It is characteristic of Islamic supremacists to blame the Christian, the Jew, colonialism, imperialism and/or the West for any Muslim failure, misdeed and misfortune. Qasim Rashid, in his column below, claims that his tiny Ahmadi sect supports the freedom of speech, but he blames Christianity for Islamic blasphemy laws, while exonerating Islam from any responsibility for them. Rashid falsely claims that blasphemy laws are “not Islamic at all,” even though they are very Islamic. Sharia law is considered divine law and it encompasses both the hadith and the Quran. The hadith is explicit on blasphemy laws, but Rashid, like many others, relies on Western ignorance about Islam. In fact, his reputation precedes him as a professional liar.
“This is what the Quran actually says about blasphemy”, by Qasim Rashid, Independent, May 12, 2017:
In the 1979 hit British comedy Monty Python’s Life of Brian, an elderly man is charged and convicted for committing blasphemy. His crime? Uttering the name Jehovah. He insists he’s innocent, but an angry crowd is ready to unleash a barrage of stones on him.
It seems life imitates art. Last week Ireland investigated Stephen Fry, an outspoken critic of religion, for allegedly running foul of a 2009 blasphemy law. In the United States this week, a woman was convicted of laughing at Attorney General Sessions, and faces a year in prison.
Blasphemy laws historically began in Christian Europe as a means to prevent dissent and enforce the church’s authority. They were exported to Muslim majority nations via British imperialism. Today, just about every Muslim majority nation that has blasphemy laws can trace them back to British statute from centuries prior.
Nowadays, blasphemy cases are becoming increasingly popular as a means to persecute minorities in nations like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Indonesia. In Pakistan, notable Ahmadi Muslim Tahir Mehdi was finally released after nearly two years in prison for the alleged blasphemy of claiming he is Muslim. Meanwhile another Ahmadi Muslim — 81-year-old Shukoor Ahmad — serves an eight-year prison term for the same alleged crime of blasphemy.
In Saudi Arabia, Raif Badawi is still in prison for the alleged blasphemy of being an atheist. And this week in Indonesia, courts convicted Jakarta’s Governor Aho of blasphemy: the governor, who is a Christian, faces a two year prison sentence. Ahok’s crime? He rebuked claims by clerics that the Quran mandates Muslims to vote for a Muslim over a non-Muslim.
By convicting Governor Ahok of blasphemy, Indonesia disgraces itself, violates human rights and ignores Islamic teachings. In fact, despite addressing blasphemy dozens of times, the Quran prescribes absolutely no worldly punishment.
That notwithstanding, Governor Ahok is right that the Quran does not mandate Muslims to vote for a Muslim over a non-Muslim. Instead, Quran 4:59-60 commands Muslims: “Verily, Allah commands you to make over the trusts to those entitled to them, and that, when you judge between men, you judge with justice… O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey His Messenger and those who are in authority among you.”
Thus, the Quran commands Muslims to judge with justice, not religion. Likewise, the Quran could have added that the faithful should only obey those in authority who are Muslim – but that notable omission speaks volumes otherwise.
So, in a twist of irony, the Christian governor accused of blasphemy cited the Quran correctly, while the Muslim clerics punishing him are themselves wrong. Thus, if such clerics are that hell-bent on blasphemy laws, they should arrest themselves and set Governor Ahok free.
But they won’t, because blasphemy laws don’t exist to protect God: they exist to protect the fragile egos of corrupt clerics. Indonesia is the world’s largest Muslim nation and has long stood as a beacon of hope. But Governor Ahok’s conviction, along with the ongoing violent persecution of Indonesia’s Ahmadi Muslims, threatens this thriving democracy’s future.
The solution is embedded in a revival of true Islam based on a proven model of success and reformation of Muslims. Muslim leadership must be more accountable to protecting the rights of religious minorities in Muslim majority nations. How tragic that a Christian should be sentenced to prison for a peaceful difference of opinion, while the Prophet Mohammed instead wrote in a letter that “Christians are my citizens and I hold out against all that displeases them”.
In 2009, His Holiness the Khalifa of Islam Mirza Masroor Ahmad delivered a landmark address in Frankfurt, Germany, where he implored religious freedom, concluding: “The followers of any religion should be able to practise their religious customs freely; otherwise if the government will interfere with religion, in this civilised world, such interference will negate their claim to being secular and discharging the rights of others.”
So how did that Monty Python blasphemy scene end? Well, it ends when the judge charged with stoning the accused to death is himself stoned to death after accidentally uttering the word Jehovah…..
Baucent says
” They were exported to Muslim majority nations via British imperialism. Today, just about every Muslim majority nation that has blasphemy laws can trace them back to British statute from centuries prior.”
What a load of nonsense. Two of the countries he mentions, Saudi Arabia and Indonesia were never part of the British Empire. As he well knows, blasphemy laws in Islam, long predate British Imperialism. But Rashid is a sly devious propagandist. The Independent, should do a little independent fact checking on this guy.
mgoldberg says
In 632, there were no british blasphemy laws. There was Sharia, Qu’ran, and the development of hadith over the next two centuries sealed it all for all time, everywhere with the command to submit all others.
Santa Voorhees says
There was no Britain at all.
Frederick Middleton says
There definitely was a Britain in the 7th century AD, it was largely Christianized by then. The migration of Angles, Saxons and Jutes from Germany and Denmark had begun, which was the beginning of England.
Santa Voorhees says
I was referencing to the fact that the Great Britain as we know it today did not exist as a whole nation in Mohammed’s time.
Either way, there definitely was no british imperialism back then. On the contrary, it is the islamics that tried to conquer us first (Portugal and much of Spain were conquered, and no, there was no british imperialism yet).
Funny how we kafirs know Islam better than Mr. Rashid. The problem is that leftists will believe him since hey, he’s a muslim so he should know.
balafama says
who are his audience ? are u saying there is not one person in the crowd that figures this is all bs . interesting that his sect of ”islam” are being murdered in pakistan,indonesia etc and no such sect dare exist in saudi or any gulf country . the irony is that instead of this charlatan decrying the murder of his sect members by his fellow pakistanis, he tries to blame it on christianity meanwhile the only place where he can speak out is in the culturally christian west .
this fool has been so dhimmified and stockholmed,it’s tragic.
gravenimage says
Actually, it is the norm for Ahmadi to whitewash Islam for the Infidels–even though orthodox Muslims oppress and murder them.
Donald R Laster Jr says
The standard attempt at deflection. The blasphemy laws are rooted in Islam by Mohammad himself to prevent people who opposed his deviant and depraved theocracy from being able to talk safely. He probably also claims the Crusades were an offensive attack on Islam, while ignoring the Islamic invasion of Europe through Spain and the 400 years of slaughter in the Middle East and North Africa by Islamics.
Charli Main says
Few things enflame me more than the bullshyte about the Crusades being an unprovoked Christian attack on all those ” poor Muslims, fighting to protect their homelands”
This crap, the favourite song of Western Muslim huggers and Muslim apologists, is a complete rewrite of historical fact.
The Crusades were in fact an attempt, by Christian armies, to LIBERATE CHRISTIAN COUNTRIES, invaded and illegally occupied by Muslim scum from Saudi Arabia.
The whole of the Middle East and North Africa continue to be occupied by these MUSLIM INVADERS, who continue to repress and exterminate the RIGHTFUL INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS OF THESE LANDS.
gravenimage says
Very true, Charli.
Donald R Laster Jr says
The guy is engaging in the standard Islamic practices of lying and deception to advance Islam. Remember, that which Mohammad wrote earlier is replaced by what he wrote later.
Karen says
Yup, he’s a liar alright.
John Forbes says
This is more LYING by the followers of this IDEOLOGY & yet another good reason to shut down this MULTICULTURALISM where cultures are allowed to set up in SEPARATION from the HOST nations.
This is GEORGE SOROS again & all must wonder just how much longer the WEST is going to tolerate this GUY ????
Santa Voorhees says
Quran 48:29
Muhammad is the messenger of Allah and those who are with him are harsh against unbelievers and compassionate among themselves.
And guess what? It was written when Britain was not even a thing.
He is in full denial indeed.
Monty says
Most Muslims don’t accept the Ahmadi as real Muslims. We have the insanity in Australia where this admittedly less violent sect is supposed to represent true Islam, according to many in the government. It’s
rather like saying you don’t have a problem because you only have lung cancer, the rest of your organs are fine. Muslims still reckon Mohamed to be the ideal man, no matter how they dress it up and attempt to explain it away. Until (i.e. never) they repudiate Mohamed, Islam has zero credibility with anyone who has any sense. Tragically, there are nowhere near enough sensible people around.
gravenimage says
And even though Ahmadis don’t believe in violent Jihad, they *do* believe in brutal Shari’ah law. So, if it were, say, voted in, they are fine with oppressing unbelievers, cutting off the limbs of petty thieves, and stoning rape victims to death.
Halal Bacon says
and I blame muslims for falling on my bullets
entropyrider says
“In the United States this week, a woman was convicted of laughing at Attorney General Sessions, and faces a year in prison.”
A simple google search will reveal that this is a lie. Even the Huffington Post acknowledges that this is not why she was convicted.
gravenimage says
Yes. There are miscarriages of justice in the West at times, but this claim is just ludicrous.
We laugh at officials here all the time.
manas says
so what Muslims all over the world are doing is,,,that they are following Christianity according to this muddle head,,,Another blasphemy….Blasphemy to counter the Blasphemy hysteria of Muslims
Karen says
“Today, just about every Muslim majority nation that has blasphemy laws can trace them back to British statute from centuries prior.”
What a deceptively clever writer Mr. Rashid is. While offering not one valid example of his central premise, he massages the readers perception by bookending his article with comical images from Monty Python, as if they were reality. The two real examples given completely mismatch his premise; 1) The Ireland blasphemy law was enacted in 2009, not during the British Empire, and 2) the woman (from Code Pink) that Rashid falsely implies was convicted of “laughing at Sessions” was in fact convicted of disorderly conduct during his confirmation hearing, a situation where unrestricted ‘shouting down’, by the likes of Code Pink is decidedly unjust.
Shmooviyet says
Thank you for explaining the truth behind the ridiculous “year in prison for laughing at Sessions” claim, for those of us unaware of her conviction.
Sounds like a leftist fantasy: laugh at someone, get arrested- if one laughed at a member of a protected group- get convicted. Sentencing also determined by the race, sex, ideology etc. of the offended, and the amount of ‘pain’ inflicted.
Karen says
And to be very clear, and fair to the woman referenced, she was arrested when she burst into laughter over statements made in Sessions’ favor. While not literally engaged in shouting down the speaker (a CODEPINK tactic), the police considered her disruptive enough to arrest and forcibly remove from the chamber.
http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/05/03/code-pink-activists-arrested-jeff-sessions-confirmation-hearing-protest
Karen says
Christine Williams wrote this similarly themed article back on May 9th: “Thirteen countries have death penalty for apostasy — all Muslim”.
I wonder how Mr. Rashid might pin this on Christianity and the British Empire.
Women’s rights, abuse of religious minorities, apostasy, blasphemy, modern day slavery; everywhere modern Muslims are confronted with elements of Sharia law in conflict with a vision of a just and peaceful future among themselves and non-Muslims. And yet, how does one discard divine law? What side will freedom-loving, educated, compassionate, democratic Muslims choose? This may become the most important question facing the West.
Danforth says
Karen raises profound questions which get to the heart of the matter. However, I would ask one more:
At some point in the (near?) future when push comes to shove and all the chips are on the table, will there be such a person as a “freedom-loving, educated, compassionate, democratic Muslim”? If they have not by now renounced their association with Islam, why would they when their brothers are at the gates?
Certainly there are important questions facing the West, but it seems to me there are too few asking these questions (present company excluded).
Why is it that the West cannot grasp the basic truth that Islam fails all tests of its false ideology? Are we in this forum simply “preaching to the choir”? RS takes this truth to the wider world and gets shouted down? Exactly who drives the ‘progressive left bus’ anyway?
Charli Main says
The Kumbya Muslim is a fantasy of people living in La La land.
People who do not ascribe to or practice the tenets of Islam ARE NOT MUSLIMS.
Denny Lee Penticoff says
I’m impressed with the knowledge of the writers in this chain. Kudos to all. Charli Main’s conclusion at 3:59 A.M. summarizes my serious study of Islam since 1992.
For example, Zuhdi Jasser, has led a Muslim reformation group since 911, American Islamic Forum for Democracy, and makes frequent appearances in the MSM. His reform movement has attracted less than one hundred Muslims. Not one MSM outlet mentions this glaring fact. Few Muslims consider Jasser a Muslim in the same vein that few consider Ahmadis true Muslims.
Furthermore, when push comes to shove, the militant Muslims will run roughshod over the less militant, complacent, or apathetic Muslims. The truth of this statement can be seen anywhere in the world. The majority will side with the militants and fulfill what some Imams consider the sixth pillar of faith, jihad, to some extent in accord with the Quranic duty. A similar phenomena occurs with dedicated totalitarians like Islamists when they seek or obtain power as Nazis or Communists. Opponents are slaughtered or marginalized.
This less militant group is huge in the secular West. Polls indicate that 28% of the Muslims in the USA believe violent jihad is justifiable to advance Islam. In the UK, the number was 52% where Muslims have a larger population. Although perhaps a mild embellishment, Muslims who practice Sharia faithfully, including attire, tend to support violent jihad. The danger to a democratic society is self-evident.
Barry says
Yet another moron with his head up his ass. When will the intelligent, educated world laugh these clowns off the world stage and back to the 6th century and Mo’s Meccan cave where they belong.
Jack Diamond says
It was Muhammad, not a British Imperialist, who said: “whoever curses a prophet, kill him.”
The actual orthodox position of Islam on the matter of blasphemy is quite clear (just as it is regarding the treatment of Christian dhimmis or in the matter of whether non-Muslims should rule over Muslims,
all in marked contradiction to what the Ahmadi is insisting)::
“The Qur’an says that Allah سبحانه و تعالى curses the one who harms the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم in this world and He connected harm of Himself to harm of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. There is no dispute that anyone who curses Allah is killed and that his curse demands that he be categorised as an unbeliever. The judgement of the unbeliever is that he is killed.
Allah سبحانه و تعالى says, “Those who harm Allah and His Messenger, Allah has cursed them in this world and in the Next, and has prepared for them a humiliating punishment.” (33:57). He said something similar about those who kill the believers. Part of the curse on them in this world is that they are killed. Allah says, “Cursed they will be. Wherever they are found, they are seized and all slain.” (33: 61) He mentions the punishment of those who fight, “That is humiliation in this world for them.” (5:45) “Killing” (qatl) can have the meaning of “curse”.[6] Allah says, “May the conjecturers be killed!” (51:11) and “May Allah fight them! How they are perverted!” (9:30) i.e. may Allah curse them.
Abu Bakr ibn al-Mundhir رحمه الله said that the bulk of the people of knowledge agree that whoever curses the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم is killed. These include Malik ibn Anas رحمه الله, al-Layth رحمه الله, Ahmad ibn Hanbal رحمه الله and Ishaq ibn Rahawayh رحمه الله, and it is the position of the Shafi’i school. Qadi Abu’l-Fadl رحمه الله said that it is based on the statement of Abu Bakr as-Siddiq. His repentance is not accepted. Something similar was stated by Abu Hanifa رحمه الله and his people, ath-Thawri رحمه الله and the people of Kufa and al-Awza’i رحمه الله about the Muslims. However, they said that it constitutes apostasy.
Ibn al-Qasim رحمه الله reports from Malik رحمه الله in the book of Ibn Sahnun, the Mabsut, and the ‘Utibiyya and Ibn Mutarrif relates the same from Malik in the book of Ibn Habib, “Any Muslim who curses the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم is killed without being asked to repent.”
Ibn al-Qasim رحمه الله said in the ‘Utibiyya, “Anyone who curses him, reviles him, finds fault with him or disparages him is killed. The community say that he should be killed just like the dualist. Allah made it obligatory to respect the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and be dutiful to him.”
The scholars are unanimously agreed that a Muslim who insults the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) becomes a kaafir and an apostate who is to be executed. This consensus was narrated by more than one of the scholars, such as Imaam Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh, Ibn al-Mundhir, al-Qaadi ‘Iyaad, al-Khattaabi and others. Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 2/13-16
With regard to the Sunnah, Abu Dawood (4362) narrated from ‘Ali that a Jewish woman used to insult the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and say bad things about him, so a man strangled her until she died, and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) ruled that no blood money was due in this case.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said in al-Saarim al-Maslool (1/162): This hadeeth is jayyid, and there is a corroborating report in the hadeeth of Ibn ‘Abbaas which we will quote below.
This hadeeth clearly indicates that it was permissible to kill that woman because she used to insult the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).
Allah says, “Those who harm Allah and His Messenger, Allah has cursed them in this world and the Next World. He has prepared a humiliating punishment for them,” (33:57) and “Those who harm the Messenger of Allah have a painful punishment,” (9:61) and “It is not for you to hurt the Messenger of Allah and you should not ever marry his wives after him. That is something terrible with Allah.” (33:53)
Know that all who curse Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, or blame him or attribute imperfection to him in his person, his lineage, his deen or any of his qualities, or alludes to that or its like by any means whatsoever, whether in the form of a curse or contempt or belittling him or detracting from him or finding fault with him or maligning him, the judgement regarding such a person is the same as the judgement against anyone who curses him. He is killed as we shall make clear.This judgement extends to anything which amounts to a curse or disparagement. We have no hesitation concerning this matter, be it a clear statement or allusion. ”
-Ruling on One Who Insults the Prophet
http://www.muftisays.com/blog/Seifeddine-M/3016_17-09-2012/ruling-on-one-who-insults-the-prophet-peace-and-blessings-be-upon-him.html
A more apt Monty Python reference to Rashid’s whitewash might be, “that’s what I call a dead parrot.”
Or maybe the one about Hitler (er, Hilter) and his henchmen pretending (not too well) to be Englishmen and then Mr. Hilter standing for office (war is deception):
https://youtu.be/vlmGknvr_Pg
Karen says
Very clear, very detailed, very straightforward. I wish every person potentially deceived by Rashid’s deflections could read your post.
gravenimage says
Fine post, Jack. Thanks.
Nonie Darwish says
There are no moderate sects in Islam!
gravenimage says
Ms. Darwish, great to see you posting here.
You are a great heroine of mine.
Stan Lee says
The official Muslim position concerning “blasphemy” is as far-fetched and distorted as the following:
The Mayor of Jakarta, Indonesia, was arrested, tried, and sentenced to two years in prison for the crime of “Blasphemy”, since though he was elected by enough votes to become Mayor and serve all of the people with honesty, fairness, and proper leadership,of Jakarta’s citizens, Islam uncovered the fact that the Mayor is a Christian, therefore according to Islam, the man was guilty of Blasphemy by winning the office of Mayor. Only a Muslim would have been eligible for that post of Mayor, and only by Islam would the crime of “blasphemy” contradict the election.
On the other hand, far from Indonesia in specifically London, England, the Muslim Mayor of London, England, UK, is heading an administration consisting of British citizens of a diverse listing of religions and politics quite successfully, obviously because to accuse this man of “blasphemy” in a dominantly Christian and secular population, would be ridiculous to accuse the man as done in Indonesia to its jailed and punished Christian Mayor, for a reason that London’s Mayor is a Muslim.
The difference here is that the British people have graduated into the 21st century, whereas Islam still oppresses based on its laws from 1400 years ago. In this case, those archaic, severe, laws need to be reviewed and corrected if Islam really wants to believe itself as “The religion of peace.”
At present, Islam cannot possibly earn the title, to believe that would be acute hypocrisy.
gravenimage says
He actually attempted to praise Islam, by saying that Muslims don’t really follow the edict that they cannot take non-Muslims as friends.
Of course, if it hadn’t been that, it probably would have been some other trumped-up charge.
ibrahim itace muhammed says
It is a lie say that blasphemy laws are at variance with the Quran.It is explicitly stated in number of hadiths that he whp insults Allah ,prophet muhammad and other prophets including true jesus(not that myth mithraist jesus),if tried and found guilty,shall be put to death.All sunni and shia schools agreed on that.it is only heretic Ahmadiyya sect as agent of colonialists has dissenting view on that.what freedom of speech are expressing by insults ,which are defamatory.There is a difference between freedom to make a fair comment and insult on a religion.in islam ,if you are competent you have right to hold a dissent view on a particular issue.such right is what led to intellectual activities during islamic golden age.It was khawarajites with perverted view on islam who attempted to curtail this freedom to hold dissenting view;but they were rejected by muslims and the sect vanished.Abdul wahhab ,a jew sponsored by christian west,revived this obnoxious khawarijite view that whoever differ with him is a kafir and shall be put to death by beheading exactly like what isis ,which originated from wahhabism, is now doing.
Jack Diamond says
You just said anyone who insults the religion of Islam should be put to death. Thank you for your honesty, and fuck you.
gravenimage says
+1
gravenimage says
Appalling apologist for Muslim savagery ibrahim itace muhammed wrote:
It is a lie say that blasphemy laws are at variance with the Quran.It (sic) is explicitly stated in number of hadiths(sic) that he whp (sic) insults Allah ,prophet (sic) muhammad (sic) and other prophets including true jesus(not (sic) that myth mithraist (sic) jesus),if (sic) tried and found guilty,shall (sic) be put to death.
……………………………….
And the vicious ibrahim itace muhammed confirms how barbaric Islam is. *Ugh*.
More:
All sunni (sic) and shia (sic) schools agreed on that.it (sic) is only heretic Ahmadiyya sect as agent of colonialists has dissenting view on that.what (sic) freedom of speech are expressing by insults ,which (sic) are defamatory.There (sic) is a difference between freedom to make a fair comment and insult on a religion.
……………………………….
“A religion”–which, of course, means Islam alone. And Infidels may not even note how violent Islam is without it being considered “blasphemy”.
And one of the main reasons orthodox Muslims oppress and murder Ahmadiyya is because they reject violent Jihad.
And notice that he, just like Qasim Rashid, blame the West.
More:
in islam (sic),if (sic) you are competent you have right to hold a dissent view on a particular issue.such (sic) right is what led to intellectual activities during islamic (sic) golden age.
……………………………….
What a load of tripe. The Islamic “Golden Age” were the death throes of societies conquered by Islam–the last vestiges of creativity and intellectual activity before the dead hand of Islam stamped them out entirely.
Also, note that the “competence” issue makes no sense in this context at all. Instead, this is used–theoretically, at least–as a yardstick for deciding who is to be murdered under “blasphemy” laws.
More:
It was khawarajites (sic)with perverted view on islam (sic) who attempted to curtail this freedom to hold dissenting view;but (sic) they were rejected by muslims (sic) and the sect vanished.
……………………………….
Uh…right. And yet, how can anyone hold dissenting views when, as ibrahim itace muhammed himself confirms, you can be executed for expressing them?
More:
Abdul wahhab (sic) ,a jew (sic) sponsored by christian (sic) west,revived (sic) this obnoxious khawarijite (sic) view that whoever differ with him is a kafir (sic) and shall be put to death by beheading exactly like what isis (sic),which originated from wahhabism (sic), is now doing.
……………………………….
ibrahim itace muhammed has made this ludicrous claim before–that the founder of the Wahhabis was actually a Jew egged on by the Christian West. Never mind that absurdity–that Jews are not named Abdul Wahhab, that the West had absolutely no presence in Saudi Arabia or any part of Dar-al-Islam in the 18th century, and that Wahhabism is orthodox Islam.
The grimly hilarious thing is that first muhammed rips Qasim Rashid for daring to imply that murdering people on “blasphemy” charges is un-Islamic and is actually a Western thing, and then he essentially does the same thing vis-a-vis orthodox Islam.
Really, he is such a ham-fisted Taqiyya artist that he cannot even keep his bs straight.
No surprise, though–given how Islam rejects reason and honesty.
Dexter L. Wilson says
I have been Baptized in the Holy Spirit. I began listening to that still small voice over 40 years ago. I had to learn how to differentiate between my own spirit and the voice of the Holy Spirit. The Koran talks about how the prophet saw his son’s wife,and then determined that Allah told him he could have his son’s wife. Now tell me to whom he was really listening? I know that many times in the past I would listen to my own spirit and realize that it was not the Holy Spirit and yet the Koran allows the prophet get away with what i have to believe he was listening to his own spirit. My God says behold I change not, and that He is the same yesterday, today and forever. We read in the Bible sons of Bible characters having relations with their fathers’ wives and having committed capital punishment crimes. I cannot be a part of a religion that allows it’s prophets to say something their God obviously did not say.
Karen says
“Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab came from the region of Najd who was born in 1114 AH in one of the cities of Najd named as ”’Ayniyyah”. His father, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Wahhab, was a scholar {‘alim} and the judge {qadi} of that region. As such, the creed of Shaykh Muhammad had been ascribed to his father. After learning the basics of religion from his father, Shaykh Muhammad went to Medina and learned from the ‘ulama’ of that region.”
Source: https://www.al-islam.org/new-analysis-wahhabi-doctrines-muhammad-husayn-ibrahimi/life-account-shaykh-ibn-abd-al-wahhab-and
Nope, he wasn’t a Jew, sponsored by the Christian West, or a Christian, sponsored by a Jew in the media. The Illuminati didn’t invent the sect. Wahhab was an Arab, from Arabia, with an Arab, Islamic father. It appears you were, uh, shall we say….exaggerating?
One other point; what constitutes a “fair comment”? And who makes that determination? Your local Sharia court? Actually, in many parts of the world, blasphemy laws seem hardly necessary. One need only whisper the charge, and thousands of enraged nuts appear in the streets ready to do some Imam’s secret pleasure – to tear the accused to pieces. The examples in Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh are too numerous to mention, but the “Teddy Bear Blasphemy” case of Sudan is perhaps the most notorious, and instructive.
Karen says
Sorry, this was a reply to Ibrahim Itace Muhammad, above.
gravenimage says
Yes–he was an orthodox Muslim.
somehistory says
In effect, he is saying that these “laws” are wrong…because he is placing the blame for people being killed on Christianity. One does not give credit for something of which they approve and think is correct in the manner in which he is pointing his ugly, lying finger. (for every finger he points, four point back at him from his own hand).
He approves of the laws and the stoning, but he knows that the majority of the world of mankind disapproves of blasphemy laws and the execution of punishment for those charged with a crime of speech.
This is the pattern that psychopaths follow…a life pattern…they attempt to place blame for whatever wrong might be charged to them without admitting that they have committed any wrong. They approve of the wrong actions, but when others voice disapproval, attempt at deflection by saying someone else is to blame.
He is a psychopath and by that, he is also a liar. And what is more, he knows it.
One of the things Jehovah does “hate” is “a lying tongue.” “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the Living God.”
This fool and son of satan will find out the truth of those Bible statements.
C T says
What utter nonsense. Anyone who knows Christian and Islamic doctrine knows that Islam regularly blasphemes against the Christian image of Jesus as God incarnate. Yet no one’s sending out nationwide texts warning Muslims to stop saying that Jesus was just a prophet or face governmental punishment.
gravenimage says
Muslim spokesman blames Christianity for Islamic blasphemy laws
…………………..
The idea that blasphemy laws were introduced to the Muslim world by British imperialism is, of course, ludicrous.
Can Rashid explain why blasphemy laws exist all over Dar-al-Islam–including places that were never under Western colonial rule–yet were done away with long since in the West? Of course not…
The fact it that blasphemy laws date back to the “Prophet” himself.
mortimer says
The Supreme Court of India on Monday 3 March 2014, dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) by Advocate M L Sharma seeking intervention by the court in directing the Election Commission to curb hate speeches. Dismissing the plea, the Apex court said that it could not curb the fundamental right of the people to express themselves.
“We cannot curtail fundamental rights of people. It is a precious right guaranteed by Constitution,” a bench headed by Justice RM Lodha said, adding “we are a mature democracy and it is for the public to decide. We are 1280 million people and there would be 1280 million views. One is free not to accept the view of others”. Also the court said that it is a matter of perception, and a statement objectionable to a person might be normal to another person.
– Wikipedia
-The Irish Law Reform Commission’s 1991 Report opined that “there is no place for the offence of blasphemous libel in a society which respects freedom of speech.”
It refused to allow the prosecution, stating “in the absence of any legislative definition of the constitutional offence of blasphemy, it is impossible to say of what the offence of blasphemy consists … In the absence of legislation and in the present uncertain state of the law the Court could not see its way to authorising the institution of a criminal prosecution”.
Sarah says
Honestly, he is just vomiting the same lies and deceit as every other Muslim. Not a single one is worth listening to while they spew hatred and do their best to obsfucate on the reality of Islam.
All day every day – all we ever hear from Muslims is one of two themes, like a broken record:
1. Islam is the religion of peace. Muslims want to live in harmony with everyone else. A ‘real’ Muslim loves peace! You’re an Islamaphobe for not agreeing that we are peaceful. You deserve to be convicted of a hate crime if you don’t love and support Islam like we do.
2. Death to all who are not Muslims! Die in the name of Allah you worthless ape’s and pig’s. Islam will take over and the whole world will submit to it, (insert a lot of ullulating at this point, whether by speaking Arabic or just plain babbling nonsense) PEACE BE UPON HIM. *Just not peace be upon you or you or you or you.
Are there really that many cowards in the West who simply cannot face up to the truth, right in front of their faces? If so we truly are surrounded at every turn, by Quislings.
Rashid and the total inanities he spews forth are worth about as much as the rubbish I carted out to the bin a couple of hours earlier. People need to wake up to this reality. Pulling an Ostrich move by just sticking their head’s in the sand isn’t going to save them when some mouth-frothing neck-beard comes sailing over the horizon with a kitchen knife in one hand and their eyes focused on our neck’s.
Valkyrie Ziege says
; ”Diversity” = Tolerance of persecution for ”thought crimes” against an invisible friend in the sky that grants magical wishes via prayer and issues ”instructions” to kill anyone who disagrees with your invisible friend in the sky.
Politicianphobia says
Sarah, I also am tired of the “Speak no evil, see no evil, hear no evil” Muslim BS. It is time for all Muslims to go to the Middle East and stay. Peace will NEVER be upon them.
Ciudadano says
Wow, every day I learn something new about disgusting islamic practices like “thighing”. It seems molestation of little children is considered “islamic” thanks to Muhamed example, again.
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071221232108AAppsxu
Ciudadano says
Also, Endogamy, marriage between first cousings, is also allowed in Islam (halal) thanks to Muhamed example.
https://pjmedia.com/blog/the-problem-of-inbreeding-in-islam/
Lydia says
So in other words, if there is no dissent, they don’t have to try and stamp it out, so they blame the dissent.
Since we are Christians, they have to kill us according to their ‘laws,’ and if we were not, they would not ‘have to’ come after us with all their laws and swords. Hmmm. The religion of ‘peace’ and ‘tolerance’ at work again, eh?
I will gladly break every single one of their laws since I speak out against Islam all over the landscape. All those signs and tweets and such don’t deter me one inch. I also see how the enemy hates freedom of speech more and more when you tell the truth. Anything but the truth is ‘okay’ with them!
Aussie Infidel says
The Khalifa of Islam Mirza Masroor Ahmad remarked, “The followers of any religion should be able to practise their religious customs freely; otherwise if the government will interfere with religion, in this civilised world, such interference will negate their claim to being secular and discharging the rights of others.”
I hope the Khalifa is not suggesting that the Islamic world is civilised? He should have added, ‘unless that religion interferes with the rights of others’ – which Islam clearly does. That’s not religious freedom, that’s religious tyranny! What other religion commands its followers to “kill the polytheists (Pagans & Christians) wherever you find them”? (Q9:5); and “be harsh upon them”? (Q9:73). Why should we tolerate a religion which will not tolerate us?
Islam is a criminal ideology which has no place in a civilized society. Anyone who thinks otherwise, is simply an apologist for the ‘religion of peace’.
Frank Verderber says
Wait a minute; you may have missed the opportunity to hold some of Rashid’s statement worthwhile! He did initially blame the Blasphemy Laws of British Imperialism. Even though it isn’t true, we have Muslim spokesman blaming the Brits for the trouble in the world. I say that’s a go for me… After all, it’s the Brits that keep the up the cultural aspect that T. E. Lawrence looked just fine in Arabian dress, and striding a white Arabian stallion. I say print this one up in bold letters and sent it to the Guardian, the Times of London, the BBC, 10 Downing Street and Chatham House!