Saudi cleric says that those who oppose gender segregation should be killed

What is it always: Do it or I KILL YOU?

No doubt, this is only to prevent muslim women from seeking better treatment from better men than the savages who think they own women.

Hmmm - see previous post about DC police.

"Whoever allows this mixing ... allows forbidden things, and whoever allows them is an infidel and this means defection from Islam ... Either he retracts or he must be killed"

Meanwhile, in a D.C. mosque:

"Some women who protested at the Islamic Center of Washington, wanting to be able to worship in the main prayer hall with their male counterparts, were asked to leave by the police."

Will Hannah and her friends be executed if they don't retract their demands?

Will the D.C. Law Enforcement carry out those executions out of respect for the islamic faith?

Tune in tomorrow for "As The Jihad Turns..."

"Whoever allows this mixing ... allows forbidden things, and whoever allows them is an infidel and this means defection from Islam ... Either he retracts or he must be killed ... because he disavows and does not observe the Sharia," Barrak said....
.................

Here is yet another example of Takfir—that any Muslim who disagrees with any aspect of Shari'ah renders themselves apostate, and thus subject to being murdered by any Muslim.

And Westerners wonder why there is no "reform" in Islam...

"Shaikh Abdul-Rahman al-Barrak said in a fatwa the mixing of genders at the workplace or in education "as advocated by modernisers" is prohibited because it allows "sight of what is forbidden, and forbidden talk between men and women".

can't let those uppiddy Muslim women know too much about "secret" Islamic teachings....

I've always rather liked the "whatever ensues" deal.

Long live freedom!

"And Westerners wonder why there is no "reform" in Islam..."

The Wahabis were the reformers: right back to the roots, which, anyways, had barely, if at all, been left.

What Islam needs is enlightenment.

I think Cavemen, 2010 covers it for the Sow.dees

Where is the supposed outrage from Western "moderate" Muslims? To make a Catholic parallel: What would the Western Catholic response be to a Roman Cardinal's edict to have anyone opposed to the Church's male-only priest rule killed?

I think it would be a little louder than the Western Muslim "outrage" we're likely to hear.

Why doesn't the good Shaikh al-Barrak (not Barack?) just go ahead and tell us "what ensues?" It's so abhorrent to him he can't even say it! How does he think HE got here?

Ohhhhh, I get it...this is all just clever islamo-speak for, "No women in the workplace!"
It's just another mechanism for muslim men to control their women. Just another manifestation of their insecurity and need for absolute power.

Never mind...

"Whoever allows this mixing ... allows forbidden things, and whoever allows them is an infidel and this means defection from Islam ... Either he retracts or he must be killed ... because he disavows and does not observe the Sharia," Barrak

I don't understand the fuss- he is one of the 'good' soldiers of Mohd. He is following the commands given by a brutal dictator over 1400 years back. It is unthinkable that the legacy of a murderous dictator is neither challenged nor it is challengeble in 21st century without serious repercussion to 7 billion people of the world.

Silence! I KEEEELL YOU!!!

And what ensues from gender segregation is all manner of perversions, including incest and keeping of boy sex slaves: http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/islamic-child-sexual-abuse-muslim.html

A prominent Saudi cleric has issued an edict...

One wonders just how a Moslem religious official becomes "prominent" or "esteemed" or the like.

*** 4:43 ***

Is it his virtuousity with Koranic Science? Maybe, cuz it seems as if the more prominent they become the more nasty they are.

Just goes to show anyone who is not infected with PC/MC nonsense that radical Muslims, like this Saudi cleric, understand Islam correctly and so-called moderate Muslims, who think that Islam is compatible with modern society, DON'T understand their own damn religion, a religion that can never be reformed anymore than Nazism or Marxism could be. Reforming Islam is a fool's errand. It's gotta' be chucked.

All these fatwas with being thrown about with such abandon, with death penalties, no less ... it makes the head spin. Does anyone know what jurisdiction is claimed for this particular fatwa? It appears to be intended only to apply to Saudi Arabia but I wonder if there is some fine print that specifically says this? Probably not.

It must be very confusing for the enlightended Muslim trying to cope with the modern world.

First, one is not allowed to mix with members of the opposite sex. Then the pious Muslim discovers homosexuality is also out of the question. And, if the Muslim in question is unfortunate enough to live in a region controlled by the Luddite Taliban then internet porn is not an option either.

It seems that the modern Muslim has little option but to become a hermit. At least it will keep the numbers down.

Welcome to the world of PC Correct Terrorism and Free Speech for Me but Not for Thee:

White Males

It Is Hate Speech If You Offend non-Whites, Females, non-Christians or Muslims

Christians

It Is Hate Speech If You Offend non-Whites, non-Christians, or Muslims

Jews

It Is Hate Speech If You Offend non-Whites, Females or Muslims

Females

It Is Hate Speech If You Offend non-Whites or Muslims

Non-Whites

It Is Hate Speech If You Offend Muslims

Muslims

It Is Hate Speech To Offend Your Imam

"US slams Israel over designating heritage sites" (AP)

This just in. The Obama Administration's collosal stupidity and Islamic bias (since when does a JEWISH HOLY SITE-THE TOMB OF THE PATRIARCHS AND RACHEL'S TOMB BECOME ILLEGITIMATE AS A JEWISH HERITAGE SITE ?) could not be any clearer.

Several points:

1. The Obama ass-licking press ALWAYS includes the word
'Slam' in any article about Israel. One would think Israel
and Slam (weren't they a 1980s pop group ?) always
go together. I would ask the ass-licking press why they
use a hockey term. Is Netanyahu or the IDF hockey players ?
The US Press is almost universally imbecilic.

2. Since when does a JEWISH HOLY SITE stop being holy simply because of its geographical location ? Let me remind readers that these sites only became holy AFTER the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem (former Nazi and Hitler ass-licker)
declared that Rachel's and the Patriarch's Tomb are holy
because Muslims recognize the Jewish prophets as well according to Quranic tradition. Funny, when Jordan controlled the 'West Bank', no Muslim ever visited the Tombs
-or 'AL AQSA' FOR THAT MATTER-another false Muslim holy site
which was re-animated from the dung heep of Hadith traditions when the Mufti and Arafat suddenly declared that
Al Aqsa was holy 1200 years after Muhammad forbade his followers to do QIBLAT facing Jerusalem but instead face
Mecca; since Jerusalem is NOT mentioned in the Quran and
Muslim Qiblat has been towards Mecca since around 720 AD,
Muslims have no historical basis for claiming the Ottoman
Al Aqsa (not Arab) as being holy to Muslims.

3. Finally, and this is laughable. How many real and imagined Islamic 'holy sites' once claimed by Muslims all over the world are off limits to non-Muslims ? Imagine Medina (the ancient Yathrib, once a predominantly JEWISH city) being
over-run with Jews (who aren't even allowed in Saudi Arabia anyway)...the Saudi Security Forces would mown the Jews down
with AK-47s in microseconds. The Babar Mosque in India which
was a Hindu Temple for 600 years until the Moghuls defaced
it and turned it into a Muslim 'holy site'. When Hindus
dared to visit the site years ago, Muslims as far away as
Indonesia rioted (not to mention the Indian Muslims who whined and bleated like infants). There are countless examples-the Dome of the Rock itself is of course JEWISH
TERRITORY but even conservative Israeli politicians don't
suggest that it be returned to Jews (though it should be).
Even 'Right Wing' Israeli FM Avigdor Lieberman never
suggested that Dome of the Rock be bereft of Muslims and
converted to a Jewish Temple which tells you that even
conservative Jews are more tolerant than the most 'liberal' Muslim.

SLAM INDEED.

OBAMA NEEDS TO BE SLAMMED UPSIDE HIS GODDAM SILLY HEAD !!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFijMqKeX48

Hmmm - see previous post about DC police.

Unfortunately, Marion Barry and the DC Police
remain influential after years of being discredited
due to a cabal of Jewish and Black Leftwing lawyers
and activists (the self-hating-Goyman's Burden-Leftwing
Jews living in Georgetown and NW DC and not Anacostia
of course) and illiterate poor Blacks in DC (who are
compelled to live in Anacostia and NE DC not entirely
by their own choosing or fault). So many Jewish
union members and lawyers in DC felt that supporting
Barry would expiate their anti-Black sins (it did
about as much as it expiated their anti-Jewish sins).
Ironically (?), Barry stayed influential so long due to
a dichotomous melange of Jewish Leftists, Nation of Islam
bullies and illiterate poor Blacks looking for 'dynamic'
street-boy leadership (and instead got a crack smoking
semi-literate ho-thumping moron as mayor). Adrian Fenty
is hardly competent but still vastly superior to Marion
Barry. I will give Fenty this-he is trying at least to clean up some of the cesspool known as the Nation's Capitol
(mostly to no avail due to the aforementioned lawyers, unions and street thugs who rule NE and SE DC).

Gee, a whole new category of people scheduled for execution. We already had Jews, other non-believers who didn't accept dhimmi status, disobedient wives and daughters, apostates, homosexuals, and now we get the gender-mixers, too.

But there is a plus side: all Moslem students will have to be withdrawn from all public, and most private, schools and colleges. The rest of the students will be able to get on with their education, without the disruptions and demands for special treatment by the Moslems. And almost all employers would be able, in good conscience, to refuse to hire Moslems; and to discharge the ones they already have.

Nakal: As a Washingtonian, I agree, alas.

Well, I can't agree with this death-dealing pimply goon's screechings about sexual segregation or death; but, as I've posted on the other thread, if Muslimahs don't like what they've got, they can move elsewhere--especially in these First Amendment-protected, God-blessed United States of America.

Ich stehe hier, ich kannst nicht anderes. Gott hilft mir. Amen.

The Sahih al Bukhari, hadith 1868, narrates that Muhammed (peas and mud upon him) ordered the desecration of non-Muslim cemeteries, the uprooting of their trees, and the apportionment of the land to Muslims.

There seems to be an ancient legal precedent for defiling and destroying what is sacred to others.

We must make it a rule to reward moderate Muslims by getting tough with jihadists.

Everytime an imam or mullah makes a fatwa to kill someone, he MUST BE KILLED, his mosque must be bombed and his family members killed.

After we do this, imams and mullahs will be more careful and thoughtful in what they say.

Mohammed heard one of his wives was leaving him, so he rushed home where he found her on the carpet in front of the tent with her belongings; he sat beside her and said, “I heard you were planning to leave me?”

She replied, “Yes, I heard your other wives saying you were a pedophile!”

Mohammed thinks for a minute or so and then responds, “that's a mighty big word for a 6 year old."

Q. How did the Muslim adulteress cross the road?
A. She was dragged by her feet, kicking and screaming, then she was stoned to death by a baying lynch-mob of brainwashed psychopaths.

Q. Did you hear the one about the violent 53 year-old paedophile?
A. Yes. He is revered by one fifth of the world's population as the one who started the world's most intolerant, repressive, misogynistic and violent religion.

"A prominent Saudi cleric has issued an edict calling for opponents of the kingdom's strict segregation of men and women to be put to death if they refuse to abandon their ideas."

I've got a better idea. We find this Sow-di cleric and kick the ever living crap out of him and tell him, no, I don't think so.

Wellington wrote:

"Destroy Mohammed and you destroy Islam. This is the path to take I would argue."

Spot on Wellington, as usual. Mohammed, as perceived by Muslims as "the perfect man" for emulation for all times in Islam, is also the defining lynchpin of Islam.

Destroy him, and rightfully so in my estimation, and Islam folds like a house of cards.

Where we differ slightly, is how exactly to get to that point. Mohammed, the obvious founder of the vile ideology of Islam, is secondary to the tenets of Islam itself, in my estimation.

Remember, that Islam is supposedly Allah driven, not Mohammed driven. That is a key element.

Attacking the doctrine of Islam, the Koran, the Hadith and the Sira, the most former supposedly divinely put forth by Mohammed through Allah, is paramount in this war we now wage as a global minority.

That said, there is no doubt in my mind at least, that Mohammed and Jesus, for example, are nothing less than diametric moral opposites, at least as far as the respective canonical and historical texts of both ideologies are concerned.

Regards.

Agreed, awake. To know muhammad is to loath muhammad. Anyone that can read the true account of that foul creep and not be repulsed, is a cold hearted sociopath. Which means they would make an exemplary moslem.

Wellington wrote:

"Talk about getting things cosmologically ass backwards, but then I've come to expect that from Mohammedans------across the board."

Sad, and quite dangerous(for us), isn't it Wellington?

Regards.

KrazyKafir,

Amen to that...no wait...is that proselytizing?

Shame, shame,shame on me.

Regards.

Wellington says
"I would add that the key to discrediting Islam is to discredit Mohammed."

When discussing with a muslim, confront him about Mohammed's actions and question his legitimacy as a prophet.

And when talking to a non-muslim, focus on Islamic doctrine (Quran, hadiths etc), and the implications for his freedom.

This seems to be the most effective approach in spreading awareness among non-muslims, and pushing some muslims towards apostasy. Whenever I have done vice-verse, the message falls on deaf ears :)

Great idea, "As the Jihad turns". A soap! Broadcast every day! About what Jihad Watch reports, with a few strong threads, situated in both the Islamic and the Democratic world.

It would by considered as highly provocative by Muslims & Apologists, of course! But by now we have experts in Arab, Iranian and Urdu and other languages Muslims speak, and we can know what THEIR TV broadcasts, like we saw about the Palestinian TV and no doubt the Iranian TV is worse. And the protocols of Zion on Egyptian TV also come to mind.

And so now if we have a great "As the Jihad turns" or "the bold and the beautiful in Islam" or so, we can return the favor, not out of spite, but in the interest of balance, reciprocity. And in the long term interest of Democracy over Islamic theocracy, even in Islamic countries.

With regard to awake and Wellington pointing out the focus of what our attack should be -- whether Mohammed, or the Koran, or the Sunnah -- I agree, as long as we understand that this project of attacking any one or all of these things (giving priority to one of them perhaps) is a project relative to our own non-Muslim Westerners. If, however, you guys conceive of this project as an attempt to discredit these things in the eyes of Muslims, I would disagree that we should waste time and money on that.

The fight, our fight, thus has two prongs, and we should keep these distinct on certain levels:

1) our fight to wake up the West to the dangers of Muslims -- by educating our fellow Westerners about Islam, which is comprised of Mohammed, the Koran, the Sunna, Sharia.

2) our fight against Muslims -- which entails many different approaches, from piece-meal incremental dishabilitation (restricting immigration, keeping tabs on any mosque that has already come on our radar as "radical"; etc.), to more aggressive measures (stopping immigration, deportation, shutting down all mosques or at least surveilling all mosques not just the ostensibly "radical" ones, criminalizing Islam, redefining Islam as a dangerously seditious organization; etc).

#1, however will have a difficult time getting off the ground and gaining traction throughout the West, unless it extends beyond the abstract level of ideas and texts, and is connected to the behaviors of actual Muslims who, in actually putting those ideas and texts into practice (as well as those who in one way or another enable Islam), make Islam dangerous for us.

That connection, however, is fraught with problems, and the biggest problem that persists is the difficulty of demonstrating that more than a small minority of "radical" Muslims are the problem. This is not an abstract problem: the longer we wait, the more millions of Muslims will immigrate into the West and will be born here, and so if we only focus on ideas & texts and on the few obvious "radical" Muslims, we will meanwhile be doing little or nothing about those millions among whom we have no way of knowing which are dangerous and which not, which are trying to mind their own business, and which are actually enabling, in one way or another, the Jihad of their more Islamic fellows. And indeed, the mere aggrandizing demographic presence of Muslims itself serves to enable the Jihad anyway, even if innumerable numbers among that presence are just ostensibly nice people. If nice Muslims exist, they cannot be allowed forever to continue to fail to own up to their responsibility of enabling Islam by the mere fact of being Muslims.

well said all

Muslim imams come out with edicts to kill people for all kinds of reasons.
They have a problem with everyone.
I expect some imam some day to come out with a fatwa telling muslims:
'Kill everybody.
And then suicide bomb yourself.'
And when everyone is dead, muslims will be happy.

Weird religion.

I really think that if they want to do this segregation thing properly they should go back to the old ways and do what Noah did to enforce it the ark: he carted Adam's dead body on board and used it as a giant (Adam was 90 feet tall) rotting bolster between the men and the women.

Wellington says

"I must say, though I personally have had some success in effecting a distaste for Islam in general when describing to non-Muslims the more sordid characteristics of Mohammed"

Oh yes. That works when the non-muslim has some inkling that Islam is a threat to him. From there, description of Mohammed works wonders.

Tenets of Shariah Law
Examples of Shariah Law include the following: (from the authoritative source Reliance of the Traveller, The Sacred Manual of Islamic Law)

Requirement of women to obtain permission from husbands for daily freedoms;

Beating of disobedient woman and girls;

Execution of homosexuals;

Engagement of polygamy and forced child marriages;

Requirement of the testimony of four male witnesses to prove rape;

Stoning of adulteresses;

Lashing of adulterers;

Amputation of body for criminal offenses;

Female genital mutilation;

Capital punishment for those who slander or insult Islam;

Execution of apostates, or those that leave the religion of Islam

Inferior status for all non-Muslims, known as Dhimmitude.

Concept of Taquiyya: A Muslim may lie or deceive others to advance the cause of Islam.

http://www.stopshariahnow.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=57&Itemid=60

islam is a social, cultural, economic, intellectual and political latrine.