CNN: Hired Muslim Shill Denies Wife-beating Verses in the Koran

*  Not for the first time. Its just amazing how eager the Western media is to propagate falsehoods like this. CNN along with the BBC are clearly totally infiltrated and have thus become tools for Islamic spin:

Guest commentary at CNN: “Nothing in Islam says you can(t) hit your wife”


Nothing. Not a thing. Except, well, Qur’an 4:34:

Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.

In mainstream Islamic practice, the Qur’an is Allah’s own words, eternal, and direct — not simply inspired in its human transmitters who were influenced by their particular time and place. In the case of 4:34, this fact spells disaster for women’s rights in letter and in spirit: The text itself tells men to beat their wives. The fact that it is the third in multiple steps does not mitigate the fact that, after a man believes he has jumped through the appropriate hoops, the Qur’an says to hit your wife.

Related links:

The broader spirit of 4:34 only compounds that disaster, endorsing the subjugation of women as the proper, divinely ordained order of things, and setting a far-reaching standard whereby violence is an acceptable recourse in domestic disputes. No, the Qur’an doesn’t say to hit your wife if she spends too much, but at the end of the day, the Qur’an does say you can hit supposedly disobedient women. But the commentator below cannot bring herself to address this verse. In fact, she denies anything of this sort exists.

The original report, along with a comprehensive treatment of the “lost in translation” canard, can be found here.

“Commentary: Wife-slapping not OK in Islam,” by Qanta A. Ahmed for CNN, with thanks to Raymond from JW

NEW YORK (CNN) — A judge in Saudi Arabia has said husbands are allowed to slap their wives if they spend lavishly, a Saudi newspaper reported this past weekend. In one fell swoop, the judge debased Islam, vilified the kingdom and disregarded the ideals the Saudi monarch himself embraces.

How sure are you that Abdullah doesn’t hit his wife… er, wives?

Islam is very clear on this issue: Both a husband physically chastising his wife for “overspending” and a judge “upholding justice” by sanctioning this abuse would be acting counter to Islam’s ideals of compassion and justice.

There is no basis in Islamic theology to support domestic abuse of any kind and specifically none pertaining to the matter of a wife’s spending pattern. […]

The only way for the above sentence to stand is if one believes it is possible to strike your wife without it being “abuse.” That is unacceptable by Western standards.

In March, more than 1,600 academics from more than 30 countries convened in Riyadh at the first symposium studying domestic violence in the kingdom. Together, international academics examined, measured and evaluated the growing reports of domestic violence and child abuse in the kingdom with a view to formulating solutions….

There have been multiple conferences of this type. All deny the basis for domestic violence in Islamic tradition, scripture, and sharia law, and thus impose on themselves a crippling limitation for truly fighting domestic violence in the kingdom.

The rest of the commentary can be found at the link above, and deals in the standard set of apologetics — for example, that Saudi women actually have it pretty good, the abaya is “liberating,” and so forth.

16 thoughts on “CNN: Hired Muslim Shill Denies Wife-beating Verses in the Koran”

  1. You guys are such losers, can’t even get a decent picture. The picture is fake and doctored. Enjoy your stay in hell guys.

  2. Hahaha, such is the typical response from Muslims. Cannot even address the topic & contents, instead whine about a silly pic. What a utter fail at deflecting the issue at hand…that Islam sanctions abuse of women, despite the pathetic taqiyya this post refers to.

    Islam makes people stupid, another perfect example.

  3. Arash,

    Please let us know, does the koran say a husband can beat his wife? Simple yes or no, with supporting documentation please. Until then, it appears that koran says yes to wife beating.

    As revparadigm says, “taqiyya”.

  4. Arash,
    Answer the question, you stupid muslim git!!!
    See post from John. What is it with you loosers? Here to waste time??? Get a job and do something useful – well you probably cannot. And as for the picture – it may well be fake but it is there to provide a counter to the original muss comment – it is called “satire”. You probably have neither heard of the concept nor do you understand it. Answer the original question you incompetent muslim twit. As has been written often enough, when you arseholes start behaving like the religion of peace come and talk. Until then go and die or get out of our homes before we are forced to get rid of you – your choice, muslim twit.

    I honestly cannot believe how stupid these muslim posters are – they are displaying intellects comparable with a slowly developing 12 year old school bully. .

    As revparadigm says, “taqiyya”.

  5. kaw,

    The answer to your question of whether the Quran sanctions wife beating is a BIG NO. But a bonehead hater like you would never understand nor accept the truth. And a barbaric hater like you will never believe anything I say, so what is the frigging point huh?
    and im not here to answer your nincompoop questions in a retarded website spreading hatred, lies and fear among people.

    The prophet has mentioned MULTIPLE times that he will not approve of wife beating.

  6. John,

    The answer is NO, the Koran does not sanction the man to physically harm the wife.

    On the other hand ….

    “When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)”

  7. Arash,
    Your response is typically muslim and somewhat amusing. It appears many muslims have then not understood your prophets words – perhaps your gripe should be with them. You claim that muslims will not physically assault their wives yet there are enough validated reports of muslims abusing women, be they family members or not, and using religion to justify their actions to show that many muslims have a different understanding or that you are just lying. I suspect that you are just a liar – and you are quite right – people would be rather silly to accept your word at face value. The evidence suggests that you are a liar, and not a good one at that. Nincompoop is a word that best describes the childish and spoilt little muslim thug that you are. You contribute little except perhaps some amusement. To refresh your memory, little boy, I didnt actually ask the question. I told you to answer the question which had been asked by another. You have still not properly answered the question – an off-the-cuff quote by you serves only to highlight the potential fact that you have no answer. Are you actually capable of thinking?? Most of us have skulls so the term bone head is applicable to the human species – thank you – I am definitely human – about you however some uncertainly remains. Have a nice day screaming at the wall. Don’t bother posting again – you are a waste of space!

  8. Arash ,
    Glad to know this site is spreading fear. Is that the same fear your mates are currently spreading in Pakistan..??? Fear of beheading , fear of hand amputation, fear of female imprisonment, fear of no education for their children , fear of poverty , fear of endless violence , fear of absolute injustice…I could go on but why should I?
    You are trying to defend the indefensible.
    And where is Saudi Arabia , Kuwait etc when all these people need help?? Their crisis is caused by Saudi Wahabbism so the Saudis should pick up the tab.
    No doubt westeners will be expected to pick up the tab.
    Hypocrisy , sheer hypocrisy.

  9. Right, Taliban are my “mates” and they are “friendly” toward muslims, and thats why they go around threatening my friends and my family members. Don’t you have ANY logic in your puny little brain theresa? Why the hell do you think the Taliban are killing other MUSLIMS? I suppose you’re just mentally retarded hence you don’t have the power to comprehend anything.

    Just like i’m sure you are friends with your christian “neo Nazi” brothers.

  10. Haha. Westerners pick up the tab?! What a joke. We know what happens when the West decides to “pick up the tab”. Its more like “lets steal the cashier, kill and rape the waitress, and then burn down the whole frigging restaurant.” We all know how the christians peacefully befriended the aborigines in Australia and the native americans in the US.

  11. kaw, you’re a bonehead and need to get your head check in the nearest veterinarian clinic.

    1. A warning to Arash:

      We welcome debate.

      That means comments need to be substantiated with evidence, i.e. quote, sura, hadith, etc.

      Name-calling, Tu Quoque and circular reasoning are not acceptable.

      Stay on topic. Shape up or ship out.

      Update: you were warned!

  12. Arash May 13, 2009 at 5:40 pm


    The answer is NO, the Koran does not sanction the man to physically harm the wife.

    On the other hand ….

    “When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)”

    The Qu’ran doesn’t sanction Muslim men beating their wives? Oh really? Then why do Islamic nations even legislate law determining the size of the stick to hit her with? This is so typical of Muslims trying to deny things that are happening that anybody can observe with just a little research.

    “When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)”

    Here is the obvious difference, in Islam they do honor it and Muslims act on it. Spousal abuse is allowed in most Islamic nations and next impossible to punish because the abuse will go unreported and they will not prosecute it as a crime. In “Christian” nations and Israel it a punishable offense that ANYBODY should be arrested for and prosecuted to the full extent. Hitting your spouse is simply unacceptable no matter the circumstance and intent.

    Six translations of Qur’an 4:34:

    1. “Men are superior to women on account of the qualities with which God has gifted the one above the other, and on account of the outlay they make from their substance for them. Virtuous women are obedient, careful, during the husband’s absence, because God has of them been careful. But chide those for whose refractoriness you have cause to fear; remove them into beds apart, and scourge them: but if they are obedient to you, then seek not occasion against them: verily, God is High, Great!” (Rodwell’s version of the Koran, Quran, 4:34)
    2. “Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them. Surely God is high, supreme.” (Dawood’s version of the Koran, Quran, 4:34)
    3. “Men are in charge of women, because Allah has made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah has guarded. As for those from whom you fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High Exalted, Great.” (Pickthall’s version of the Koran, Quran, 4:34)
    4. “Men are the managers of the affairs of women for that God has preferred in bounty one of them over another, and for that they have expended of their property. Righteous women are therefore obedient, guarding the secret for God’s guarding. And those you fear may be rebellious admonish; banish them to their couches, and beat them. If they then obey you, look not for any way against them; God is All high, All great.” (Arberry’s version of the Koran, Quran, 4:34)
    5. “Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in their sleeping places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great. (Shakir’s version of the Koran, Quran, 4:34)
    6. “Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband’s) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whom part you fear disloyalty and ill conduct, admonish them (first), (next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them means (of annoyance) for Allah is Most High, Great (above you all). (Ali’s version of the Koran, Quran, 4:34)

    The difference is Jews and Christians do no honor those verses in Exodus as a command for all time. Jews and Christians understand cultures change and permissive sense of certain things are no longer applicable. The Bible is very clear on commands that will remain as principles for moral behavior for all time…and many do not.

  13. Arash,
    Yawn!! You should first learn a little about aboriginal history before commenting, Your comment is inaccurate and insulting to both Aboriginal and on-Aboriginal australians. Similarly your statement regarding the american indian is also inaccurate. One signature of the contact between a culture and a culture that is slightly less technically advanced is the usual destruction of the less advanced culture. The major example of where Christians have behaved as muslims do was the complete destruction of the Aztec empire by Fernando Cortes and the Spanish crown. Note that this was prosecuted for economic and political reasons – religion was used as a convenient rallying point for the Spanish (and to manufacture some moral authority) which is also what muslims seem to do. The only other example thart come to mind is the removal of the Taino and similar from the Carribean, also by Spanish, for similar reasons. This has not happened to either the Aboriginal and North American Indian cultures and they will survive. And in both cases, a fairly viscous war was fought against the newcomers for approximately a period of one century. As regards the west picking up the tab, well, we have picked up the tab in this and the last century – you muslims have done little. In Bosnia muslims were saved by our people (though this now seems to have been a setup). In Indonesia it was Western Aid (not muslim aid) that primarily helped Indonesia and other countries decimated by the Tsunami – the examples are countless, as are the countless examples of muslim beligerence. We pay the vast majority of funds which support the UN and even though we are not altruistic in this endeavor, we are far more fair that the muslims countries which abuse the function and purpose of the organisation. You are fairly typical in that you can only react to adverse comment with bluster and with threats – despite having been asked you offer nothing to substantiate your claims. As regards muslim behaviour to other cultures, the almost complete decimation of the central african region by arab/muslim mercenaries and slavers over a period extending approximately 10 centuries is simply one example, of many, where muslims have sought to destroy non-muslim societies. Despite the fact the the european market dominated the slave trade in the later 18th century, the slaves where people who were almost always kidnapped against their will by arab muslims. Arab muslims maintained the African slave trade for economic purposes. Read the journals by Livingtone, or Burton, or Speake where some description as to the arab involvement in the african slave trade is given. I invite you to justify what is currently happening in Southern Thailand, where the muslim population is committing genocide against the Buddhists. Kashmir is another example of violence driven by muslim ambitions. Rather than abusing people, try and present a solid counter argument. If you cannot, think a while and ask yourself why not. Perhaps there is something for you to learn after all if you are capable of doing so. It is, in the final analysis, your choice. There is little difference between your line of argument and those used by the Taliban, and it seems probable that given the right pressure you would quickly slip into their ranks. I wonder if you have ever argued down a fanatic at your mosque?

  14. Arash ,
    The Taliban are why are muslims terrorising other muslims?
    Just making personal attacks here does not really work.
    People could respect you more , if you gave reasoned answers.

  15. Why are Islamic spokesmen in the West lying about the Qur’an’s “wife-beating” verse?


    It is worth noting how several translators render the key word in the Qur’an’s notorious verse sanctioning the beating of disobedient women (4:34), وَاضْرِبُوهُنَّ, waidriboohunna.

    Pickthall: “and scourge them”
    Yusuf Ali: “(And last) beat them (lightly)”
    Al-Hilali/Khan: “(and last) beat them (lightly, if it is useful)”
    Shakir: “and beat them”
    Sher Ali: “and chastise them”
    Khalifa: “then you may (as a last alternative) beat them”
    Arberry: “and beat them”
    Rodwell: “and scourge them”
    Sale: “and chastise them”
    Asad: “then beat them”
    Dawood: “and beat them.”

    Laleh Bakhtiar, in a new translation that has received wide publicity, translates it as “go away from them.” However, in light of this unanimity among the translators, both Muslim and non-Muslim, this seems difficult to sustain – all of these authorities got the passage wrong until Bakhtiar? But her impulse is understandable, as many Muslims today regard this verse with acute embarrassment. Muhammad Asad adduces numerous traditions in which Muhammad “forbade the beating of any woman,” concluding that wife-beating is “barely permissible, and should preferably be avoided.”

    Unfortunately, however, this is not a unanimous view. Sheikh Syed Mahmud Allusi in his Qur’an commentary Ruhul Ma’ani gives four reasons that a man may beat his wife: “if she refuses to beautify herself for him,” if she refuses sex when he asks for it, if she refuses to pray or perform ritual ablutions, and “if she goes out of the house without a valid excuse.” Also, Muhammad’s example is normative for Muslims, since he is an “excellent example of conduct” (Qur’an 33:21) – and Aisha reports that Muhammad struck her. Once he went out at night after he thought she was asleep, and she followed him surreptitiously. Muhammad saw her, and, as Aisha recounts: “He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?”

    And now a questioner at Yahoo Answers asks a question that most don’t know to ask and that few among those who do know dare to ask:

    Why do non Arabic speaking Muslims try to delude themselves & others that 4:34 means ‘leave” not beat?
    Quran 4:34 has historically been translated as hit, strike or beat, until modernity when Muslims became ashamed of Allah’s perfect marital problem solving principles, so Yusuf Ali first added “lightly” after beat, then others went further & started claiming that it means “leave”.

    As the majority of Muslims globally are non Arabic speakers, and as most converts to Islam are keen to swallow all lies to save their faith, they managed to fool quite a few.

    Here are examples of the word:

    Verse: 8.50 Object: Human Faces
    If thou couldst see, when the angels take the souls of the Unbelievers (at death), (How) they smite their faces and their backs, (saying): “Taste the penalty of the blazing Fire-

    Transliteration: Walaw tara ith yatawaffa allatheena kafaroo almala-ikatu yadriboona wujoohahum waadbarahum wathooqoo AAathaba alhareeqi

    Qur’an 8:50
    yadriboona wujoohahum literally meaning “hit their faces,” which is translated by Muslims as “beat their faces.”

    Verse: 47.27 Object: Human Faces
    But how (will it be) when the angels take their souls at death, and smite their faces and their backs? Fakayfa itha tawaffat-humu almala-ikatu yadriboona wujoohahum waadbarahum

    Qur’an 47:27
    yadriboona wujoohahum literally meaning “hit their faces.” Also translated correctly by Muslims

    Comparing the two terms
    Beat them and leave them are different phrases in Arabic. The arabic word idribohunna driven from the root word Darab does not have any other meaning than Beat when it comes to mean “Yadreb Ahadan” = Hit someone. Idriboohunna (أضربوهن) means beat them (for female plural). Adriboo Anhunna (اضربوا عنهن) is the one that means abandon or leave them. According to the Arabic lexicon

    Arabic Transliteration Meaning
    ضرب Zarb Beat
    أضربوهن (used in 4:34) Idriboohunna Beat them
    اضربوا عنهن Adriboo Anhunna abandon them, leave them

    Quran 4:34 says Idriboohunna أضربوهن, not Adribu Anhunna اضربوا عنهن. These two phrases have different meanings.

    The vast majority of Muslims in the world don’t speak Arabic, many converts to Islam don’t learn sufficient Arabic first.

    Why try to fool themselves that a circle is a square because this verse jeopardizes their faith?

    Why not examine this verse & other unpleasant verses & then decide to take a courageous step of quitting?


    “daraba” clearly means “beat” and is in common usage as such. As an Arabic speaker it is ridiculous to suggest daraba means anything else.

    … the Koran is only Allah’s word in Arabic – there is no restriction on changing meanings in translations as they are only “interpretations”.

    … it is a common practice to hide clear statements that may be embarrassing to Islam’s image or teachings.

Comments are closed.