• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

UK’s Independent: Muhammad had British values, so fight “extremism” by teaching more Islam in schools

Nov 3, 2015 5:28 am By Robert Spencer

This is just the sort of thing the addled Leftists of the Independent eat up by the truckload. But let’s look into some of the British values that Islamic tradition holds Muhammad as having taught:

Women must cover everything but their face and hands: “‘O Asma’, when a woman reaches the age of menstruation, it does not suit her that she displays her parts of body except this and this,’ and he pointed to her face and hands.” (Sunan Abu Dawud 4092)

Adulterers should be stoned to death: “There came to him (the Holy Prophet) a woman from Ghamid and said: Allah’s Messenger, I have committed adultery, so purify me….And she was put in a ditch up to her chest and he commanded people and they stoned her….” (Sahih Muslim 4206)

Those who leave Islam should be killed: “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him” (Sahih Bukhari 9.84.57).

Fight against unbelievers until they convert to Islam or submit to Muslim hegemony: “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)

Jews and Christians are accursed: “Allah cursed the Jews and the Christians, for they built the places of worship at the graves of their prophets.” (Sahih Bukhari 2.23.472)

Sajda Khan is right: if these aren’t British values now, they will be soon enough.

Muhammad Had British Values

“INDEPENDENT: Teach MORE Islam In UK Schools, Muhammed Had British Values,” Breitbart London, November 2, 2015 (thanks to all who sent this in):

The Independent newspaper has published an article claiming that more Islam should be taught in schools because the Islamic prophet, Muhammed, had “British values”. The article is written by a PhD student who claims she has “a lot” of “respect” for a leading UK Muslim Brotherhood activist.

The author, Sajda Khan, used to write for the Huffington Post, though many of her articles – all propaganda pieces about Islam – have now been “removed at the request of the author”. Ms. Khan – who once slammed UK think tank Civitas for attacking the idea of “jihad” – also has a different name to the one listed on her Huffington Post profile from 2012.

Her name was “Sahar” on the HuffPo, whereas she now goes by “Sajda”. She has denied changing her name, though admitted: “I began to write under a  pseudonym but then resorted to my own name – because I didn’t see a need.”

Ms. Khan wrote for the Independent:

Simply put, the way to combat Islamic extremism is to invest in real Islamic teaching in British schools: teaching that proves the Prophet Mohammed would never have condoned their actions.

Many reading this will find it difficult to stomach, but the Prophet Mohammed had British values. Those values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, mutual respect, and tolerance of those of different faiths and beliefs that schools are now required to promote are inherently Islamic.

But her article directly contradicts one she wrote for the Telegraph just 5 months ago, entitled: “British values won’t stop violent extremism”. She wrote:

Violent extremism needs to be rooted out, but we cannot win a war by silencing people. People should be able to hold differing views as long as they do not break the law and live in harmony with others. There is a danger that the proposed tougher legislation will be carte blanche to criminalise law-abiding people. What we need as a society is a common language, common principles and dialogue.

Her comments appear to be a claim that Muslims can live in Britain and contribute to society while not agreeing with traditional British values, although she also makes the claim in the Telegraph: “British values as defined by our home secretary Theresa May – such as democracy and the rule of law, tolerance and acceptance of different faiths – are inherently Muslim values too”.

In the Independent, she continues:

This is a golden opportunity to develop within our schools a curriculum based upon the biography of Prophet Muhammad, which clearly demonstrates and embeds British values… Investing in a theological education that teaches the real tenants of Islam is the only way we can genuinely win over those who have turned to extremism – whether we like it or not.

But Ms. Khan’s own connections may bring her entire position crashing down. She recently communicated with Anas Al Tikriti, a known supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood whose father ran the Iraq Islamic Party, and who has expressed his admiration for terrorist group Hamas. She tweeted at him on October 25th: “Salam Anas, hope you are well. Is Friday’s debate available to watch anywhere?”

She appears to have been referring to the “Is Islam the cause or solution to extremism” debate, hosted by the Islamic Education and Research Academy (iERA) – an organisation led by Hamza Tzortzis, who has previously affirmed his commitment to beheading for those who fought against Muslim interests. IERA has listed among its advisers two preachers banned from the UK for extremist views, and Tzortzis was recently publicly shamed after his name and e-mail address appeared on the Ashley Madison affair website hack list.

When told by Al Tikriti that the video of the debate would be available soon, Ms. Khan replied, “jazakAllahkhayrn [May Allah Bless You] Anas, look forward to it. Please keep me informed”.

Ms. Khan told Breitbart London of her conversation with Mr. Al Tikriti: “I do not know @anasaltikriti  personally but I believe he’s doing a lot of good work and I respect him a lot.”

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Featured, journalistic bias, Taqiyya, United Kingdom, War is deceit Tagged With: Independent, muhammad, Sajda Khan


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. sile Draper says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 5:36 am

    I feel sick to my stomach reading this…the lunatics are surely running the asylum!

    • Marty says

      Nov 3, 2015 at 5:43 am

      Don’t know if its the same story, but Breitbart London (who have banned me for
      undisclosed reasons) have run this story today.

      “UK GOVT HANDS £5 MILLION TO ISLAMIC TRUST WHICH FORCED
      HIJAB ON STUDENTS AND WHOSE STAFF SAID GAYS SHOULD BE
      STONED TO DEATH”

      I’m opposed to all religious schools, including independent ones, though I guess
      Christian & Jewish ones have a claim for cultural reasons.
      How our government can make any claims to be “conservative” is beyond me.
      The UK taxpayer is forced to support training grounds for kids who
      are guaranteed to be dangerous misfits at best, & terrorists at worst.
      Insane.

    • Hindu American says

      Nov 3, 2015 at 7:17 am

      Barbarians are not just “at or past the gate”, they are now well and truly entrenched within the English DNA. Truly a sad state of affairs for a nation for whom the sun would never set and for a race that resolutely fought the Nazis on land, sea and in the sky, transitioning to a collection of dhimmis, pimps and sell outs. All within a hundred years.

      • Huck Folder says

        Nov 3, 2015 at 3:09 pm

        And this old chestnut:

        “…the real tenants of Islam…”

  2. DP111 says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 5:36 am

    Even commentators in the Independent are not prepared to swallow this balderdash. The comments, with few exceptions, are uniformly scathing of the article.

    The Independent must surely be concerned, when its own loyal readers show such independence of mind.

    • Roger says

      Nov 3, 2015 at 9:10 am

      Ah, but would these same commentators say what they truly think out loud in public?

      • eduardo odraude says

        Nov 3, 2015 at 10:57 am

        Roger, that may turn out to be a decisive downside of the internet — it lets people blow off steam and deceive themselves they are taking a stand against jihad, but their anonymity means they are not really taking a stand. Anonymity makes internet criticism of limited value. Such criticism requires little or no risk, commitment, or accountability, and is therefore too easy to consider unserious.

        What is needed instead is mass public non-anonymous opposition to the core parts of Islam that are totalitarian. But most people won’t join public opposition until it is already a mass public movement. Yet it cannot become a mass public movement unless many join. Maybe the way to escape this Catch 22 is for people to join Act for America. They are an activist group that seems to be very effective and already pretty large.

        • dumbledoresarmy says

          Nov 5, 2015 at 4:56 am

          Excellent points.

          ALL of us regulars need to bear that in mind, and beware of dissipating all our energies and time on the internets. I know *I* am tempted that way.

          Just venting – let alone sitting round in a circle moaning and groaning and bewailing the Fall of Europe, the Fall of America, and basically conceding defeat and encouraging others to throw in the towel also – is an utter waste of time; and may, indeed, by demoralising all the new posters and lurkers coming on board – help to *produce* the dire outcome that the Prophets of Doom vehemently claim they are merely ‘predicting’ or ‘describing’.

          The only real justification for posting comments in any forum, even this, is with the intent to further *educate*/ awaken; and to point people toward suitable – and doable – courses of action.

          In Australia, first Q Society was founded, and now the Australian Liberty Alliance is getting off the ground.

          In the UK, there is March for England, the EDL (not half as bad as the mainstream likest to paint it), Gavin Boby’s Law and Freedom Foundation, and Paul Weston’s “Liberty Great Britain” party.

          Not sure about Canada – there is the website “Point de Bascule”, and a very ‘outside the box’ First Nations man, Ryan Bellerose, a very strong Friend of Israel btw, has formed a group he calls “One Nation” (which name, for an Aussie, has unfortunate connotations with a short-lived political party from a good many years ago now, that mainly seemed to be about East Asian immigrants, not Islam; Bellerose’s “One Nation” is something else entirely, I think it has distinct possibilities).

          In the USA, as you say, there is ACT for America, and I would *strongly* advise *all* American jihadwatchers to join up and find *some* way of getting involved, whether financially or by joining – or forming – a local chapter, and then getting on board with the various campaigns.

          And there is always letter-writing to politicians, which one does in one’s own name, as a constituent and citizen.

          BTW – You and others here might like to read the following beautiful and thoughtful piece that I encountered in an Israeli newspaper online. It’s about our response to Jihad. It’s cast in very specific Jewish/ Israeli religious and cultural terms, but it is easy enough to discern the underlying principles involved, and readily ‘translate’ across into one’s own religious and/ or social and cultural context.

          http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/17790#.VjR2oGCCbHg

          Op-Ed: Why are we fighting and what is our best response?
          Building is the right response to terror, but not just building houses.

          Friday, October 30, 2015 3:50 PM
          GABRIEL GOLDENBERG

          You will notice he’s not omitting the ‘be prepared to fight’ aspect, as evidenced by this paragraph – “Take a class and learn some new skills (martial arts classes anyone?”.

  3. DP111 says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 5:42 am

    It must be obvious to even the most dim witted Muslim, that they are not wanted in Britain. If I was not wanted in some country, I would leave asap. A sense of honour and shame would force me to leave,

    But here are Muslims, whining, moaning and forever complaining, instead of leaving for an Islamic country of their choice.

    What is clear is that Muslims have no sense of shame or honour,

    • Jaladhi says

      Nov 3, 2015 at 5:45 am

      Hey, what is shameless to wage war in the cause of Mo/allah?? ..True they are the most shameless, ungrateful, hypocrites on the face of this earth!!

      • DP111 says

        Nov 3, 2015 at 8:41 am

        True. the most ungrateful wretches to be allowed tp continue to suck the blood out of us.

    • eduardo odraude says

      Nov 3, 2015 at 11:03 am

      Many Muslims have all too much sense of shame and honor. Muslims are responsible for over 90% of honor killings worldwide. A problem arises when their sense of “shame and honor” is strongly influenced by the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira. They then feel shame about things they should feel no shame about, but feel no shame about things that should shame them terrifically.

  4. Jaladhi says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 5:42 am

    The Brits have totally turned into morons, zombies, etc. More music to Muslim ears!! Ten years from now , Great Britain will be known as Britainistan with Queen as Grand Caliph!!!

    • Jay Boo says

      Nov 3, 2015 at 6:21 am

      There are still many British who are against this as DP111 wrote above.
      Such a thing could happen anywhere that a selfish PC approval seeking editor grovels.

      • mortimer says

        Nov 3, 2015 at 11:50 am

        The ‘new, improved’ British values are now:

        1 No Golden Rule 2 No free speech 3 No democracy 4 Jihad – holy war of supremacism 5 Honour killings 6 Taqiyya – sacred lying 7 Taqlid – group think 8 Misogyny – repression of women 9 Rape of kafirs as jihad prizes 10 Genocide 11 Ethnic cleansing 12 Al-Walaa wal-Baraa – Islamic apartheid 13 Torture 14 Plundering 15 Cruel and unusual punishments 16 Backwardness – stagnation 17 Violence against women 18 Slavery 19 Discriminatory Sharia law 20 Hatred of the arts 21 Pedophilia disguised as child marriage 22 Fifty generations of cousin marriage and genetic defects 23 Cruelty to animals 24 Extortion tax to humiliate disbelievers 25 No historic basis 26 Anti-intellectual obscurantism 27 FGM 28 Arab racism 29 Theocratic totalitarianism 30 Vigilantism

  5. Shirley A. Smith-Rhodes says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 5:45 am

    There is NO COMMON GROUND for islam and any other religion! If Europe does not wake up, they are lost! The basic problem is, muslims are NOT in our countries to assimilate, they are in our countries to take them over by violence or sheer numbers or any method in order to destroy them and make a muslim caliphate complete with sharia law! They couldn’t care less about what we believe, stand for or our culture! WE should have enough sense to identify and classify islam for what it is! It is not a religion! It is a satanic cult of a totalitarian government system to rule the world! To eliminate all infidels and establish a world caliphate, complete with sharia law, for worship to their false God! Until we wake up and deal with this fact we are in grave danger! 1 John 4:8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. The common theme throughout the Bible is this… Faith and Love! The theme of islam is fear and hate! Perfect Love casts out all fear! islam is Anti-Christian! They have one plan which is, you worship their allah or they kill you!

    • Charles says

      Nov 3, 2015 at 6:53 am

      Amen to that. The biggest problem is our politicians, they are the ones who brought this curse in all of Europe and North America. Political correctness is the nail in our coffin, and Christianity will no longer exist if nothing is done. Christianity fought hard and blood was shed to drive out this cult. Our politicians need to address and stop this invasion of Muslims.

    • Spot On says

      Nov 3, 2015 at 4:13 pm

      Winston Churchill said that some Muslims became loyal English soldiers while most were nothing but trouble. He used much harsher terms than that. There should be no secret about why this is. In most Western religious families, some children are more religious than others and some even avoid religion altogether. The same would surely be true of Muslims except for the extreme family pressure by Muslims parents to be devout.

      A devout Muslim is a great candidate for the Jihadists. Also a not so religious Muslim who wants to redeem himself with his family should also be a great candidate. The problem is that there is no way for others to know who is and who is not inclined to be a Jihadist. Some estimates place the percentage of Jihadists at 16% of total Muslims. This is one in six or the same odds as Russian Roulette.

      We can condemn all Muslims or we can condemn just known Jihadists as Jihadists. There is no way to know beforehand except that the odds are 1 in 6 like Russian Roulette. Different people can be more or less religious at different times in their lives so there is truly no way to know. Additionally, Muslims may read the Koran or not. If they do, the odds are higher, you get my gist.

      If anyone plans to invite a Muslim to their home (or even neighborhood) there is a one in 6 chance that the Muslim is very dangerous to others. Would anyone play Russian Roulette with themselves, their families, or their neighbors? Absolutely not. Why then would anyone wish to have ANY Muslim anywhere near them.

      • abad says

        Nov 3, 2015 at 5:55 pm

        Muslims= NIMBY

  6. Jaladhi says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 5:51 am

    The most criminal pedophile, rapist, invader, looter, hater, … had British values?? I didn’t know the Brits were like him? What planet the editors of The Independent are from?? Ugh.. morons!!

  7. Jay Boo says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 6:14 am

    The Independent newspaper should have wrote:

    Islam is a lot like a religion. Except for:
    – the part about Muhammad’s alibi, being a god.
    – the look-at-me piety prayer dances.
    – the virgin girl sex-slave Paradise with included pretty boy servants.
    – the vengeful bloodlust should anyone mock Islam’s obvious farce.
    – the outrageous claim that a someone like Muhammad was a prophet.

  8. Matthieu Baudin says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 6:16 am

    Like their one time guru, Dr Timothy Leary, the New Left/Counter Culture generation just make it up as they go along. This is their reality compass; they say what sounds acceptable and the world duly falls into line.

  9. The awful truth says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 6:21 am

    Even if we agree that Muhammad was a cuddly teddy bear who loves us look what happened to the British school teacher when she did encourage a teddy to be named after the great Mo. She was going to be executed before the UK government saved her. Some teddy bear.

  10. Richard says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 6:24 am

    Winston Churchill: Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.

  11. Katowice says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 6:41 am

    Who with any intellectual integrity, to say nothing of self-respect, would allow him or herself be condescended to in this manner by such an individual? I would call this low quality deceit, but perhaps the Left’s onto something. Read some of the academic left’s apologia for the Khmer Rouge in the 70s. Outwardly calling for the fall of Western civilisation (and using “imperialism”, at minimum, five times per page) didn’t sell too well. So now we’ve this. Oleaginous deference to any situationally appropriate minority, no matter how vapid and trivial, as long as they say the magic words; “conversation”, “dialogue”, “tolerance”, and so on. And of course, such bleating is to be treated as above mere ideology, and thus immune from criticism unless you’re some kind of dastardly bigot.

  12. John in cheshire says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 6:52 am

    If Mohammed had British values then muslims should have no problem abiding by our rules.

    • Charles says

      Nov 3, 2015 at 6:56 am

      Mohammed values is all Hog-Wash.

  13. SIngh the SIkh says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 7:21 am

    Will the Mohamed bio mention the prophet took a six year old girl as a bride. That he ejaculated on her thighs before consummating the ‘marriage’ when the girl was nine. How British is that?

  14. Myxlplik says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 9:27 am

    Okay, she’s right. No new mosques are to be constructed, and no new unauthorized repairs are to be allowed on the ones already standing. No Muslim is to ever have any authority over a non-Muslim, including the ability to testify in court. Muslim men are not allowed to marry non-Muslim women, but Muslim women are encouraged to marry non-Muslim men. If Muslim complain about the abuse their Imams will be rounded up and crusified along the Thames River, followed by a general state of looting, raping of Muslim women, and burning of Muslim neighborhoods.

    Mohammed would be proud of this new curriculum.

  15. PRCS says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 10:06 am

    ” IERA has listed among its advisers two preachers banned from the UK for extremist views”

    At some point, words and phrases such as “radical/radicalism”, “extremist/extremism”, etc., need to be relegated to the dustbin of misinformation.

    Such descriptions maintain the false notion that Muslim literalists, Islam’s truest believers, are twisting, perverting, and hijacking THE religion of peace.

    A misinformed public cannot effectively challenge Islam’s teachings.

  16. duh_swami says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 10:30 am

    Mahound had values…He also had a lot of very bad habits and some wild and crazy ideas. The evidence is in the literature, if you cn believe the literature..
    In the end, his karma caught up with him…Allah and Gabriel didn’t bother to show up and give him a grand send off…No angels singing, no celestial fireworks, no golden chariot or winged horse…Nothing..After a few days od diminishing expectations, and his body was getting a little ripe, they buried him where he spent most of his time, under his bed.
    What does this have to do with British values? Nothing, absolutely nothing…

  17. dragaozao says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 10:39 am

    How is it possible that a nation so proud of its values like Engand WAS, dies is such a miserable way? Suicide without dignity!

    • eduardo odraude says

      Nov 3, 2015 at 11:49 am

      This is a risk for any nation that becomes too rich and comfortable, too tranquilized by entertainment and luxury. Too many stop caring about much beyond material comfort and pleasure. The US is definitely at risk.

  18. Jeremiah says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 10:45 am

    They have a sense of humor.

  19. eduardo odraude says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 11:43 am

    To defeat the Left perspective on this, we have to understand it. A large part of the left genuinely believes that the defense of Muslims is compassionate, that the growth of the Muslim population does not represent an existential threat, and that such growth on the contrary weakens the power that any tyrannizing majority can exercise over the society. A large part of the left believes that the increase in “diversity” tends to increase cultural freedom for the individual. With regard to Islam, many on the left have been misinformed and manipulated, and have some blind spots (as does the right), but a large part of the left is not fundamentally evil. They have many good motives. Perhaps if the leftist with good motives is to be persuaded about the exceptionally totalitarian nature of Islamic doctrine and the need to limit Islamic immigration, we must find ways to argue that appeal to those good motives (compassion, cultural freedom), not just attack the Left for its blind spots or point to those parts of the Left that are evil (parts of the right are surely evil, too). For example, instead of cursing the left for its multiculturalism, we should learn to argue with the left that Islam will destroy multiculturalism and introduce a dominant theocratic monoculture. Cultural freedom and multiculturalism are a net good, so long as supremacist and totalitarian cultures are excluded.

    People on the right might do a lot of good for the counterjihad cause by “going undercover,” learning how to speak leftist language, and how to argue with leftists on their own terms about Islam. Start by studying Sam Harris you tube videos critical of Islam. He exemplifies how a non-conservative can criticize Islam pretty effectively so that leftists — at least some of them — start to listen.

    • eduardo odraude says

      Nov 3, 2015 at 11:54 am

      Bill Maher is another Islam critic to study for language and methods capable of persuading the left. Mark Durie’s book The Third Choice does not seem to be left or right, but his work may be useful in persuading the left because his criticism of Islam is simultaneously very hard hitting yet very compassionate.

  20. Angemon says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 12:04 pm

    The Independent newspaper

    Should be sued for false advertising and forced to change its name.

  21. mortimer says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 12:05 pm

    Where did Theresa May get her ideas about Islam?

    She obviously picked her thoughts about Islam from the air…from wishful thinking. She definitely hasn’t troubled herself to read the life of Mohammed where we find the REAL MOHAMMED, rather than the Mohammed of Theresa May’s fantasy life.

    British Values she highlights are: 1) rule of law…in contrast, Mohammed made up his rules based on his own opportunism and shifted the rules frequently 2) tolerance…in contrast, Mohammed sent contract killers to murder his verbal critics 3)…in contrast, Mohammed was completely intolerant and commanded all Christians and Jews to be expelled from Arabia

    Theresa May’s version of Islam is as reassuringly liberal as it is a misrepresentation of the uncomfortable, real facts of Islamic supremacism found in Islamic source texts.

    Islam is supremacist, fascist, non-democratic, misogynistic and religiously bigoted.

    • mortimer says

      Nov 3, 2015 at 12:08 pm

      British values?? 3) tolerance of those of different faiths …in contrast, Mohammed was completely intolerant and commanded all Christians and Jews to be expelled from Arabia

  22. Mirren10 says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 1:11 pm

    Here’s what I commented on that article;

    ”Sajda Khan is either an egregious liar, or hasn’t bothered to read the biography of mohammed, or the ahadith, and simply believes what she was told in the madrassa. Or she thinks that we are all stupid and lazy, and no-one will bother to read the evidence for themselves.

    A man who married a little girl of six, raped her when she was nine, murdered, tortured, raped and stole, does not exemplify ‘British values’.”

    After I posted it, it disappeared into the ether; possibly awaiting ‘moderation’. It will be interesting to see if it ever appears.

    • Wellington says

      Nov 3, 2015 at 3:34 pm

      Hopefully it will, MIrren, but it probably won’t since the ultimate sin where Islam and pc/mc are concerned is telling the truth, as you did.

      • Mirren10 says

        Nov 4, 2015 at 6:26 pm

        Just went back to check.

        Surprise, it’s not there.

  23. Sam says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 1:20 pm

    Just when I think West can not get any more delusional I hear something like this and I shake my head in disbelief. “Mohammad had British values” This is really rich now.

  24. duh_swami says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 5:06 pm

    Mahound’s values were o lofty that Allah looked to him for advice.
    A lot of what is in the Quran came from Mahound.
    Except for his frequent trips into the dark side of nurser, robbery, rape, torture and other perversions and bad habits, he was nearly a saint…What has this got to do with British values> Nothing…

  25. duh_swami says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 5:21 pm

    Mahound used to go about town sucking the tongues of little boys and kissing infant boys privets, molested and raped little girls, and was known to sleep with dead women, he also robbed caravans and villages and kept about a dozen wives happy…And the most amazing thing, he did all that on the same day.
    What does that have to do with British values? Nothing.

  26. epistemology says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 6:50 pm

    That woman is utterly insane as all defenders of Islam are, the ISIS guys live like the first followers of their self-appointed prophet. He had no British values only barbaric sharia.

  27. kay says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 7:46 pm

    Re Ms Khan: “Many reading this will find it difficult to stomach, but the Prophet Mohammed had British values. Those values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, mutual respect, and tolerance of those of different faiths and beliefs that schools are now required to promote are inherently Islamic.”
    ____________________________________________

    Here are the Islamic values.

    Sharia Versus Freedom: The Legacy of Islamic Totalitarianism
    by Andrew G. Bostom (Author)
    Publisher: Prometheus Books; ISBN-10: 1616146664
    http://www.amazon.com/Sharia-Versus-Freedom-Islamic-Totalitarianism/dp/1616146664/

    __Educational purposes asserted. No infringement intended. __

    Review for Sharia versus Freedom
    By Alyssa A. Lappen on October 28, 2012
    In this overarching analysis, Bostom provides an engrossing and encyclopedic catalog of ideology and history of the naked totalitarianism of Islamic religious and political doctrines — a diametric opposite to free Western social structure. Sharia prohibits political freedoms, freedoms of conscience, faith, and expression (both oral and written). . .
    Intrinsically totalitarian jihadist and Islamic canon neither concerns nor governs only “believers.” By Muslim belief, according to scholar Joseph Schacht (d. 1969), the “clear path to be followed” establishes divine, global Islamic order and cannot “be penetrated by the intelligence … i.e., man has to accept it without criticism.” It governs Muslims, and also “activities of the tolerated members of other faiths so far as they may not be detrimental to Islam.”
    Sharia code requires Muslims to mount regular jihad attacks on unvanquished non-Muslims and permanently, deliberately humiliate “inferior” jihad survivors. Their incorporation into Islamic polity subjects non-Muslims to sharia (pp. 110-112) and its inheritance statutes, requirements and prohibitions and draconian hadd penalties — including death (by stoning) for adultery, apostasy, and highway robbery (whose victim was murdered); . . .
    Muslims understand sharia, tracing to Quran passages (like 45:18, 42:13, 42:21, and 5:48) and other Islamic texts, primarily hadith (Mohammed’s reputed sayings and deeds) — as “the totality of Allah’s commandments” governing man, Schacht notes.
    Islam cements “religion” to its 7th century totalitarian dogma, Bostom shows. . .
    In 1948, English-speaking Arab League Office member Aboul Saud described Islam to investigative journalist John Ray Carlson as “a religious form of State Socialism,” granting the state “the right to nationalize industry, distribute land, or expropriate” those rights and property. (p. 256). .
    A 1979 treatise on jihad by Pakistani Brigadier S.K. Malik reflected bedrock Islamic ideology and its preface described the “bipolarized” Islamic world view designed by Hanafi school founder Abu Hanifa (d. 767) — of “two opposing camps– Darul-Salam (Islam) facing Darul-Harb,” one submissive, the second “engaged in perpetuating defiance” of Allah (p. 201).

  28. Angemon says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 8:15 pm

    Muhammed Had British Values

    Apparently muhammad was truly a citizen of the world, since besides having “British values” a millennium before the Kingdom of Great Britain even existed, he also was comparable to George Washington:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/craig-considine/an-unlikely-connection-between-the-prophet-muhammad-and-george-washington_b_2439940.html

    Here’s a classic straight from the time machine, from the not-so-far year of 2013: Robert Spencer, David Wood and Pastor Joseph tag-team to beat that myth into a bloody pulp and tell the truth about muhammad:

  29. Karen says

    Nov 3, 2015 at 9:54 pm

    Appears Ms. Khan either has some logic and comprehension issues, or is just using the old propaganda rule that says the bigger the lie, the more likely people will believe it. (Unthinking people, that is.)

    Islam is actually “inherently” theocratic, which is pretty much nothing like being “inherently” democratic, but some dummies in the West will fall for this nonsense. (Add this silly statement about Islamic democracy to the ones about Islam leading the way in Women’s Rights, etc. Har har har.) .

    * Why teach Islamic radicals more Islam?
    * If Islamic values = British values, then why not just teach more British values? We’re talking Britain, after all.
    * Using Khan’s principle of non-logic, British values and Islamic values are the same, but Islamic values de-radicalize the extremists, while British values can’t. How tiresome her writing is.

    Hypocrite that she is, she talks British patriotism, but her reaction to Cameron’s proposed a plan to promote “certain values” draws a strange reaction; she simply cannot accept this plan. Why not? (Follow the links in the article for Cameron’s remarks about promoting “certain values”.)

    Solution – not allowing entry to immigrants who can’t respect and embrace British values would work very well indeed.

    • occupant 9 says

      Nov 4, 2015 at 3:52 am

      Karen, bingo!! But, we live in an age that has devalued common sense.

      “* If Islamic values = British values, then why not just teach more British values? We’re talking Britain, after all.”

      See? The above statement reeks of common sense and doesn’t promote, in a “resistence is futile” rolling mantra, Islam, Islam, Islam, all the time and everything Islam.

      It would be too obvious to stop Muslim immigration, let alone reverse it. For some diabolical reason, those elected/sworn to protect the nation are utterly disinterested in honoring their oaths and insist on importing the least appropriate candidates to make a positive contribution to western civilization they can possibly find.

      • Karen says

        Nov 5, 2015 at 9:46 am

        If our leaders are not chasing money and perpetual re-election by illegal voters, then what their master plan entails is a complete mystery to me, occupant 9.

  30. dumbledoresarmy says

    Nov 5, 2015 at 5:50 am

    Teaching kids about Islam in schools would be fine, if they taught the plain *facts*. If they taught the ugly *reality* , without whitewashing it or glossing it over.

    Besides the famous Churchill discussion of Islam in “The River Wars” (original 1899 edition), there is also a lapidary article by the brilliant Irishman Conor Cruise O’Brien, that appeared in the “Independent” – yes, ** the ‘Independent”!!!** – at a time when war was raging in Algeria between the not-quite-so-devout Mohammedans and the full-on sharia pushers.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-lesson-of-algeria-islam-is-indivisible-1566770.html

    “The Lesson of Algeria: Islam is Indivisible”.

    *All* the teachers would need to do, is to ‘unpack” and then expand a little upon Mr O’Brien’s introductory paragraphs.

    ‘Fundamentalist Islam” is a misnomer which dulls our perception in a dangerous way.

    “It does so by implying that there is some other kind of Islam, which is well disposed to those who reject the Koran.

    “There isn’t.

    “Islam is a universalist, triumphalist and political religion. It claims de jure dominion over all humanity; that is God’s will. The actual state of affairs, with unbelievers of various sorts dominating most of the world, is a suspension of God’s [that is, ‘allah’s – dda] will, and a scandal to the faithful.
    “The world is divided between the House of Islam, and the House of War, meaning the rest of us.
    “For more than two centuries now, the House of War has been in the ascendant, and the House of Islam has been abased.
    “The remedy for this unnatural and intolerable state of affairs is jihad.
    “Jihad is defined as ‘the religious duty imposed on all Muslims to wage war upon those who do not accept the doctrines of Islam’.

    “The Prophet Mohamed himself not merely preached but waged jihad. God’s [that is, allah’s – dda] word, dictated to the Prophet and preached by him, is binding on all Muslims, and his example is their inspiration.

    “in the glorious [note: O’Brien himself is not an Islamophile by any means; I think his tone here is probably meant to be somewhat ironic, or as adopting, for the purposes of argument or demonstration, the Mohammedan POV – dda] centuries of expansion, the jihad carried Islam from Arabia, to the west as far as the Atlantic; to the north, as far as Vienna; to the south as far as the Sahara and down the east coast of Africa to Madagascar; and to the east across Persia and the Indian subcontinent into part of China, and Indonesia.

    “What is going on today in the Muslim world is not the advent of some aberrant thing called Islamic fundamentalism but a revival of Islam itself – the real thing – which Western ascendancy and Westernised post-Muslim elites no longer have the capacity to muffle and control.

    “The jihad is back….”.

    And then, toward the end of the article, there is *this* [remember, it was 1995]

    “…President Clinton’s personal approach to this matter appears to be governed by a kind of woozy ecumenism, fairly prevalent among Western liberal churchmen.

    “As the president told the Jordanian Parliament in October: “After all, the chance to live in harmony with our neighbours and to build a better life for our children is the hope that binds us together. Whether we worship in a mosque in Irbid, a Baptist church like my own in Little Rock, Arkansas, or a synagogue in Haifa, we are bound together in that hope”.

    “‘All the great religions are the same’ is the idea. Only they aren’t.

    “The Clintonian world view observes [sic: this seems to be some kind of error – it *has* to be ‘obscures’ – dda] the hard specificity of Islam.

    “The Prophet Mohamed did not offer his followers a chance to live in harmony with their neighbours.

    “He taught them to fight their neighbours, if they were unbelievers, and kill them or beat them into submission.

    “And it is futile to say of those Muslims who faithfully follow those teachings today that their actions are not ‘intrinsically related to Islam’.

    “We are facing an Islamic revival…”. END EXCERPT

    As in 1995, so also in 2015. As with the jihadis in Algeria, so now the jihadis of Islamic State, and elsewhere.

    Think about it. Imagine a teacher in, say, Year 6 or Year 7, in a history class, just reading out Conor Cruise O’Brien, and then supplying, to support what O’Brien is saying, the relevant passages from the Quran, and perhaps also from other portions of the Islamic ‘trilogy’. Imagine what a High School teacher could do with it. All you really need in addition is a basic discussion of Islamic deception, and you’re set.

    Teachers, for their preparation, could read Mark Durie – “Which God?” and “The Third Choice” – and Mr Spencer’s “The Truth About Muhammad” and “The Complete Infidel’s Guide to the Quran”.

    For reinforcement? – John Quincy Adams’ hard-hitting analysis of Islam, its teachings and goals, that Andrew Bostom unearthed from essays that Adams had written in 1829.

    “In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar [i.e., Muhammad], the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth.

    “Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion.

    “He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy;

    “and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind.

    “THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST:– TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE….

    …While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men….

    “The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God.

    “The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute [that is, the Jizya – dda];

    the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace [e.g. the ‘peace process’ in the Middle East, today; at this point the astute history teacher, whether in upper primary or in high school, would consult Mr Spencer on the subject of the Treaty of Hudaybiyya, and provide the necessary cross-reference – dda]; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat:

    “but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force….”.

    Teachers could also, in their preparation, make use of Jacques Ellul’s essay on Jihad, written as Foreword to Bat Yeor’s “The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam”. He examines Islam with the eye of a sociologist and a professor of law.

    http://www.dhimmi.org/Foreword.html

    Or they could read this – “From ‘Cold War’ to ‘Guerra Fria’, which was written, like Conor Cruise O’Brien’s brilliant little piece, in the early 1990s. The footnotes alone are an education.

    http://www.ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/GUERRA.HTM

    Any intelligent teacher who set out simply to teach their pupils the very, very basics, exactly as set out in these articles that I have linked, would be providing them with civilisation-saving information.

    (For good measure: all infidel girls aged 9 and over would watch “Not Without My Daughter” and Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Theo Van Gogh’s film “Submission”; the older girls would be encouraged to read two books called “Escape! from an Arab Marriage” and “33 Secrets Arab Men Don’t Tell American Women” (but would be informed that ‘Arab’ in this case = Muslim), and also Ayaan Hirsi Ali, “Infidel” and “The Caged Virgin”.

  31. Plutarchus7 says

    Nov 5, 2015 at 8:31 am

    RULE, MOHAMMED!: THE FUTURE NATIONAL ANTHEM OF ISLAMIC GREAT BRITAIN

    RULE, MOHAMMED!

    When Mohammed first, at heaven’s command,
    Arose from burning desert sands
    This was a sign to every land
    That Islam is their Fate.
    And the holy jinn ecstatically
    Sang this triumphant strain:

    Rule, Mohammed!
    Mohammed is the way.
    All Brits shall ever ever ever
    Be his slaves.

    Britons not so blest as He
    Must in their turn
    Fall on their knees.
    To Allah and his Prophet fall
    While Islam triumphs eternally
    The dread and envy of them all.

    Rule, Mohammed!
    Mohammed is the way.
    All Brits shall ever ever ever
    Be his slaves.

    Still mightier shall Mohammed rise
    More dreadful from each enemy blow
    More deadly, deadly than before.
    His sword shall tear apart the sky
    And reign down hell upon his foes,
    His victory assured.

    Rule, Mohammed!
    Mohammed is the way.
    All Brits shall ever ever ever
    Be his slaves.

    Haughty infidels shall never tame,
    And fail to bring the Prophet down,
    And will but rouse God’s wrathful flame
    As they work their woe to His renown.

    Rule, Mohammed!
    Mohammed is the way.
    All Brits shall ever ever ever
    Be his slaves.

    Our jihadis with perfect freedom found,
    Shall to God’s happy realm repair.
    Blest with 72 pure virgins crowned,
    Now that Islam’s conquered the world down here.

    Rule, Mohammed!
    Mohammed is the way.
    All men shall ever ever ever
    Be his slaves.

    http://www.apollospeaks.com

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • Hoi Polloi on Why so many Muslims can’t wait for Biden to get inaugurated
  • Hoi Polloi on EU Parliament members call for firing of border agency director for preventing illegal migrants from entering Europe
  • jacksonl03 on India: Police make first arrest for ‘love jihad’ under new law
  • Yogi on Canadian Mental Health Association studies Muslim women’s mental health due to ‘discrimination’ and ‘hate crimes’
  • Walter Sieruk on Iranian Kurdistan: Muslim brothers behead their sister in honor killing over her romantic relationship

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.