As M. Cherif Bassiouni, Distinguished Research Professor of Law Emeritus and President Emeritus, International Human Rights Law Institute, DePaul University, will tell you, you're a greasy Islamophobe if you think that Islamic law prescribes the death penalty for apostates. Anyone who thinks that must simply be "hate-mongering." In reality, as M. Cherif Bassiouni, Distinguished Research Professor of Law Emeritus and President Emeritus, International Human Rights Law Institute, DePaul University, will tell you, "a Muslim’s conversion to Christianity" -- or, presumably, to anything else -- "is not a crime punishable by death under Islamic law."
Great. The only problem is that large numbers of Muslims around the world don't seem to have gotten the message, and seem instead to agree with those greasy Islamophobes.
"Chechen rebels put fatwa on separatist leader living in London for abandoning Islam," from the Daily Mail, August 25 (thanks to Alexandre):
Chechen rebels have today called for prominent separatist leader Akhmed Zakayev to be killed, saying he has abandoned Islam.Zakayev, who lives in London, represents the moderate wing of the separatist movement and has clashed with radical Islamic insurgents in Russia's southern republic of Chechnya.
An Islamic rebel website said Zakayav had recognised the authority of Ramzan Kadyrov, the Kremlin-backed leader of the region.
'Public remarks show that he (Zakayev) has fallen away from Islam,' the website said, adding that Doku Umarov, Chechnya's most wanted separatist leader, was behind the order.
'The court has ruled that the killing of this apostate is a duty for Muslims.' It did not say what court had issued the ruling....
OT, but here's an article from a Dutch newspaper or news service, found on the ROP website:
"Wilders Compares Prophet Mohammed to Pig
"THE HAGUE, 28/08/09 - Party for Freedom (PVV) leader Geert Wilders has seized on a news report from Saudi Arabia for peppery written questions to the cabinet. In these, he compares the Islamic prophet Mohammed to a pig.
"Wilders has requested clarification from Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen on a marriage in Saudi Arabia between an 80 year old man and a 10 year old child. The child had run away from her elderly husband, but was brought back to him by her father, the English-language website Arab News reports based on a Saudi newspaper.
"Wilders asks the minister if he shares the view that 'this man is behaving like a pig, just like the barbarous Prophet Mohammed, who married the six year old girl Aisha.' The PVV leader wants Verhagen to summon the Saudi Arabian ambassador to express his repugnance."
Close www.nisnews.nl
Yes, Mo' certainly behaved swinishly in this, and many other ways. Maybe that's why he forbade Moslems to eat pork. It would be akin to cannibalism.
Muslims should get used to Muslims abandoning Islam...it will be happening often...and soon...
The court ordered it, but can't enforce it, so it becomes the duty of any and all Mahoundians to do it. Zakayev is no longer safe in London...It won't be long till we read where he was shot on his way to work, blown up in his car, or worse yet kidnapped...Kidnappers for Allah always make sure justice is carried out...Usually slowly and painfully carried out...It's fiendish work, but there is no shortage of volunteers...
Keep stuck to your guns and keep sticking it back to them, Robert. You don't let M. Cherif Bassiouni, Ahmed Rehab, or the lot of them box you in and define you, nor do injustice to your causes!
Robert, I applaud your efforts to help such correctors of wrong ideas about Islam such as:
M. Cherif Bassiouni, Distinguished Blah blah harumph Emeritus and la-dee-da burp Emeritus, wheeze cough snort Institute, Blahiversity Plplflsphlspklflppp (let me wipe that spittle off of your collar), or Ahmed Rehab-a-dab-banana-banna-ree-rye-roe-ranna, the slick-as-lard-willie pimp-daddy of CAIR. These guys REALLY need your help seeing how SO many times we find that the "misunderstanders of Islam" have infiltrated the deepest reaches of the Muslim world and are SO hard to find until you point them out.
I'm sure they are ALL a big mistake.
Keep up the good work.
greasy Islamophobes?
Harumph! Really Robert - I may be an Islamophobe, but greasy? I assure you that I shower every day!
Quick! Get Prince Charles on the case. He seems very fond of Islam so he can nip over to Chechnya and clear up this misunderstanding.
Robert, I know there are Koran and Hadith verses that command the killing of apostate ex-Moslems and that makes it part of sharia. Therefore all Moslems are obligated to "execute" the order.
On the related subject of familial "honor killings" of female relatives not involving apostasy, though, are there also Koran and/or Hadith verses justifying or excusing such killings even though the female is still a Moslem? If so, what are they and wouldn't that contradict another Koran command (I don't remember the specific verse #)that Moslems shouldn't kill other Moslems? Or does that fall under the Islamic doctrine of abrogation (nasky business, that).
Thanks, T.H.
wouldn't that contradict another Koran command...
Yea. Know that verily the koron contains many contradictions, logical fallacies, and outright falsehoods. Evil it is and stupid too.
nabi ZK (pbum)
More on topic. Zakayev is for sure a total mohametaenian apostate. Nabifically certified by...
nabi ZK (pbum)
Nice example of the way Mohammedans 'think'.
A Muslim gang boss, Kadyrov, chooses (for the moment, perhaps because he feels weak) to accept to occupy a subordinate position vis a vis a non-Muslim entity - the Kremlin. By doing this he gets access,presumably, to Russian military goodies, and he gets Power over his fellow Muslims.
Zakayev is accused of having thrown his lot in with Kadyrov. That is: of having subordinated himself to a Muslim who has subordinated himself to Infidels.
Or perhaps Zakayev is seen as having allied himself with, or 'made friends with', a Muslim who has 'made friends with' Infidels.
(Quite probably, in fact, both Kadyrov and Zakayev may be classed as 'slow jihadists', vis a vis the Kremlin, in the same way as Fatah could be called 'slow jihadists' vis a vis Israel. Their 'friendship' with the Russian infidels would be tactical and feigned, for their own/ Muslim advantage, not real).
Another group of Muslims, however, is not satisfied. Even feigned friendship, feigned alliance with Infidels is - presumably - seen as dangerous or Un-Islamic (perhaps they feel that those who fake friendship with Infidels might just possibly be tempted into *real* friendship). So they proclaim that Zakayev is an apostate - seemingly, in their eyes, all that is necessary for a charge of apostasy, of ceasing to be 'Muslim', is for a Muslim - however feignedly, however temporarily - to accept a position subordinate to, or superficially 'friendly' with, a non-Muslim; or for another Muslim to then ally himself with such a Muslim.
Zakeyev is to be killed not because he is himself a bully-boy and murderer (he is both of those things), but because -nota bene -- he has "fallen away from Islam." That is the only category that makes sense for Muslims. For mere corruption or murder of opponents is not enough. The Ruler is to be obeyed, unless his behavior can be characterized as not that of a Muslim. There is no appeal to universal principles of morality. It is not that this family has appropriated much of the nation’s wealth, or that ruler has appointed all of his cousins to high positions, or that the sons of that other ruler go around raping girls with impunity.
Had Zakeyev been someone else, someone juset as vicious and murderous as he is, but had been merely an indigenous lord of Muslim misrule, instead of, as Zakeyev is, a local enforcer for the Russians, then only the usual handful of the intellectually and morally advanced would have been against him. The rest would have been subservient to the ruler’s authority. Despotism comes naturally to Muslim polities.
Look at the Muslim-dominated countries. There are 57 members of the O.I.C. How many of those dominated by Muslims are at all "democratic"? How many hold elections, but the elections are farcical How many Arab Muslim countries are ruled by families who seize much of the nation's wealth -- or demurely, by now, merely have it appropriated --- such as the Al-Maktoum of Dubai, the Al-Nahyan of Abu Dhabi, the Al-Thani of Qatar, the Al-Sabah of Kuwait, and so on. Then there are the monarchs – the kinglets of Jordan for example, who do not have oil and gas but have a long tradition of extracting foreign aid (it was the C.I.A., or rather American taxpayers, who picked up the bills for the high-end call girls who arrived at the assorted suites of that “plucky little king” Hussein of Jordan, every Wesetern columnist’s favorite Arab leader). How long has Mubarak with his Family-and-Friends plan been ruling in Egypt, and how “democratic” are any of his farcical elections? In Tunisia, where Ben Ali continues, thank god, to ruthlessly round up those who oppose the secularist tendencies of his regime, which merely continues what Habib Bourguiba and the Destour Party started, what would happen if the secret police stopped their work? In the Sherifian monarchy (the king being a descendant of Muhammad, which helps to protect him from attack) of Morocco, where is the democracy? Give the Muslim world a close look, and you will find hints of democracy only in a few places. The rule of law, the equal treatment of all minorities, the careful guarantees of individual rights, the legal and political instiutions that make all of this possible, and the widespread shared understanding of why all this is necessary, why merely elections and head-counting do not constitute the kind of “democracy” we think the word should signify. In Lebanon, because of a large and powerful Christian presence (that is, the Maronites), there has been a kind of “democracy” in the sense that elections are held, and the results mean something, but the agreement to assign certain posts to a Christian, a Sunni, a Shi’a, a Druse, and the continued reliance on the census of 1934 (thank god, for in those days the Christians constituted a much greater percentage of the population) shows how imperfect Lebanese “democracy” is.
But mostly, where there are not hereditary rulers – monarchs and princes and sultans -- there are “republics.” The word “republic” means, in the Arab and Muslim context, not a “republic” in the Western sense, but merely a regime that is based on something other than hereditary rule by a dynasty. How many of those “republics” are akin to Western democracies? The closest one is Turkey. And that is because Turkey is a country where, ever since the 1920s, an effort – Kemalism – has been made to put in place laws that will systematically constrain the political and social power of Islam, and to create the conditions in which genuinely secular people – about one-fourth of the Turkish population – can arise. The tragedy is that those beneficiares of Kemalism, now threatened by the sinister Erdogan and his associates, allowed the army, through its power to stage coups, to be the guarantor, through force, of Kemalism. Instead, the Kemalist effort ought to have continued, with a relentlessness and a ruthlessness that would match, or overmatch, the relentlessness and ruthlessness displayed by Erbakan, Erdogan, and all the others, including that most dangerous man, Fethulah Gulen.