The overweeningly arrogant and narcissistic Ahmadiyya Muslim apologist Qasim Rashid labors assiduously to proselytize for his tiny sect, which most Muslims deem heretical and outside the pale of Islamic orthodoxy, and mainstream media outlets routinely give him a platform to do so — a platform they would never give to Christian or Jewish or Hindu or Buddhist apologists. This is even worse because Rashid has an ever-lengthening history of dishonesty: previously he has whitewashed Muhammad’s support for torture and the reality of jihad violence and Sharia oppression; dissembled about the Qur’an’s sanction of deception of unbelievers; lied about the presence of violent passages in the Qur’an; lied about the Qur’an’s sanction of beating disobedient women; lied about the nature of Sharia; and called for limitations on the freedom of speech and expression to outlaw behavior and speech some Muslims may find offensive. When challenged about the “facts” he has presented, he (like virtually all other Islamic supremacists) responds with furious ad hominem contempt, but no substance.
Today in the Huffington Post, he is lying about Muhammad’s stance toward the persecution of Christians. Why does the media, even the far-Left media such as the HuffPo, continue to give this proven serial liar a platform? Because he tells them what they so desperately want to hear: that Islam is benign, that the real problem is “right-wing Islamophobes,” etc.
“ISIS Violates The Consensus Of Mainstream Islam By Persecuting Christians,” by Qasim Rashid, Huffington Post, August 27, 2015:
In central Syria, Daesh (“ISIS”) recently destroyed an ancient monastery and a church. This, after abducting several Christians, in what has become the group’s long scourge on humanity. While global Muslim leaders have categorically condemned Daesh, Daesh continues to insist their acts are permitted — even commanded — by Islam.
But if, as Daesh claims, Islam obliges Muslims to raze monasteries, kidnap Christians and rape women, then several questions arise.
For example, how then did an ancient Christian monastery survive this long? Built in 432, or roughly 180 years before Islam’s advent, this monastery withstood nearly 1,500 years of Muslim rule in peace.
Likewise, how did Syria’s 2.3 million Christians, or 10 percent of the Syrian population, survive all these centuries? For centuries, Muhammad and Muslims have practiced a religion foreign to the one Daesh practices.
The answer to this is very simple, and it isn’t the one that Rashid proffers, that “Muhammad and Muslims have practiced a religion foreign to the one Daesh practices.” The real answer is that Islamic law doesn’t command Muslims simply to kill Christians indiscriminately, but to offer them three choices: conversion to Islam; subjugation as dhimmis, denied basic rights under the rule of Islamic authorities; or death. Syria’s Christians and the monks of the monastery lived as dhimmis for centuries, until the Ottoman Empire, under Western pressure, abolished the dhimma in the 1850s. After that Christians in the Ottoman domains, and the former Ottoman domains after the fall of the empire, enjoyed almost equal rights with the Muslims — until the advent of the Islamic State, which attempted to reassert Islamic law over them.
Even the Islamic State didn’t just murder Christians outright, but first ordered them to pay the jizya, the tax specified for the subjugated dhimmis is Qur’an 9:29, and return to dhimmi status. When the Christians refused, they were then considered to be kuffar harbi, infidels at war with Islam — an established category in Islamic law — and killed. In every step of this progression, the Islamic State acted in accord with Islamic law, the Qur’an, and Muhammad’s example — as illustrated by the words attributed to Muhammad in this hadith: “Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war…When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them…. If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them.” (Sahih Muslim 4294) That’s exactly what the Islamic State did, as you can see here.
Contrary to Daesh’s ignorance and propaganda, Prophet Muhammad sought to protect the rights of Christians.
To begin with, the Qur’an 3:114 praises Christians and refers to them as “the People of the Book,” afforded immense respect.
How much respect? Enough to be conquered and subjugated. Here is a Qur’an verse Rashid (unsurprisingly) leaves out of his soothing little farrago of misdirection: “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” (9:29)
The Qur’an 2:63 additionally acknowledges that Christians can and will attain divine reward.
Here’s another Qur’an verse that Rashid doesn’t quote: “And whoever desires other than Islam as religion – never will it be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers.” (Qur’an 3:85) How, then, to explain that Qur’an 2:63 seems to say that Christians will enter Paradise, if only those who profess Islam will avoid being “losers” in the “Hereafter”? The Qur’an also says this about those “respected” People of the Book: “Indeed, the disbelievers among the People of the Book and the polytheists will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the most vile of creatures.” (Qur’an 98:6) The “disbelievers among the People of the Book” are the Jews and Christians who don’t become Muslims; 2:63’s promise of Paradise to the Christians only refers to those Christians who accept Islam.
Think this is just the tendentious reading of a greasy Islamophobe? Fine. Don’t take my word for it. Consult the mainstream Muslim translators of the Qur’an, Abdullah Yusuf Ali and Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall, as well as Mohammed Asad, who all felt it necessary to add parenthetical glosses to 2:63 to make it clear that the verse means that Jews and Christians (as well as Sabians, whose identity is disputed) will be saved only if they become Muslims. Qur’an.com adds “before Prophet Muhammad” in brackets after “Jews or Christians or Sabeans,” making it clear that those three could only be saved as such before the advent of Islam, but now they must convert to Islam to be saved. And according to Ibn Abbas, this verse was abrogated by 3:85. And a saying attributed to Muhammad by Tabari has the Prophet of Islam saying that only those Christians who died before his coming will be saved, but those who have heard of him and yet rejected his prophetic claim will not be.
Moreover, the Qur’an 22:40-41 explicitly forbids destroying any house of worship, including churches.
“For, if Allah had not enabled people to defend themselves against one another, monasteries and churches and synagogues and mosques — in which Allah’s name is abundantly extolled would surely have been destroyed” (22:39–22:40). This passage would indeed seem to be a blanket prohibition against the destruction of churches; proof that jihadists who commit that act do so in defiance of their religion. Unfortunately, though, this is not all that the Quran says. The Quran many times reaffirms that its message is the same as that of the Torah and the Gospels, and calls on Jews and Christians to note that and accept it as divine revelation. Allah tells Muhammad: “And We have revealed to you the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it” (5:48), after affirming that in the Gospel was “guidance and light, confirming that which preceded it of the Torah as guidance and instruction for the righteous” (5:46). Those who do not accept the new revelation are castigated and threatened with punishment, as we have just seen: “Indeed, the disbelievers among the People of the Book and the polytheists will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the most vile of creatures” (98:6).
Remember, the passage that Rashid invokes forbids destruction of any house of worship in which “Allah’s name is abundantly extolled.” While Allah’s name may indeed be abundantly extolled in the churches and synagogues of those who acknowledge Muhammad and the Quran, the same cannot be said of the churches and synagogues of “they who disbelieved among the People of the Book.” This is how the Islamic State, in destroying churches and other houses of worship in Iraq and Syria, can justify its actions on solid Islamic grounds. But Rashid does not address this— thereby rendering his piece powerless to refute the actions of the Islamic State, however comforting his arguments may sound to uninformed non-Muslims.
Irrespective of what religion people follow, the Qur’an 60:9 commands Muslims to be kind and equitable to all those who do not persecute them and drive them out of their homes on account of their faith. Likewise, the Qur’an 8:61-63 forbids fighting anyone, regardless of faith, who “inclines towards peace.”
Rashid here omits all mention of Qur’anic passages mandating offensive jihad against unbelievers: 9:29, quoted above, which commands Muslims to fight the People of the Book for no reason other than that they are People of the Book, and others such as this one: “And fight them until there is no fitnah and the religion, all of it, is for Allah” (Qur’an 8:39). If Muslims have to fight unbelievers until religion is all for Allah, it can hardly be said that they should only fight in a defensive context, or should lay down their arms when they’re not being persecuted.
In a 2012 letter to Emeritus Pope Benedict, Mirza Masroor Ahmad, the khalifa of the Ahmadiyya Muslim community, said, “If any Church or other place of worship stands in need of protection, they will find us standing shoulder to shoulder with them.”
Yet three years after this, in 2015, Muslims in Niger torched 70 churches in a twisted bid for “revenge” for cartoons of Muhammad, with which the Christians in Niger had absolutely no involvement. No Ahmadi Muslims were seen “standing shoulder to shoulder” with the Christians of Niger.
Prophet Muhammad exemplified the Qur’an’s commandment to protect the rights of Christians. Over a thousand years before America’s founding fathers guaranteed religious freedom for all Americans, Muhammad penned a groundbreaking “covenant to those who adopt Christianity near and far.”
We are with [Christians]! Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by God, I hold out against anything that displeases them. No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate. If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray.
Around 628 AD and after gaining power, Prophet Muhammad placed his seal on this letter and sent it to the Christians of St. Catherine’s Monastery at Sinai. The letter survives to this day, as does the monastery.
While Daesh attacks Christians under the guise of religious authority, Muhammad’s letter guaranteed Christians protection from all attacks. He ensured Christians had complete freedom of religion and expression. While Daesh destroys monastery after monastery, Muhammad’s letter explicitly ordered, “No one is to destroy a house of their religion, [or] to damage it,” as doing so would, “spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet.” And while Daesh rapes women, Muhammad guaranteed Christian women autonomy in marriage and in worship.
This ancient document, known as the Achtiname, is indeed supposed to have been written by Muhammad around 628 to the monks of St. Catherine’s Monastery in the Sinai. Unfortunately, it is of even more doubtful authenticity than everything else about Muhammad’s life. Muhammad is supposed to have died in 632; the Muslims conquered Egypt between 639 and 641. The document says of the Christians, “No one shall bear arms against them.” So were the conquerors transgressing against Muhammad’s command issued just over a decade before their invasion of Egypt?
There is no mention of this document in any remotely contemporary Islamic sources. Among other anomalies, it bears a drawing of a mosque with a minaret, although minarets weren’t put on mosques until long after the time Muhammad is supposed to have lived, which is why Muslim hardliners consider them unacceptable innovation (bid’a).
The document exempts the monks of St. Catherine’s monastery from paying the jizya. While it is conceivable that Muhammad, believing he bore the authority of Allah, would exempt them from an obligation specified by Allah himself in the Qur’an (9:29), the Achtiname specifies that Christians of Egypt are to pay a jizya only of twelve drachmas. Yet according to the seventh-century Coptic bishop John of Nikiou, who had firsthand knowledge of what happened when the Arabs invaded Egypt, Christians in Egypt “came to the point of offering their children in exchange for the enormous sums that they had to pay each month.”
The Achtiname, in short, bears all the earmarks of being an early medieval Christian forgery, perhaps developed by the monks themselves in order to protect the monastery and Egyptian Christians from the depredations of zealous Muslims. Modern scholars doubt its authenticity, and the prevailing opinion among Muslims is likewise dubious.
Muhammad advanced this teaching from the Qur’an 4:20 which declares, “It is not lawful for you to inherit women against their will.” Thus, the Qur’an resoundingly rejected any permission to rape — let alone commandment.
The seizure of Infidel girls and their use as sex slaves is sanctioned in the Qur’an. According to Islamic law, Muslim men can take “captives of the right hand” (Qur’an 4:3, 4:24, 33:50). The Qur’an says: “O Prophet! Lo! We have made lawful unto thee thy wives unto whom thou hast paid their dowries, and those whom thy right hand possesseth of those whom Allah hath given thee as spoils of war” (33:50). 4:3 and 4:24 extend this privilege to Muslim men in general. The Qur’an says that a man may have sex with his wives and with these slave girls: “The believers must (eventually) win through, those who humble themselves in their prayers; who avoid vain talk; who are active in deeds of charity; who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess, for (in their case) they are free from blame.” (Qur’an 23:1-6)
The rape of captive women is also sanctioned in Islamic tradition: “Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him): 0 Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al-’azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.” (Muslim 3371)
It is also in Islamic law: “When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled.” (Umdat al-Salik O9.13)
Narrated ‘Aisha and ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abbas: When the last moment of the life of Allah’s Apostle came he started putting his ‘Khamisa’ on his face and when he felt hot and short of breath he took it off his face and said, “May Allah curse the Jews and Christians for they built the places of worship at the graves of their Prophets.” The Prophet was warning (Muslims) of what those had done. (Bukhari 1.8.427)It has been narrated by ‘Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim. (Muslim 4366)
Anyway, Rashid concludes with some nonsense about a golden age of Islam, and this final flourish:
We can revive that golden age for people of all faiths and no faith by adhering to the true Islam that Prophet Muhammad established — one of universal religious freedom and equality for all humanity.
“We can revive that golden age for people of all faiths and no faith by adhering to the true Islam that Prophet Muhammad established…” Would the Huffington Post ever publish an article that declared that “we” could revive a golden age — any golden age — for all people by adhering to true Judaism or true Christianity? What do you think?
mortimer says
Ahmaddiya was created out of the desire to incorporate certain Hindu doctrines into Islam and create a more ‘moderate’ version of Islam that softened jihad. Ahmadis practice jihad of the tongue. One thing that Ahmaddiya does well is the TAQIYYA, because most of their spokesmen start by lying to Westerners, especially to journalists.
Ahmadis normally begin by misrepresenting their heretical Islamic sect as the mainstream. It is not the Sunnite mainstream.
Ahmadis not only have doctrines that deviate (bida) from Islam, but they have created their own revised version of the Koran to flavor the wording to suggest their heresies. These deviation from the received Koran text are dishonest.
Most things in Islam depend on the mere say-so of Mohammed. Ahmaddiya continues this Islamic tradition of obscurantism by relying on a reincarnated Mohammed.
Jay Boo says
Not forgetting that — The Koran itself is of course very dishonest.
“Most things in Islam depend on the mere say-so of Mohammed. ”
That would assume that the (supposed) say-so of Mohammed was not corrupted in the first place despite Muslims repeated claims otherwise.
Michael Copeland says
“Most things in Islam depend on the mere say-so of Mohammed.”
Mohammed said it is all right to deceive in the cause of Islam.
One man’s word is all Islam has: no witnesses, no later saints.
http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/news-libertygb/6829-one-man-s-word-is-all-islam-has
don vito says
Mr. Mortimer, I had read recently that Amhaddiya, were prevented from entering mekka, because they too are kfur. You seem rather knowledgeable on islam and moslems, do you know this to be true? If so, could you please point me to written evidence of such. I have taken an interest in this possibility lately, but don’t know where to find such information. Anything that you could point me to, I would be in your debt, would be sincerely appreciated. Don
RonaldB says
It may be small consolation to note that the Ahmadiyya try to fool not only infidels, but themselves.
A huge question is, knowing that mainstream Muslims would be more than happy to exterminate the Ahmadiyyas, why do they continue to represent Islam as a peaceful, tolerant religion to infidels? To the extent that infidels believe the Ahmadiyya, the barriers and defenses that the Western countries might erect against the massive invasion of Muslims are weakened. Ultimately, if the Saudi or Muslim Brotherhood subversives gain enough influence, the Ahmadiyyas will be persecuted and suppressed, just as they are in Pakistan.
But, are the Ahmadiyyas any more irrational than the Western governments themselves, who deny the pernicious nature of mainstream Islam to the point of literal absurdity? The Ahmadiyyas are preparing the ground for their own suppression and persecution.
But, it must be said that an Ahmadiyya community, like the subsidized housing in Toronto, will not be associated with violence,and will not increase the danger in the streets…at least until their influence paves the way for immigration of additional mainstream Muslims, who will certainly be associated with violence.
mortimer says
Islamic doctrine is NOT based on a single hadith or Koranic verse, but on a network of verses, quotes and commentaries by canonical Islamic scholars. These doctrines were fixed before 1111 AD and MAY NEVER BE CHANGED.
Muslims are commanded to hate Christians, to kill them or enslave them or extort money from them.
5:51: “O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he among you that turns to them for friendship is of them.”
3:64: “Verily Allah has cursed the Unbelievers (whom he defined as Christians in the 5th surah “Believers, take not Jews and Christians for your friends.) and has prepared for them a Blazing Fire to dwell in forever. No protector will they find, nor savior. That Day their faces will be turned upside down in the Fire. They will say: ‘Woe to us! We should have obeyed Allah and obeyed the Messenger!’ ‘Our Lord! Give them double torment and curse them with a very great Curse!’”
4:89 “seize them and slay them wherever you find them: and in any case take no friends or helpers from their ranks.”
:101 “When ye travel through the earth, there is no blame on you if ye shorten your prayers, for fear the Unbelievers May attack you: For the Unbelievers are unto you open enemies.”
9:29-33 “Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in God, or in the last day, and who forbid not that which God and His Apostle have forbidden, and who profess not the profession of the truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled.”
“Take not the Jews and Christians for friends … slay the idolaters [infidels] wherever ye find them. …Fight against those who … believe not in Allah nor the Last Day” (Sura 5:51; 9:5,29,41).
Muslims are ‘friendly’ to Christians, but never true friends in the same way that a farmer looks after his farm animals, knowing they are their for his use. Muslims are supposed to hate Christians ‘for the sake of Allah’.
Jay Boo says
But of course the (real reason) Muslims are supposed to hate Christians is not ‘for the sake of Allah’ but for the same reason Muslims hate Jews and others.
Without enemies to blame Islam threatens to become accountable.
Jay Boo says
BBC is running a non-stop soapbox telethon about the plight of Muslim refugees from Libya and Syria.
Are Muslims the only people in the world that matter?
BBC says yes.
Muslims are not even held accountable for aiding other Muslims.
The Arab spring is our responsibility says BBC.
Jay Boo says
Muhammad is dead.
Islam is all about death.
Jesus lives.
Christianity is about life.
duh_swami says
We can revive that golden age for people of all faiths and no faith by adhering to the true Islam that Prophet Muhammad established — one of universal religious freedom and equality for all humanity.
That sounds like it came out of an opium pipe…Crap., pure BS…
Gabriel has nice things to say about Christian in Quran 5:82, but puts a curse on them till the last day in Qyran 5:14, because they forgot part of the message. Gabriel is schizophrenic……
Jaladhi says
Ahmadiyas are just as big liars as the rest of the Muslims who don’t consider them Muslims! What a travesty – poor fellows are trying so hard to assimilate with Muslims and all they get is scorn from them. This guy should go to Pakistan and preach them about Islam – he won’t last there even a day – Mo/allah’s followers will dispatch him to hell in no time!
Michael Copeland says
Here are some words of muslims in Britain “protective” of Christian rights:
“A permanent war institution, Cultural Invasion, Destroying the foundations of Western civilisation, British Police Go to Hell, Freedom Go to Hell, Fifth Column, A Group will Rise, Jihad to defend the muslims, No House of Commons, Hands Off Muslims, SHARIA … ENFORCED, our own police force, Islamic Emirates for Britain, One Nation TO THE EXCLUSION OF ALL OTHERS, One War, A Complete Upheaval of the British Ruling System, Down with the Queen, tinderbox, dynamite, blow up.”
http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/news-libertygb/5741-definitely-a-danger-to-western-democracy
ECAW says
“The Qur’an 2:63 additionally acknowledges that Christians can and will attain divine reward.”
Qasim Rashid’s copy of the Sher Ali translation is wrong. The verse in question is 2:62, which is abrogated by 3:85
http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/2/62/default.htm
ECAW says
“Around 628 AD and after gaining power, Prophet Muhammad placed his seal on this letter and sent it to the Christians of St. Catherine’s Monastery at Sinai.”
These supposed covenants to the Christians are increasingly being used by Islamic whitewashers such as John Andrew Morrow, Craig Considine, Mehdi Hasan and Qasim Rashid to kid the kuffar (and perhaps themselves too). For those interested in the subject, here is an introduction:
https://ecawblog.wordpress.com/2015/04/23/mohammeds-apocryphal-covenants/
RG says
But of course mohammerhead always ‘defended’ the rights of Christians and of course he never ever would have even thought of subjugating the dhimmi kuffars. This Qasim Rashid is a lyin’ sack-a-schitt!!!!!
Brian says
Islam’s Allah is called the “Great Deceiver”…That title of course in Judeo-Christian belief goes to Satan, The Father of Lies. No wonder the collective West – and most Muslims themselves – are deceived by that murderous, fascist, supremacist, evil ideology of Islam.
Truth Seeker says
It seems He says about One Mohammad yet to be Born! Quran. Sura4:52. Those (Christians) are they whom Allah has Cursed, and whomever Allah curses, you shal not find any helper for him.
Truth is Christian Population was made Very Close to Zero by Massacre.
The Supremacistic Activity of Denial of Glaring Truth is only Possible only by Boasters.
Voytek Gagalka says
“Would the Huffington Post ever publish an article that declared that “we” could revive a golden age — any golden age — for all people by adhering to true Judaism or true Christianity? What do you think?”
That would be a revelation to me, and probably to anyone else, and of such magnitude that I sincerely believe it could never happen in this universe, because that would require Huffington Post guys to abandon the tenants of their creed in which case the ultimate and final solution of Hitler would be their only option.
Angemon says
This is standard muslim apologist “logic”: “Oh yeah? Well, if muslims are instructed to kill Christians and Jews why are there still churches and Christian communities in muslim-majority nations?”.
Truth Seeker says
Destruction of Monastery was not of any use to them. Thus it was not Destroyed. What happened to the Cathedral of Constantinople?
10% Christians in Syria from which year onwards? Is it from the Time of Mohammad? What are the Civil rights provided to them?
Comparing to other Muslim Countries, Syrians did show more Tolerance, but that is not all.
Wellington says
An utter decimation by Spencer of Rashid’s contentions. Truly, a destruction of the first order. Beautiful to read. Beautiful to behold.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
… his tiny sect, which most Muslims deem heretical and outside the pale of Islamic orthodoxy, and mainstream media outlets routinely give him a platform to do so…
There is a great hunger for Unicorns among our news entertainers. They need to parade them before the camera in the flesh to prop up the “radical extremist” angle, or the gutsier postulation of the “radical Islamist.” Look at the picture of this guy, he looks like a Unicorn to me. But maybe I’m biased.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
No, maybe the Holy Prophet Mohammed is the biased one:
When the last moment of the life of Allah’s Apostle came he started putting his ‘Khamisa’ on his face and when he felt hot and short of breath he took it off his face and said, “May Allah curse the Jews and Christians…
— Holy Prophet Mohammed on his death bed in Bukhari 1.8.427
The old bastard still had his laser-like focus right up to the last. Based on such heroism as this, one assumes he’s got the tallest throne in Jannat, the Moslem Porno Heaven.
jayell says
I admire all the correspondents here for supplying chapter and verse to shoot this idiot down, but this story is just so obviously plain ridiculous. He’s clearly just making it up as he goes along, like the rest of his sort.
No Fear says
Ahmadiyah? Kafir!
Jimbo says
A little history that has been forgotten might help regarding “protecting the right of Christians.” Christopher Hitchens pointed out in his essay “Jefferson Versus the Muslim Pirates” that some “1.5 million Europeans and Americans were enslaved” by Muslims “from 1530 and 1780” and that, in one example that had nothing to do with passage of ships along the Barbary Coast, “the people of Baltimore in Ireland” were “carried off by ‘corsair’ raiders in a single night.” And when Jefferson and John Adams called on Tripoli’s ambassador in March 1785 to complain about the Barbary States “preying on American shipping, enslaving both crews and passengers,” they were informed that “it was written in the Koran, that all Nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon whoever they could find and to make Slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.” Hitchens added: “It is worth noting that the United States played no part in the Crusades, or in the Catholic Reconquista of Andalusia.” Have not Mohamed and his followers simply been, by their examples, the forerunners of all mafias, drug cartels, and fascist organizations that have since come into being? What are the chances HuffPost would print this?
jimbo says
What’s the chance HuffPost would post the often forgotten history of “Jefferson Versus the Muslim Pirates,” i.e. that Muslims enslaved some “1.5 million Europeans and Americans between 1530 and 1780.” And when Thomas Jefferson and John Adams called on Tripoli’s ambassador to London to complain, they were told “it was written in the Korean, that all Nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, and it was their right and duty to make ware on whoever they could find and to make Slaves of all they could take as prisoners…” From Christopher Hitchens “Arguably Essays.”
Bashir says
Qasim Rashid is a brainwashed Ahmadi…I grew up as one of them. So happy to be free.
Qasim’s father was an employee of Ahmadiyya INC., hence, his life’s mission is to promote their business to the world…this article is spot on. Ahmadis are Quranist, and they stole all of their ideas from Sir Syed and the Aligarh Movement of India. They thought that they could hide Islam and create their own version that they could sell and make money…and thats exactly what they did..
Bashir Shah
T.J. Thomas says
“How, then, to explain that Qur’an 2:63 seems to say that Christians will enter Paradise, if only those who profess Islam will avoid being “losers” in the “Hereafter”? ”
Because according to Qur’an 3:83, the verse before the one you quote above, anyone who follows “what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Descendants, and in what was given to Moses and Jesus and to the prophets from their Lord” and submits to those things will be given a place in Paradise as “Muslim”, those who submit to God.