Now while I agree that  we must vet  our sources and try to verify as  thoroughly  as possible. I will point out that AlterNet  also posted this article from a source they  claim to have known to be Islamophobic.  I went to their source and from there went further to the source they  claimed.  A video on  You Tube that was sourced through Press TV.  Now whether or not Press TV is a propaganda tool of Iran  or not I cannot be certain.  I am well aware  that  many sites use them as a valid source for reports and had no reason to believe that this one was a fabrication. 

Not  withstanding I stand by  what  I wrote having believed it was true as I never  once attacked Islam.  Rather  the idea that  women should be treated as chattel for any  man’s pleasure be it  for whatever reason.  I held accountable the  West  who backs those who would do such a thing and never once  brought religion into play.  Just  as I  have posted on Priests who have committed sexual crimes against  children and just  as I would any  rapist  or pedophile.  Therefore I  take exception to the label that Islamophobia was the  reason for this story spreading like wildfire to  coin   used by  AlterNets Editor.  In my  case it  was the outrage of  women being yet  again  treated like cattle or property to  be used without concern for them as human  beings deserving of respect and care.  Anyone who has been following my  blog would know this.  Simply  because we are  outraged does not make us Islamaphobes.  In my  case especially  it was more outrage  and concern that  this would be the  case.  I feel that  if one is trying to deter others from generalizations then one also should refrain from such  generalizations.

AlterNet  has deleted their original post on this story I only  have the excerpt sent to my  email which I will post  here  so I am not also called a liar as well as an Islamaphobe.  My apologies to anyone who was  upset by this post my  intent has never  and will never be to single out an entire culture or religion for the sins of a few.

AlterNet News <replies@alternet.org>	1:19 PM (15 hours ago)
to me

NEWS UPDATE – January 2, 2013

Saudi Religious Leader Calls for Gang Rape of Syrian WomenAlterNetHe specified that the “intercourse marriages” last only a few hours “in order to give each fighter a turn.” READ MORE»

Editor’s note: On January 2, AlterNet was one of several outlets that published what turned out to be an article based on a false report. We would like to apologize to our readers for the error.

On January 2nd, the story of a Saudi Sheikh issuing a fatwa that condoned ‘intercourse marriage’ or gang rape in Syria exploded over the internet.

According to various sources, Sheikh Mohammad Al-Arifi had stated that foreign fighters in Syria had the right to engage in short term marriages to satisfy their sexual desires and boost their determination to fight against the Assad regime. Syrian girls and women from age 14 upwards were considered fair game and apparently secured their own place in heaven if they participated in these ‘intercourse marriages’.

By the evening a simple Google search of the words, ‘Saudi Sheikh’ , Syrian, and ‘women’ brought up some 5 million references and at least 3 pages of links to articles spreading the news. Not surprisingly there was immediate online uproar too, though as one commentator put it, much of the discussion was about whether these arranged temporary marriages technically constituted ‘rape’. This in itself is worrying.

There was also skepticism from many quarters about the veracity of the report, particularly among savvy Mideast experts.  Rightly so. The story, much like the one a few months ago about Egyptian Islamist MPs proposing laws that permitted sex with a deceased spouse up to 6 hours after his/her death, turned out to be a gross lie.  Sheikh Al-Arifi has issued a denial via his Facebook page. Over the next few days, the various websites and media outlets that spread the story will no doubt issue their retractions. But the story also raises many questions.  For starters, where did it come from? AlterNet inadvertently picked it up from the overtly anti-Islamic Clarion Fund site. Others pointed to the Iranian regime backed Press TV as the primary source on December 31 2012.  But the earliest English language reporting comes on December 29 from an obscure YouTube news site called Eretz Zen, tagged as a YouTube channel by a “secular Syrian opposed to having [his] country turned into a Taliban-like state.”

What’s extraordinary and depressing is that a slew of websites picked up the story and ran with it, some claiming legitimacy because the other had posted it and clearly no one bothered to do some basic fact checking. Arguably this is just the nature of the net and minute by minute news updates. The story was too sensational to give up. But one would imagine that if a similar story emerged about a Christian cleric or a Rabbi, someone, somewhere would have paused before posting it. Sadly, in the case of stories about Muslim clerics or Islamists the same red flags don’t seem to apply.

Read Full Retraction  Here

******************************************************************

Humanitarian  Intervention?  Really?  Where?

Perhaps all those involved in this humanitarian effort  should volunteer to take  the place of innocent women  and girls and help these jihadists find some relief?   Hmmm,  perhaps this cleric should also volunteer and sacrifice in the name of jihad so he can secure his entry into paradise?  Is this the democracy and the  justice that the  Syrian people need? 

I think if  given a choice they  would stay with Assad rather than these demented pigs who claim to know what  is best for them.  Perhaps they   should round up the mothers, wives and 14  year old daughters,  granddaughters , etc…..of these war mongers and ship them off to  sacrifice for the cause? Strange but  it  seems to me they would be horrified at the prospect of doing such a thing.  Yet it is perfectly  acceptable  to perpetrate this crime upon  Syrian  Women?  HYPOCRITES!!

******************************************************************************************

A Wahhabi religious cleric in Saudi Arabia, Muhammed al-Arifi, who is very influential in Jihadi circles, has recently issued a fatwa (religious edict) that permits all Jihadist militants in Syria to engage in short-lived marriages with Syrian women that each lasts for a few hours in order to satisfy their sexual desires and boost their determination in killing Syrians. He called the marriage as ‘intercourse marriage’. It requires that the Syrian female be at least 14 years old, widowed, or divorced.

Is this the Western-promoted “freedom and democracy” that Syrians want?

Source: Lebanese al-Jadeed TV

Another source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/12/31/280993/militants-can-marry-syrian-women/

Militants can marry Syrian women: Wahhabi cleric in Saudi Arabia