Having failed to frame Spencer and Geller for murder in Toulouse, Islamic supremacists and their tools try to frame us for murder in California

A Muslim woman, Shaima Alwadi, has been brutally murdered in California. A note was left next to the body, saying, "go back to your country you terrorist." This has led Islamic supremacist smear merchants and their tools to blame -- who else? -- Pamela Geller and me for Alwadi's murder, so desperate are they to silence our message of truth.

This has happened before, and doubtless will again. The most notorious example, of course, was when an international chorus of media and Islamic supremacists blamed Geller and me for murders in Norway that were carried about by a man who wanted to aid Hamas and ally with jihad groups. Then they were even prepared to blame us for a murder in New Jersey that turned out to be a love triangle that the killer -- in a move that may be illuminating for the Shaima Alwadi case -- tried to frame as an anti-Muslim hate crime. Not only did we receive a tweet from a Muslim blaming us for the murder, but also a well-placed source told me that Hooper was “salivating and waiting to jump all over” the murder story. “They are waiting to blame you for everything.”

Indeed. And not waiting, but just going ahead and doing it anyway, facts be damned. So now the Islamic supremacist Boy Reza Aslan, who is callous enough to make bets about the murders of Jewish schoolchildren, has turned from blaming us for the jihad murders in Toulouse to blaming us for the murder of Shaima Alwadi, adding a veiled threat in as he does so:

Aslanthreat.jpg

Other Islamic supremacists have piled on, using the same talking points, as has Antiwar.com writer Justin Raimondo, ever eager to do the bidding of his Islamic supremacist masters:

Murder, murder everywhere – in Afghanistan, where a rampaging US soldier killed 16 Afghan civilians, half of them children, and in a quiet Southern California suburb, where Shaima’s 17-year-old daughter found her mother on the floor, her brains bashed in, next to a note that echoed the slogans shouted by Robert Spencer, David Horowitz, Pamela Geller, Rep. King, Rep. Royce, Rep. Miller, Newt Gingrich, and all the rest of the Republican haters and militarists.

They all have Shaima’s blood on their hands. What’s ugly is that, lacking any moral instinct, they aren’t even trying to wash it off. They feel no more remorse for the death of an innocent woman than a hawk feels after it has killed a rabbit. This is where a decade of constant warfare, and – arguably – the modern trend toward moral relativism and nihilism, has led us.

Never mind that I have been consistently on record against the Wilsonian adventures of those Raimondo calls "militarists" since March 2003; since when have the facts ever troubled Justin Raimondo in mid-screed? In fact, no one in this whole new orgy of demonization of Pamela Geller and me is much interested in the facts. Take, for example, this that came in after I responded to Aslan's tweet above by pointing out that Muslim men are by far the most common killers of Muslim women:

SinceWhen2.jpg

Well, maybe since we spoke out for Aasiya Hassan; or Aqsa Parvez, who had been consigned to oblivion by her family until Pamela Geller decided to get her a headstone; or Fatima Abdallah; or Amina and Sarah Said; or Jessica Mokdad; or so many others.

When has Reza Aslan or Justin Raimondo or anyone else in their camp ever shown any concern at all for the plight of those Muslim women or others like them?

That's right, the correct answer is never. They're too busy trying to frame us for murder to spend any time helping out Muslim women in trouble.

Meanwhile, the questions multiply about the Shaima Alwadi case. Hamas-linked CAIR and others are trumpeting it as a hate crime, but there is evidence that it is something else altogether. Pamela Geller has the information here. In this video at 1:35, a neighbor says the glass in the house was broken out, not in -- yet the claim is that the "Islamophobic" intruder broke the glass in and entered the house.

Then there is the very odd behavior of the daughter who says she was sleeping upstairs at 11:15 Wednesday morning, and slept through the "Islamophobe" breaking the glass and beating her mother to death. Look at the house -- it is not that large. It is impossible to break glass without making noise, and didn't Shaima scream at the sight of the intruder? The girl, meanwhile, seems like nothing more than a bad actor, holding a dry tissue to her face and pretending to cry, and accomplishing nothing beyond appearing to be oddly unaffected by the brutal murder of her mother:

And finally there is this al-Arabiya report, in which the family demonstrates detailed knowledge of a murder for which there is supposed to be no witness. How do they know the exact sequence of the blows? How do they have so much precise information about exactly how it was done?

There are other questions as well. Pamela Geller has more here.

Shaima Alwadi deserves justice. She deserves better than to be used by Islamic supremacists and their useful idiots as the centerpiece of a campaign of vilification and character assassination against defenders of freedom. She deserves to have her killer found and prosecuted. Instead of using her to defame and scapegoat the defenders of Muslim women, Islamic supremacists should demonstrate that they have some scintilla of concern for Muslim women as well, and join us in calling for justice for Shaima Alwadi.

| 101 Comments
del.icio.us | Digg this | Email | FaceBook | Twitter | Print | Tweet

101 Comments

| Leave a comment

This story came out yesterday or the day before, and I immediately suspected that there may be more to it than meets the eye; that is, in my opinion, it is far more likely that this was some kind of honour killing than a hate crime perpetrated in a quiet suburb at midday.

As for the daughter's "performance," calling it bad acting would be giving a grave disservice to bad actors.

I look forward to the truth coming out either way.

Ima

Reza's pretty extreme?

I think the daugter a genuinly upset. however I have to agree with you that there is more to it than just a random act of singling this woman out. after all there a lot more ligit targets out ther.
How are you doing Ima?
M

Having failed to frame Spencer and Geller for murder in Toulouse, Islamic supremacists and their tools try to frame us for murder in California
..........................................

Sickening—but this scarcely surprises me. I first saw this story when the appalling Jihad apologist "DefenderofIslam" posted a link and claimed it was the fault of Jihad Watch.

Firstly, Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller have *never* condoned any sort of violence against Muslims. This is base calumny. Rather, it is violence in the name of Islam that is savaging others.

Secondly, right from the beginning this has sounded more to me like an "honor killing" palmed off as "Islamophobia" than anything else. And the more details I've seen, the more this sounds like the case.

I feel for Shaima Alwadi and am horrified by her death. It didn't have anything to do with the actions of decent Anti-Jihadists, though.

Calumny, slander and libel. You can sue these dolts for sure.

Robert, keep us posted on this one. I agree that justice needs to be done, but I'd also like to see what tumbles out in the investigation, arrest, and trial.

That girl seems rather convinced that the suspect was male and acted alone.

Raisin Azzhat is a non-comical joke. I would bet that a male family member of this lady committed this terrible act.

There have been too many other Muslims in America who have filed "anti-Muslim hate crimes" with law enforcement who turned out to be the perpetrators of the crimes they tried to pin on Americans.

Islam should be categorized not as a religion, but as a
he-man woman haters club where lying, raping, pillaging, rioting and murder are not only permitted, but are etched into its criteria.

What a garbage cult that ancient desert nomad with a psycological disorder founded.

Good to note that Reza Aslan has properly described himself through admission that he's a muslim terrorist. We've known it along.

One news report has said that the victim wife's body, the corpus delicti, is now beyond El Cajon police jurisdiction, and in Iraq.

Clousseau-quality police work? How could it have ever been released?

dont worry it will be all over the news. I will bet my life savings it is someone who she knew and that they left the note to make it look like a hate crime.
M

Most women Muslim or non-Muslim who are killed in their homes in such a brutal fashion are killed by a man in their life usually a husband or boyfriend. It unlikely that a random "islamophobe" wandered in off the street, kill the woman and then conveniently left a note for the police to find.This will likely turn out like the case of the Muslim woman shot and killed by an "islamophobe" as her "innocent" Muslim husband looked on. Turns out the woman was killed by the girlfriend of the Muslim husband at the husbands request.I'm sure the police are looking closely at the husband and any other males connected to this woman.

This is the ultimate wet dream for CAIR. Hold on, they will be coming out with both barrels blazing. Here is the "backlash" and "hate crime" scenario they have been salivating over and fantasizing about for so long.

I have heard that broken glass has only been found INSIDE the premises. This could be yet another honour killing.

In standard domestic violence case murders, the perp (8 times out of 10) is the spouse or boyfriend. The police should be looking suspiciously at the husband firstly because of that fact. That said, the note about her being a "terrorist" may be a possible coverup ruse by the murderer to throw law enforcement off track. If law enforcement have been paying attention to recent similar cases (eg. Noor Almaleki in Nevada and Muzzamil Hasan beheading his wife in New York state) the honour killing angle should also be a consideration in this case.

All the rushing to judgement by the public and media about this being a case of "islamophobia" could turn out to be the same blundering as the rush to judgement about the Toulouse jihadist being a "neo mazi". We will know soon enough, hopefully.

Hi, Miriam, I'm fine, thank you. Sun News is running the story now about the "How to beat your wife" book offered for sale in an Islamic bookstore in Toronto. The owner of the store said they were "picking on him."

How is your son? Is he still in Afghanistan?

Ima

Shaima Alwadi was murdered by someone she knew, who then left a note hoping to distract the police.

This is an old, old, old, old, old, old story that in previous times would have involved "a black man", but when police investigate it is found out that the murderer was the husband, boyfriend, etc.

The fact that CAIR, and Loonwatch, and Aslan are exploiting this tragedy is evil in action.

Reza Asslick is blinded by hate and desperate to throw Robert and Pamela under the bus ...to hell with the truth!

Reza Aslan can boldly dare the "Islamophobic f---s" to "come find" him because he knows that he is not at any significant risk of being violently attacked by "Islamophobes".

Why won't Reza Aslan boldly dare the jihadists and sharia supremacists to "come find" him when he critiques their views (oops--Reza Aslan does not critique their views and is not in the business of opposing them. He is instead in the business of using propaganda to attack those who oppose the jihadists and sharia supremacists.)

This is just more libelous nonsense from Reza Aslan.

Reza Aslan promotes the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. He is engaged in a campaign to deceive naive non-Muslims about Islam while the jihads of all sorts continue apace.


This is the last straw Mr. Spencer regarding azzlan. Please, haven't we been subjected to enough of his lying psychotic hate-filled profane rants? Please do not feature anything regarding this freaky lunatic anymore. Enough of azzlan!

how the hell does the canadian government even allow the publication of this book. it is like a pedohpile publishing a book as how to have sex with a 9 year old boy. I don't get it. I am not an expert on constitutional law but this is way off. and I mean way off. I was in Toronto once and seeing all these muslims in head scarve, is just depressing to say the least. you guys really have your work cut out for you. I am hopning my son is ok. he called me about a week ago and he siad dad I am going on a mission and of course he would not tell me where. no surprise here. however, that siad he some where to take a D...bag out. one shot to the lefy eye as he says.
M

Telling the truth should never make anybody kill another person. Just the contrary. Pam and Robert are trying to help Muslims for years by telling the TRUTH about Islam so they can leave this totalitarian idealogy which was created by a madman. My question to these idiots is that, can't they verify themselves what PAM and Robert say is true? Or do they really have different agenda?

champ: as an Iranian I can tell you this that there are quite a few vile bastards that are in Iran I am sure you know this. but this guy Reza, is not be taken lightly, if you go on his site you will see that he is a shroud busniman and he will sell his own mother to advance his agenda. well may not his mother she has to be in her 70s. I should have siad his sister or his wife.
Champ: it is a beatiful day here in NYC and the topic of Islam brings about some depression, so I am off to smoke a cigar and a stiff scotch or two!!!!!!!!!!
M

Reza is married? ..oh my who would marry that vile creature? A glutton for punishment it seems. Well enjoy the nice weather andyour Cee-gar, lol! :)


Oh man.

I read that story a couple of days ago and the first thing which ran through my mind was that it seemed like the note was more of a cue card for the detectives so they should get their thinking straight.

The family just moved their but some random stranger just came in off the street to target a woman whom he didn't know to kill her over her faith? It did not sound believable even before I saw the videos.

Go back and just replay the video of the daughter (without watching her body language). Just listen to her speech. Where does her voice rise, fall, sound strong like a victorious athlete and take breaths. Note those points in the time. Then rewatch it for her body language at those points. She's well shielded by not allowing us to see her eyes but you can still pick out stuff. Stuff she will have a hard time with when she makes her official statement.

I had not heard about this until now.

I am so sorry that you and Pamela have to endure yet another round of this filth, being unjustly accused of things you would never do or condone.

May the truth be known, and soon. Stay strong.

Something is wrong with this case!!

Something dodgy!!

One of those internal Muslim matters!

On theory!

Take care of the wife -

The daughter is 17 years - he may have wanted to marry her off - naturally to help his cousin/nephew get a US passport - and perhaps - the wife objected.

The daughter is at the marrying age - this is a contentious point - in many an immigrant family.


As one Muslim girl in the UK who escaped from such family conditions - say that - when her father looked at her and her sister - all he saw were two British passports.

-

The police should check to see if there was a marriage in the works and whether the mother was in agreement.

One successful British Muslim woman - was brought in front of her younger sisters /cousins and had her throat slashed - that the police suspected - was to show the others what they would get if they disobeyed [as in became too independent/ too western].

-

This 17 year old daughter - may have witnessed her mother's murder - and could be terrified and have seriously mixed feelings - about this so-called honor from a foreign land.

She may not want to see her father go to prison.

-

With the mother out of the way - and some poor 'Islamophobe' put behind bars - he can then continue with his plans to marry - off his daughter - and the US gets a new Muslim citizen to be proud of!

Until the next generation - and the same pressure is applied.

This is how it is done in Europe!

Afraid there is nothing exceptional about it!!

My impression: the family member who(I believe) did this killing, did a hack-job of covering his tracks. This might not be as fast a slam dunk as cracking the Shafia murders was, but law enforcement will figure this out forthwith. In the Shafia case, there were the wire taps to fall back on. I don't know wire tapping is legal down there


Wire taping can be legal providing it is done with warrants.

I read about the service in the local paper. There are a lot of suspicious people there too.

"The girl, meanwhile, seems like nothing more than a bad actor, holding a dry tissue to her face and pretending to cry..." -Robert

She does appear to me be crying and there are tears in the initial segment.

I find the reported evidence to be pretty ambiguous at this stage. The note could be indicative of a hate crime, or a staging of one to cover up something else. We would have to see the pattern of the glass shards to determine whether the window was broken in or out (and it could be a combination of both), and that in itself wouldn't clearly indicate anything. The statements from family members about the precise details of the attack are possibly conjecture about what is supposed to have happened based on the appearance of the murder scene and based on talking with the police.

Interestingly, the girl makes a broad accusation that the killer is neither Christian, nor Jewish, nor Muslim, but rather someone "without a religion," because, she asks, how could someone who believes in God do such a thing? In fact, of such categories, atheist is a highly unlikely possibility in this case, because (a) atheists are a very small percentage of the population in the U.S., (b) in the criminal population (in jail) there are less atheists than one would expect based on their percentage in the population. This doesn't mean that the killer couldn't possibly have been an atheist, it's just unlikely according to the data thus far and baseline probabilities. (Due to such considerations, it's also unlikely to be a Jew).

Anyways, her claim that no one with a religion and belief in God could kill a mother is false, because Muhammad clearly permitted Muslims to engage in vigilante killings of anyone who merely spoke ill of him:

"Ruling on one who insults the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)"
http://islamqa.com/en/ref/22809/insulting%20the%20prophet

Also see this:
"Muhammad’s Dead Poets Society: The assassinations of satirical poets in early Islam."
author: James M. Arlandson
http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/dead_poets.htm

What are the odds of Reza Aslan actually being an Iranian Agent on assignment?

a)50-50
b)60-40
c)75-25
d)90-10
e)98-02

This murder was commited by a pedohameddan, and they put that note on/beside the body to divert the attention of the police, media, homicide detectives, other pedohammedans and libtards.

Too obvious. They should dissimulate a little bit.

Reza,

Some of us have always known that you're a terrorist in disguise. The enablers, apologists, mouthpieces, and so on--they're not far removed from the first-line terrorists. I'm sure that you know this.

.

It should come as no surprise that the Islamic machine is going to do everything that it can to silence the truth about Islam by alleging a link between the words of truth-tellers on Islam and the actions of unknown--but presumed to be non-Muslim--killers of Muslims. Short of physically attacking Robert and Pamela, or the killer (s) leaving a note with Robert and Pamela's signature at a crime scene, the Islamic policy of desperation cannot get more desperate to silence the truth.

Islam: where freedom ends and slavery begins.

Reza Aslan wrote:

If a 32 year old veiled mother is a terrorist than (sic) so am I you Islamophobic fucks Gellar (sic) Spencer et. al. Come find me.
........................................

Grotesque. Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller receive death threats all the time from Aslan's vile coreligionists, whereas Aslan has never been threatened by these "Islamophobes".

Another important point, which I don't believe anyone has yet mentioned.

Thirty-two year old Shaima Alwadi was the mother of a seventeen year old daughter. that means she gave birth to this daughter at just *fifteen years of age*, and was probably impregnated at just *fourteen*.

So—this poor woman was *already* clearly the victim of her husband and family. We just have to see if they finished her off, as well...

What I find most disturbing about this video is something the reporter said in answer to the anchor's query of, "What are the police saying about this?":

"Police are calling this an 'isolated incident'."
________________________________________________

Now, that language strikes me as very strange - is it code for, "No, there isn't a Muslim Hating spree-killer at large?"

I don't think so, because there's only one killing.

I think the cops already smell a rat, and they used that phrase to sound innocuous - and it does.
_______________________________________

Prediction? A man closely related to the family did this. Too much violence for a woman, and the notion of a tire iron strikes me as more "manly" a tool with which to commit murder.

Finally, the glass being broken from the inside out smells of coverup by a stupid person, trying to make it look like a "break-in", or it could point to an object being thrown at someone, and it crashed through the window - but if that's the case, where, and what, is the object?

We'll just have to wait on this one, but something is definately fishy, and Reza Aslan needs to have his ass kicked in the boxing match I plan to have with him for $1000 USD.

1000 bucks?!

I'd box that arrogant little supremacist prick into oblivion for free.

As for the baghead with the crocodile tears; her perfomance brought two words to my mind Susan Smith. My gut reaction was the same I had years ago watching that vile woman lie after having killed her two children.

Reza is becoming even more unhinged. That tweet is not a threat so much as it is him imagining that Robert and Pamela are personally going to hunt him down and kick his butt. While I personally have no doubts about Robert and Pamela’s preternatural might, somehow I think that’s unlikely. I wonder if this paranoid nut imagines that Robert and Pamela can “see” him through his television and stuff like that. He is clearly obsessed.

"Shaima Alwadi deserves justice. She deserves better than to be used by Islamic supremacists and their useful idiots as the centerpiece of a campaign of vilification and character assassination against defenders of freedom."
So very true, always, Robert and Pamela, Amen to that.

And yes Miriam, I'd be happy to join you on the Scotch, Glennlivet, or such, and yes, I'm waiting to learn who was likely the islam honor killer, and maybe the reason, even will appear, with luck. Grievingly sadly, the daughter may know the tragedy details.

Also, MR, best not to give any details of anything your son says, even after he leaves the sandbox, he could be in danger from details, even though not specific. Agents are believed to be everywhere, according to recent news, as I'm sure you well know. Likely there are those keeping a matrix on each of us, other than the hopefully good guys, the DHS, etc.

I say good guys, "maybe" because I just learned again of the high level enemy compromising of our agencies, like the CIA, whose head named Roger, I think, became a muslim to marry, unbelievably, a muslim girl.

The mistake in the interview was that the girl was allowed to wear her tinted eyeglasses. One's physiognomy is telling, so those shades only served to hinder a better reading of her sincerity.

Islam: where freedom ends and slavery begins.

The plight of Muslim women around the world at the hands of Muslim men is horrendous and reprehensible. (Posters to Jihad Watch will have no doubt why that is!) Its taken a long time (too damn long) but it seems to finally being picked up by the media:

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/03/28/world/asia/afghanistan-women-rights/

And would you believe it - the Pakistani media actually picked it up first - but of course there was no mention of the hundreds of similar cases languishing in Pakistani jails!

Further to the Toulouse murders, not only are Spencer & Geller blamed but - it just gets better - the father of that murdering @#$$hole is suing French police for the death of his son!

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/French-gunmans-father-to-sue-police-over-his-death/articleshow/12449076.cms

Anything is theoretically possible but this crime very much has an inside job feel about it. Well, Muslims are first-rate at inside jobs, especially where brutally killing Muslim women is concerned. And Muslims are also outstanding at projection and playing the victim card. Figure the odds here. It ain't difficult.

If you break than glass window or door to enter than house most of the glass will fall outside the house. If broken from the inside most of the glass will fall inside the house. I worked security before.

Reza Aslan is a sick mind,he is so vulgar,he has no taste and is a bully.That is why I decided to analyze his books to see if he was intellectually honest,he isn't.

READ THIS

"About Ibn Kammuna,13th Century Jewish Intellectual of Baghdad,who wrote a Famous Book against Islam"

http://www.antisharia.com/2012/03/29/about-ibn-kammuna13th-century-jewish-intellectual-of-baghdadwho-wrote-a-famous-book-against-islam/

AND ALSO

"The Greatest Book in Arabic,the “Thousand and One Nights”,is a Copy of a pagan,pre-Islamic book from Iran"

http://www.antisharia.com/2012/03/22/the-greatest-book-in-arabicthe-thousand-and-one-nightsis-a-copy-of-a-paganpre-islamic-book-from-iran/

"Dante,the Greatest Italian Writer,has Mosques,Muhammad and Ali in Hell in the Divine Comedy"

http://www.antisharia.com/2011/12/02/dantethe-greatest-italian-writerhas-mosquesmuhammad-and-ali-in-hell-in-the-divine-comedy/

Boy Reza needs to shut his hummus hole...sheesh! IMO, she was murdered by her husband or a hit man hired by her husband, and the note was left behind to make it appear as though she was the victim of a hate crime. Well, let's face it, she WAS the victim of a hate crime...Muslims hate their women.

For what it's worth, a couple of the more recent stories about this case:

http://www.cbs8.com/story/17280643/police-logs-describe-possible-suspect-in-murder-of-el-cajon-mother

Interesting that the daughter was reported missing late at night, a relatively innocuous incident that could, however, ignite the deadly "I've-been-dishonored!" rage in a devout muslim male. I wonder if she was out burning the midnight oil the night before the murder, having slept in until 11:15 the next morning. That's excessive even for a teenager.

And the elusive "young man seen running away" is now described as dark-skinned and wearing a "hoodie", which is not going to mesh well with the current "hoodie march" mentality surrounding our ongoing Let's-Lynch-Zimmerman media and race-baiter fueled national frenzy. Likely to throw cold water on the "hoodie and hijab" parties described in this story.

Anyone can look up on Google Maps the murder scene on Skyview Street in El Cajon. It is the white house at the right end of the street just before the curve. There is a dirt road and a large parking lot behind the house. One would expect reports of police out back there taking tire castings and other possible evidence of a fleeing perp or speeding getaway car, especially if so many people have allegedly seen this hoodie-clad lurker over the past several weeks. He may in fact have been seen in the neighborhood (doing nothing illegal, just passing by) and be currently hiding under his bed in terror lest he find himself the sacrificial lamb in this little muslim morality play.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-03-28/iraqi-woman-beating-death/53825028/1

It's still possible that this crime was committed by an intruder, but the evidence remains vague and scanty. Don't let this story slip off the radar, as it may well do if this turns out to be an "honor" killing or the like.

And Reza Ashole-an, if you are reading this, I'm 68 years old, I HATE Islam, and I would gladly stick the business end of my cane up your butt. Your fear of and submission to the "allah" who does not exist has made a functional psychotic out of you and it is a sad comment on our times that you are able to gain a moment's attention from anyone.


All you need to know is that Reza worships a misoghynistic/pedophile while he support the actions in gaza where females and chattle and kids are suicide-bombers.


Expecting a sane debate with Reza is like expecting to see Mr.PotatoHead win $1 million dollars on Jeopardy.

Reza attack females from all faiths because he's been brainwashed about how muslims are the Super-race to rule the Earth one day. He actually believes the crap he spews about peace and justice via Sharaih Law .

"the glass being broken from the inside out"

CSI: San Diego

Scene Two: Back at the lab. One of the lab techs is examining the fibers of the back of the murdered woman's shirt under a microscope.

"Traces of tiny shards of glass."

"Hm. Evidently, that would account for the patterns of glass spatter we found outside the window, since only something resembling the shape of a body would have broken the window that way."

"Yes, and someone also spent a good deal of time brushing off the glass from the woman's shirt and hair, and expected it was all gone. We even found indications her hair had been washed post-mortem."

"So, apparently, at some point, she was thrown against the window, the glass broke out, then she was murdered, and the perp realized he had to remove the evidence of glass from the victim, in order to pin it on a fictional 'intruder'..."

Let's hope, at any rate, that real police are actually as on the ball about pursuing all possible leads as the ones who play them on TV.

The language of Reza Aslan and Co in their comments is always filthy. They seem not to be able to construct a sentence without using an obscenity. Not only are their arguments mostly ad hominem but they are also foully expressed . The form and the content of their speech match in a perverse kind of way.

That second Twitterer, "Vas", looks a bit like Chris Sarandon:

http://www.alicia-logic.com/capsimages/fn_070ChrisSarandon.jpg

-- though no doubt he usually looks like this especially in the morning after a night of Mohammedan clubbing:

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/dailymusto/dog_day_afternoon_Chris-Sarandon.jpg

or even this:

http://needcoffee.cachefly.net/needcoffee/uploads/2008/07/sarandon-fright-night.jpg

Did she commit the capital crime of showing a hint of an intent to declare herself an apostate? Did she develop these treasonous pro-freedom ideas as a result of reading JihadWatch? Could she have become the next anonymous apostate blogger? Sadly, the hope for freedom when coupled with naïveté can be a dangerous mix, among the most ordinary of pious Muslims.

These pious folks appear so transfixed by their own hatred that they project their psychotically myopic world view upon anyone describable as other. It may be true that they believe that the whole world is as evil as they are, or worse. It must be a direct result of being smothered under an Islamic wet blanket.

Some of us are actually more intrigued by silly questions like whether the new iPad runs too hot, or not. The real problem is that the other is actually totally oblivious and unconcerned. It takes affirmative effort to even pretend to notice the evil among us at this early stage.

lilredbird wrote:

For what it's worth, a couple of the more recent stories about this case
............................

Thanks, lilredbird.

This, from the linked story:

Also in the police reports, a call for service from Jan. 31, two months before the beating attack. The victim, Shaima Alawadi, called police at 10:50 p.m. to report her 17-year-old daughter, Fatima Alhimidi, had been missing for two hours.

The teenager told her mother that her head was hurting and then went out for a walk. The girl had not returned so Alawadi called police, according to the report.

A short time after the call, the police response was canceled and a note in the log said the teen was located at 11:12 p.m. that same night.
............................

This might be important. Did the family feel Shaima Alawadi was not doing enough to control her daughter?

Hard to know, but it seems a bit odd that a parent would otherwise call the police if a 17 year old went out for a couple of hours.

More:

Neighbors said investigators also towed away a red Nissan van registered the victim's husband, Kassim Alhimidi, 47.
............................

Kassim Alhimidi is 47. Shaima Alawadi was 32. Her daughter is 17.

Assuming Kassim Alhimidi is also Fatima's father, that means he married Shaima when he was 29 and she was 14—that is, if she was not even younger.

A 29 year old impregnating a 14 year old—in the civilized West that would be, *at best*, statutory rape. And that's if it was consensual.

We need to watch this case...

Reza Aslan is losing the argument. primarily because he can't frame an argument, especially with a multitude of his co-religionists consistently and repetively undermining his false assertion with their words and actions.

In a world between Spencer and Aslan, I'd wager my dollar on Spencer in terms of longevity at this point. I haven't seen Aslan invited to parse, disseminate and obfuscate on any mainstream venues as of late.

Does anyone have evidence to the contrary?

How can one tweet have so many factual errors is beyond me . Only someone as delusional as Reza Aslan could do it.

And here are the errors :

1. Yes Reza, veiled mothers have and can be terrorists.

2. Spencer et al are NOT Islamophobic. They simply stand up too and bring to light the Jihadist ideology and those who promote it. Like Reza.

3. By saying "come find me" he is implying that Spencer et al are somehow violent and would want find and hurt Reza. Sorry Reza, Spencer and Gellar are clearly anti-violence, you would know this if you followed jihad watch more closely.

4. Use's public profanity - And to think this guy gets called to lecture school kids.

If Reza Aslan had any credibilty left it is totally gone now.

The ironic thing about the tweet is that he calls himself a terrorist. Your too easy Rez.

OT

Sun TV follows up with more on the Islamic wife beating book controversy:
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/politics/archives/2012/03/20120328-180155.html

I guess the difference between the murder of Shaima Alwadi and those of the Jewish children is simply this - the murder of Shaima Alwadi is condemned and deplored by Mr Spencer and all right thinking people who also deplore the daily Jihadi murders.

We hope that the murderer is brought to justice.

The murderer of the Jewish children on the other hand is at the very least condoned by many Muslims and by many greeted as a heroic act.

How Reza Aslan misleads about Muhammad's marriage to 9-year-old Aisha

Notice how Aslan, on pages 64 and 65 of his book No god but God claims that Muhammad did not consummate his marriage to Aisha when she was 9:

...Aisha...was nine years old when betrothed to the Prophet...And while Muhammad's union with a nine-year-old girl may be shocking to our modern sensibilities, his betrothal to Aisha was just that: a betrothal. Aisha did not consummate her marriage to Muhammad until after reaching puberty...

Why doesn't Aslan mention what the core Islamic texts tell us?

From Sahih al-Bukhari, the most canonical hadith collection:

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64:

Narrated 'Aisha:

that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 65:

Narrated 'Aisha:

that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)."

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88:

Narrated 'Ursa:

The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 236:

Narrated Hisham's father:

Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.

-------------------------------------

Many other core Islamic texts could be quoted in a similar vein.

It should be noted that Aisha was nine lunar years old. Since a lunar year is about 355 days, on Aisha's ninth Islamic birthday she would have been 9 x 355 = 3195 days old. That is actually about 90 days younger than what we call a 9 year old. We mean someone at least 9 x 365 = 3285 days old. Thus if the consummation took place soon after her ninth lunar birthday, she was, in our sight, only 8 year and nine months old. An eight-year-old.

___________________________________


How Reza Aslan whitewashes Muhammad's caravan raids

First, notice how Aslan, on pages 82 and 83 of his book No god but God, makes Muhammad's caravan raids look bloodless:

By declaring Yathrib a sanctuary city, Muhammad was deliberately challenging Mecca's religious and economic hegemony over the Peninsula. And just to make sure the Quraysh got the message, he sent his followers out into the desert to take part in the time-honored Arab tradition of caravan raiding.

In pre-Islamic Arabia, caravan raiding was a legitimate means for small clans to benefit from the wealth of larger ones. It was in no way considered stealing, and as long as no violence occurred and no blood was shed, there was no need for retribution. The raiding party would quickly descend on a caravan -- usually at its rear -- and carry off whatever they could get their hands on before being discovered. These periodic raids were certainly a nuisance for the caravan leaders, but in general they were considered part of the innate hazards of transporting large amounts of goods through a vast and unprotected desert.

Though small and sporadic at first, Muhammad's raids not only provided the Ummah with desperately needed income, they also effectively disrupted the trade flowing in and out of Mecca...

Why does Reza Aslan make no mention of what core Islamic texts say about those raids, for example, what happened at Nakhla, where for the first time Muslims succeeded in finding a caravan to target? See page 287 (425 in the Arabic) of the earliest Muslim biography of Muhammad:
They [the Muslim raiders] encouraged each other, and decided to kill as many as they could of them and take what they had. Waqid [one of the Muslim raiders] shot Amr bin al-Hadrami [one of the caravan's leaders] with an arrow and killed him...

Hi Defender of the Indefensible

You wrote: 'If you break than glass window or door to enter than house most of the glass will fall outside the house. If broken from the inside most of the glass will fall inside the house. I worked security before.'

It's the exact reverse, you clown! No wonder you were fired.

Anyway, this murder has Islam's 'honor-killing' fingerprints all over it. And the forensic boys in the USA are very good at finding molecular sized pieces of evidence.

I wonder what Reza will say when one or more family members are charged with this murder?

We need to actively redefine the word Islamophobe as someone who has a healthy fear of being forced to submit to Sharia law. We need to expose what Sharia law is and what it means and all that it entails. Compare U.S. Constitutional law with Sharia law and see how many people become Islamophobes.

Hostile muslims residing in this country have figured out that honor killings are seriously prosecuted by the authorities -- thus the BS "hate crime" note to distract.

"How Reza Aslan misleads about Muhammad's marriage to 9-year-old Aisha."

See it from the positive side. Aslan cannot condone that a pre pubescent girl (chronological age 8 years and nine month) by her father is forced into and commsumate marriage to a middle aged man. So he reject the relevant adadith which he can do because they are man made and not the words of God.

The real problem for a Muslim in this regard is not the ahadith but the words of God in the Qur'an (65:4) about waiting periods for pre pubescent girls, implicitly allowing this practice of child marriage:

"The waiting period of those of your women who have lost all expectation of menstruation shall be three month in case your entertain any doubt; and the same shall apply to those who have not yet menstruated"

Comment by Sayyid Mawdudi:

"Those women may not have experienced menstruation either because they are too young, or because their menstrual cycle was delayed (as does happen in the case of some women), or because they never experienced menstraution at all (which happens rarely). In any event, the waiting period of such women is the same as for women who are divorced after menopause; namely, three month from the time of the pronouncement of divorce."

Mawdudi confirms (as so many other scholars) that marriage to pre-pubescent girls is allowed by Allah, and what Allah has allowed man cannot forbid. It is here the real problem lies for all Muslims who believe that the Qur'an is the immutable words of Allah eternally and ubiquitously valid.

The only way to get around this conclusion is to reject that the Qur'an is eternal and exist coequal with God and instead understand it as created at the time of revelation to answer specific historical questions. In order to do that the gates of itjihad must first be reopened.

Ima

I believe that this is exactly the case. We were discussing it on Debbie Schlussel's site earlier. One poster suggested that since the husband had already had 5 kids out of her, he was just bored and wanted to do away w/ her. So he gets her murdered, while he and his kids are conveniently away, and as a part of this contract killing, he pins it as a hate crime to deflect attention from himself.

To be more detailed, since they were all in the US, he couldn't just do a triple-talaq and go hump another teen. So he arranged for this killing, since she had clearly grown too old and outlived her use, which was simply spawning more Mohammedans. If things go according to plan, he can go back to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan or wherever, pick up the next 13 year old that he lusts for, bring her back and restart the process.

DefenderofIslam

As Buraq pointed out, it's exactly the reverse - and if the criminals couldn't do that much right, they fall within the stupid criminals category. But as people have speculated, this was probably and inside job, and an honor killing disguised as a hate crime, since real hate crime perpetrators don't leave such notes or such evidence on their victims.

Top Islamic scholars' explanations of Qur'an 65:4 show that the verse assumes consummation of marriage with prepubescent girls

Before quoting the scholars on Quran 65:4, it should be noted that Quran 33:49 lays down that when a divorced female is to marry a new spouse, a waiting period is required only if the previous marriage was consummated. The scholars I will be quoting below all know this.  One of them, Maududi, mentions and explains it.

With that in mind, first consider Ibn Abbas, a companion of Muhammad, and one of many authorities who affirm that Qur'an 65:4 refers to the waiting period for prepubescent girls to remarry after divorce.

Ibn Abbas on Qur'an 65:4

(And for such of your women as despair of menstruation) because of old age, (if ye doubt) about their waiting period, (their period (of waiting) shall be three months) upon which another man asked: “O Messenger of Allah! What about the waiting period of those who do not have menstruation because they are too young?” (along with those who have it not) because of young age, their waiting period is three months. Another man asked: “what is the waiting period for those women who are pregnant?” (And for those with child) i.e. those who are pregnant, (their period) their waiting period (shall be till they bring forth their burden) their child. (And whosoever keepeth his duty to Allah) and whoever fears Allah regarding what he commands him, (He maketh his course easy for him) He makes his matter easy; and it is also said this means: He will help him to worship Him well.

Some eight hundred years later appeared the Tafsir al-Jalalayn, one of the most widely used interpretations of the Qur'an. Tafsir al-Jalalayn also tells us that Qur'an 65:4 speaks of waiting period for divorce of prepubescent girls:

And [as for] those of your women who (read allā’ī or allā’i in both instances) no longer expect to menstruate, if you have any doubts, about their waiting period, their prescribed [waiting] period shall be three months, and [also for] those who have not yet menstruated, because of their young age, their period shall [also] be three months — both cases apply to other than those whose spouses have died; for these [latter] their period is prescribed in the verse: they shall wait by themselves for four months and ten [days] [Q. 2:234]. And those who are pregnant, their term, the conclusion of their prescribed [waiting] period if divorced or if their spouses be dead, shall be when they deliver. And whoever fears God, He will make matters ease for him, in this world and in the Hereafter.

65:4, according to Wahidi's respected explanation of the Qur'an:

(And for such of your women as despair of menstruation…) [65:4]. Said Muqatil: “When the verse (Women who are divorced shall wait, keeping themselves apart…), Kallad ibn al-Nu‘man ibn Qays al-Ansari said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, what is the waiting period of the woman who does not menstruate and the woman who has not menstruated yet? And what is the waiting period of the pregnant woman?’ And so Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse”. Abu Ishaq al-Muqri’ informed us> Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Hamdun> Makki ibn ‘Abdan> Abu’l-Azhar> Asbat ibn Muhammad> Mutarrif> Abu ‘Uthman ‘Amr ibn Salim who said: “When the waiting period for divorced and widowed women was mentioned in Surah al-Baqarah, Ubayy ibn Ka‘b said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, some women of Medina are saying: there are other women who have not been mentioned!’ He asked him: ‘And who are they?’ He said: ‘Those who are too young [such that they have not started menstruating yet], those who are too old [whose menstruation has stopped] and those who are pregnant’. And so this verse (And for such of your women as despair of menstruation…) was revealed”.

The bracketed text is not me, it's in the Wahidi at Altafsir.com

Ibn Kathir is perhaps the Muslim world's most respected Quran expositor.

Kathir says of 65:4

Allah the Exalted clarifies the waiting period of the woman in menopause. And that is the one whose menstruation has stopped due to her older age. Her `Iddah [waiting period before remarriage] is three months instead of the three monthly cycles for those who menstruate, which is based upon the Ayah [verse] in (Surat) Al-Baqarah. (see Qur'an 2:228) The same for the young, who have not reached the years of menstruation. Their `Iddah [waiting period before remarriage] is three months like those in menopause. This is the meaning of His [Allah's] saying;
[Qur'an 65:4] (and for those who have no courses...)

Syed Abul Ala Maududi (died 1979), another famous Qur'an expositor, says of Qur’an 65:4:

Here, one should bear in mind the fact that according to the explanations given in the Quran the question of the waiting period arises in respect of the women with whom marriage may have been consummated, for there is no waiting-period in case divorce is pronounced before the consummation of marriage. (Al-Ahzab: 49). Therefore, making mention of the waiting-period for the girls who have not yet menstruated, clearly proves that it is not only permissible to give away the girl in marriage at this age but it is also permissible for the husband to consummate marriage with her. Now, obviously no Muslim has the right to forbid a thing which the Quran has held as permissible.

So major Muslim expositors of the Quran agree that Quran 65:4 assumes and supports consummation of marriage with prepubescent girls. These expositors know what Maududi above mentions: per Quran 33:49, a waiting period before remarriage is only required if the dissolved marriage was consummated.

And many Muslim translations of 65:4 make absolutely clear that it refers to remarriage of prepubescent girls. (See for example these translations: Al-Muntakahb, Abdel Haleem, Abdul Majid Daryabadi, Aisha Bewley, Ali Quli Qara'i, Muhammad Mahmoud Ghali, Muhammad Taqi Usmani.)

You worked in security? For whom - CAIR staff? Hamas in Ramallah? Hizbullah in Dearborn? For whom exactly? Please don't tell us that it's an organization w/ Western interests @ heart!

Ole Harting

You can pine for the 'gates of Ijtehad (not Itjihad)' to be re-opened, but frankly, it's none of our business! Just as if you ain't a Catholic, you have no business demanding that that church relax its laws against married clergy or contraceptives; if you ain't Jewish, you have no business demanding that circumcision be ended; if you ain't Hindu, you have no business demanding that the caste system be abolished; if you ain't Sikh, you have no business demanding that mandatory beards and turbans be relaxed; if you ain't Zoroastrian, you have no business demanding that conversions into that religion be allowed.

Ultimately, whether Muslims reform or not is their own business, and something that we shouldn't be involved in any more than we should have been involved in the Arab Spring movements. Our priority should be to flush out Muslims from our societies, and seal them within dar ul Islam, and then let them sort it out. Last thing we need is get involved into a messy Islamic theological debate, where the basis for reform is very likely simply not there.

Great comment, Infidel Pride ..I wholly agree.

Reza Aslan is one sick Islamic puppy alright. Where has this *PRO* Muslim Brotherhood snake once come out in public and forcefully demanded an end to the persecution of the apostates of Islam and other non-Muslims throughout the Middle East/Islamic world?

Reza Aslan is devoid of moral conscience or he would have left Islam yearssssss ago...

We ex-Muslims living with Islam's formal and informal death penalty for apostasy know for certain that Islam is evil both in part and on the whole.

From WikiIslam:

Persecution of Ex-Muslims

Islam is the only religion in the world which does not allow its followers the freedom to change faith. According to Shari'ah laws (extracted from the Qur'an and Sunnah), apostates of Islam must be sentenced to death. This has led to ex-Muslims often being persecuted, abused and killed. This treatment of apostates is not simply down to the issue of state-enforced religion as some may suggest. As you will find out on this page, the violence or threats of violence against apostates in the Muslim world usually derives not from government authorities but from family members and individuals from the Islamic communities themselves, who operate very often with impunity from the government. This point is further emphasised by the persecution and murder of ex-Muslims which has now become evident in many Western non-Muslim societies.

Persecution of Non-Muslims

Partly through fear and partly through politically correct hypocrisy, the Western media rarely publish news stories involving Islamic violence and persecution. This may seem a strange statement to some who constantly hear other proclaiming that the media focuses far too much on the negative actions of Muslims, but did you know that in 2008 alone, there were 2,204 separate documented incidents of Islamically motivated violence which led to death? In total there were 10,779 deaths and another 18,213 critically injured. That's more people killed each and every year in the name of Islam, than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined.[1] More than 29 people are killed in religiously motivated attacks every single day at the hands of Muslims, but do do you hear of this on the TV or radio? If you spend just one short hour reading through some of the news articles we have compiled, there would have been another one to two deaths attributed to Islam and countless other incidents involving beatings, rapes, abductions, forced conversions, desecration of non-Muslim buildings etc. No other religion or ideology [past or present] inspires the sort of hate that Islam produces.

According to Islamic laws, non-Muslims in Islamic Lands should be subdued and be treated as dhimmis (second class citizens). They should be coerced and intimidated to convert to Islam, through special humiliating taxes like Jizyah imposed on them. This has been happening in the Islamic World since the last 1400 years. While Muslims demand for concessions in non-Muslim countries, non-Muslims are systematically persecuted, terrorized and ethnically cleansed from Islamic lands. With the recent rise of the Muslim population in the traditionally Christian/Secular West, also comes the noticeable rise of Islamic violence and terrorist activities aimed towards the non-Muslims.

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Main_Page

Kuwaiti authorities arrested a man Tuesday for insulting the Prophet Muhammad via his Twitter account, based on a Sharia-based blasphemy law, which is highly regarded in the mostly Sunni Muslim country. The incident reportedly drew calls for the man’s death.

Read more: http://www.maghrebchristians.com/2012/03/29/kuwaiti-man-threatened-with-death-for-offending-prophet-muhammad-on-twitter/#ixzz1qUd1QwxS

Youssef

Ole Hartling, it's true that Qur'an 65:4 is arguably the biggest problem. Above I quote four or five major Islamic scholars who all agree that it assumes consummation of marriage with prepubescent girls.

But you underrate the importance to mainstream Islam of the sahih ahadith, especially when the same content is repeated in several canonical ahadith from different chains of narrators.

Hadith reports about Muhammad and his companions: Why are certain collections considered essential by maintream Muslim scholars of Islam?

In the Qur'an, "Allah" says at least 25 times that Muhammad is to be obeyed.

That is one reason why most Muslim scholars of Islam accept the Bukhari hadiths and a few other hadith collections as authoritative for Muslims: canonical hadiths show what Muhammad did and said, permitted and forbade.


Hadith is nothing but a reflection of the personality of the Prophet, who is to be obeyed at every cost.

The above quote can be found on many, many Islamic sites on the web, including this one.

           --------------------------------------


It is impossible to understand the Qur'an without reference to the Hadith...

The above statement used to be at islamonline.net.  The quote can now be found at many places on the web, including here.

           --------------------------------------


The overwhelming majority of Muslims consider hadith to be essential supplements to and clarifications of the Qur'an, Islam's holy book, as well as in clarifying issues pertaining to Islamic jurisprudence

-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith#Usage

            --------------------------------------

A tiny percentage of Muslims are Qur'an-only Muslims who reject even the most canonical hadith collections. The mainstream of Islamic scholars considers Qur'an-only Muslims to be apostates. However, mainstream Muslim spokespersons speaking to non-Muslims will sometimes deny any significance even to the most canonical hadiths. The denial may have several sources: 1) embarrassment about the content of a hadith, 2) a deliberate intention to deceive non-Muslims and give a false impression that the spokesperson would never support the ugly (to non-Muslims) values displayed in a particular hadith, or 3) general ignorance about ahadith.

Why do most believing Muslims take seriously the canonical hadith collections' reports about what Muhammad said and did?  Because Muslims take seriously the Qur'an's many commands to obey Muhammad. They also take seriously Qur'an 33:21:


Certainly you have in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar for him who hopes in Allah and the latter day and remembers Allah much.

And no wonder Muslims take the Qur'an seriously: they consider the Qur'an the Incarnation, or rather Inlibration, of God. Christians often say the Bible is inspired by God.  Muslims do not believe the Qur'an is the result of anything so indirect or human-mediated as "inspiration" from God.  The Qur'an is taken to be the verbatim transcript of Allah addressing Muhammad.  The Qur'an's words are thought to exactly duplicate those in a book that has existed eternally with Allah in paradise.

The daughter is so bad at lying. Phony as a three dollar bill.

Fortunately the police are rather used to being lied to and this performance has probably heightened their suspicion that someone in the family commited the crime. Add to that the lesson that every homicide officer knows, that the investigation proceeds from those closest to the victim (husband,wife,children, etc.) and works outward from there until you start looking at complete strangers and I have little doubt that the investigators are not much impressed with the hate crime evidence.

There are many in the US who support the idea of enhanced punishment for hate crimes. I am not one of them. But if we are going to go that way should there not also be enhanced punishments for faking a hate crime to cover a criminal act? Is a fake hate crime not as damageing to society because of the distrust it sows among various groups,its potential to inspire riots and revenge, as a actual hate crime?

Seems fair to me.

From the article

"When has Reza Aslan or Justin Raimondo or anyone else in their camp ever shown any concern at all for the plight of those Muslim women or others like them?"
"That's right, the correct answer is never. They're too busy trying to frame us for murder to spend any time helping out Muslim women in trouble."

Word

I think what the girl was saying about the killer's religion was that inspite of what the killer may profess, he has no real religion. That's how I read it anyway. But I agree with Robert and others.... She's not coming clean I don't have special knowledge but in my work I see people all the time who have just lost their loved ones and with or without giant shades you can spot it. You never forget that look. By contrast, I'm sorry to say I have seen tons and tons of wailing for the camera on every news station. This has something of that look about it.

Asslan is getting more and more hostile isn't he? Before we know it'll be "F you infidels, Allahu Akbar!" Personally I think Muslimes like him and and those of Cair and Isna and so on are just seething with rage because no matter how much they lie and cover up Jihad, more and more westerners are waking up to the truth of Islam.

What else could they do if not blame Robert and Pamala?

I mean Robert and Pamala are a threat whom are alerting the general public about the real ideology of Islam. That most certainly is frightful for all Muslims. I mean they have been taught (brainwashed) these last 1400 years that Islam is the only true religion. And that Islam demands respect and submission by all non-Muslims.

That must be very satisfiing if it were true. So while Robert and Pamala are trying to alert people of this misbelief. Muslims have to feel very uncomfortable by this information. Because this information is totally different and questions Muhammads instructions.

So when a Muslim dies they will not realize paradice after all.

That must be very frightening for most Muslims. But if you can get passed that sort of thinking and hear Robert and Pamala's messages it actually delievers Muslims from Islam and gives you the truth and ever lasting life through our Savior Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ died to save us all from judgement day. And that is the good news for all humans.

Instead of trying to charge or kill Roger and Pamala Muslims should be thanking them, for saving their soul, by showing them the truth. And not some fictional story.

So lets find out once and for all who's right and who's wrong. By having serious debates to get at the truth. Because there is only one truth, and one God.

For me and may family that God is, and always has been, Jesus Christ.

Roger and Pamala are actually helping each and every find out the truth. We all want the truth don't we?


Two things I found odd in the Bob Crane murder and Jon Benet Ramsey case was that the Cops said there were no signs of a forced entry for Crane's death but failed to pint out there was also no sign of a Forced-exist where a killer fled quickly, as for Job Benet....the dad said he came down stairs as found her in the basement dead and ran up to call 9-1-1.
Wait a minute, only 2 people could have known she was already dead .....the killer or the person that conspired to fake the pedophile-Killer angle , or both of them.
How the hell did he know just by sight to run up and call 9-1-1 that she was found dead unless he knew it ahead of time and staged his 9-1-1 call . What parent would being missing their child for several days and then see them in the basement and assume they are dead , or abandone them to call 9-1-1 even though 9-1-1 is pointless unless to complete the charade and appear to solve the kidnapping and break-in. The Note left for Benets bounty was clearly written , so either the person has good night vision or no fear of turning on the lights to write the note and had lots of time and wasn ot heard braking in.


This case for the bogus hate-crime to deflect form the many islamic based murders in the West and now in france is full of holes too and CAIR never did worry about the truth because they knew their followers were too stupid to ask the tough questions or do follow-ups when the truth did come out. CAIR-canada does the same thing, the hate-crimes
pop out right when islam is being exposed as the death-cult it is and CAIr wants to change the channel.

It's a terrible crime and the person responsible for it is the person or people who beat this woman to death, no one else, especially not people who have never called for violence against Muslims nor even insinuated that it was acceptable.


Shows you are getting to them !

'Reza Aslan can boldly dare the "Islamophobic f---s" to "come find" him because he knows that he is not at any significant risk of being violently attacked by "Islamophobes".'

Isn't that the truth.

Hi minoria.

Thank you very very much for the link to the article on the 1001 Arabian Nights. I actually learned a lot from this article.

Buraq, you said :

''I wonder what Reza will say when one or more family members are charged with this murder? ''

The smarmy little creep will say: 'This is not an honour killing. Honour killings do not exist in islam.' Or, 'This is a plain murder. It has nothing to do with islam, or being muslim, and it is islamophobia to say it is.' Or even, 'this family is being unfairly targeted because they are muslim and the police are complicit in racism.' Or ... but why go on ? He and his slimy CAIR mates will find some way of spinning it. The creature is a totally and utterly loathsome little lying lizard.

Infidel Pride wrote:

if you ain't a Catholic, you have no business demanding that that church relax its laws against married clergy or contraceptives; if you ain't Jewish, you have no business demanding that circumcision be ended; if you ain't Hindu, you have no business demanding that the caste system be abolished; if you ain't Sikh, you have no business demanding that mandatory beards and turbans be relaxed; if you ain't Zoroastrian, you have no business demanding that conversions into that religion be allowed...

It would be our business, however, if Catholics, or Jews, or Hindus, or Zoroastrians were perpetrating and planning mass-murderous terror attacks in the name of their religion in thousands of places all over the world. Since they aren't, then their internal reforms are indeed none of our business.

But if they were, it would damn well be our business; and I would advocate the same measures against them which I advocate against Muslims -- who are the only group of people on planet Earth currently perpetrating and planning mass-murderous terror attacks in the name of their religion in thousands of places all over the world.

If Muslims would stop exploding, we'd leave them alone. It's that simple.

And Ole Hartling and other Ego-Quoquist Islam apologists can dredge up ancient history all they want to try to change this simple fact, but it won't do their feeble attempts at a counter-argument any good.

P.S.: (I say "Ego-Quoquist" and not "Tu-Quoquist" because for now I give Ole Hartling the benefit of the doubt of taking at face value the Americana twang of his Yosemite-Sammish nickname.)

traeh,

Good marshalling of evidence to refute the ridiculous claim that the Islam of Muslims only follows the Koran.

I would recommend you add one more piece of evidence: This quote from a distinguished academic scholar of Islamic law and of comparative law, Prof. Chibli Mallat (text in square brackets is mine for clarification from the context):

“...none [of the four schools of Islamic law] would disagree with the statement attributed to the Syrian jurist Awza’i (died 774 a.d.) that the Book [i.e., the Koran] is in greater need of the sunnah than the sunnah is of the Book.”

-- from his scholarly article “Islamic to Middle Eastern Law: a Restatement of the Field (Part I)”, in The American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 51, No. 4 (Autumn, 2003), p. 724.

Let's parse and simplify that quote for those with thicker watermelon rind around their brains:

According to all 4 schools of Islamic law, the Koran is in greater need of the sunnah than the sunnah is of the Koran.

A brief examination of Prof. Mallat's curriculum vitae will show the only people that matter (i.e., those with a modicum of intelligence) that his academic credentials are solid.

Also relevant in this regard is that his academic career has taken him to Princeton (2006-7), Yale law school (2005-2006), Virginia Law School (2006 and 2008), in addition to his being professor in the law department of the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London, and Director of its Centre of Islamic and Middle Eastern Law -- as well as EU Jean Monnet Chair of European Law and Director of the Centre for the Study of the European Union at the University of Saint Joseph, Beirut; not to mention SJ Quinney Presidential Professor of Law and Professor of Law and Politics of the Middle East at the University of Utah. (See here for more.)

Hey, look! I think that geyser Ole Hartling is ready to blow again!

Infidel Pride wrote, replying to "DefenderofIslam":

You worked in security? For whom - CAIR staff? Hamas in Ramallah? Hizbullah in Dearborn? For whom exactly? Please don't tell us that it's an organization w/ Western interests @ heart!
......................................

"DefenderofIslam" has mentioned here before that he was a "security guard" at his own mosque.

As everyone knows, "security" covers a *lot* of ground—everything from untrained 18-year-old kids and old semi-retirees making minimum wage to watch a warehouse at night and call the cops if anything looks suspicious; to armed guards with some training; to fully-trained moonlighting police officers; to personnel provided by prestigious high security firms; to the superlative agents of the Secret Service.

I believe "DefenderofIslam" fell into the first category, or perhaps even below that. He may have served as a mosque "security guard" on a purely voluntary basis.

In any case, the idea that the semi-literate "DefenderofIslam" is claiming any knowledge of "security" beyond whatever he may have misremembered from "Law and Order" reruns seems just laughable.

Traeh wrote:

Ole Hartling, it's true that Qur'an 65:4 is arguably the biggest problem. Above I quote four or five major Islamic scholars who all agree that it assumes consummation of marriage with prepubescent girls.

But you underrate the importance to mainstream Islam of the sahih ahadith...
......................................

Good post Traeh, and good additional comments from LemonLime.

I always find the "Qur'an-only" argument a bit of a red herring. For one thing, *very few* Muslims are "Qur'an-only", and there is no orthodox reason for them to be so.

Secondly—and perhaps more importantly—this would not help much when it comes to the barbaric nature of Islam. Those advocating "Qur'an-only" often imply that this renders Islam perfectly civilized and non-violent, and that it is only the Hadith and Sira that present problems.

There *are* a handful of issues—such as 9-year-old Aisha—that would cease to be a problem with such "Qur'an-only" Muslims. but as Ole Hartling points out, the Qur'an itself refers to child marriage, just as plainly—although in a rather less dramatic manner—as do the Hadiths.

The facts are two-fold—there are *very few* Qur'an-only Muslims, and given the vicious and horrific nature of the Qur'an itself, it wouldn't help much if there were.

I believe the "Qur'an-only" nonsense is mostly another form of whitewashing Islam for credulous Infidels. Taqiyya artists will assume that few Kaffirs have read the Islamic texts, and so they can posit a mass of "moderate", "Qur'an-only" Muslims, and have little fear of being contradicted by non-Muslims, many of whom are all too willing to listen to this twaddle.

Luckily, there are knowledgeable Infidels like Ole Hartling, Traeh, and LemonLime.

That's one of the great virtues of Jihad Watch—spreading just this kind of knowledge.

"Hey, look! I think that geyser Ole Hartling is ready to blow again!"

...yeah a bunch of hot air; nothing of fiery substance.

gravenimage,

"I believe the "Qur'an-only" nonsense is mostly another form of whitewashing Islam for credulous Infidels."

The function of the "Qur'an-only" nonsense is not only whitewashing, but also blowing extra obfuscatory smoke into the discussion, to make things needlessly more complicated, and thus make the relative simplicity of condemnation of Islam that much more difficult to communicate to the culture at large.

Thanks LemonLime,
I've copied your excellent citation for future reference.

Thank you, gravenimage.

LemonLime

It wouldn't be our business. I suggested that Muslims be expelled from non-Muslim lands, and that should remain the case regardless of whether or not Muslims reform or transform Islam. Reason being that even if they do agree on such changes, there will remain the uncertainity principle of how many Muslims have embraced the new Islam, and how many haven't. Which would make things no better than they are now.

No, we should unconditionally expel them back to dar ul Islam, and lock them in. After that, they may reform, or not, and whether they do or not would be of no consequence to us - we shouldn't care, we shouldn't change our policies even if they do. It (their reform) would be messy, and would involve knowing things that are of no interest to us, but would be crucial in whether they do change or not. Leave that to them, but make it clear to them that it's irrelevant - they don't get to come back to Bilad ul Kafir regardless of what they do!

As everyone knows, "security" covers a *lot* of ground—everything from untrained 18-year-old kids and old semi-retirees making minimum wage to watch a warehouse at night and call the cops if anything looks suspicious; to armed guards with some training; to fully-trained moonlighting police officers; to personnel provided by prestigious high security firms; to the superlative agents of the Secret Service.

I believe "DefenderofIslam" fell into the first category, or perhaps even below that. He may have served as a mosque "security guard" on a purely voluntary basis.

In any case, the idea that the semi-literate "DefenderofIslam" is claiming any knowledge of "security" beyond whatever he may have misremembered from "Law and Order" reruns seems just laughable.

I worked in wharehouse an I read books on police science. When than glass door is being break to gain entry most of the glass will fall outside the builting not inside the builting. There was than notice than few week early found outside the house telling the to go back where they came come you terrorist the family thought it was than joke. Robert seem to believe that muslum fake hate crime that is going to be his undoing one day. The Beauty Queen murder either the father or mother have anything to do with it. The ramson notice was odd as it ask for money like 247,212 and one penny (I donot member the amount) every other ramson notice in the history of kidnapping give the money than round number like 10,000 or 100,000 dollars.

The Mosque like the job I do. I walk the ground keeping than eye out for people who have no bussien on the mosque ground but must be polite as they may be wanting to learn about Islam. I keep than eyes on the childern when they are outside playing. I got my seld than self phone last august so I can call the police it needed.

LemonLime wrote:

The function of the "Qur'an-only" nonsense is not only whitewashing, but also blowing extra obfuscatory smoke into the discussion, to make things needlessly more complicated, and thus make the relative simplicity of condemnation of Islam that much more difficult to communicate to the culture at large.
......................................

Very true, LemonLime.

Thanks for clearing things up, "DefenderofIslam"—and for essentially confirming everything I wrote.

So, reza wants to look for him? o.k., I'm going to start turning over all the rocks I see.
reza, reza, come out come out where ever you are.....

Traeh, there is no serious doubt about Ayesha's physical immaturity when she married Mohammed.

This is what she says about an incident in March 629, when she was 14½ years old and Mohammed took his family to Mecca.

Bukhari 6:293. Narrated Ayesha. We set out with the sole intention of performing Hajj and when we reached Sarif, I began to menstruate. Allah’s Apostle came to me while I was weeping. He said “What is the matter with you? Are you menstruating?” I replied, “Yes.” He said, “This is what Allah has ordained for the daughters of Adam. So do what all the pilgrims do with the exception of the tawaf round the Kaaba.”

Was she weeping because she would be prevented from performing some of the rituals - or because this was the first time she had ever menstruated? Compare Mohammed's attitude to Ayesha with his attitude to another of his wives in the same week. (Safiya was 17 and it was definitely not her first menstruation.)

Bukhari 26:789,815, 73:178. Narrated Ayesha. Safiya began to menstruate, and the Prophet wanted to have sex with her. He saw Safiya standing at the entrance of her tent, downcast and sad because she was menstruating. The Prophet said, “What a nuisance! You will detain us! Didn’t you perform tawaf-al-ifada on Slaughter Day?” She said, “Yes, I did.” He said, “Then there is no problem; [you have finished your ritual obligations and are free to] depart.”

But even if Ayesha did reach menarche at age 8¾, so what? She still wouldn't have been physically mature enough to bear a child safely. Little girls who are cursed with early puberty are still little girls. They are not ready for sexual activity.

There is plenty of evidence that Ayesha was very intelligent, but that doesn't mean she had the mental maturity of an adult when she was 8¾. Even if her IQ was 150, that would have given her the functional ability of a 12½-year-old (not of an adult) and the life-experience of an 8¾-year-old. For example, even in a crude society where "mentally mature enough for marriage" meant "knowing how to cook", cooking takes practical experience as well as base-level intelligence. It is known that, for several years after marrying Mohammed, Ayesha remained a bad cook.

Actually, the issue of "mental maturity" does not enter the issue of whether she gave informed consent to her marriage to Mohammed. She was not told that the marriage contract had been signed. She did not know she was married until the moment of consummation. So it is irrelevant whether Ayesha was legally married at five, fifteen, twenty-five or fifty years of age. If she didn't know about the contract, she did not give informed consent.

Suspicious from the start: my daughter at five was a better actress. Any WHY the sunglasses?

SS wrote:

"Reza Aslan is devoid of moral conscience or he would have left Islam yearssssss ago..."

Very true, SaleemSmith ...and perhaps he will reach a watershed moment in his life and forsake his addiction to islam, just as you have.

Thanks for comment:

“But you underrate the importance to mainstream Islam of the sahih ahadith, especially when the same content is repeated in several canonical ahadith from different chains of narrators.”

I am just pointing out some logical possibilities which could make Islam compatible with Western ethics. Orthodox (mainstream Sunni Islam) depends on the Sunna and sahih ahadith because Islam is understood as a complete and comprehensive set of laws – Sharia - which in details regulate all aspects of life. This is Islamic legalism. You express the same thought this way:

“The overwhelming majority of Muslims consider hadith to be essential supplements to and clarifications of the Qur'an, Islam's holy book, as well as in clarifying issues pertaining to Islamic jurisprudence. The overwhelming majority of Muslims consider hadith to be essential supplements to and clarifications of the Qur'an, Islam's holy book, as well as in clarifying issues pertaining to Islamic jurisprudence.”

So, is Sharia “divine” or man-made?

For the most part man-made according to the scholar, dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq, who is making a bold attempt to reopen Islam and Sharia for reinterpretation:

“Let us first ensure that we understand the word “divine”. According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, the word means: “of, relating to, or proceeding directly from God.” Is shariah directly from God? The answer to this question depends on how we define the scope of shariah. For example, if shariah is equivalent to Islamic law (fiqh), then it cannot be divine. The reason is indisputably clear: fiqh or Islamic law in its totality is mostly human construct. Even though one of the usul (source methodologies), the Qur’an, is regarded by Muslims as divine, the other sources – hadith, ijma (consensus) and qiyas (analogical deductions) – are not divine.

To fully appreciate the relevance of the preceding statement, it is important to understand and acknowledge some essential aspects of each of the three non-divine sources. It is important to know that ijma, even if achieved, is a human construct. However, more importantly, there is hardly anything on which there is ijma, including even the definition of ijma. Many scholars do acknowledge that on most things people claim ijma there is no ijma. According to Imam Ibn Taymiyah, "... many problems about which people think that there is ijma on them, while in fact there is none. Rather in some cases even the opposite view is correct and is upheld.”

Also ijma is not a source to derive laws; instead, it is more for validation of a law that is already derived or formulated by others. Some scholars have elevated the status of ijma above hadith. And, there are others who have elevated ijma, quite unacceptably, above all other sources, including the Qur’an. However, there are also eminent Islamic jurists, such as al-Amidi, one of the leading scholars of usul al-fiqh, who had to recognize the “probabilistic” basis of ijma.

“Amidi seems, when all is said and done, to belong to the camp of those who saw the Ijma as functioning as a probable indicator of the law, one that could yield nothing more than opinion. True, he seems, on the issue of the authority of the Ijma, to try to straddle the fence between the two camps by affirming the near conclusiveness of the supporting Qur’anic and Sunnaic texts, especially the latter. But near conclusiveness is not, from a technical point of view the same thing as conclusiveness, and Amidi finds himself constrained in the end to let the absolute authority of the Ijma rest upon probability. This being the case, he has no choice but to regard the Ijma as actually operating as a probable indicator dependent upon the fallible deliberations of the individual mujtahid.”

For much of Islamic laws, qiyas has been the most commonly used source. It is acknowledged even by Islamic jurists and scholars that qiyas is essentially a method of human reasoning. Of course, the analogical reasoning is applied in connection with something available in the two primary sources: the Qur’an and the Sunnah. However, at the end, it is still a human construct, and thus not divine. It is no wonder that there is hardly any agreement among (or even within) various schools of jurisprudence on many such matters of shariah. Thus, most of the output of qiyas can’t be regarded as divine. Even though hadith is regarded as one of the two primary sources, I wanted to deal with it last in this context, because it is one of the most sensitive issues. However, a Muslim is conscientiously duty-bound to approach any such issue in light of the guidance of the Qur’an and the Sunnah in an objective manner. The Qur’an is divine, as we believe that it is direct, verbatim and unadulterated, final revelation from God. However, hadith is not at the same level of the Qur’an. It is important to note that what constitutes authentication of hadith, so that we can separate the sahih (authentic or sound) ones and also be able to grade or classify the rest, is a human process. Even the criteria or methodology of authentication is a human enterprise. Many Muslims might not know that while Sahih al-Bukhari is the most highly regarded collection of the Prophetic narrations (and deservingly so), he did not specify what criteria he used to evaluate a narration and select certain ones for his collection. Indeed, the compilers of the six major collections [sihah al-sitta]1 generally have not specified or disclosed their criteria. Other scholars later have attempted to identify what might have been their criteria, in a manner of “reverse engineering.”

“Most of the authors of six principal books of hadith did not describe their criteria in selecting the material, except for a sentence here and there, but it is possible to arrive at some conclusions from their writings. Hazimi and Maqdisi studied the subject. They studied the qualities of narrators whose ahadith have been recorded in those books and tried to find out a general rule. Hazimi says that those scholars had certain criteria in accepting a narrator whose hadith they were going to record in their books.”

The collection enterprise itself was undertaken several centuries after the Prophet, involving hundreds of thousands of people. The compilers themselves did not specify the criteria of authentication. Indeed, the list of authentication criteria was not identical among the compilers. That’s why, let alone other collections, the two most highly regarded collections, Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, have many hadiths that appear in one, but not in both.

Moreover, hadiths are graded as sahih (sound), hasan (good), daif (weak) and maudu (fabricated). While there is a broad agreement on many hadiths that are regarded as sahih, there are many about which there is no agreement about their authenticity. Some hadiths are regarded sahih by some scholars, while not so by others. Also, Bukhari and Muslim being titled as Sahih does not mean that all the hadiths in those collections are sahih. Also to be noted is the fact that the authentication methodology of the compilers does not scrutinize a hadith in terms of its matn (text), whether the content of any hadith is consistent with the Qur’an, other hadiths, or established historical facts, etc.

Thus, while the authentication process and the noble contribution of the hadith scholars have elevated the hadith literature at a much higher level of acceptability and reliability, scholars do recognize that unless mutawatir (narrated in exactly similar words through numerous chains, as contrasted with ahad - solitary or simply non-mutawatir), even sahih hadith yields only probabilistic or speculative knowledge, not certainty. Therefore, hadith literature is a precious treasure for us to benefit from as a complementary source of guidance, but the human input is too high to consider it as a divine source. Since the Qur’an has only a few and most important injunctions covered (and even that, in general terms), and most of the shariah (laws and codes) are based on hadith, where hadith is not divine in the sense the Qur’an is, it is important to understand why any claim that shariah (in a sense that it is a complete code of life, covering all aspects of life) is simply wrong and untenable. Indeed, anyone who claims that shariah – in the sense that it covers the entire spectrum of life for which sacred and binding laws and codes are already laid out – is making an erroneous (or worse!) statement. Such a statement can’t be supported from an Islamic viewpoint.

“The Sharia is ... the totality of divine categorizations of human acts. But these categorizations have not, according to the common Muslim view, been precisely spelled out for the benefit of mankind. True, God has revealed his eternal speech – an attribute inhering in his very essence – to mankind through prophets. But when searches through the repositories of divine revelation, one does not find an abundance of statements of the form ‘X is obligatory’ (or recommended, disapproved, forbidden, etc.). Instead, one finds a variety of less precise linguistic forms on the basis of which human scholars must ascertain to the best of their ability the divine categorizations and then give precise expression to them. Statements of the form ‘X is obligatory’ are thus, for the most part, the result of human scholarly effort; they are not themselves given. What is given is a plethora of highly interpretable ‘indicators’ (adilla) of the divine categorizations. God in his wisdom has chosen to engage human beings in the toilsome task of ferreting out the categorizations from these indicators, of articulating what he himself has not precisely articulated. In this way he has afforded them greater opportunity for proving their devotion to him and for attaining favor with him.”

So, can shariah be divine in any particular sense? First, if shariah is understood as the Divine Will, as in the words of one of the leading Muslim scholars of our time Khaled Abou El Fadl (“eternal unchanging law as it exists in the mind of God”),4 yes it can and must be regarded as “eternal”, “immutable,” “divine,” and “infallible.” However, we are not enabled to read the “mind of God.” God is Eternal, Infallible, and whatever laws exist in his mind are immutable. But that is not the case with us as human beings. Even in regard to the Qur’an, the Book as the final revelation is divine and thus immutable, but our human understanding and interpretation of the Qur’an are not divine or infallible.

Unfortunately, Muslim scholars/jurists rarely offer their thoughts/views/rulings with the relevant disclaimer. Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani, who is also one of the most coveted experts in the field of Islamic finance, is not generally an exception. However, in one of his works, there is a rare candor about the fact that what is human input is not infallible.

... it needs to be realized that whereas the laws ordained by Allah and His Prophet are sacred and there is no room for doubts about it, when these laws are codified, that code of law represents human effort, which is not infallible, but susceptible to mistake. The drafting of any law is a very delicate undertaking. All possible situations have to be kept in mind and provided for in words. Since human intelligence, being limited, cannot visualize all kinds of circumstances in advance, there is always the possibility of flaws and weaknesses in any piece of law. The Hudud Ordinances are no exception. They may suffer from weak drafting. They may contain some aspects that are in need of review and improvement.

The Qur’an is immutable in the sense that we are not to discard or eliminate any verse of the Qur’an. Any specific and explicit injunction of the Qur’an – in the general sense – is immutable.

For example, fasting is obligatory on any able-bodied adult Muslims. However, there are only a few verses about fasting, without any details, which we learn from the Sunnah, as reflected in hadith. As soon as we go into the details, we see that there are many divergent, and even contradictory narrations, on the basis of which, using ijma, qiyas, whenever relevant, the scholars have derived further details about the rules. Thus, the disagreements we see among various madhab (schools of fiqh) are the result of the human element in the process of extracting and formulating the rules and laws. In this example, that fasting (sawm) is fard (obligatory) is immutable. No one can claim any longer that it is not obligatory on able-bodied Muslims. All other details, not explicitly specified in the Qur’an or established through mutawatir hadiths are available on only probabilistic basis. That does not mean that we can’t use those details. Indeed, we can and must. However, to claim that anything is “divine”, such as Shariah (actually, the users of that notion mean Islamic laws), while most of which is human construct, is elevating the threshold for acceptability of it to an indefensible level.

The bottom line is: the sense in which shariah is commonly used in terms of its scope and equivalence with laws covering the entire spectrum of life, where the details of the laws are derived not necessarily from divine source, but from semi-divine (hadith)5 and non-divine (ijma and qiyas) sources, is NOT divine.

There is one other serious negative ramification of treating Shariah in its comprehensive legalistic sense as divine. As explained later in this essay based on the works of al-Amidi, a noted scholar of the classical period, ijtihad, which constitutes the basis of bulk of Islamic laws in their details yields only probabilistic knowledge. Furthermore, as the works of Ibn Khaldun contributed to the repository of knowledge of the humanity in general, inspired by Islam but based on an inductive method, indicates that at certain level, seeking knowledge and understanding can’t be limited to merely sacred texts and deduction as a methodology. Another noted Islamic scholar, al-Shatibi [d. 790 AH] applied inductive method to develop better understanding of Shariah from the perspective of intent [maqasid].6 Unfortunately, text-oriented deductions from sacred texts gradually led to reductionist legalism.

Is Shariah immutable?

Once again, one must define Shariah to properly answer this question. If Shariah is used in the common sense as it is used, and as being promoted by various Islamic movements and certain countries that attempted (or are attempting) to “implement” Shariah, it is definitely not immutable. Indeed, according to Maududi, one of the leading Islamic personalities of twentieth century, deen (Islam in the generic sense of submission to our Creator God) is immutable, as it has been constant throughout human history. However, shariah is not immutable, as there have been variations in shariah under different messengers, such as Moses, Jesus and Muhammad (p).

“Now I shall tell you what Shariah is. The meaning of Shariah is mode and path. When you have acknowledged God as your sovereign and accepted His servitude and have also admitted that the Messenger is the tangible ruler holding authority on His behalf and that the Book has been sent by Him, it will mean you have entered Deen. ... After this, the mode in which you have to serve God and the path you have to traverse in order to obey Him, is called Shariah. This mode and path has been indicated by God through His Messenger who alone teaches the method of worshipping the Master and the way to become pure and clean. The Messenger shows us the path of righteousness and piety, the manner in which rights are discharged, the method of carrying on transactions and dealings with fellow-beings and the mode of leading one's life. But the difference is this that while Deen always was, has been, and is still one and the same, numerous Shariahs came, many were cancelled, several were changed but these alterations did not change the Deen. The Deen of Noah was the same as that of Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Shuaib, Saleh, Hud and Muhammad ( peace be on them) but the Shariahs of these Prophets varied from each other to some extent. The modes of saying prayer and observing fast were of one kind with one prophet and of another kind with the other. Injunctions about Halal and Haram, rules of cleanliness and codes of marriage, divorce and inheritance somewhat differed from one Shariah to another. In spite of this, all were Muslims---the followers of Noah, the followers of Abraham, the followers of Jesus and those of Moses, and we too are all Muslims because Deen is one and the same for all. This shows that Deen is unaffected by differences is the rules of Shariah. Deen remains one though modes of following it differ.”

The above view is consistent with the Qur’an.

The same religion [deen] has He established for you as that which He enjoined on Noah - the which We have sent by inspiration to thee - and that which We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and Jesus: Namely, that ye should remain steadfast in religion, and make no divisions therein: to those who worship other things than Allah, hard is the (way) to which you call them. Allah chooses to Himself those whom He pleases, and guides to Himself those who turn (to Him). [42/ash-Shura/13]

Thus, often when we come across assertions that Shariah is immutable or eternal, it is nothing but vacuous, emotional, unscrupulous and indefensible statements. This understanding is reflected in the historical development of Shariah or Islamic law as a rigid body of theological dogmas and legal codes.

“By the tenth century, the basic development of Islamic law was completed. The general consensus (ijma) of Muslim jurists was that Islamic law (Islam's way of life) had been satisfactorily and comprehensively delineated in its essential principles, and preserved in the regulations of the law books or legal manuals produced by the law schools. This attitude led many to conclude that individual, independent interpretation (iitihad) of the law was no longer necessary or desirable. Instead, Muslims were simply to follow or imitate (taqlid) the past, God's law as elaborated by the early jurists. Jurists were no longer to seek new solutions or produce new regulations and law books but instead study the established legal manuals and write their commentaries. Islamic law, the product of an essentially dynamic and creative process, now tended to become fixed and institutionalized. While individual scholars like Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328) and al-Suyuti (d. 1505) demurred, the majority position resulted in traditional belief prohibiting substantive legal development. This is commonly referred to as the closing of the gate or door of iitihad. Belief that the work of the law schools had definitively resulted in the transformation of the Sharia into a legal blueprint for society reinforced the sacrosanct nature of the tradition; change or innovation came to be viewed as an unwarranted deviation (bida) from established sacred norms. To be accused of innovation-deviation from the law and practice of the community-was equivalent to the charge of heresy in Christianity.

While a good part of the traditional Islamic segment has elevated Shariah in general to a sacrosanct level and understood and treated it as immutable, many Islamic jurists also have recognized the principle that a vast portion of Shariah is changeable subject to time and place. This principle is: “Rulings change according to time and place.” Indeed, some Islamic jurists and scholars, even parallel to the regime of taqlid, have always continued the legacy of ijtihad in their pursuit of keeping the laws and codes relevant to the contemporary times. Islamic jurists of our contemporary times, who are in tune with the modern challenges, are also trying diligently to bridge the gap between the laws and the reality, where immutability at the broader or detailed level simply can’t be considered tenable. Indeed, the dynamism of Islamic law has been the hallmark of even the period of the companions of the Prophet. At the level of applied details, the sunnah is not immutability, but just the opposite. Ibn Qayyim shares an illuminating perspective on this important matter.

“Omar ibn al-Khattab judged [in a case in which] a woman died and left her husband, her mother, two full brothers and two half brothers from her father, and decided to distribute the third of her inheritance between all the full as well as half brothers. A man said to him [i.e., to Omar] ‘you did not do the same in the year so and so.’ Omar replied: ‘that [decision] was according to what we had judged then and this [decision] is according to what we are judging today.”

End of quote.

There are some serious efforts among Islamic scholars going on to bring Islam out of the barbaric darkness and in line with contemporary Western ethics. We should not just disregard such attempts as taqyyia but as logical ways to overcome the moral crisis of Islam in direct opposition to the answers from Salafists and Islamists.

The only way to fully accomplish the task of modernizing Islam is to revert to the position of the Mu'tazilites, that the Qur'an had to have been created; otherwise the historical events it relates would have necessarily been predetermined.

The Qur'an could then be seen as specific answers to historical events having no relevance for later times when things were different – much in the same way as the violent episodes in the Old Testament is interpreted. The role of the Qur'an would then mostly be as an inspiration and some general principles necessary to live a just life.

Some scholars have pointed to this possibility such as ayatollah Jalal Ganj'i, a colleague of ayatollah Khomenei, who took the Mu'tazilite position of the created Qur'an and advocated a historical concept of the revealed words of Allah. “If we really want to understand what is was the the verses of the Qur'an meant to Muhammad and his companions you must take the historical conditions at the time of the Prophet into consideration”, ayatollah Ganj'i points out. Otherwise you risk to understand the opposite of what the Qur'an in reality tries to say. He emphasize that each Qur'anic verse is an answer to a specific historic event.
Ganj'i presents an elegant solution to the fundamental problem facing the Muslims: how to reconcile the claim of the divine origin of the verses with their - by modern standards - barbaric and immoral content? He advices a method to make the Qur'anic text relative without having to deny, that it is the exact words of Allah.

The political implications of this historic and relative way to interpretate the Qur'an is also very interesting. Ganj'i vehemently denies that the Qur'an should preach a struggle for Muslim world conquest or dominance, or that Islam should be in opposition to freedom and democracy.

Ganj'i was expelled from Iran together with other non-fundamentalist scholars and went into exile in Paris.

In principle it is possible to reform Islam without denying the truth of even one word in the Qur'an. You just have to reinterpretate the basic theological concepts upon which everything else depends. The practical obstacles are of course enormous and very little points in this direction at present.

Thanks for good and well documented comment.

SS wrote:

"Reza Aslan is devoid of moral conscience or he would have left Islam yearssssss ago..."

Very true, SaleemSmith ...and perhaps he will reach a watershed moment in his life and forsake his addiction to islam, just as you have.

Ole Hartling wrote:

So, is Sharia “divine” or man-made?

For the most part man-made...
...................................

Well, Ole, you and the logical Dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq have me convinced.

Now, all you need to do is convince *this* Islamic cleric—and all those many others like him:

"Egypt: Muslim cleric calls for implementation of Sharia punishments: crucifixion and amputation"

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/03/egypt-muslim-cleric-calls-for-implemenation-of-sharia-punishments-crucifixion-and-amputation.html

Ole Hartling seems to think that just because there is variety and a lack of consensus (ijma) among Muslims, this somehow mitigates the overall and underlying fanaticism and evil of Islamic law, Islamic society, Islamic culture, and the Islamic psychology.

Analogy: If there were a group of 100 people, and all of them disagreed with each other about how and under what circumstances it is proper to count every hair on their heads 50 times a day while fitting in their group's other obligations of behaviors the West would define as rape, pedophilia and murder;

and if these 100 people daily have seminars and disputations during which they disagree about 1,000 particulars of the aforementioned obsessions and depravities;

but none of them ever fundamentally questions the ethics of what they assume is obliged to be proper, by standing up and saying and doing what a normal person would say and do under those circumstances -- "This is horrible shit -- are you people fucking insane!? I'm outta here! And I'm calling the cops on you!";

would the mere fact of their disagreements and the diversity these disagreements ostensibly manifest be relevant to our reasonable condemnation of (and repulsion by) the entire group and all its members?

Of course not.

Ole Hartling is spending a lot of time and effort monstrously "straining the gnat" and grotesquely ignoring the toxic soup.

"Well, Ole, you and the logical Dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq have me convinced."

That's what I call a good beginning. According to legend Muhammad had only three followers when he began preaching. ;-)

Ole Hartling wrote:

"Well, Ole, you and the logical Dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq have me convinced."

That's what I call a good beginning. According to legend Muhammad had only three followers when he began preaching. ;-)
.............................................

Do I have to put a "sarc" tag on *everything*?

Firstly, Ole, I'd appreciate it if you never compared me to one of the "Prophet's" loathsome "companions" ever again—even if it may have been tongue-in-cheek.

Then, it appears you are going for Margaret Mead's "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has" approach.

Well and good. But do you actually believe that three people—two of them Infidels, and one of those a woman—are going to be able to reform Islam?

And what of the good Dr. Farooq? Well, in one piece, he takes pages and pages to argue that it *may* not be necessary to execute apostates from Islam in some few cases.

In another piece, he just drops the mask of "moderation" entirely, and rants about "Zionism" and how Jews supposedly control the media.

I'm not sure I'd really expect much at all from his quarter.

But this *does not* mean I am a cynic when it comes to the idea of the "small group of thoughtful, committed citizens" and their ability to effect change.

Indeed, I believe this describes perfectly not illusory 'reformers of Islam', but rather the Anti-Jihad movement.

"Firstly, Ole, I'd appreciate it if you never compared me to one of the "Prophet's" loathsome "companions" ever again—even if it may have been tongue-in-cheek."

AHAHA!!!!!

gravenimage,

But this *does not* mean I am a cynic when it comes to the idea of the "small group of thoughtful, committed citizens" and their ability to effect change.

Indeed, I believe this describes perfectly not illusory 'reformers of Islam', but rather the Anti-Jihad movement.

An exquisitely apt chiasm.

And Ole Hartling's Peak or Geyser is a chasm away from understanding or supporting it.

Leave a comment

NOTE: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.







Not Peace But A Sword by Robert SpencerDid Muhammad Exist? The Muslim Brotherhood in America, by Robert SpencerIslamophobia: Thoughtcrime of the Totalitarian FutureMuslim Persecution of Christians, by Robert Spencer Obama and IslamThe Ground Zero Mosque: Second Wave of the 9/11 Attacks
The Complete Infidel’s Guide to the Koran


Stealth Jihad


The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam


The Truth About Muhammad


What they’re saying about Robert Spencer
“My comrade-in-arms, my pal, my buddy.”
Oriana Fallaci

“Robert Spencer incarnates intellectual courage when, all over the world, governments, intellectuals, churches, universities and media crawl under a hegemonic Universal Caliphate’s New Order. His achievement in the battle for the survival of free speech and dignity of man will remain as a fundamental monument to the love of, and the self-sacrifice for, liberty.”
Bat Ye’or

“Robert Spencer is indefatigable. He is keeping up the good fight long after many have already given up. I do not know what we would do without him. I appreciate all the intelligence and courage it takes to keep going despite the appeasement of the West.”
Ibn Warraq

“America's most informed, fearless, and compelling voice on modern jihadism.”
Andrew C. McCarthy, Senior Fellow at National Review Institute

“Robert Spencer is the leading voice of scholarship and reason in a world gone mad. If the West is to be saved, we will owe Robert Spencer an incalculable debt.”
Pamela Geller, Atlas Shrugs

"The consummate Islam critic and expert." — Bruce Bawer

“Over the years, we have become friends, and I have received his assistance on several pieces of legislation I proposed.”
Former Congressman Tom Tancredo

“Few people are capable of applying scholarship, analytical reasoning, and objectivity to their topic -- while simultaneously being readable and witty -- as can Robert Spencer.”
Raymond Ibrahim

“A national treasure...The acclaimed scholar of Islam.”
Frank Gaffney, Center for Security Policy

“I am indeed honored to call him my friend.”
Brad Thor, novelist

“A top American analyst of Islam....A serious scholar...I learn from him.”
Daniel Pipes

“A brilliant scholar and writer.”
Douglas Murray

"One of my best teachers."
Ashraf Ramelah, Voice of the Copts

“Thank God there’s at least one man with balls left in the West.”
Kathy Shaidle, Five Feet of Fury

“I read people like [Mark Steyn] and Bob Spencer and the rest of them, and I say, ‘Boortz, you’re pretending you’re an author. These people really are. They really write some entertaining, some standup stuff.’”
Neal Boortz

“Robert Spencer is the Stephen King of Jihad.”
Chris Gaubatz, Muslim Mafia

“Armed with facts and fearlessness, Spencer stands up for Western civilization.”
Michelle Malkin

“Widely read in conservative foreign policy circles.”
New York Times

“Widely read in many quarters in Washington.”
Washington Post

“A canny operative who likely has the inside track on the State Department’s Middle East affairs desk should the tea party win the White House.”
New York Magazine

“A hero of the American right.”
Karen Armstrong

"The leading anti-Islamic intellectual in the United States....The go-to Islam expert for the right wing."
Salon Magazine

“Robert Spencer is an Edward Said turned upside down.”
Stephen Suleyman Schwartz

“One of the nation's most notorious Islamophobes.”
Hamas-linked CAIR

"Geller and Spencer are probably the most important propagandizing Islamophobes in the world. These people's voices speak very loudly — not just here in the United States but overseas."
Heidi Beirach, Southern Poverty Law Center

“Satanic ignoramus.”
Khaleel Mohammed

“The Likud anti-Christ.”
Dar al-Hayat newspaper (Saudi Arabia)

“Zionist Crusader, missionary of hate, counter-Islam consultant.”
Al-Qaeda’s Adam Gadahn, “Azzam the American”



Follow me on Twitter
facebook islam
RSS feed

Monthly Archives



Donate
Jihad Watch is a 501 (c) 3 organization. Donations are tax-deductible.


Robert Spencer debates on The Quran Teaches WarVideo: Robert Spencer on CPAC Breitbart News
Crucified Again by Raymond Ibrahim
SIOAFreedom Defense InitiativeJihad Watch VideosAmerican Freedom Law Center
Note: Listing here does not imply endorsement of every view expressed at every linked site.

» ACT for America
» Always on Watch
» American Center for Democracy
» American Coptic Association
» American Council for Kosovo
» American Freedom Alliance
» American Freedom Law Center
» American Islamic Forum for Democracy
» American Sheepdogs
» American Thinker
» Americans Against Hate
» Americans for Legal Immigration
» Amerisrael
» Amillennialist Contra Mundum
» Annaqed
» A New Dark Age Is Dawning
» Answering Islam
» Answering Muslims
» Anti-CAIR
» Apostates of Islam
» Aramaic Broadcasting Network (ABN)
» Armies of Liberation
» Assyrian International News Agency
» Atlas Shrugs
» Atour — The State of Assyria
» Australian Islamist Monitor
» Biafra Nation
» Blazing Cat Fur
» Bosch Fawstin
» Brad Thor
» Brussels Journal
» CAIR Watch
» Campus Watch
» Caroline Glick
» Christians Under Attack
» Citizen Warrior
» Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights
» Conservative Nation News
» Copts.com
» Creeping Sharia
» Daniel Pipes
» David Horowitz Freedom Center
» The David Project
» David Thompson
» David Yerushalmi Law
» D. C. Watson
» Dearborn Underground
» DEBKAfile
» Dhimmitude.org
» Dry Bones
» Ellis Washington Report
» Europe News
» Eye On Islam
» Ezra Levant
» Faith Freedom International
» Father Zakaria
» Federale
» Five Feet of Fury
» Foundation for Democracy in Iran
» Free Congress Foundation
» The Free Copts
» Freedom Defense Initiative
» FrontPage Magazine.com
» Geert Wilders
» Genocide1915.info
» Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center
» History of Jihad
» Hizb ut-Tahrir Watch
» Honest Reporting
» Honor Killings
» Human Rights Congress for Bangladesh Minorities
» India Defence
» Infidel Blogger’s Alliance
» Infidels Are Cool
» The Intelligence Summit
» International Analyst Network
» International Free Press Society
» Internet Haganah
» The Investigative Project on Terrorism
» IOwnTheWorld.com
» IranPressNews
» Iran va Jahan
» Islam Review
» Islam Speaks
» Islam Versus Europe
» Islam Watch
» Islamic Terrorism in India
» Islamist Watch — Middle East Forum
» Israel Matzav
» JihadOnBuddhists.org
» Kejda Gjermani
» KRSI: Radio Sedaye Iran
» Liberated
» Logan's Warning
» Looking At the Left
» Mahdi Watch
» Mapping Sharia
» Mark Steyn
» Martin Kramer
» MEMRI TV
» Middle East Facts
» Middle East Quarterly
» Middle-East-Info.org
» Middle East Media Research Institute
» Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA)
» Militant Islam Monitor
» Morning Star
» Muhammad Tube
» The Muslim Issue
» Muslim World Today
» Myths and Facts
» National Vietnam & Gulf War Veterans Coalition
» NewsReal Blog
» No Mosques At Ground Zero
» Nonie Darwish
» Northeast Intelligence Network
» Occidental Jihadist
» One Jerusalem
» Open Speech
» Operation Give
» Operation Gratitude
» Organiser
» Orwellian Culture
» Palestinian Media Watch
» PamelaGeller.com
» Panun Kashmir
» Pedestrian Infidel
» The People's Cube
» The People of the Book
» Persecution Project
» Political Islam
» Politically Incorrect
» Politiskt Inkorrekt
» Q Society of Australia
» Radio Farda
» Radio Jihad
» RAWA: Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan
» Raymond Ibrahim
» Red Alerts
» Refugee Resettlement Watch
» Religion of Peace
» Republican Riot
» Reuters Middle East Watch
» The “Reverend” Jim Sutter
» SANE: Society of Americans for National Existence
» The Second Draft
» Shire Network News
» SITE Intelligence Group
» Small Wars Journal
» Smoke-Filled World
» The Snooper Report
» Snow Report Blog
» StandWithUs
» Steve Lackner
» The Stiletto Blog
» STOP! Honour Killings
» Sultan Knish
» Tell the Children the Truth
» Terrorism Awareness Project
» Theodore’s World
» Tom Gross Media
» Translating Jihad
» Una via per Oriana
» Undaunted
» United States Central Command
» Urban Infidel
» Walid Shoebat
» Winds of Jihad
» Women Against Shariah
» World Council for the Cedars Revolution
» Yid With Lid
» Z Street
» Zilla of the Resistance
» Zionist Conspiracy
David LittmanOriana Fallaci Thousands of Deadly Terror Attacks Since 9/11The incredible Reza Aslan automated insult generator! iGoogle Gadget
Site Meter