Not long after I spoke in Calgary on April 28, the notorious imam Syed Soharwardy challenged me to debate. The challenge featured his usual graciousness:
I’m always happy to defend the truth and accuracy of my positions, and so I ignored his smears and defamation and accepted the challenge. I asked the Calgary chapter of the Jewish Defense League, the host of my recent talk in Calgary, to help set up the debate. I hadn’t proposed them as providing the venue or the moderator, but only to organize the event, but Soharwardy rejected their involvement, basing his rejection upon years-old false charges against the JDL. He in turn proposed that the Interfaith Council of Calgary host the debate and provide the moderator, and when I rejected that, he proposed the Beth Tzedec synagogue in Calgary, which I also rejected.
Why did I reject his proposals? Because the Interfaith Council of Calgary and Rabbi Shaul Osadchey of the Beth Tzedec Congregation both denounced me when I came to speak in Calgary, before I had said a word, basing their denunciations on the libelous and highly tendentious smears of Leftist and Islamic supremacist groups in the U.S.
The idea that either group could or would host a fair and impartial debate is laughable, and Soharwardy knows that. It is clear that he doesn’t want an open and honest discussion of the agreed-upon topic (“The Qur’an Teaches Violence Against Unbelievers,” with him arguing no and me arguing yes), but a Stalinist show trial in which he and his hand-picked moderator vilify and defame me for “Islamophobia” to the delight of his hand-picked audience.
I’ve noted it many times: why can’t Muslims debate? Why are Muslim spokesmen almost to a man so brittle and insecure about their beliefs that they are afraid to debate them in a genuinely open forum? If they really believe what they’re saying is true, why not defend them in a debate that isn’t rigged? What is Syed Sohwarwardy afraid of?
My agreement to debate stands. If he can come up with a genuinely neutral moderator, I’m there.

Angemon says
Truly a display of “islamic courage” – the “courage” one gets knowing there’s a whole crowd behind him
Anyway, I propose Ezra Levant for moderator. And perhaps Mr. Levant has connections who can provide a venue?
Sovereign Man says
Haha, this cowardly muzzi-fascist pig will never actually dare debate Robert in an open and neutral setting, and especially with Ezra moderating. He is the one who sicced the Canadian “Human Rights” Tribunal on Ezra, then turned tail and ran away like the filthy cur he is when the media starting looking more closely at what form of vermin he really is: http://www.canada.com/story.html?id=5162d29c-ffe4-4f4a-8d25-fe5e097c0963
Jay Boo says
Soharwardy’s biggest enemy is not finding the courage to debate in a fair exchange, but rather:
The Truth
Truth — is precious like a mothers milk to a baby.
Islam however, — is like what is left behind after the baby has nourished on the life giving milk, when the diaper becomes full.
Vlad says
Sunni, then Shiat 🙂
Mirren10 says
Shades of Max Abrahms … 🙂
mortimer says
Abrahms has only made a sociological study of Islam, rather than understanding the jihad doctrine itself which is Spencer’s specialty.
By debating the validity of the jihad doctrine, Abrahms realized he would be decisively, soundly and crushingly defeated, because the jihad doctrine is something he barely understands, and a doctrine he has avoided learning about, and yet he dismisses the jihad doctrine from constituting the ‘real’ cause of Islamic terrorism. That is not a scholarly approach to dismiss jihad as a motive in terrorism without a thoroughly acquaintance of it.
Abrahms would probably also say that religion was not the ‘real’ motive for the Crusades, such is his sociological and blinkered approach which denies the importance of religious doctrine in motivating war.
Abrahms probably doesn’t know the jihad doctrine takes up over 60% of the Koran, 72% of the Sira, and 21% of the hadiths of Bukhari. In all, 31% of those texts are about jihad. The rest is mainly about Mohammed, how he ate, defecated, had sex with his two dozen wives and slaves and captives and his vicious punishments for those who broke his rules. Very little of the Islamic trilogy is about Allah, prayer or religion. The purpose of it is mainly to show Muslims how to act like Mohammed.
Abrahms likely doesn’t know that either.
KABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM says
I have a pet theory regarding mad m0’s hatred of man’s best friends. It centres on m0 defecating in the desert and a surprize intrusion by a nosy black dog.
Jay Boo says
I do not have any problem with poop jokes
but that is a merely narcissistic rant of gratuitous gibberish.
jihad3tracker says
As Robert puts it, high-profile Muslims are “brittle and insecure” BECAUSE THEY KNOW HOW MUCH HATRED TOWARD INFIDELS IS IN THE QUR’AN.
They also know that he could recite verbatim dozens of suras and verses — even in a hypnotic trance, deep REM sleep, or irrecoverable coma.
JawsV says
soharwardy@iscc.ca
Elton says
The answer is because the truth is not in them. If it was they would lose. They can’t even refute the most extreme of the jihadists.
heidi says
my favorite response to the accusation of being “anti islam”
More Ham Ed says
It’s a must-watch video from about 2 years ago.
https://www.youtube.com/user/patcondell/videos
Cecilia Ellis says
More Ham Ed, you and Heidi have made my day! I checked out the link you provided; it now holds an honored status as one of my Favorites. I forwarded that link to my friends. Thanks so much! ?
Richard Courtemanche says
What a speaker! Pat Condell has it on the button. How could pro-Islam types continue for follow their insanity? Indoctrination… radicalization! Perhaps evil is part of life unfortunately.
Cecilia Ellis says
Heidi, thank you for posting this awesome video. I found it on YouTube, after viewing it here, and immediately forwarded the link to several people. It will go far in helping them start today with renewed vigor in asserting their anti-Islamic stand. What an irrefutably educational, appropriate and hilarious presentation! ?
gravenimage says
Pat Condell rocks!
Tater Salad says
How much of a terrorist supporter is the new London, England Mayor ?
http://www.barenakedislam.com/2016/05/08/trying-to-out-obama-barack-hussein-obama-hillary-clinton-already-is-taking-pandering-to-muslims-to-a-whole-new-level/ .
Boston Tea Party says
It’s hilarious, really. Muslims and leftists have created this caricature of Robert as some angry, hateful, ill-informed firebrand who cherry-picks quotes from the Quran and takes them out of context to make Islam looks bad. After a while, some of those Muslims and leftist start to believe their own bull, and then want to debate Robert. They imagine that Robert is going to give HIS opinion on what Islam is, and then they’ll come in and calmly explain the “true, peaceful Islam.” But unfortunately for them, they get on stage and they’re confronted with the reality of Spencer: a mild-mannered, calm, humorous intellectual, who quotes almost exclusively from mainstream, well-respected Islamic sources.
John Marst says
That’s a polite way of saying Robert hands them their asses. And he always does, if Youtube provides a representative sample.
gravenimage says
So true.
Ashley says
“If they really believe what they’re saying is true, why not defend them in a debate…”
_________________
Exactly! Who would NOT defend their core principles and beliefs in a civil debate?
What is Syed Sohwarwardy afraid of? Well, my guess is a few inconvenient truths about Islam, the Qur’an and its teachings…
Mark Swan says
With those that must rely on the darkness to shield them…light is truly the enemy.
This reveals that the one thing all Muslims fear the most, would be an open forum,
with clear, honest conversation, covering what Islam is, and what it offers the world.
Wellington says
Pathetic. What a wuss. This imam has no guts. Probably few brains too. Would love to see such a debate on neutral ground, where it obviously should be, because Spencer would destroy this guy I have no doubt and within a short time the imam would be reduced to name-calling and insults as is invariably the case when someone really knows Islam and points out its many pathologies.
Jay Boo says
“within a short time” is an understatement.
These Muslims usually start name calling right at the opening bell.
Wellington says
Pretty much, Jay Boo. Pretty much.
Graeme Howarth says
I don’t know – you’d have a much better idea than I, but I would tend to debate the guy anywhere as long as your personal safety is assured. Venues that are neutral, let alone friendly, may be getting harder and harder to find. If we don’t debate in hostile environments we may be getting to the stage where we lose the only chances well get.
But as I say, you’ve a much better idea of all this than I. I’m sure you know the score well and are making the right decision. It’s not your fault that these people do want to engage in a fair debate.
Ashley says
No doubt Robert will mop the floor with Mr. Sohwarwardy if and when such a debate is held.
Honestly, I don’t think public debates are the way to go at this juncture. Islam continues to spread, attacks are on the rise, and you can’t fix stupid. Robert is a target at ANY public venue. If you can’t fix stupid, why risk your life?
Robert has his plate full educating and enlightening the masses about Islam. I enjoy his interviews via Skype knowing that he is safe. He is a prolific writer.
Robert receives death threats on a regular basis. His family is in jeopardy. He has to be on guard 24/7.
Of course, Robert is a rebel and will do what he feels he needs to do. But I certainly don’t want him to debate in a hostile environment. The risk/reward ratio just doesn’t compute for me.
gravenimage says
No, you can’t fix stupid. But I have never thought that these debates are primarily aimed at the apologists for evil Robert Spencer is debating with or their sycophantic supporters, but rather at the general public who may attend these debates and are generally civilized people but in need of more information about the threat of Jihad.
But I agree with him and with you, Ashley–if a venue is sufficiently hostile it will be just packed with barbarians shouting him down, and few members of the general public–and if it is *really* bad, it will put him in particular danger.
Mark Swan says
A National Televised Debate Is Needed.
linnte says
That would be excellent! If we could get a National debate going, millions would watch!
Angemon says
There was, a couple or so of years ago, a video where SoCowardly was confronted with the picture of a “Canadian” muslim who blew himself up in Syria. One that he claimed not to know. He did. The look on the bastard’s face told everything. He knew the guy and he was *proud* of what he did. Unfortunately, the YT account (Aloha Snackbar) was shut down and I couldn’t find the video elsewhere.
Hope says
They cannot possibly win the debate because the Koran simply says what it says. Violence against unbelievers is one of the principle themes in the Koran! Robert Spencer did not write the Koran, yet muslims get angry at him for talking about what’s in it! This is their pattern of behavior. When backed into a corner by logic and facts, they get angry and call names and accuse opponents of islamophobia. They exhibit childish behavior.
Perhaps in earlier times, it was easy for muslims to lie about the contents of the Koran because the only way to check the facts was to find a copy of it that was not printed in Arabic. But today, the truth is out there online for all to see! I hope that more people will be brave enough to look at it for themselves.
gravenimage says
There have been good translations of the Qur’an available for well over two hundred years now–Muslims just count on Infidels not bothering to read it.
Hope says
And we never had the need to read it, because once upon a time we were free to live our lives in peace, without having islam shoved down our throats 24/7 by our political and media “elites.” Islam was a backwater, 7th century joke that belonged in the Middle East and it woud have remained so, were it not for Western multicultural apologists and evildoers willing to sell out for Saudi money.
gravenimage says
That’s because Islam was much less of a threat after it was beaten back, beginning with the defeat of the Barbary Pirates two hundred years ago.
Jefferson read the Qur’an so he could better understand what we were up against.
Western Canadian says
This imam is a piece of lying rubbish, who should have been thrown into a trash bin and deported when he was going to the police, DEMANDING compliance with sharia thuggery, by throwing Ezra Levant in jail for daring to publish the mad mo cartoons……
Failing that, when he was quoted as claiming that muslims in Canada are treated like Jews in 1930’s Germany, he should have been classed as what he is: A raving, lying, hate filled lunatic, and banished to obscurity. However, the hard left is foolish enough to hold hands with his breed of vermin, so he is given a platform to speak, which he abuses to do all the things devout muslims do: Lie, Project their own vile behaviours, such a hatred, falsehoods, etc.
And with garbage like shiny pony pretending to be our prime minister (will not capitalize for such a jackass), NOTHING will be done by the authorities who should be acting to shut this lying criminal down.
mortimer says
Sowarhardy is a stealth jihadist. He overestimates his arguments. He is trying to pretend that ISIS is not Islamic, when in fact ISIS is led by one of the most thoroughly Islamic scholars in the world.
Fessitude says
Soharwardy is not as slickly stealthy as Maajid Nawaz, Zuhdi Jasser, Salim Mansur, or Asra Nomani, for example. Now those would be interesting challengers for Spencer to debate, since they are much slipperier and tend to fool so many even in the Counter-Jihad with their spiffier lemon of a Used Car of Reformed Islam.
I trust that if Spencer put his mind to it, he could wrest the Islam out of those sleight-of-taqiyya artists. And I think any one or more of them would be quite willing to do it and agree to any terms Spencer requests. If only he would deem it important enough to put it on his to-do list; for one would think that the problem of pseudo-reformers fooling the Counter-Jihad is a high priority to expose…
Wellington says
I admire your straight-talking eloquence, Western Canadian.
gravenimage says
Yes–hear, hear, Western Canadian!
mortimer says
The venue is less important than the moderator and/or judges. A recent debate between Mark Steyn and a former supreme court judge led to a highly biased crowd changing its view from 77 per cent who’d supported the motion to just 55 per cent. 22% swung to Steyn’s side.
Spencer’s fact-based reasoning will change minds. Sowarhardy’s name-calling will be his only resort and will further turn people away from Islam. Anyone who has studied Islam and has seen debates with mullahs trying to defend the indefensible realizes that Islam is intellectually obscurantist and morally stuck in the barbaric 7th century with no way to defend either of those fatal flaws…except by the sword. The sword is not an ‘argument’ in debate.
Sowarhardy must be feeling the pressure to get out of this now. He’s trying to get out of it without seeming to be a coward.
Ashley says
Thank you for those stats, Mortimer.
Admittedly, I’m over-protective of Robert Spencer. My hang-up. I can’t shake the Garland, TX shit out of my head.
Good to know there IS great value in the public debate venue…
It is just that Robert has stuck his neck out there and then some…
linnte says
Robert, we trust you and know you are righteous on this issue. Time to go to Facebook and wag a “shame on you” in the Imam’s face.
Christopher Doean says
I don’t usually post off-color remarks, but if and when the debate takes place, kick his ass!!
Guest says
You were right to reject this mr. Spencer. In a room full of supremacists you can’t change anyone’s mind even with the truth
D-spot says
The ‘Munk Debates’ would be an excellent venue for this exchange. Conducted as they are with intelligence, respect, reason and sound judgement (at least from one of the participants).
mortimer says
Munk Debates might be interested. How about Steve Paikin?
D-spot says
This would be an excellent choice, a real person of substance with credentials and an ability to moderate with impartiality and restraint (imagining what a debate like this would conjure!).
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
[1] The challenge is for a debate “in public”. This phrase “in public” does not mean “before an audience in the same room”, like
http://cdn.greenandgoldrugby.com/804F73/gagr/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Peanut-Gallery.jpg
The public could be watching on TV, and the debaters could be in separate studios, with Imam Soharwardy surrounded by a phalanx of jinn to protect him against attack by scimitar-wielding Islamophobes.
[2] “A controversial American author and blogger who slams Islam, drew more than 200 people to a Calgary speech along with a cross section of critics who say he …”
The writer of this description, despite his comma abuse, deserves recognition for his poetic abilities. Note the “I slam Islam” pun. And the verb is not “attracted” but “drew”; this is a veiled (or hijabbed) reference to Spencer’s Draw Muhammad contest in Garland, Texas. And “cross section” is a tour de force of multiple meanings: beyond its surface meaning, “cross” brings to mind the emblem of the Crusaders, and their cross disposition in welcoming Islam (it might also be a crosspatch reference to the Evangelical Ted *Cruz*).
[3] According to his Wikipedia biography,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syed_Soharwardy
is a “direct descendent (Sayyid) of Prophet Muhammad”: he’s a great-great-…-great-grandson of the Prophet himself! Where has Soharwardy published his genealogy? Can we look up his family tree on Ancestry.com?
Soharwardy kind of reminds me of this imam
http://www.isgoc.com/site/abouttheimam/
who, when challenged to produce the isnad-like chain of teachers in his “Eijizah in Quranic Recitation that goes back to Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), similar to the concept of Apostolic Succession”, flatly refused, giving no coherent reason.
One of many silenced UK citizens says
Long time reader first time poster.
Thank Robert for your insight it has really opened my eyes to Islam, i often tell trusted friends about your site as unfortunately you can imagine being in the UK you can’t challenge Islam without being arrested under hate speech ‘laws’ or be excused of being racist
Side story – I remember very vividly being told in form class back in 1997 by a cocky muslim that islam would take over the world in 2015 and wow was his prediction ever so scary.
I’m genuinely embarrassed that the UK has banned you from the country as a friend of mine recently asked when are you speaking in the UK and i had to give him the bad news. (Are you able to speak in South Ireland??)
Anyway Thanks again your knowledge, it has helped me no end with a few debates.
WorkingClassPost says
Hello and welcome.
Perhaps, now that London has a new mayor who has made a living defending human rights, that ban will be lifted (but don’t hold your breath).
In all seriousness, if an invite for Robert to speak here in London were refused, it is exactly the sort of case that we should expect an ex lawyer like Mr. Kahn to try to overturn, if he is the honest and impartial politician that he professes to be.
gravenimage says
Welcome! Don’t give up yet!
mortimer says
Soharwardy? So-cowardly.
KrazyKafir says
good one
gravenimage says
Very true.
livingengine says
Eric Allen Bell is still claiming the Counter Jihad Movement is a front to advance Christianity, and attacks R. Spencer, P. Geller, and Wallid Shoebat. https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://de.richarddawkins.net/articles/interview-mit-eric-allen-bell-teil-2&prev=search
mortimer says
Rubbish. Bell is overgeneralizing. The CJ is composed of people who are concerned about freedom of expression. There is no evidence they are predominantly Christian. I know Hindus, Jews and atheists who are all fighting this theocratic fascism with equal resolve.
By the way, Pam Geller is Jewish…off track on this one. However, assuming the claim is correct, who has a better motive to oppose Islam, since Christians are the most persecuted group on earth and persecuted mainly by Islam? What is wrong with defending Christians from persecution? Are you prejudiced? Does Bell say Christians should not be spared from genocide?
Mark Swan says
Darn Good Comment mortimer
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
Thank you, livingengine, for finding this. But Eric Allen Bell’s words, which must have originally been in English, seem to have been translated into German and then back into English. A short example:
“He [Robert Spencer] contacted me when I was fired at Daily Kos. We denied [huh?] together some radio broadcasts and also met in person for an interview. I learned a lot of [about? from?] Robert Spencer and I am thankful for him.” Where is the German text? I’d like to find what got translated as “denied”. Better yet, is the original English available?
Mark Swan says
Why…
Eric Allen Bell on Facebook .
1 comments
comments
From Jens Kröcher | Saturday, 07 May 2016 5:25
the fire with fire … The Counter-Jihad movement is dominated by evangelicals. Efforts to education in all the honors by the “prestige” of the movement, these efforts are futile because hardly a liberal or Left is willing to take local theses seriously. Good that the Foundation has published this interview.
theme
Foundation
religion
science
politics
news
discussions
Books
Also on the subject
Interview with Eric Allen Bell – Part 1
Eric Allen Bell is a US blogger, filmmaker and media consultant who lives in New York. Through his work on a documentary about …
Continue reading
headings
AK evolutionary biology
leaving the church
creationism
Books
Richard Dawkins
Genderismus
atheism
videos
Hangouts
Eric Allen Bell on Facebook .
1 comments
comments
From Jens Kröcher | Saturday, 07 May 2016 5:25
the fire with fire … The Counter-Jihad movement is dominated by evangelicals. Efforts to education in all the honors by the “prestige” of the movement, these efforts are futile because hardly a liberal or Left is willing to take local theses seriously. Good that the Foundation has published this interview.
theme
Foundation
religion
science
politics
news
discussions
Books
Also on the subject
Interview with Eric Allen Bell – Part 1
Eric Allen Bell is a US blogger, filmmaker and media consultant who lives in New York. Through his work on a documentary about …
Continue reading
headings
AK evolutionary biology
leaving the church
creationism
Books
Richard Dawkins
Genderismus
atheism
videos
Hangouts
Eric Allen Bell’s words are just His miss-guided opinion…He appears to be a confused rattle-trap. He went for Islam because He despises Christianity…that is His weird mindset and problem, alone. He sure does not have anything to offer anyone else.
Mark Swan says
Not sure how all the above got in there…but the bottom four lines are mine.
livingengine says
Here is an English version of Eric Allen Bell’s screed. http://www.faithfreedom.org/the-radical-truth-about-moderate-islam-by-eric-allen-bell/
Fessitude says
“still”? Surely he wasn’t doing that when he was friendly with Spencer…?
Angemon says
ITT: Fessitude doesn’t know what “still” means. Was EAB doing that in the past? Is he doing it now?
livingengine says
Yes, he was doing it while among us in 2012. please see the story here. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEXtbzawYEhZuCy1_i4eLNh3M77xtECZp
gravenimage says
*Disgusting*. Eric Allen Bell was actually welcomed here at Jihad Watch.
heidi says
i disagree with the comment that Mr. Bell was saying counter jihad was a front for christian extremists. after reading the somewhat poor translation, it was clear to me that Bell was just disappointed that Spencer didn’t do more to distance his message of facts about islam from others who may be simply religious supremacists of other faiths. not a criticism, just a point, and i often see that as well. Bell does an amazing job of explaining truths of islam to the left, and his dedication to spreading this truth is invaluable. he simply does not want this to turn into a battle of religious supremacy, and i respect that.
livingengine says
Heidi,
There is no doubt that EAB is a liar, a fraud, a bigot, and a coward. I wouldn’t say this unless I had a lot to back it up. Please watch the story of EAB vs. the Counter Jihad Movement here. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEXtbzawYEhZuCy1_i4eLNh3M77xtECZp
This is my email livingengine@yahoo.com, please contact me, and I will send you screen shots of Eric Allen Bell’s excesses including his bigotry, his cowardice, his fraud, and above all, his lying, and lying, and lying, and lying.
heidi says
i have no intention of joining your attempt to malign Mr. Bell. it would have been so easy for him to simply remain silent and get paid for making a movie on “islamophobia”. he had every thing to lose by telling the truth, and indeed lost a lot of money and many relationships. He was one of the first people i raising awareness about the truth about the violence, death and oppression inherent in islamic teachings and practices, and i am grateful for everyone with the courage to speak out risking jobs,& friendships to honestly confront the human rights violations committed by islamists. i do not message with supremacists of any kind, and am signing off of this thread
livingengine says
I am skeptical of Eric Allen Bell’s recounting of his time in Murfreesboro for two reasons.
The first is that, if one reads his retelling in “The High Price of Telling the Truth about Islam”, and “The Radical Truth about Moderate Islam” it becomes clear that Eric Allen Bell talked himself out of a job.
Here is some of what he says:
“One of the producers said I was starting to sound like an “Islamophobe”. One of them said I was sounding “Right Wing”.”
“ . . no one would even touch the materials I had placed in front of them, not even the Quran. It was as if I had dumped radioactive waste on the table. The mood in the room was very uncomfortable. “
“ . . . this meeting was not going the way I had hoped”
“ . . . I was very frustrated.”
“ . . I fought and I fought.”
“Finally, I was told, “Eric, you have a choice to make. Either finish the movie we all agreed you were going to produce for us, or give us back our money. We don’t want to be a part of some right wing, Muslim bashing propaganda”. I assured them this was not propaganda and that I did not want to bash anyone, rather I wanted to expose the truth about Islam, not just Islamophobia. This was about social justice. I kept repeating the words “social justice” and “human rights” in any context I could think of, until finally everyone stood up and let me know that the meeting was over.”
“After some soul searching, I did return the money.”
The second reason I am skeptical is that despite being someone who has spent years writing dramatic action, Eric Allen Bell never shares what his “soul searching” consisted of. The “turning point” in this story is never revealed. I am highly skeptical of this version of things.
If, instead of returning the money, he was fired, then Eric’s “The High Price of Telling the Truth about Islam” would have been his first successful attempt at defrauding the Counter jihad Movement which would have made his subsequent actions ( lying on Israel National Radio, pretending to have a bounty on his head, and suppressing the truth about the bounty, pretending to be science of consciousness, pretending to be an intellectual, etc.) that much easier.
Dennis says
This scholar Imam should debate al- Baghdadi instead. I’d like to see that one on the internet. Let’s hear these boys try to convince the world that Islam is peaceful.
mortimer says
Bingo. However, that fellow seems to ‘debate’ with a knife in one hand.
Mark Swan says
Good One Dennis
gravenimage says
Canada imam wants to debate Robert Spencer, but only before groups that condemned him
………………………
Yes–we can imagine what a circus that would be, with the audience threatening and shouting Robert Spencer down.
A venue need not be particularly friendly–but it has to be at least civilized and neutral.
What do we know about the vile Imam Syed Soharwardy?
Ludicrously, he posted this on his Facebook page:
Islamophobes and the Terrorists
For me there is no difference between the Islamophobes and the terrorists. Both have more in common than differences.
• Both misquote and misinterpret the verses of Qur’an to justify their hate.
• Both misinterpret the Hadith (Sayings of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)) and Islam’s jurisprudence.
• Both are intolerant, hateful and self-declared champions on Islam.
• Both share hate for Muslims and the non-Muslims supporters of Muslims.
• Both want to Isolate Muslims from the peaceful world.
• Both stereotype all Muslims and blame Islam for the atrocities carried out by the terrorist organizations created by the CIA, like Daesh (ISIS), AlQaeda, Taliban, etc..
• Both are funded, supported and trained by the anti-Islam agencies and individuals.
• Both recruit youth to propagate their causes.
• Both want to stop the propagation of Islam.
The only difference between the Islamophobes and the terrorists is that the Islamophobes are the agents of hate and the terrorists are their tools.
…
In other words, he is absurdly claiming that it is “Islamophobes” who are behind Jihad terror.
Of course, Jihad is mainstream Islam–“Islamophobes” like Robert Spencer just dare to point this out.
Mark Swan says
This guy dares to say “recruit youth to propagate their causes”…totally unfeeling for the
children His poisonous religion has strapped in vests with explosives and sent out to
murder themselves and others…what a monster this guy really is.
Whee says
One BIG difference the imam left out —– the terrorists claim to be Muslim, while the Islamophobes do not.
As someone posted earlier, why doesn’t this imam challenge the ISIS terrorists to a debate instead? After all, ISIS’ claims to be Islamic is the bigger threat to Islam’s public image than Spencer & company’s views.
Better yet, rather than a stuffy debate, howz about some media channel gather a few ISIS supporters together with this imam and his buddies (along with some staff from the Quilliam Foundation for good measure) for an Islamic version of “The View” or “Big Brother”? THAT would make for some eye-opening, interesting, never-before-seen TV, yah? Bet it would get high ratings too.
Santa Voorhees says
• Both misquote and misinterpret the verses of Qur’an to justify their hate.
Quran 3:28
A muslim shall not befriend the unbelievers in preference over the muslims.
Whoever does so has no connection whatsoever with Allah.
Quran 3:151
Soon We shall cast awe in the hearts of disbelievers because they have appointed partners to Allah, for which He has not sent any proof; their destination is hell; and what a wretched abode for the unjust.
Quran 5:51
Oh people who Believe! Do not make the Jews and the Christians your friends; they are friends of one another; and whoever among you befriends them, is one of them; indeed Allah does not guide the unjust.
Quran 9:5
Then when the sacred months have passed, slay the polytheists wherever you find them, and catch them and make them captive, and wait in ambush for them at every place; then if they repent and keep the prayer established and pay the charity, leave their way free; indeed Allah is Oft Forgiving, Most Merciful.
Quran 9:29
Fight against the People given the Book(s) who do not accept faith in Allah and the Last Day, and who do not treat as forbidden what is forbidden by Allah and by His Noble Messenger, and who do not follow the true religion, until they pay the tariff with their own hands with humiliation.
Quran 9:30
And the Jews said, “Uzair is the son of Allah”, and the Christians said “The Messiah is the son of Allah”; they utter this from their own mouths; they speak like the former disbelievers; may Allah kill them; where are they reverting!
Quran 47:1
Allah has destroyed the deeds of those who disbelieved and prevented from Allah’s way.
Quran 48:29
The muslims are harsh towards the unbelievers and merciful among themselves
• Both misinterpret the Hadith (Sayings of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)) and Islam’s jurisprudence.
Bukhari 4.52.220:
Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand.”
Bukhari 9.84.57
Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.
• Both are intolerant, hateful and self-declared champions on Islam.
The only intolerant are the muslims, and yes, both of them are self-declared champions on Islam because both actually read the Quran and Hadiths.
• Both share hate for Muslims and the non-Muslims supporters of Muslims.
Islamophobes hate muslims because of their behaviour, terrorists hate muslims because they are not muslim enough.
• Both want to Isolate Muslims from the peaceful world.
No, terrorist want to impose sharia on everyone’s throats, be them christians, jews, yazidi, even muslims themselves.
Islamophobes are simply quoting the Quran and Hadiths.
• Both stereotype all Muslims and blame Islam for the atrocities carried out by the terrorist organizations created by the CIA, like Daesh (ISIS), AlQaeda, Taliban, etc..
Not true, we do know that not all muslims are terrorists or bad people. However it is clear that there is a small fraction of them (and I’d say a significant one) that want to kill us.
And yes, Islam is all to blame for the attacks.
CIA created Isis, AlQaeda, the Taliban…?
Maybe… the US can defeat them in one month if it wants, but since they are still around that maybe a possiblity.
• Both are funded, supported and trained by the anti-Islam agencies and individuals.
Wait… why would anti islam agencies support a group like Isis who is 100% islamic and follows the Quran to the letter? It doesn’t make sense.
• Both recruit youth to propagate their causes.
Yes, terrorists do.
Islamophobes are simply quoting the Quran.
• Both want to stop the propagation of Islam.
One can only hope!
The only difference between the Islamophobes and the terrorists is that the Islamophobes are the agents of hate and the terrorists are their tools.
Tell me why islamophobes would do that in the first place? Why?
If muslims were peaceful, islamophobes wouldn’t exist and Robert Spencer wouldn’t be here to run this site to explain why muslims have this behaviour straight out from the Quran.
As always, the truth prevails.
Dan says
Look.
America.
When it comes to liberal/socialist/politically correct/brown nosed pandering, the CBC makes any of your networks look like a bunch of conservative choir boys.
We’re number one. We’re number one. We’re number one–
Oh, crap, wait, no, d’oh!
(Sarc of course)
(For the lib trolls who think they’re the only ones capable of it.)
Linde Barrera says
To Robert Spencer- After reading about Prof. Imam Soharwardy’s false narratives on Islam, I hear chickens clucking and vultures screeching. So glad your voice, Mr. Spencer, is like the voice and words of Jesus Christ when he said (in John 16:2-3) “In fact, a time is coming when anyone who kills you will think he is offering a service to God. They will do such things because they have not known the Father or me.” So please keep up your rigorous research into the doctrines of the Quran, and keep writing about them for many more people to learn about the evil ideology of Islam. You are my hero and I love you. God bless you and yours. Stay safe.
Dr. J says
Muslims hate scrutiny of their “Holy Books” and “Religion” (which is not much religion, but it is all about hating unbelievers, Jews, Christians and Strict Rules).
In any case, I’ve read many of your books, they are excellent, my guess is that the critics have never read your books, or really know much at all about Islam, and the goals of groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, or CAIR.
Your ability to deal with the constant criticism is inspiring, and it shows that you are a very brave individual trying to warn all of us who live in free countries about the problems growing worldwide as Islam infects almost every country and will demand submission to Islam by everyone if they ever gain enough power. Even now, they are abusing the legal system, and courts in the USA to impose their will and their Sharia law. It needs exposure, thanks to people like you it might even be understood by the many people who think Islam is a Peaceful religion. Clearly it has a history of violence and abuse of freedoms.
Elizabeth Arnold says
But now the cunning Imam Soharwardy will be able to say he wanted to debate with Robert but was refused! He knows full well in his heart he cannot argue with someone who knows Islam like Robert Spencer.
Just the fact that Mohammed married a 6 year old child is enough for most Westerners to be appalled by the Ideology, let alone the violence and cruelty, explicitly targeting Jews and Christians, in the most of the Koran. There can never be a debate as far as Soharwardy is concerned because too many people will think, “mmmm so not really peaceful at all!!” In fact, quite the opposite. No matter what Obama says!
celticwarriorcanada says
Great call Robert, you certainly know how to chose your battles carefully ! Under those circumstances you would definitely be casting your Pearls before the Swine ! Proof once again that islam is a cult for spineless, gutless , ball less males , who are unable to defend themselves , but have to depend on the Gang of other spineless gutless ball less males ! The truth is this man (If I can even call him a man! ) knows very well that without his gang behind him You Would Destroy All His Arguments, most of which would consist mainly of personal attacks anyways!!!
SBJ says
That’s why they are so quick to pull out the “Islamophobic” card. It attempts to stop all criticism of Islam.
John Johness says
How about you suggest to the good professor ( who pays this guy’s wage?) that you each provide a list of 10 venues, promoters and moderators. Then see if there is any fit. Then get it sponsored by TV or the like. This would look good for you rather than having to explain his choices.
Don’t forget any Isloonies in the audience asking stupid questions or leftards trying to stop you talking is not a problem as it demonstrates to the viewers their real danger.
TH says
That coward knows that if he debated with Robert Spencer, he would be demolished. I have seen several of his debates with pathetic muslim on Youtube and none of them do more than mouth out one logical fallacy after another. The same goes for those whom I have seen debate with David Wood. They are pathetic and they seem to think that the audience is stupid.
SD says
Ive dealt with many muslims and I will tell you from experience they only feel brave in groups. The moment they are alone their arrogance becomes fear, however this doesnt make them any less dangerous because they dont fight fair anyways. Robert Spencer knows his stuff and anyways how can anybody deny the common sensence fact that muhammad killed people and in his function as role model in islam not only makes it easier for muslims to kill but encourages it not only in his personal example but in quranic teaching and the biography of the false prophet muhammad that are looked to by muslims for guidance.
SD says
This muslim must be insane if he believes that islam is seperated from violence, either that or he hasnt read his book.
Benedict says
The Muslims are basically cowards, and they know it. only talk and bluster telling the world that they are the chosen people of god. But they are an insecure lot
Purushottam Deshmukh says
Respected Mr. Robert Spencer,
It is my personal opinion that you should not debate with people who have been an utter failure at logic. They are an incredibly violent herd. They have never possessed even an ounce of divine grace. Had they had it, the Middle-East region on the earth would be a paradise. There is no point in accepting challenges of these (people?). Arguing with them would be sheer waste of your intelligence and hard-earned knowledge and time. I hope you you keep continued enlightening non-Muslims all over the world. Thank you!
Richard Courtemanche says
You’re a coward Syed. Your proposal is stupid coming from a “person” who’s naturally stupid. How depressing for this country to continue accommodating such idiotic and evil birds.
Mr Spencer wouldn’t be able to get a word in, not to mention his security in front of a cattle of low-mental indoctrinated apes.
Syed would be so outclassed that I would even suggest Mehdi Hassan as a moderator.
Get serious, Syed! Step up or shut up.
ICH says
Debating Muslims is usually terrible.
No matter what you say they start blurbing for so long and so erratically,
your eyes cross and you fall asleep.
They never do answer a thing
a strong moderator is key
Florida Jim says
muslims are like Democrats they don’t debate they simply spew talking points and mock their opponent which is why most are help in mosques or secure muslim areas.Muslims are not nice people at all and should be avoided if you want to keep your country, your city, your black, your life.
TomF says
You’d mop up the floor with him Robert. I can just hear this jack-ass twisting himself into a intellectually ridiculous pretzel to explain why the Koran doesn’t say what it says it says. It’s the unalterable word of God….except when it isn’t…get it?
Harry ko says
Kick his Ass Robert !He is a coward like the rest of the Muslim Farrar !!!!!
Ivan Erickson says
SIX IRREFUTABLE PREMISES ON THE CHRISTIAN VS THE ISLAMIC FAITHS: A PERSONAL EMAIL FOR MR. SPENCER ON A TOPIC FOR YOUR DEBATE:
Ivan Erickson says
March 21, 2016 at 2:18 am
FROM ICE: A repeat of a previous comment: I am still waiting for someone to correctly refute my six irrefutable premises on the Christian & Islamic faiths: Please do not allow these poor lost soul representing the Islamic faith to come into our schools, or any other public place, to spew lies about Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church. If you do allow Islamic people into our schools or other public facilities, make certain first that the speaker(s) know that you will follow up their speech with my six irrefutable premises regarding the Catholic & Islamic faiths, so that all people are taught the Truth and Light of the One True God Who Lives before they leave the meeting..
SIX IRREFUTABLE PREMISES ON THE CHRISTIAN VS THE ISLAMIC FAITHS:
1. The first important premise to address is regarding the belief of the beloved people of the Islam faith – as well as by many people of other faiths – that professes that Allah is the same God as the God of the Jews and the Christians. To prove as succinctly as possible that this is not the Truth, I will ask you the following question, Reverend Ann, that you may seek the answers to this falsity in the heart of your own soul: If Allah is the same God as the One True God of the Christians and the Jews, why does Allah deny repeatedly throughout the Koran that Jesus is the Only Begotten Son of God, when God Himself prophesied 60 times and mentioned over 300 times in the Old Testament the future coming of a Messiah, a Suffering Servant, His Son, who would die on the cross for the salvation of all mankind? Would God prophesy the coming of His Son, a Messiah and Savior, only to deny Him through Mohammed, who professed to speak for Allah? Would this not make God a liar?
2. The second premise to address is the Islam belief that Jesus Christ was only a prophet – that He was not deity or the only Begotten Son of God. In 1 John, 2:18-23 we read: “Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that the antichrist was coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. Thus we know this is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not really of our number; if they had been, they would have remained with us. Their desertion shows that none of them was of our number. But you have the anointing that comes from the holy one, and you all have knowledge. I write to you not because you do not know the truth but because you do, and because every lie is alien to the truth. Who is the liar? Whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Whoever denies the Father and the Son, this is the antichrist. No one who denies the Son has the Father, but whoever confesses the Son has the Father as well.”iIn 1 John 4, 1-3 we read: “Beloved, do not trust every spirit but test the spirits to see whether they belong to God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. This is how you can know the Spirit of God: every spirit that acknowledges Jesus Christ come in the flesh belongs to God, and every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus does not belong to God. This is the spirit of the antichrist that, as you heard, is to come, but in fact is already in the world.”ii Also, Jesus Christ professed many times in the Gospel that He was the Messiah, the only Son of God the Father. If the Islam faithful sincerely believes that Jesus was a Prophet, how can they at the same time not believe that He was God’s Son? – For a prophet is one who speaks the Truth for God, you see.
3. The third premise that I wish to address is the Islam belief that Mohammed was the final prophet of Allah, and that he was inspired through the angel Gabriel to change God’s previous words of the Holy Bible in order to bring mankind His final words. After Mohammed’s death, Mohammed’s words were later written in their book called the Koran. The Koran, as you know, professes to contain four God-inspired books: the Torah of Moses; the Zabur (Psalms of David); the Injil (Gospel) of Jesus; and the Koran. In changing, deleting and adding to the Inspired words of God’s Holy Bible, Mohammed and his followers committed a grievous sin against God! In Revelation 22:18, 19 we read: “I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words in this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words in this prophetic book, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city described in this book.”iiiMohammed and his cohorts did not merely add to or take away God’s words of His prophetic Book! They deleted the entire Book of Revelation, as well as most of the other Holy Books of the Bible! I sincerely believe that Jesus was stating that we must not add to, delete, or to desecrate any of the Holy words of the entire Old and New Testaments of the Bible, for He, being the Son of God, certainly knew that Revelation was the last Book of the Bible and was most likely speaking of the entire Bible as “The Book.” And please do not counter by rationalizing that the God changed His own laws and words via the alleged angel Gabriel and Mohammed! Jesus Christ, speaking for God, knew that the Islams, Mormons, and people of other false faiths would attempt to change, delete, or to deny God’s laws, words and Scripture in the future! This is why Jesus stated emphatically that He is the end of the law!
4. The fourth premise that I will address is regarding the alleged angel Gabriel who purportedly instilled Mohammed with Allah’s messages given to him over an approximate 22-year period with the words that later became the Koran. The alleged angel Gabriel repeatedly denied that Jesus was the Son of God! However, the true angel Gabriel, speaking to Mary the Mother of Jesus in Luke, 1:31-33 states the following: “‘Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus. He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give him the throne of David his father, and he will rule over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.’”iv God, in His infinite wisdom, does not have to give two of His angels the same name – He surely has given each of them a personal, special name, as He will do for all those whom enter God’s kingdom. So, how then can one reputed angel Gabriel of the Koran deny repeatedly that Jesus is God’s Son, when the true angel Gabriel that appeared over 5 centuries earlier had called Jesus “Son of the Most High”?
5. The fifth premise is regarding the utilization by Mohammed and subsequently by the entire Islamic faithful of: the God of the Jews and the Christians; Abraham; the prophets; and a semblance of the One True God’s Holy Scripture in the Koran. Why did not the author of the Koran use his own text and credos, as the Hindus and the Buddhists have done? The reason that the author of the Koran utilized this ploy was so that a semblance of Truth, or a certain credence and correlation would be portrayed to the Muslim-Islams, in order that from that time onward they may more easily be duped and led away from the Truth and the Light when they read or heard the words of the Koran.
6. The sixth premise, Reverend Ann, is regarding your sincere belief that you can be an adherent of both the Christian and the Islam faiths. This, as you were made aware of in the above premises, is impossible, as the two religions are diametrically opposed to one another. For you must understand that the Christian faith stems from the words of Truth and Light of the One True God who Lives – the One Whom has proven to be the One True God; for He is the only God who is able to prophesy infallibly those many things to come throughout the history of mankind and even until the end of the age. The Islam faith, on the other hand, stems from the antichrist of which was revealed to you above from the words of God in 1 John. Also, in 1 Corinthians, 10:14-22 we read: “Therefore, my beloved, avoid idolatry. I am speaking as to a sensible people; judge for yourselves what I am saying. The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.
Look at Israel according to the flesh; are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar? So what am I saying? That meat sacrificed to idols is anything? Or that an idol is anything? No, I mean that what they sacrifice, [they sacrifice] to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to become participants with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and also the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and of the table of demons. Or are we provoking the Lord to jealous anger? Are we stronger than he?”v
Western Canadian says
What is needed, is a defence fund. So that Robert and others can sue in civil court, vermin like this imam and his boot lickers, to break the grip that islamo-thugs have on the ‘news’ media.. What group funding streams are available, so that funds can be made available…
Or can an organization be founded, such as FIRE is for defence against educational fascists? What can be done, to start using the courts against these criminals?
King Sobieski says
As entertaining as it would be to watch a debate between the Imam and Mr Spencer, I would be cautious . This man has a long history of duplicitous conduct ,at times even denying his own written statements . He is on record as condemning ISIS but fully supports Sharia “for all people in all countries” . Being a Sufi he no doubt has some slight differences in interpretation of the Quran . As with most Imams and prominent Islamic activists in the west , they do not pop their heads up unless there is an agenda to further , usually by involving the media in some manner. Given what I have read of this man , I’m fairly certain that he has no intention of conducting a fair and balanced discourse . Personally, I would much rather see a moderated informal discussion conducted on the net , perhaps on the Glazov Gang or something of the like. The idea of Mr Spencer engaging in public debates with Islamists would be unwise given all the threats on his life at this point . *Proverbs 4-5 Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you yourself will be just like him. Answer a fool according to his folly, or he will be wise in his own eyes.
Jaem says
Robert has the truth and the truth always prevails.