy Prophet. Looking at history, he was in the Holy Prophet’s midst only for the last 2 years of the Prophet’s life. Any hadith claiming words of praise about Muawiya from the Holy Prophet have been fabricated by Muawiya himself. He was a great propaganda machine and spent much of his time in power creating new hadiths about himself and Bani Ummaya. He also created other hadiths trying to discredit Imam Ali (a.s.) and Bani Hashim in an attempt to legitimise his rule.

      The reality is that he was not a great companion of the Holy Prophet, and the Prophet enunciated not one word of praise or merit about Muawiya. Many Sunni scholars have come to this conclusion in their research, including Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Jalaluddin Al-Suyuti and Abdul-Haqq Dehlavi who all attest to there being no hadiths in praise of Muawiya in their books.

      The Ahle-Sunnah also believe Muawiya to have been a legitimate ruler, caliph of the Muslims. He obtained the Caliphate by ousting the 2nd Holy Imam, Imam Hasan (a.s.) through bribery and blackmail of Imam Hasan’s supporters. He negotiated a peace treaty with Imam Hasan (a.s.) and then systematically broke every single article of the treaty. He broke the central condition of the treaty – regarding succession to his rule, by appointing his cursed son Yazid as Caliph.

      He is, in effect, Islam’s first tyrant. He was the man who created structures of kinship and autocracy. He dug the roots of tyranny, terror and totalitarianism that defaces Islam today. Famous Sunni scholar, Abul Ala Maududi, in his 1973 book “Caliphate and Kingship”, outlines in detail the numerous ways in which Muawiya enriched himself at the expense of the people, how corrupt he was, how many companions and innocent Muslims he killed and how he amassed both power and wealth. He turned the Caliphate into a Kingship. (After all that criticism, Maududi still managed to end the book with “Hazrat Muawiya, (r.a.)”!!)

      If he is a true Caliph and deserved the title, why is he not one of the Khulafa-e-Rashideen – the four rightly guided Caliphs? Why does it end with Imam Ali (a.s.), why wasn’t Muawiya added to this list? They know the truth, but cannot bring themselves to admit as much. The irony is that how could he be a great Caliph when some of his own companions refused to pray behind him? A companion of Abu Huraira, no friend of the Shia, claims in Sirat-e-Halabiya that “On the plains of Siffin, Abu Huraira would pray Salat behind Ali, but would go and eat with Muawiya. Someone asked why he did this, to which he replied “Food with Muawiya is better, but Salat under Ali is better.””

      In fact, Muawiya himself made it obvious that he was only interested in power and material gain. He didn’t even pretend to have any inclination towards the spiritual, the moral and the Islamic aspects of caliphate and leadership of the Muslim community. Sunni scholar Sibt ibn al-Jawzi writes in his book, Mir’at al-Zaman that Muawiya openly claims “I did not fight you to pray, fast and pay charity, but rather to be your leader and to control you!” From the horses mouth himself.

      His last claim to ‘fame’, say the Ahle-Sunnah, was that he was a writer of the Holy Quran when it was first revealed – ‘Writer of the Revelation.” Before analysing this claim further, in and of itself it’s not that big a deal to be the Writer – one of the writers became an apostate in later life, as claimed by Sunni scholer Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani who writes in his book “Fath al-Bari”: “The first man from the Quraysh who was the writer of the revelation was Abdullah bin Saad. After this he apostatised and became a kaffir.”

      Was Muawiya a Writer of the Revelation? As I mentioned earlier, he converted to Islam in 630 AD, just 2 years before the death of the Holy Prophet. How could he be the writer, when most of the Quran had already been revealed and transcribed by the companions of the Prophet? Sunni scholar Allama Zahabi in his book “Tareekh ul Islam” states that “Muawiya was the writer of the Prophet’s correspondence, his letters between the Prophet and the Arabs.” I guess “Writer of Letters” doesn’t quite have the same ring to it. This is further backed up by notorious Egyptian Sunni scholar Sayyid Qutb, the forefather of Al-Qaeda, who writes in his book “Social Justice in Islam” “The erroneous fable still persists that Mu’awiya was a scribe who wrote down the revelations of Allah’s Messenger. The truth is that when Abu Sufyan embraced Islam, he besought the Prophet to give Mu’awiya some measure of position in the eyes of the Arabs; thus he would be compensated of being slow to embrace Islam and of being one of those who had no precedence in the new religion. So the Prophet used Mu’awiya for writing letters and contracts and agreements. But none of the companions ever said that he wrote down any of the Prophet’s revelations, as was asserted by Mu’awiyas partisans after he had assumed the throne. But this is what happens in all such cases.”

      So Muawiya was not the man who wrote down the Quran. He was however the man who made his army place 500 copies of the Quran on spears and lances during the Battle of Siffin when he was losing and yet he is still praised by Sunnis today. When Newsweek claimed in 2005 that soldiers had desecrated copies of the Quran in Guantanamo Bay these same Sunnis were up in arms across the globe and yet they ignore the mistreatment of the Quran by Muawiya centuries ago. He’s not the writer of the Quran, he is an abuser of the Quran.

      Setting the path for many Muslim leaders today, he was the first ruler to publicly drink alcohol. Sunni scholar Ahmad ibn Hanbal writes in his famous collection of Hadtih: “Musnad” “”Abdullah bin Buraida said: ‘I entered on Muawiya with my father, then he (Mu’awiya) made us sit on a mattress then he brought food to us and we ate, then he brought a drink to us, Muawiya drank it and then he offered that to my father, thus (my father) said: ‘I never drank it since the messenger of Allah made it [that drink] Haram’….”

      However, his greatest claims to infamy are the harsh treatment and even the killings of several companions of the Holy Prophet & Imam Ali (a.s.) for which he was responsible. Abu Dharr al-Ghifari was a great companion of the Holy Prophet, who stated that “The earth has not borne nor has the sky covered, a man more truthful than Abu Dharr”- as narrated by Sunni scholar Allama Muhammed ibn Saad in his book Tabqat Ibn-e-Saad. He goes on to narrate how Abu Dharr constantly used to criticise the corrupt and lavish rule of the third caliph, Uthman ibn Affan. On Muawiya’s say so, Uthman had him flogged and whipped and then exiled outside Madina, to Al-Rabathah, where he died alone a few years later.

      Muawiya was responsible for the death of the great companion of the Holy Prophet, Ammar ibn Yasir. There are many Sunni narrations praising the status of Ammar ibn Yasir. According to the Sunni book Sunan ibn Majah (one of the Sunni six major Hadith collections), the Holy Prophet said “Ammar is filled with faith, with imaan, from the crown of his head, to the soles of his feet.” He was the son of Yasir and Sumaya, who were amongst the first people that were martyred in the name of Islam.

      When it came to his death, it was prophesied by the Holy Prophet and is mentioned in both Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim (the 2 most important Sunni books of hadith). Sahih Bukhari narrates: “Ibn ‘Abbas said to me and to his son ‘Ali, “Go to Abu Sa’id and listen to what he narrates.” So we went and found him in a garden looking after it. He picked up his Rida’, wore it and sat down and started narrating till the topic of the construction of the mosque reached. He said, “We were carrying one adobe at a time while ‘Ammar was carrying two. The Prophet saw him and started removing the dust from his body and said, “May Allah be Merciful to ‘Ammar. He will be inviting them (i.e. his murderers, the rebellious group) to Paradise and they will invite him to Hell-fire.” ‘Ammar said, “I seek refuge with Allah from affliction.” (Volume 1, Book 8, Number 438). And in Sahih Muslim: “This hadith has been transmitted on the authority of Umm Salama that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said to ‘Ammar: A group of rebels would kill you.” (Book 041, Number 6968).

      Who were these rebels that would kill Ammar ibn Yasir? History is clear when it records the death of Ammar in the Battle of Siffin. He fought in the ranks of Imam Ali (a.s.) and was killed by the army of Muawiya. The famous English translator of Sahih Muslim, Abd-al-Hamid Siddiqui goes on to add a footnote to the above hadith about Ammar: “This narration is clearly indicative of the fact that in the conflict between Hadrat Ali and his opponents, Hadrat Ali was on the right as Ammar Ibn Yasir was killed in the Battle of Siffin fighting in the camp of Hadrat Ali.” It does not, therefore, make much sense to say that both Imam Ali (a.s.) and Muawiya were in the right.

      Muawiya then went on to have Ammar ibn-Yasir beheaded and mutilated. It was Muawiya who first introduced such immoral and un-Islamic practices that his cursed son Yazid would then continue at Karbala and that so many Muslim terrorists continue around the world today – with their beheadings of hostages and mutilations of the bodies of their enemies.

      Muawiya was also responsible for the deaths of other Muslims such as Hujr ibn Adi. Abul Ala Maududi writes in “Caliphate and Kingship” that Muawiya had Hujr ibn Adi buried alive for refusing to curse Imam Ali (a.s.). He also killed Muhammed ibn Abu Bakr – son of the first caliph and foster son of Imam Ali (a.s.), and then wrapped him in the carcass of a dead donkey and burned it to ashes. It was following this incident as narrated by Allama ibn Athir, in his book Tarikh-e-Kamil, that Ayesha, wife of the Holy Prophet and sister of Muhammed ibn Abu Bakr, began cursing Muawiya after every salat.

      His greatest crime was killing the grandson of the Holy Prophet – Imam Hasan (a.s.). Muawiya paid Imam Hasan’s wife, Jada 100,000 dirhams and his son, Yazid’s hand in marriage if she would kill her husband. She poisoned his water, causing him to suffer for 40 days before dying. This has been reported in many major Sunni hadith books, including works by Abul Fida, Abdul Rahmān bin Abd Rabbāh, Ibne Shahnah and Ibne Abdul Birr. Muawiya went on to pay Jida the money, but refused to marry his son to her – if she could kill one husband, what would stop her killing her next husband?

      Muawiya is arguably the greatest contributor to the Sunni-Shia split that exists today. His hatred of Imam Ali (a.s.) and the Ahlul Bayt continues to this day from his followers, from those Sunnis who ignorantly respect him. The Sunnis who try to build up Muawiya are living in denial. Muawiya was a corrupt, greedy and un-Islamic leader and should be treated as such. I encourage you to open your eyes and hearts and come to realise who Muawiya really was.



      • Islam is better than Catholicism. Why did you slaughter Paul? And why did you slay Jesus your story character? Ref ACTS 5:30

        Acts 5:30 (KJV)

        30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye SLEW and HANGED on a tree.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s