Qaradawi: "If they had gotten rid of the apostasy punishment Islam wouldn't exist today"

"People are forced into Islam by being born into it, and then being held into it by the threat of losing relationships with loved ones if they reject the religion."

I dunno. I suspect the threat of having one's head sawn off is the strongest motivation to remain an accursed muslim.

...and even supposing that the death penalties for apostasy, blasphemy, etc., were dropped, Islamic policy enforces such punishing, onerous, debilitating, and precarious conditions for non-Muslims anyway that Muslims are strongly inhibited from becoming non-Muslims.

In other words, Islam is a very heavily, very thoroughly rigged self-sustaining system. As such, it can only be defeated from powerful and sustained opposition from outside.

"I dunno. I suspect the threat of having one's head sawn off is the strongest motivation to remain an accursed muslim."

I agree. It's a rigged system, I tells ya.

Vet true, they are born into it and stay slave to it. Except I was smart enough and the balls to break loose from this evil ideology.
m

Oh yeah, just needed to add that I meant no offense to the Roach Motel product.

"" "If they had gotten rid of the apostasy punishment Islam wouldn't exist today"
.............................

GI- Doesn't this bloody idiot realize what he is admitting? He is admitting that so many Muslims would *flee Islam if they could* that it couldn't continue to function as an organized creed.""

I don't think so. He is telling his comrades to kill apostasy without hesitation. Islam appears to brainwash the followers enough to make them believe the life needs to be lived miserably. Go to any of our poor neighborhoods, you will find nobody likes his/her neighbor to have a happy life.

Mo had probably worked that one out, or the people who written about Mo. It will not take much for a brain-dead-Mohaund to kill an apostasy, especially when it is blessed by the Imam's Imam such as Qaradawi. I call Islam a misery trap.

BlueRaven wrote:

GI- Doesn't this bloody idiot realize what he is admitting? He is admitting that so many Muslims would *flee Islam if they could* that it couldn't continue to function as an organized creed.""

I don't think so. He is telling his comrades to kill apostasy without hesitation.
............................

Of course, you are quite correct, BlueRaven.

Just as Communists have been all too happy to build walls to keep their people in, pious Muslims are all too happy to slaughter apostates in order to "defend" Islam.

What I meant, of course, is that—just like those walls keeping desperate people in Communist countries through fear—that this says something very telling to thoughtful, compassionate, rational people.

That very definition excludes pious Muslims.

miriam rove wrote:

Vet true, they are born into it and stay slave to it. Except I was smart enough and the balls to break loose from this evil ideology.
m
.............................

You are a brave man, miriam, and I salute you. Although I doubt if even such a courageous person as yourself would have been able to break free of Islam had you been forced to remain in the horrific Islamic Republic of Iran.

Great interview with Bill Warner. Bill provides the insight you ask for. http://goo.gl/v5Ku1. It is good to see intelligent interviewing from Canada. Canada has its own Jihadis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Khadr and CAIR. http://goo.gl/GNIAu Bill has this baby nailed. Great to hear him mention his growing group of anti-jihadists includes American cops. We will need aware and patriotic American cops and ex-military when Obama takes the next steps. Max.

Welcome, Exmuslim! Good to see you posting here. I am always impressed when someone is able to break free of the terrible prison of Islam.

I'm sure readers here at Jihad Watch would be very interested if you ever want to tell the story of how you left Islam.

"Doesn't this bloody idiot realize what he is admitting? He is admitting that so many Muslims would *flee Islam if they could* that it couldn't continue to function as an organized creed."
-----------------------------------------------He, like all the other monsters of Islam, don't care. They believe we Kafirs are too stupid to understand. I remember a quote (not exact) from one of the "William" books (Richmal Crompton) I read as a child. "William told so many lies that he grew to live those lies. William's life became a great lie." The more they imbue themselves in this delusion the more removed they become from reality. Following are a few quotes from the "esteemed" Ayatollah Khomeini Book of Etiquette. Khomeini butchered thousands of Iranian dissidents following his accession to Islamic supremacy beginning in 1979. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1340433/posts. These madmen are so insane they believe they epitomize reality. Max.

Would you believe that there are people near and dear to me who still insist that the Berlin Wall and mined strip between the Thuringerwald and Baltic were only to defend "democratic" Germany from Western infiltration?

And, I have colleagues who gleefully point to the Tuaregs' burning manuscripts in Timbuktu to "prove" that there's "nothing Islamic" about Mali's troubles?

Thanks for the welcome I'm thinking about sharing my story but in due course since I only very recently left, I would however like the assure everyone that there are many willing to leave this terrible religion if only they had a chance. Don't be fooled by Muslims boasting to you the number of people coming to their religion I use to be very active in dawah or inviting people to Islam most converts or reverts as they're called are either in a relationship with a Muslim and hence convert to appease them or they are simply lied to by Muslims about how great this religion is many if not most end up leaving for example in dawah group we used to convert ten people a day then a week later we found out that 9 out 10 had left the religion in the fist week although someones this would be ten out of ten.

Good points by both Awake and LemonLime, glad to see civil discussion.

The facts relevant to establishing Qaradawi's level of popularity are available online, I'm quite sure, because I've read them, over the years. I also have lots of stuff on Qaradawi on file, just don't have time to access it at the moment. The relevant data on the popularity of the apostasy penalty comes from polls which, again, have been posted here over the years and which I have on file...

...and again the issue of ready access to relevant info arises, highlighting yet again the need for a Handbook for Infidel Debaters that has in it the crucial information.

I don't see it as a contradiction. Opposing for Qaradawi is simply a broader category that includes but is not limited to killing. His view is that apostasy needs to be opposed in every way that a Muslim is capable of opposing it. For example, he thinks he's working to oppose it by, among other things, writing these articles and making these statements. Here is an example of Qaradawi's views on apostasy:

http://www.slideshare.net/IslamicBooks/apostasy-major-minor-by-dr-yusuf-al-qaradawi-2777415

Note: this article was originally available on IslamOnline, Qaradawi's popular site (btw, that's another indication of his popularity--just look at his site ranking), but was later removed. It's no longer available. Qaradawi (or whatever underlings might have been responsible) apparently made a number of changes to the site around the time of the so-called Arab spring and before he made his famous much-publicized appearance in Tahrir Square in support of the MB.

Kinana, I see now. I was thinking of "opposing the apostasy law" -- but obviously he means opposing apostasy itself.

Exmuslim wrote:

Thanks for the welcome I'm thinking about sharing my story but in due course since I only very recently left...
..........................

Kudos to you for having done so. I'm happy to see that even a devout Muslim who engaged in Da'wa is capable of questioning Islam. Glad to see you here.

Kepha wrote:

Would you believe that there are people near and dear to me who still insist that the Berlin Wall and mined strip between the Thuringerwald and Baltic were only to defend "democratic" Germany from Western infiltration?
..........................

Not only would I believe it, Kepha, I have experienced just the same thing with some of my own close relatives. The apologia may have taken somewhat different forms, but was essentially the same—excusing the savagery of the Gulag, and the "Cultural Revolution", and, God help me, even the "killing Fields", because these good Communist nations had to "defend themselves" against Western undermining.

So—while the apologia for Islam specifically is a relatively new thing, "politically correct" excuses for barbarism date back quite a long way.

Important stuff from Awake, LemonLime, and Kinana of Khaybar.

All too many Westerners hearing Qaradawi are apt to consider him some sort of "radical" who is ignored or even opposed by the mainstream of "moderate" Muslims. Never mind that there appear to be an awful lot of "radicals" out there...

This willful denial is a huge obstacle for anyone trying to educate Infidels about the Jihad threat.

Also, good post from Max Modine.

Welcome, Exmuslim! For the first few months you may have felt welcome as a brother within islam, but around here you're like a rock star! ..so great that you left islam :)

Exmuslim (and fellow Aussie)

when you said, "The first few months were interesting I never felt so welcomed before by so many people everyone called me their brother in Islam" I was reminded of an article I read some time ago, that catalogued the 'marks of a Cult'. New recruits (not only new voluntary recruits to Islam, like you were, but new recruits to other sorts of dangerous closed cults) are 'love bombed'.

Here's an article that lists the 'marks of a cult' (that is, the sort of thing that Islam is, in spades).

http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/43960
Wednesday, 19 September 2012

'Steven Hassan, Former Moonie, Offers Some Features That Define A Cult

"You go down the criteria, one by one, and see how many fit the case of Islam, currently awarded the status of "religion" rather than of "cult."...".

More discussion of the marks of dangerous cults, here, in a jihadwatch comments thread (the poster did not, alas, give a source reference or link, but it is interesting nonetheless):

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/04/jihad-set-to-resume-in-gaza.html#c85894

Just_Linda | April 28, 2005 7:59 PM

"Islam is a cult... read the cult characteristics below and prove me wrong.

"The group is focused on a leader to whom members seem to display excessively zealous, unquestioning commitment.

"The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.

"The group is preoccupied with making money.

"Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished. {That one is Islam, in spades! - dda}.

"Mind-numbing techniques (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, debilitating work routines) are used to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).

"The leadership dictates sometimes in great detail how members should think, act, and feel (for example: members must get permission from leaders to date, change jobs, get married; leaders may prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, how to discipline children, and so forth). {Islam dictates what foot you put first when entering the toilet and which foot when exiting, and how you may clean your backside after defecating, and so on, and on, and on..- dda}.

"The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s), and members (for example: the leader is considered the Messiah or an avatar; the group and/or the leader has a special mission to save humanity).

"The group has a polarized us- versus-them mentality, which causes conflict with the wider society. {Yup: 'Dar Al Islam vs Dar al Harb' - dda}.

"The group's leader is not accountable to any authorities.

"The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify means that members would have considered unethical before joining the group (for example: collecting money for bogus charities, committing suicide, etc). - {Yep, that's Islam to a T - dda}

"The leadership induces guilt feelings in members in order to control them.

"Members' subservience to the group causes them to cut ties with family and friends, and to give up personal goals and activities that were of interest before joining the group.

"Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group.

"Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.'

'Yup... this is islam."

And some things you may find helpful, if you haven't come across them before:

ex-Muslim (now atheist) Ibn Warraq's article that runs Islam past the various indicators of Fascism that were identified by Italian writer Umberto Eco -

http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/1554

Islam, Middle East and Fascism
by Ibn Warraq

Ibn Warraq concludes that the Islamic system should perhaps be designated an 'Ur-Fascism'.

Elsewhere, Ibn Warraq writes on 'Islam as Totalitarianism':

http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/18947
Monday, 12 January 2009
Apologists of Totalitarianism: From Communism to Islam, Part I

ISLAM AS TOTALITARIANISM
 - by Ibn Warraq

"Charles Watson, and G.-H. Bousquet refer to Islam as a totalitarian system tout court, while Bertrand Russell, Jules Monnerot, and Czeslaw Milosz compare Islam to various aspects of communism, and finally, among others, Carl Jung, Karl Barth, Adolf Hitler, Said Amir Arjomand, Maxime Rodinson and Manfred Halpern note Islam's similarities to fascism or nazism (the latter two terms often used synonymously)....".

And this little article that talks about the way that Fear is used to control people in Islam:

http://islamsfatalflaw.blogspot.com.au/2009/01/why-islam-is-different.html

Monday, January 5, 2009

Why Islam is different

And a further exposition of the same:

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/11/islam-is-fear-part-i.html

Saturday, November 05, 2011
Islam is Fear, Part I

Hope some of this helps. If you feel overwhelmed, just read one thing and then look at the other things later, bit by bit.

A couple more questions.

*Before* you joined Islam, did any of the Muslims who were talking to you ever mention the Apostasy Law? That is, the sharia rule that any person who leaves Islam must be killed?

If you didn't find out/ hadn't heard/ weren't told when you joined, when was it *after* you had joined that you found out you had joined a cult whose members are supposed to *kill* anyone who leaves it?

I ask this because I wouldn't be at all surprised if you *weren't* told when you were being dawa'-ised.

In his book 'Liberty to the Captives' Dr Mark Durie says that "because of the way knowledge is organized *and even guarded* (my emphasis - dda) in Islam, it can be difficult to know what Islam 'really' teaches on certain subjects', and he adds:

"Islamic religious knowledge is not democratized,in the way Biblical knowledge has been in recent centuries. **In Islam certain things are just not discussed if there is no need to mention them, or it might put Islam in a bad light to do so: information about Islam is made available on a need-to-know basis".

Was that your experience? That information about what sharia entails, for example, was doled out bit by bit, once they thought they had you far enough inside?

Glad to see an interesting topic come up on JW after a while - most of it is news about same old, same old

I fully agree w/ this. Laws against apostasy is just one weapon among many that Muslims have to keep their numbers intact. I actually see the law against blasphemy and the one against apostasy 2 sides of the same coin - one aimed at quitting Islam, and the other at changing or challenging Islam. And also, the unrelenting persecution of Infidels, coupled w/ laws that ensure that they are second class citizens also contribute towards that.

And laws are not all. In most previous cases in history, when persecution was the norm, as with Nazis and Communists and several before them, families would usually stick together and thereby have another source of strength in their conviction. The problem here for apostates is that in addition to being ostracized by society at large, they also face ostracism from their own families, if not out & out death threats. Even if the law would later punish their killers, as in the case of non-Muslim countries, that doesn't mean much if the killers don't fear the consequences and go ahead and kill them anyway.

But honestly, I don't see a situation where the law against apostasy alone will go away, while the others described above will stay. If it's a pro-Islamic setting, as in almost all Muslim countries, that law ain't going anywhere. If it is in a setting where by some unforeseen set of circumstances, Islamic laws are rolled back or repealed, then along w/ the apostasy laws, all the other laws described above would go as well. I just can't contemplate a scenario where some will go and the others will stay.

When you couple the translated source and general lack of name or face recognition, this eureka moment falls short in my estimation. Say the name Bin Laden and everyone gets it. Say Qaradawi and almost everyone says...who?

You hit the nail right on the head here. Just like Muslims practice projection when they take the things they do and project it onto their enemies, such as 'Zionists making their bread from the blood of others', similarly, Westerners practice a different sort of projection by assuming that just b'cos they aren't interested in certain things, other people elsewhere in the world ain't either.

The fact is that none of the people who feature on this site or in Spencer's books - be it Qaradawi, Tariq Ramadan, Reza Aslan, et al are people that most people in the West have even heard of. So they assume that most Muslims don't know any of them either, and once that assumption sets in, it's difficult to imagine their ideas being the basis of any influence.

I think it would be a lot more convincing to show people the result of popular uprisings that have happened in the Arab Spring countries, and use that to demonstrate the popular support for Islamic fanaticism. Of course, there are those who won't be convinced by that either, but it's still easier than using people whom few in the West have heard of.

Infidel,

Agreed--abolition of punishment for apostasy would probably not occur in isolation. I was just doing a bit of a thought experiment there to make a point, namely, that Islam is a system that is very thoroughly rigged, redundantly so, for sustaining itself (whilst having the added benefit of making life better for Muslim males, at the expense of others).

I mentioned that Islam could only be defeated from outside. But I neglected to mention that I also think it could collapse from within due to internal conflict. While Islam is rigged to thrive in an environment where there are non-Muslims available, when there aren't enough non-Muslims around to oppose then this same programming can turn Muslim groups against each other, with each party claiming the others are not following Islam closely, properly, extensively enough.

The fact that Islam has survived, and thrived, as long as it has, is due to a combination of its own self-sustaining programming, plus the lack of sufficient sustained attack on the evil system--which is so deserving of being attacked--from the outside.

1. Why did I remain Muslim for son long, simple answer is because I actually believed this was the truth and the only way to attain Jannah or paradise. Also for a time I genuinely believed especially in dawah that I was bringing light to people living in darkness and falsehood namely Christians and Jews.

2. Why leave Islam as you can guess any revert or even born Muslim who begins to study Islam in detail will eventually become disgusted with it. What kind of a god would pour molten lead into one's ear for listening to music? What kind of a god orders for lead to be poured into your eye's for looking at a girl? What kind of a god orders for you to fight against disbelievers until they submit to his authority? What kind of a god orders the killing of apostates how weak can he and his religion be that he needs to resort to fear to keep people in Pathetic if you ask me.

Kinana

I've sometimes wondered whether the 'Two cats of Killerney/Killkiney' model could work in destroying Muslims from inside. I actually doubt it could, b'cos in most Muslim countries, it would be extremely difficult to obtain stalemates as the results. In just about every Muslim country, one sect has a major edge over the others, and could wipe them out in an all out war. Also, if such a civil war decides to simply transcend borders, the Shias would be wiped out due to their numbers alone.

It would be the other non-Islamic based aspects of various divides in various countries, such as Pashtun vs Tajik in Afghanistan, Panjabi vs other in Pakistan, Farsis vs Arabs/Balochis/Azeris in Iran, Arabs vs Berbers in Tunisia and Libya, Arabs vs Blacks in N Sudan, and so on that could perpetuate civil wars in those countries, if done right. But even in the worst scenario, I don't see the entire populations of countries disappearing. While those countries could be weakened, in the current climate, it would mean millions of them fleeing to the West, and polypragnomic (to use one of Hugh's favorite words) leaders there trying to end those, or take in those refugees, further exacerbating an already ugly situation.

Also, that magic billion plus number - it's not going to go down by what happens in the Middle East. As we all know, the bulk of them live in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia and India. So it would take a war against the first 3 countries, as well as a civil war in India, to really bring down those numbers.

Good points, on why internal conflict (physical fighting) is probably not going to bring Islam's numbers down enough. If you are right, then Islam is going to have to be brought down through outside intervention. In this respect, I was not thinking so much in terms of physical fighting as in major political and social interventions, e.g., requiring that Islamic countries drop their penalties for apostasy, blasphemy, heresy, and so on; and ultimately treat women and non-Muslims equally to Muslim males. Economic and other sanctions could be imposed on such countries that fail to comply. That's just one example of some measures that could be taken; there are many more. It may take generations until such measures result in accumulating significant effects. Of course, all of this assumes we have leaders in place who are motivated and willing to use such measures, but that is not the case. One thing seems to be clear thus far after 1400 years: It is probably not going to go away, unless there is some massive and sustained undertaking, initiated from the outside, to destroy it; or else to render it socially, politically, legally ineffective and therefore on a path to dissolution.

The solution to defeating Islam is a step-by-step process, and I believe must be tackled using multiple methods, physical fighting to deal with the militants, social and political measures to deal with the larger populations.

Infidel,

The most basic thing our leaders could do is oppose (a) Islam, or at least (b) the many elements of sharia that are contrary to our basic laws and values. As it is, our leaders never ever voice any objections to any element of sharia, no matter how crazy the element, much less criticize Islam per se. But I do think our leaders voicing their objections as step 1 would have a strong effect in terms of social pressure. Remember, all those Islamic leaders are never ever challenged on their beliefs. Instead, our leaders have been comforting them and reassuring them that the Islamic status quo can continue unchallenged. Some, such as Hillary and Obama, are praising oppressive aspects of Islam and even attempting to bend Western laws, and abuse their positions of power, in order to effectively enforce Islamic laws and taboos.
Instead, imagine a president of the U.S. or prime minister of U.K. or France publicly verbally blasting some major Islamic countries on a host of human rights violations (re apostasy, blasphemy, marriage to child brides, rape of children, slavery, etc.). This would have a great effect of at least starting a huge argument.

For the above to work, of course, requires a mainstream media, that actually supports human rights, that would present the above controversy in a way that is at least objective, if not favorable to our side. Of course, we don't have a mainstream media that supports human rights; we have a mainstream media that supports Islam.

All of the Islamic countries are in serious violation of the U.N. Charter. They should be removed from the U.N. Of course, that's not going to happen, with the Islamic Bloc countries currently constituting a plurality at the U.N. We could abolish the U.N. (most importantly, cutting its funding, thereby putting a further burden on Islamic countries if they wish to continue it) and establish a united nations of free countries.

We can and should be supporting massive propaganda campaigns directed into Islamic countries, challenging sharia and Islamic beliefs and promoting western values such as freedom of expression (in the proper sense of being able to criticize political and religious figures and ideas, etc.), freedom of conscience, and the equality of all people in the eyes of the law.

We should withdraw any funding to Muslims in Islamic countries. We should end immigration from Islamic countries (except for non-Muslims). We should strengthen non-Muslim groups and regions within Islamic countries. Muslim clerics who call for the death of apostates or critics should themselves be classified correctly as terrorists, leaders of terrorists, and killed forthwith.

I can go on listing suggestions for changing the Islamic world into a better place, but for each such proposal there must be the willingness and the mind-set to do it, and in each case we currently don't have it because of the politicians, media, academics, etc., who are overwhelmingly in favor of Islam and not opposed to sharia.

Of course I wasn't informed of this in fact I only discovered this some time after converting, we were also instructed to always smile at the infidels when giving dawah in order to win them over while inside we could curse them this is why Dawah groups are always reported to have the best of manners even though it's only a show to fool the people then of course you fed people rubbish about how peaceful Islam is and how great muhammad was. Only once someone was praying five times a day and fasting every second day as I was were they then slowly told the truth about Islam.