As I have noted many times, whenever the mainstream media asks whether Islam really has anything to do with all the atrocities committed in its name, you can be absolutely sure that the answer will be no. Here is yet another in an endless barrage of examples.
In reality, there is much support in the Qur’an and Sunnah for the death penalty for blasphemy. It can arguably be found in this verse: “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.” (5:33)
Also: “Those who annoy Allah and His Messenger – Allah has cursed them in this World and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating Punishment” (33:57)
And: “If they violate their oaths after pledging to keep their covenants, and attack your religion, you may fight the leaders of paganism – you are no longer bound by your covenant with them – that they may refrain” (9:12).
There is more in the hadith. In one, Muhammad asked: “Who is willing to kill Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?” One of the Muslims, Muhammad bin Maslama, answered, “O Allah’s Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?” When Muhammad said that he would, Muhammad bin Maslama said, “Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab).” Muhammad responded: “You may say it.” Muhammad bin Maslama duly lied to Ka’b, luring him into his trap, and murdered him. (Bukhari 5.59.369)
“A Jewess used to abuse the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and disparage him. A man strangled her till she died. The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) declared that no recompense was payable for her blood.” (Sunan Abu-Dawud 38.4349)
“Blasphemy and the law of fanatics,” by Fareed Zakaria, Washington Post, January 8, 2015:
As they went on their rampage, the men who killed 12 people in Paris this week yelled that they had “avenged the prophet.” They followed in the path of other terrorists who have bombed newspaper offices, stabbed a filmmaker and killed writers and translators, all to mete out what they believe is the proper Koranic punishment for blasphemy. But in fact, the Koran prescribes no punishment for blasphemy. Like so many of the most fanatical and violent aspects of Islamic terrorism today, the idea that Islam requires that insults against the prophet Muhammad be met with violence is a creation of politicians and clerics to serve a political agenda.
One holy book is deeply concerned with blasphemy: the Bible. In the Old Testament, blasphemy and blasphemers are condemned and prescribed harsh punishment. The best-known passage on this is Leviticus 24:16 : “Anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them. Whether foreigner or native-born, when they blaspheme the Name they are to be put to death.”
This is why you see so many Jews and Christians killing people for blasphemy these days. It is supremely disingenuous for Zakaria to bring this passage up without bothering to mention that both Judaism and Christianity have mainstream interpretative traditions that reject the literal application of this penalty.
By contrast, the word blasphemy appears nowhere in the Koran. (Nor, incidentally, does the Koran anywhere forbid creating images of Muhammad, though there are commentaries and traditions — “hadith” — that do, to guard against idol worship.) Islamic scholar Maulana Wahiduddin Khan has pointed out that “there are more than 200 verses in the Koran, which reveal that the contemporaries of the prophets repeatedly perpetrated the same act, which is now called ‘blasphemy or abuse of the Prophet’ . . . but nowhere does the Koran prescribe the punishment of lashes, or death, or any other physical punishment.” On several occasions, Muhammad treated people who ridiculed him and his teachings with understanding and kindness. “In Islam,” Khan says, “blasphemy is a subject of intellectual discussion rather than a subject of physical punishment.”
Somebody forgot to tell the terrorists. But the gruesome and bloody belief the jihadis have adopted is all too common in the Muslim world, even among so-called moderate Muslims — that blasphemy and apostasy are grievous crimes against Islam and should be punished fiercely. Many Muslim-majority countries have laws against blasphemy and apostasy — and in some places, they are enforced….
In Muslim-majority countries, no one dares to dial back these laws….
Why not, if they have no basis in the Qur’an and nothing to do with Islam?
jp says
Who cares what a plagiarist terror whitewasher says
Jay Boo says
Who can you trust?
Not this slimy guy.
Fareed Zakaria (KING OF PLAGIARISM)
CNN no shame
http://theweek.com/article/index/272133/three-major-publications-have-acknowledged-plagiarism-by-fareed-zakaria-does-cnn-have-no-shame
Al Jazeera puppet NPR has admitted to shelving the story
gravenimage says
Almost everyone here knows what the slimy Fareed Zakaria is—but most of the Western public does not. All too many will assume that Zakaria is a respected journalist who knows whereof he speaks, and who is being completely honest. That’s the whole point of this whitewash of Islam.
voegelinian says
One can imagine (not without a David-Letterman frisson of repulsion) the likely cocktail parties that occur in various breezily jet-set locales (a penthouse atop Manhattan; a Hollywood producer’s mansion in Bel Air, Los Angeles; Kensington Palace, London; a pied-à-terre in the 6th arrondissement of Paris…), where the likes & ilk of Fareed Zakaria, Thomas Friedman, Pierce Morgan, Charlie Rose, Prince Charles, Ariana Huffington, Reza Aslan, Huma Abedin, Bill Connolly, Michael Palin, Bono, Sting, Lady Gaga, Sir Paul McCartney, Ron Howard, George Clooney (and his brand-spanking Muslim wife), et cetera ad nauseam, all mingle, grinningly in the know of the sparkling wit of the Absolute Truth of Politically Correct Multi-Culturalism.
gravenimage says
Ah, yes—the soirée from hell, Voeg. Although I must say that some of the guests like Thomas Friedman are just well-meaning, politically-correct ignoramuses, while those like Fareed Zakaria and Reza Aslan are much more knowing whitewashers of evil—but there is no doubt that these hyenas rely on such clueless lap dogs to spread the word to the rest of the sheep (if I may mix my metaphors a bit), who are all too happy to hear that Islam is truly a religion of peace, and presents no threat to us—the increasingly inconvenient, ever growing mountain of evidence to the contrary.
Jaladhi says
Well this guy is a liar, liar, liar!! Just like other Muslims he lies to defend Islam and now he is blaming politicians for what is written in Quran!!! It will do him a lot of good if he goes back to a madrassa to learn his beloved Quran from a maulvee!! Why would WaPo keep this liar on their payrolls??
Jay Boo says
“Fareed Zakaria: Islamic death penalty for blasphemy “creation of politicians””
—————————————————-
Technically, he is not lying if the full truth were to be told.
Muhammad was a politician pretending to be a prophet.
The Muslims who burnt competing contradictory versions of the Koran and revised a new version were also politicians.
roger woodhouse says
Its a great pity that while those muslims who burnt competeing contradicory versions of the Koran just didnt allow two. One all singing all dancing sweetness and light (the one our polticians like to quote ) and the other which all the terrorists can carry into battle when out on their killing sprees.At least then we would know just where the ‘moderate’ muslims stand (perhaps)
Keith says
Nah, the moderates would be carrying the all sweetness and light version and in their right hand they would be carrying the violent version in their right hand.
Jaladhi says
Zakaria is simply lying when there are many examples in in Hadiths and Sira where Mo/allah asks his followers who will kill those who insult him – which is blasphemy according to him and of course many of the followers obliged Mo by killing his insulters. And Zakaria says blasphemy is created by politicians. Amazing never cease to come out Muslim mouths!!
Boston Tea Party says
I think Fareed is missing something that many astute Muslims fully understand: harsh penalties for blasphemy and apostasy are essential to prevent the collapse of Islam.
Ayatrollah says
I don’t think there is an islamic country where you can safely say something bad about pbuh. And all have laws, not just street justice. This guy is making up his own islam.
boakai ngombu says
there is a difference between blasphemy against the Unique God and blasphemy against Islam.
and the punishment for blaspheming against the Righteous God – fair (just) and right – is a far cry from demanding death for infracting the supposed will of the malevolent belligerent Allah god of Islam (unknowable; the best of all deceivers) and the brothers down at the mosque who are it’s slaves.
The Unique God intends to be merciful and bestows unmerited mercy upon the undeserving who are incapable of pleasing Him on their own. He restores people to righteousness, as He is righteous.
the Allah god of Islam makes many demands, sheds much blood, and destroys the helpless and undeserving for the least infraction. its rage is all people see by the actions of the slaves.
Jay Boo says
Even if a Muslim is pious his whole life, Allah might still send him to torments of the grave on a whim.
No wonder so many Muslims wish to opt out with the jihad martyr clause.
RonaldB says
Your all-powerful god, maker and shaper of the universe, sits around in his easy chair just waiting for some unfortunate unbeliever to say something bad about him, so he can consign him to hell.
God, what a boring job your god has.
Keith says
He has got nothing else to do so any tiny bit of excitement like condemning some one to hell for a minor infraction must be a high point in his day
William says
If one wishes to expose his duplicity, one should ask him these questions: What do you believe should happen to someone who mocks Mohammed with caricatures? Do you believe that person or persons should be punished? If yes, on what basis would you make that judgement? In other words, what source would you use to determine that it is wrong to caricature Mohammed? And what type of punishment should he or she get?
Bezelel says
@William, If one wishes to expose his duplicity) He did disavow any credibility for punishment yet I suspect he does favor it,same as the rest of the death cult. It’s just another feeble attempt at moral equivalency. Which is a tactical distraction from the horrid facts that we all just witnessed. After all Quakers can be a dangerous lot donchya know.It’s sickening and insensitive towards the victims for him to do such.
Michael Copeland says
Fareed Zakaria is denying a verse in the Koran. There is the death penalty for that.
Manual of Islamic Law, “Reliance of the Traveller” (a free download) o8.7(7). Any passer-by can carry it out without penalty “since it is killing someone who deserves to die” (o8.4). Sharia has vigilante justice.
epistemology says
In Judaism it’s only forbidden to say the name of G’d. I don’t know of any stonings being reported in the Torah. Muzzies keep stoning all the time. Their unholy Koran says you’ve got to be killed for apostasy. Fareed Zakary is a liar, he says there is nothing about stoning in the Koran. Saw him yesterday on CNN, he keeps lying. saying that that there is no law against blasphemy in the Koran. Islam equals Nazism and Fareed doesn’t want tom understand it.
Godwin says
This cunning fellow is using Taqiyyah to cheat the world, esp. the Westerners.
jewdog says
I agree with him, in the sense that all those politicians, which is really what imams are, since Islam is a totalitarian political creed as much as a religion, trace their inspiration back to the politician Mohammad.
gravenimage says
Fareed Zakaria: Islamic death penalty for blasphemy “creation of politicians”
……………………………..
If by that he meant “a creation of political Islam”—which is, of course, indistinguishable from orthodox Islam itself, then this would be accurate.
But he is, of course, just spouting Taqiyya to “defend” Islam—he doesn’t want us “filthy Infidels” to know what Islam really says.
And he is not claiming that this is just carried out by a “tiny minority” of Jihadists like those who slaughtered journalists and cartoonists in the horrific attack on Charlie Hebdo, but has to admit that this is also enforced by “politicians”—in other words, most of the leaders in the Muslim world. Virtually every Muslim country has punishment for ‘blasphemy’—even when it is hidden in euphemisms such as “Insulting Turkishness”.
And punishment for ‘blasphemy’ has become increasingly common in Dar-al-Islam as the Muslim world further Islamizes—both on the books and in being enforced. Victims have been fined, imprisoned, flogged, and increasingly murdered—either by the state or by pious members of the Ummah who take such homicidal enforcement into their own bloody hands.
This, too, is mainstream Islam—and has been ever since the days of the “Prophet”.
Rezali Mehil says
Hello Graven,
How are you?
I have been very impressed with the 4 million” je suis Charlies” world citizens in Paris this past weekend. I want you to know that no matter what the idea …IMHO no one …but no one deserves to be brutally murdered by doing hundreds of vile drawings.
Peoples here have asked why bring in the smiling PAL leader …it sends the wrong message? IMHO we need to TRY at least to bring to an end to divisions – easier said than done I know but at least it needs to be done at the politician level – the world is not yet ready for THOSE divisions and the implications behind it?
Fareed Zakaria is right at least for the blasphemy laws introduction in Pakistan – Ordered by Zia -Ul Haq in the 1970s’ which were once ridiculed …we see they have now started to find their way in other parts of the Islamic world – and really I feel within the next 10 years all Western countries will have “an understanding” of *these* blasphemy laws even if they are not passed by law.
Sure the Ebdo magazine had the right to put any drawings it likes …but my question is “does it help in the bigger picture” to get along? I mean why bother …there are bigger and better things to write about aren’t there?
Surely you agree ….and if you don’t…. can you please show and share your new drawings please?
More Later….
Rezali
gravenimage says
The repulsive Rezali Mehil wrote:
Hello Graven,
How are you?
I have been very impressed with the 4 million” je suis Charlies” world citizens in Paris this past weekend. I want you to know that no matter what the idea …IMHO no one …but no one deserves to be brutally murdered by doing hundreds of vile drawings.
……………………………………….
Charlie Hebdo first came on the radar of Rezali Mehil’s murderous coreligonists when they reprinted the Danish Jyllands-Posten cartoons, which mostly just note that Islam is violent and a threat to freedom of speech.
*This* is what Rezali Mehil considers “vile”—daring to point to the violence of Islam.
And why not? No criticism of Islam is allowed under Shari’ah.
And her claim that no one deserves to be murdered for this is pretty iffy—she had many times here lauded those who murder others for “disobedience” to Islam, and in fact considers the murderers the ‘real victims’, since the murder victims ‘forced their hand’.
More:
Peoples here have asked why bring in the smiling PAL leader …it sends the wrong message? IMHO we need to TRY at least to bring to an end to divisions – easier said than done I know but at least it needs to be done at the politician level – the world is not yet ready for THOSE divisions and the implications behind it?
……………………………………….
Of course—let’s bridge the divisions between Jews and other Infidels and those who want to see then destroyed. Ending such divisions will give homicidal Muslims much easier access to their victims.
More:
Fareed Zakaria is right at least for the blasphemy laws introduction in Pakistan – Ordered by Zia -Ul Haq in the 1970s’ which were once ridiculed …we see they have now started to find their way in other parts of the Islamic world – and really I feel within the next 10 years all Western countries will have “an understanding” of *these* blasphemy laws even if they are not passed by law.
……………………………………….
What crap. These laws do not date from the 1970s in places like Pakistan and Iran, but from the earliest days of Islam. Shari’ah and its blasphemy laws held sway in much of Dar-al-Islam for well over a millenium.
But the civilized West had dome influence in the Muslim world for a period, and so the Muslim world at least went through the motions in many places of ending slavery and curbing the gaudiest excesses of Shari’ah law, including penalties for “blasphemy”.
But Islam has been resurgent in many places over the past fifty years or so, and the tipping point in many places was indeed the ’70s. But this is nothing new—just a reassertion of mainstream Islam.
More:
Sure the Ebdo (sic) magazine had the right to put any drawings it likes …but my question is “does it help in the bigger picture” to get along? I mean why bother …there are bigger and better things to write about aren’t there?
……………………………………….
What could be less important than exposing the threat of oppressive and violent Islam to freedom of speech and other human rights? Certainly, it will make things *much* easier for Rezali Mehil and her fellow Muslims to “get along” with imposing Shari’ah—which she has championed—if Infidels not only do nothing to oppose it, but don’t even dare to openly say that this is going on.
More:
Surely you agree ….and if you don’t…. can you please show and share your new drawings please?
……………………………………….
Of course Rezali Mehil realized that I would not agree to self-censorship. So here are my cartoons criticizing the “Prophet’s” rape of little Aisha and his massacre of the Banu Qurayza tribe:
http://s478.photobucket.com/user/gravenimageartist/media/AishasWedding-1.jpg.html?sort=3&o=0
http://s478.photobucket.com/user/gravenimageartist/media/JWswing.jpg.html?sort=3&o=3
http://s478.photobucket.com/user/gravenimageartist/media/BanuQurayza.jpg.html?sort=3&o=2&_suid=142111689063605215794066898525
Wellington says
Zakaria is either a deceiver or an ignoramus (my money’s on the former) but the effect is the same, i.e., the continued attempt to whitewash Islam.
Ain’t working anymore. I have posted negative comments about Islam at Yahoo many times now and usually I get at least four or five thumbs up (often more like ten or twenty) to every thumb’s down I receive.
Three truths out there right now about Islam: 1) This religion is wretched as it has always been; 2) Western elites keep doubling (or is that dumbing?) down in denial about this first truth; 3) The rank and file of one Western nation after another have had it with the lies told about Islam by both Muslims and Western elites.
Jake Neuman says
For FREE BOOK – KILLING PROPHET MUHAMMAD go to: http://www.godofmoralperfection.com
gfmucci says
Fareed is a disgustingly deceitful person. He has Islamic family roots, so I guess his words are understandable in that context. I never cease to be amazed how deception so easily flows off of Islamic tongues.
From Wikipedia: Zakaria was born in Mumbai, Maharashtra, India, to a Muslim family.[3] His father, Rafiq Zakaria, was a politician associated with the Indian National Congress and an Islamic scholar. His mother, Fatima Zakaria, was for a time the editor of the Sunday Times of India.
pdxnag says
Does the tag #GrandDeflection capture the essence of the argument of the appeases and apologists?
pumbar says
Alarmingly, he looks like one of the Osmonds.
Champ says
LOL!!! ..you’re right he does 😀
TotallyPeeved says
Lying clump of pig smegma.
Jay Boo says
Muslims, take a close look here and soon the image of Muhammad will appear.
http://pamelageller.com/2014/12/muslim-brutallly-tortures-and-honor-murders-his-10-year-old-daughter-for-adultery.html/
Beagle says
Here is an Islamic take citing fiqh in 2005: http://www.yanabi.com/index.php?/topic/37928-the-penalty-for-insulting-the-holy-prophet-sallallaahu-alaihi-wa-sallam/
In a nutshell, insulting a prophet (read: Muhammad) is kufr which cannot be forgiven and therefore must be punished by death.
Salah says
Why is he trying to whitewash Islam? taqiyya? of course, taqiyya is most probably the reason why he’s doing it.
Yet I think there’s another reason besides taqiyya.
Deep inside, most Muslims are starting to feel the shame of belonging to such an evil religion. Many of them, especially the average Muslim is waking up to a very unpleasant reality: Islam is evil.
The shock is so great that he is unable to swallow it, at least not right away. As time goes by, he will.
Islam is in its last gasp, it’s dying. Unfortunately, a dying beast is extremely dangerous, it will shed a lot of innocent blood in its last moments.
Ayattollahowmany says
Four Islamic words for this liar for Islam—
1. Taqiyya
2. Tawriya
3. Kitman
4. Muruna
Buraq says
So, Zak’s back, the clown! Beware of lies and deceit along with that false smile like a row of Chiclets.
Deirdre Gates says
Did Mohamed’s Arabic extend to complex abstract nouns such as ‘blasphemy’? Mr Spencer’s book on Mohamed points out that much of the Koran seems to consist of garbled and peculiar mis-translations of Christian texts which the translator(s) either did not understand in the original Syriac or for which concepts there was no suitable vocabulary in Arabic.
If there was no Arab word for blasphemy, then blasphemy could not be pithily defined. Arabs would need to run all the way round the houses and up the High Street to come up with a description of this ‘crime’.
Perhaps Mr Spencer could clarify this point?
gravenimage says
Robert Spencer has certainly covered this, Deirdre—but I’m mot sure if it’s all in one place.
But here’s an excellent work from the Religion of Peace site that spells this whole phenomenon out really clearly:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/016-insulters-islam.htm
And you are quite right that the Islamic texts do not use the word “blasphemy”—they mostly talk about insults to Allah or his “messenger”. But his is, of course, the same thing.
jay says
that sneaky double talk.. No, the word “blasphemy” does not appear. But what does is a relentless violent hatred of anyone who does not submit to Islam. Leaving Islam is punishable by death and so is talking badly about the Prophet (who IS the religion). Not joining the religion is a crime and sin, etc, etc, That’s technically blasphemy! Jesus, these people. I want to scream.
Ignore all the murder/death/kill stuff, the word blasphemy isn’t in there! Everyone go home, peace prevails.
Jack Diamond says
Refusing to address Muhammad’s example in over and over again having those killed who mocked or “vexed” him; or the understanding of his friend and successor Abu Bakr that killing applies to insulting Muhammad, not to someone insulting he Abu Bakr (http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/free_speech.htm) and refusing to address that there is strong consensus among the scholars, Zakaria’s only concern is protecting the reputation of Islam at all costs (what’s left of it).
In a manual of Islamic law like Umdat al-Salik, blasphemy (“to revile Allah or His Messenger” “to be sarcastic about Allah’s name, His command, His interdiction, His promise or His threat”; “to speak words that imply unbelief”) is grounds for apostasy (leaving Islam) for a Muslim and it is grounds for the non-Muslim subject of the Islamic State to lose their “protected” status if he “mentions anything impermissible about Allah, the Prophet, or Islam.” Both carry a death penalty. Whether the actual word “blasphemy” is used is besides the point.
Ibn Taymiyyah on the legal opinion of those who curse Muhammad:
“Shaykhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah on the necessity of killing whoever curses the Prophet, Peace and Blessings be upon him. Taken from Mukhtasar As-Saram Al-Maslool `Ala Shatim Ar-Rasul (Summary of The Drawn Sword Against the One Who Curses the Messenger) Pages 31-33
Translated by the Islamic Emirate
THE FIRST MATTER:
That Whoever Curses the Prophet Peace and Blessings be Upon him, Muslim or Kafir, Must be Killed.
This is the methodology of the general scholars. Ibn Al-Munthir said: “The general scholars agreed that whoever curses him, Peace and Blessings be upon him, must be killed. This was stated by Malik, Al-Layth, Ahmad, Ishaaq, and Ash-Shafi’ee, and Nu’man (Abu Hanifa) said that the Dhimmi (Jizya-paying non-Muslim) is not to be killed.”
And Abu Bakr Al- Faarisee – a companion of Ash-Shafi’ee – stated that there is the consensus of the Muslims upon killing who curses the Prophet, Peace and Blessings be upon him, just as the ruling for whoever curses other than him is whipping. And this consensus is carried down from the consensus from the premiere generation of the Tabi’een and the Sahabah. It was said by Sheikhul-Islam – or he intended their consensus on the necessity of the killing if he was a Muslim. And such was reported by Al-Qadi [The Judge] `Iyad.
And Ishaq Ibn Rahaway said that all of the Muslims are in consensus that whoever curses Allah or curses His Messenger, or rejects something from what Allah revealed, or killed a prophet, that he is a Kafir; and even if he accepts all that was revealed by Allah. And Al-Khattabi said, “I don’t know of anyone who disagrees with the obligation of his killing.”1
And Muhammad Ibn Suhnoon said that the scholars are in consensus that the one who curses the Messenger is a Kafir; and whoever doubts his Kufr is a Kafir. The bottom line: That the Muslim one who curses [The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him] is to be killed without disagreement, and it is the opinion of the methodology of the four Imams as well as other than them; even if he is a Jizya-paying non-Muslim, he is killed as well – according to Malik and the people of Madina; and it is the way of Ahmad and the scholars of Hadith. Ahmad specified it many times.
It was stated by Hanbal, Abus-Saqr, Al-Khallal, Abdullah, and Abu Talib – that he is to be killed whether he is Muslim or Kafir. It was said to Ahmad [Ibn Hanbal], “Is there a hadith for [supporting] it? He said yes, there are Ahadith. One of them is the Hadith of the blind man who killed the woman when he heard her curse the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, and the Hadith of Hasan.
He [Ahmad Ibn Hanbal] said: And he should not be asked to repent. It was narrated by Abu Bakr in “Al-Shafee.” So there is no disagreement that he is to be killed, and that his treaty is nullified.”
1. Ma`alim As-Sunnan 6/199
——-http://inspiremv.blogspot.com/2010/09/slaughter-whoever-insults-prophet.html
mortimer says
Sharia permits the murder of anyone who verbally opposes Islam, since they are at war with Islam:
“There is no indemnity obligatory for killing a non-Muslim (harbi) at war with Muslims.” -Reliance of the Traveller, o4.17, p.593
…………………….
A mullah gives permission to kill kafirs who blaspheme:
At Islam Q & A, one asks if it is permissible to insult Christians who defame the Prophet. The response: Yes! And kill them, too!
Answer :
Praise be to Allaah.
Defaming the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is a kind of kufr [unbelief]. If that is done by a Muslim then it is apostasy on his part, and the authorities have to defend the cause of Allaah and His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) by executing the one who defamed him. If the one who defamed him repents openly and is sincere, that will benefit him before Allaah, although his repentance does not waive the punishment for defaming the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), which is execution.
mortimer says
Further to above:
“If the person who defames him is a non-Muslim living under a treaty with the Muslim state [i.e., a dhimmi], then this is a violation of the treaty and he must be executed, but that should be left to the authorities. If a Muslim hears a Christian or anyone else defaming the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) he has to denounce him in strong terms. It is permissible to insult that person because he is the one who started it. How can we not stand up the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)? It is also obligatory to report him to the authorities who can carry out the punishment on him. IF THERE IS NO ONE who can carry out the hadd punishment of Allaah and stand up for the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) then THE MUSLIM HAS TO DO WHATEVER HE CAN, so long as that will not lead to further mischief and harm against other people. But if a Muslim hears a kaafir defaming the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and he keeps quiet and does not respond for fear that this person may then defame him even more, this is mistaken thinking.”
Imam Muhammad bin Sahnoon said: There is consensus (ijma) amongst ulama that ANYONE WHO INSULTS THE PROPHET (Peace be upon him) and finds his defects then such a person is “KAFIR” and there is promise of Allah’s tornment upon such a person and in sight of Ummah THE RULING REGARDING HIM IS TO “KILL HIM” rather whosoever doubts in Kufr of such a person then he/she commits kufr himself [Qadhi Iyaadh, Ash-Shifa, Page No. 134, Published by Dar ul Kutb al iLmiyyah, Beirut, Lebanon]
Muslims commit a grave sin if they do not kill the blasphemer!
ECAW says
I’ve been trying to point out in the newspaper comments columns that the Hebdo killers were only following the example of Mohammed in assassinating satirists. As usuaI, i find that providing actual information is one of those things which trigger moderation (that’s a nice word for it isn’t it?) This is a useful link on the subject anyway:
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Killings_Ordered_or_Supported_by_Muhammad
gerard says
“Somebody forgot to tell the terrorists.”
He says all this from the safety of a non-muslim country. Let this hypocrite go to Pakistan or Iran and publically voice these opinions. See how long he will live.
cs says
In short guys, who is he??? I don’t know.
gravenimage says
Fareed Zakaria was, unbelievably, the editor of Time Magazine—and was editor of Newsweek until he drove it into the ground. He is also CNN’s flagship foreign affairs show. There’s more on his resume, but this gives you the general idea.
He is also a vile Taqiyya artist, who constantly whitewashes Islam. He’s snowed a lot of Infidels.
Angemon says
And somehow, two people born and raised in France, who learned about islam in France, believed that insulting muhammad is punishable by death. Hmmm, I wonder how they got that idea…
“One holy book is deeply concerned with blasphemy: the Bible. In the Old Testament, blasphemy and blasphemers are condemned and prescribed harsh punishment.”
And cue in the false moral equivalence. What this baboon conveniently leaves out is that Christians believe that the New Testament abrogates the Old Testament and Jews consider stopped carrying out that penalty a long time ago – in fact, 100% of Jewish-majority nations don’t carry the death penalty for blasphemy.
Zakaria is trying to weasel out on a technicality – although the word “blasphemy” is not in the quran, the blanket expression “spread corruption” more than covers it.
And on several occasions he had them killed. What’s your point?
Perhaps Mr. Khan should be preaching to muslims in muslim-majority countries. It’s not the non-muslims who need to be convinced of that, it’s the majority of muslims worldwide. I, for one, would gladly give him a first-class one-way ticket to the third-world islamic hellhole of his choosing with the condition he’d travel around the country and explain imams everywhere that islam doesn’t carry the death penalty for blasphemy.
eib says
I disagree with this statement on the basis of the hadiths, sira, Islamic law. The mass murder of free speakers is no creation. It is reality. How dare Zakaria insult those who mourn.
john spielman says
the death penalty for apostates and blasphemers is according to sharia law. see the web site SUNNIFORUMS to confirm
Rob Porter says
If it’s any comfort to you, this is what I wrote to Zakaria at his comments email address: “Fareed,
Having read your article ‘Blasphemy and and the law of fanatics’, I now understand why with such alacrity you frequently find it so easy to support policies and statements of President of the U.S., Barack Obama. From this article, on the surface, it would seem that either you do not know much about the content of the Qur’an or, regarding Islam and its teachings, are a deliberate liar. Having read a substantial amount of the Qur’an and know something about the Hadiths, I now believe that it is the latter and that you are a contemptible, taqiyya-subscribing, Muslim bloody liar. You are, in effect, nothing more than a man of low moral character and in league with the often inane comments-spouting pathological liar, Barack Obama. Like Obama you are an apologist for a savage, religious-phobia afflicted ideology of hatred and intolerance that has absolutely nothing of value to offer mankind.
voegelinian says
Yes, Fareed Zakara is part of the para-military wing of the Stealth Jihad, whose various members in different degrees, and with different styles & flavors, practice the Jihads of the Tongue & Pen — i.e., propaganda and disinformation (activities which other totalitarian ideologies, Nazism and Communism, found to be of vital importance).
Meanwhile, some of the Stealth Jihadists (e.g., Maajid Nawaz, Zuhdi Jasser) seem to have adopted quite a clever new tactic, of feigning concern & alarm at the problems of Islam. Their target audience is the Counter-Jihad: and it’s working — if someone as otherwise astute as Frank Gaffney is fooled by the sweet taqiyya they whisper in his ears.
Jae M says
Zakaria does not know Islam or if he does, he is lying. Interesting that he does what they all do and try to switch the topic to the harshness of the bibles old testament. That is a standard way they argue to avoid the truth and atrocious crimes being placed squarely on the ideology of Islam. One look at the guys eyes in the picture posted of him and all I could see was darkness coupled with the fake, scary smile.
Michelle Wayne says
Yes you right !! his smile is fake and the look in his eyes so fake folse like the rubbish he write.
Boston Tea Party says
At some point, though, don’t these arguments about the “true” nature of Islam become moot? I mean, it’s like arguing whether or not Nazism is a valid expression of true German nationalism as the panzer divisions are advancing on Paris.
Dracula says
Tu quoque: The first refuge of Islamic apologists.
Michael Copeland says
What is wrong with reviling religions? If Mohammed did it it must be all right. His contemporaries complained that he
“has reviled our gods, denounced our religion, derided our traditional values and told us that our forefathers were misguided.”
(Al Tabari) http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/antagonizing.htm
Mohammed provides the “beautiful pattern [of conduct] to follow” (Koran 33:21)
BC says
“Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.” — Bukhari 9.84.57 ‘baddala deenahu, faqtuhulu’
Not the Quran perhaps but the hadiths make it clear as day. I always thought Farid one of the more intelligent people on CNN (the bar is not high) but he is talking nonsense this time.
mortimer says
You are being charitable. It is disinformation. It is intentional.
mortimer says
Lying when under pressure is considered honorable in Islam. When caught with full-blown Islamic terrorism and blasphemy-murder, LIE ABOUT IT. DENY IT.
Years back, President Mubarak hosted a feminist meeting in Cairo. Western feminists learned about FGM’s 90% prevalence in Egypt…many for the first time. They were shocked and asked the president. Mubarak immediately LIED, insisting ‘no one in Egypt does this’.
Lying to kafirs is ‘good’ in Islam.
voegelinian says
Fareed is intelligent; i.e., in Islamic terms, clever as a snake (with plenty of subtle affectations of false assimilation into the modern Western world), and thus able to fool people who otherwise are beginning to slowly stir their sleeping limbs awake to the problem.
Undaunted says
What a slimy lookin’ scrote. Ick.
Anushirvan says
“By contrast, the word blasphemy appears nowhere in the Koran. (Nor, incidentally, does the Koran anywhere forbid creating images of Muhammad, though there are commentaries and traditions — “hadith” — that do, to guard against idol worship.)”
What a liar !
Shirk = idolatry = an accusation of blasphemy. An allegation reiterated constantly in the Quran ! This allegation is NOT confined to a few hadiths, either ! Talk about a disingenuous attempt at trying to separate two innately linked concepts ! Semantics gobbledegook !
Only useful idiots and the unsuspecting general public would fall into such a trap !
voegelinian says
Fareed is practicing kitman — telling part of the truth, while deliberately obscuring other crucial parts. Here, he may be technically correct that the word “blasphemy” isn’t in the Koran; but, of course, he’s thereby obscuring the fact that the effective synonyms for it (e.g., shirk, fitna, fasad, etc.) are in fact central, vividly blood-red stones in the Koran’s overall mosaic of belligerent, supremacist hatred.
Anushirvan says
I actually DO know that. Which is why I wrote down the word ‘trap’ in the first place.
hammar says
When one thinks about it…”mohammed” is actually and idol. He was not a prophet when he was alive or a religious person either. He was a killer,thief is basically all that is what he was. He had a child sex slave Aisha who was six years old when he married her. A rather sick idol. So nothing can be given to him to credit his life as being a person of faith or rather a good man at all.
Thomas Hulting says
Fareed Zakaria is a Muslim, born a Muslim, raised a Muslim, still a Muslim! LYING, according to the Koran, is not just permissible, but recommended BY THE KORAN if it is done in the furtherance of Islam! Fareed Zakaria is a Muslim LIAR!
mortimer says
Farid Zakaria is not revealing to his uninformed readers why Islam cannot be reformed: it is ‘perfect’, ‘complete’ and ‘eternal’.
To reform Islam is blaphemy that must be punished by death.
Sharia permits the murder of anyone who verbally opposes Islam, since they are at war with Islam:
“There is no indemnity obligatory for killing a non-Muslim (harbi) at war with Muslims.” -Reliance of the Traveller, o4.17, p.593
Imam Muhammad bin Sahnoon said: There is consensus (ijma) amongst ulama that anyone who insults the Prophet (Peace be upon him) and finds his defects then such a person is “KAFIR” and there is promise of Allah’s tornment upon such a person and in sight of Ummah the ruling regarding him is to “KILL HIM” rather whosoever doubts in Kufr of such a person then he/she commits kufr himself [Qadhi Iyaadh, Ash-Shifa, Page No. 134, Published by Dar ul Kutb al iLmiyyah, Beirut, Lebanon]
CornHolio says
Robert,
You forgot the last couple lines of the 33:57 verses, that clearly state that those who insult Muhammad deserve death.
*33:60 – If the hypocrites do not relinquish and [also] those in whose hearts is a sickness, AND the RUMORMONGERS in the city [do not give up], We will surely urge you [to take action] against THEM, then they will not be your neighbors in it except for a little [while].
(action to follow)
33:61 – Accursed, they will be seized wherever they are confronted and slain violently:
33: 62 – Allah’s precedent with those who passed away before, and you will never find any change in Allah’s precedent.*
You can’t get much clearer than that. Along with the other two groups there, the hypocrite Muslims and those with a “disease in their hearts”, those who “spread false rumors” about Muhammad and Islam shall be slain wherever they are found, and 33:62 makes the permission completely open-ended.
How is that not exactly what the Paris terrorists did? These were literal “rumor-mongers” about Islam and Muhammad, and they were “taken and killed where they were found”, and it even includes a justification to kill the Muslim cop, as he was clearly a “hypocrite”, by protecting these evildoers.
voegelinian says
The Arabic for 33:61 is interesting:
waquttiloo taqteelan (both rooted in the QTL “kill” word)
Some of the English translations reveal the curious locution there, e.g.: “slain with slaughter”. It sounds redundant; a redundancy redolent with blood; sort of like saying “murdered murderously”. Laying on the hatred and violence thick. One can almost palpably feel the giddy, orgasmic transport of Satanic fervor there.
libra says
Fareed like obama are apologist shills for this political, false religion. eventually the world must conclude that islam must be considered the same as naziism and treated accordingly. it is the petrodollars that have enabled the destruction and killing, yet obama resists energy independence for the usa. from his actions –it is plain to see that he is one of them and not one of us. he is a muslim and he will defend their actions right up to the time he leaves office. i wish that could happen tomorrow. he continually disgraces this country. he hates the usa and all we stand for.
Kristian Grönqvist says
We see that in Africa……
Charles Johnson says
This zakaria is yet another apologist for barbarians
Eric of Manchester says
These are the types of lies that get millions killed. Shame on Fareed, shame.
Oncactus says
This is what I care about Islamist that killing innocent people.