I am a Canadian ex-Muslim male; I converted to Islam and stayed in the religion for approximately four years, before leaving it due to disbelief and moral disgust. Now I live every day with Islam’s formal and informal death penalty for apostasy, hoping that my former Muslim friends don’t recognize me on the street.
In this article, I critique the efforts of a Muslim activist in Canada and self-proclaimed counter terror expert named Mubin Shaikh. Mubin first achieved public notoriety in Canada in 2006 for helping law enforcement officials prevent a jihad attack hatched by a group of Canadian Muslims known as the “Toronto 18.” The Toronto 18 had the goal of beheading the then-Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, as well as blowing up certain buildings in the cities of Toronto and Ottawa, Canada.
Mubin has since gone on to become a media commentator, appearing on ABC, NBC, CBC, and CNN, among others. Mubin has also been active in consulting with and training various law enforcement officials and military groups. Among other things, Mubin is currently busy on Twitter and with documentary film making, attempting to absolve the teachings of canonical Islam (the Quran, hadiths and Muhammad’s sira) from being in any way responsible for the Islamic terrorism and Islam-related social and societal problems we see occurring throughout the world today.
In his recent Twitter posts and other public comments, Mubin states that he is in favour of killing ISIS members on the battlefield, claiming that they are evil “misunderstanders” of Islam, giving the good religion of Islam a bad name. Speaking as an ex-Muslim, I would say that ISIS and Al-Qaeda members are devout, fully obedient Muslims, unwilling to overlook or discount the many self-evidently cruel and highly violent commands contained within Islam’s above mentioned canonical texts.
Strategically speaking, it doubtlessly benefits the Muslim Ummah (the community of Muslim believers — among whom Mubin counts himself), which continually strives for the growth of Islam, to have the most bloodthirsty jihadis among them killed off, as they would prove to be unstable and ineffective persons should larger hostilities break out between the Muslim and non-Muslim community. Mubin doubtlessly knows this, therefore his stance in favour of killing ISIS members is not necessarily praiseworthy and should be seen in the light of what has been mentioned above.
In addition to favouring the killing of ISIS members on the battlefield, Mubin has stated that ISIS members returning to countries such as Canada and the USA, etc., who fail to be disabused of their jihadist inclinations should be incarcerated in high security prisons. One of the severely important challenges faced when attempting to “deprogram” jihadists is that one has to try to get them to except a totally whitewashed version of Islam — an Islam devoid of the many harmful and violent texts and teachings contained within mainstream orthodox Islamic theology that jihadists are well aware exist, and are expected as devout and obedient Muslims to enact in the real world. Another equally difficult challenge when attempting to “deprogram” fully obedient Muslims is that those Muslims can simply lie to law enforcement officials, claiming that they disavow jihad activity in order to gain their freedom, all the while continuing to conceal their steadfast commitment to Islam and jihad.
Mubin Shaikh attempts to deny that Islamic texts are the main motivating factor involved in jihad terrorism, while placing all of the blame for Islamic terrorism on Muslim “misunderstanders” of Islam and on various grievances, as well as on what Mubin is now commonly calling “causation.” He is attempting to prevent a needed critical examination of Islamic theology, which is in effect misleading law enforcement officials to a considerable extent, and leaving them woefully unprepared to understand the threat of Islamic terrorism and effectively defeat it.
If and when such a critical examination were to occur, Mubin and his Islam apologist cohorts are sure to sling false charges of “Islamophobia” and possibly demand that charges of “ hate speech” be brought against those who perform this critical examination. This is part of the current playbook of Islamic activists. Furthermore, if the politically correct kid gloves were taken off and the many harms and dangers of Islam were to be revealed, Mubin and numerous other Muslim apologists would surely be waiting in the wings to spin all manner of Islamic Taqiyya in hopes of confusing and frustrating non-Muslims, and in turn deflecting attention away from the many falsehoods and injustices of Islamic theology proper.
What initially made me want to write this article was that I had noticed that Mubin was attempting to smear many of the Western world’s great anti-jihadists and folks who may happen to be critical of Islam (not a crime in the non-Islamic world, as of yet). People such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller, Ezra Levant and Tommy Robinson. By labeling these folks as bigots, racists, and Muslim haters, when they are in reality no such thing, Mubin and his ilk have effectively put a target on the backs of these people. And as an added bonus, Mubin is furthering his efforts of preventing the many negative aspects of Islamic theology from becoming known to the wider public and law enforcement officials. How curious and convenient for him!
The fact that “Undercover Jihadi” Mubin Shaikh has still not renounced Islam is big red flag for me. There is a certain line of differentiation that gets crossed in this crucially important matter, and Mubin has crossed way beyond that line. He knows very well the hideously dark contents contained within the Quran and Muhammad the prophet of Islam’s Sunnah, and yet he is trying his best to prevent others from discovering them, and/or to convince others to disregard the vital role they play in Islamic jihad terrorism.
The Quran repeats over and over again that its verses are clear and are to be considered as instructions for Muslim believers to follow. The meaning and mandates of the Quranic passages below cannot be easily “misinterpreted or taken out context,” as Muslim apologists would have people believe. The Islamorealist scholars at TheReligionofPeace.com have thoroughly refuted the false claims that Islam does not teach offensive warfare. It also permits sex slavery, wife beating, and the killing of apostates, etc. Feel the love and attempt to overlook the hatred and violence contained within the Quranic passages and Muhammad’s sayings and doings below, if you so choose.
Quran 3:138: This Quran is a clear statement to (all) the people and a guidance and instruction for those conscious of Allah.
Quran 6:114: (Say), “Then is it other than Allah I should seek as judge while it is He who has revealed to you the Book (the Quran) explained in detail?” And those to whom We (previously) gave the Scripture know that it is sent down from your Lord in truth, so never be among the doubters.
Quran 16:89: …And we have sent down to you the Book as clarification for all things and as guidance and mercy and good tidings for the Muslims.
Quran 3:28: Let not the believers take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may guard yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (to remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah.
Quran 9:23: O you who have believed, do not take your fathers or your brothers as allies if they have preferred disbelief over belief. And whoever does so among you – then it is they who are the wrongdoers.
Quran 9:29: Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given as believe neither in Allah nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what Allah and His Apostle have forbidden, and who do not embrace the true Faith, until they pay the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.
Quran 9:123: O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him).
Quran 47:4: When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly. Then grant them their freedom or take ransom from them, until war shall lay down her burdens. Thus shall you do. Had God willed, He could Himself have punished them; (but He has ordained it thus) that He might test you, the one by the other.
The Quran states that all those who deny Muhammad’s claims are the enemies of God and Man and that “unbelievers are the vilest of all creatures” (Quran 98:6) and that the “believers are the best of people” (Quran 3:112).
Hadith: Sahih Bukhari, Vol.4 Book 52, No. 196:
Narrated Abu Huraira: “ Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,’ and whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,’ his life and property will be be saved by me except for Islamic law, and his account will be with Allah, (either to punish him or to forgive him)”
Hadith, Sahih Muslim 4294:
“When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to 3 courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also except 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 payment of the Jizyah (the Islamic tax). If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them.” – Muhammad
Quran 33:21: There is a good example in Allah’s apostle for those of you who look to Allah and the Last Day and remember Allah always.
Here is a recent statement from a group of Bangladeshi apostates living in the UK explaining the reasons why they have abandoned Islam:
One who claims to be a messenger of God is expected to live a saintly life. He must not be given to lust, he must not be a sexual pervert, and he must not be a rapist, a highway robber, a war criminal, a mass murderer or an assassin. One who claims to be a messenger of God must have a superior character. He must stand above the vices of the people of his time. Yet Muhammad’s life is that of a gangster godfather. He raided merchant caravans, looted innocent people, massacred entire male populations and enslaved the women and children. He raped the women captured in war after killing their husbands and told his followers that it is okay to have sex with their captives (Qur’an 33:50). He assassinated those who criticized him and executed them when he came to power and became de facto despot of Arabia. Muhammad was bereft of human compassion. He was an obsessed man with his dreams of grandiosity and could not forgive those who stood in his way…
The statement continues,
Muhammad was a narcissist, like Hitler, Saddam or Stalin. He was astute and knew how to manipulate people, but his emotional intelligence was less evolved than that of a 6-year-old child. He simply could not feel the pain of others. He brutally massacred thousands of innocent people and pillaged their wealth. His ambitions were big and as a narcissist he honestly believed he is entitled to do as he pleased and commit all sorts of crimes and his evil deeds are justified.
RichardL says
Mubin Shaiykh gets regularly invited to speak at various governmental institutions. My wife, a CT scholar, has had to endure him three times. Virtually all her colleagues find Mubin an academic non-entity (he is doing a PhD), think he is simply selling himself as an ex-jihadi, and strongly dislike him on a personal level (he never pays for his round of beers, but drinks like a fish). He gets invited because he is the token allahist who is supposed to connect with the Muslim students. He does not even do that.
Marina says
He drinks beer? And he calls himself a good Muslim!
RichardL says
It’s a business for him: I am a former jihadi and can explain true islam. There are couple of guys on the circuit but he simply is the least likable and believable.
He drinks beer, yeah. At least if it is free. 😉
R Russell says
When you find out the meanings of the following words you will see the deception.
Taqiyya, Tawriya, Kitman and Muruna
PATRICIA FRANCES KOENIG says
The secret societies like the Rockefellers and Rothschilds and George Soros’ Open Society (GLOBALISTS) promote and protect Islam (legally and in the media) in order to destroy Christianity, undermine society, and dominate the world.
Garfield says
People need to research this more. Liberals and communists have the same goals as islam- disruption and destruction of free western society. It is no surprise they work together. Why I don’t know. Unless you accept that some people are bloodthirsty killers, power mad and insane.
ada says
Patricia! you are anti-Semitic and barbaric like the Nazis were!!!! The Jews are so few in the world and can never dominate! on the contrary, they bring culture, science and only good to the world (when people like you and others are not trying to kill them)! Jews, mostly are fighting the backward Islam as Islam’s goal is to kill all of them…..
mortimer says
Agree with Saleem Smith that Mubin Shaikh is “CURIOUS”.
It is truly IMPOSSIBLE to maintain as Mubin Shaikh does, that JIHAD HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ISLAM. Mubin Shaikh is inventing his own modernized version of Islam … we can only try to understand why. Has the government hired him to deceive Muslims?
Islam’s medieval writers and modern Islamic university teachers CLEARLY UNDERSTAND JIHAD AS RELIGIOUS WARFARE:
– The famous medieval Islamic philosopher Ibn Khaldun wrote: “The Islamic state, whose principal function was to put God’s law into practice, sought to establish Islam as the dominant reigning ideology over the entire world. … The jihad was therefore employed as an instrument for both the universalization of religion and the establishment of an imperial world state … In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the [Muslim] mission and [the obligation to] convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force… The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense… Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations. .”
– Imran Ahsan Khan Nyazee, Assistant Professor on the Faculty of Shari’ah and Law of the International Islamic University in Islamabad. In his 1994 book The Methodology of Ijtihad, he quotes the twelfth century Maliki jurist Ibn Rushd: “Muslim jurists agreed that the purpose of fighting with the People of the Book … is one of two things: it is either their conversion to Islam or the payment of jizyah.”
Nyazee concludes: “This leaves no doubt that the primary goal of the Muslim community, in the eyes of its jurists, is to spread the word of Allah through jihad, and the option of poll-tax [jizya] is to be exercised only after subjugation [of non-Muslims].”
–
Infidel says
We have our share of Mubins in India… the pretenders and stealth Jehaadists. The Indian movie industry Bollywood is a viper’s nest of Trojan Mubins…. Shameless creatures.. misuse the tolerance and freedom of India’s Hindu majority society and always in the game of undermining it… Among the non-Western non-Muslim powers, India and Israel are one of the worst sufferers of non-stop Islamic torment and horrors. If either one of them fall to Islam, it is not a good sign for the Greater West. Both India and Israel are unfinished business for Islam.
Lebel says
“The fact that “Undercover Jihadi” Mubin Shaikh has still not renounced Islam is big red flag for me.”
Of course, the only Muslim acceptable for you and your ilk is an ex-Muslim and that is why he is absolutely right to call you and yours, bigots and anti-Muslim. This is how the groundwork for genocide is laid. In short, you disgust me.
“Strategically speaking, it doubtlessly benefits the Muslim Ummah (the community of Muslim believers — among whom Mubin counts himself), which continually strives for the growth of Islam, to have the most bloodthirsty jihadis among them killed off”
Same idea, you are setting up a system where anything a Muslim says on a subject confirms your pre-established conclusion. Robert Spencer does the same thing, or rather he gets others to do it for him.
Example:
Saleem : “Hey random (evil) Muslim guy, what should we do with ISIS”
Random Muslim: “They should be imprisoned”
Saleem: “aha! you want them to conduct Dawa in prison and then go out and commit more atrocities.”
Random Muslim 2: “Kill them all”
Saleem: “Aha! you want them to be killed so infidels will not know how evil Islam is”
Random Muslim 3: “Kill them all and kill me also because I am basically like them according to you”
Saleem: “Taqqiya! through your death you are trying to soften infidel hearts”
Through bigots like you, Robert Spencer is setting up an ideology where the only good Muslim is an ex-Muslim and where anything a Muslim says or does is evil.
RichardL says
The von Lebels are a nice aristocratic family. I think your name should be libel.
Hugh has a good heart and believes that Shaykh deep down wants to atone. I know him and can assure you that he simply sells himself. He complained over a beer or five that his wife wants to be veiled. He does not socialise with the Muslims but with FBI guys when he is invited to give his talk (always the same). It’s a business.
Be more careful who you attack and who you defend, otherwise you might lose readers of your posts like me.
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
Your arguments are base solely on an ‘argumentum ad hominem.’ You throw the word “bigot” around quite freely and use it in a personal attack on the author and the publisher of this site.
Let’s look at this word “bigot” because my experience is that the people who use it, or rather abuse it, actually don’t know what it means.
big·ot (ˈbiɡət/) noun: bigot; plural noun: bigots
a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.
(Note that most who throw this word around think it to be synonym for “racist” but it isn’t.)
Might I add a side note that Mohammadism, by the numerous instructions in the Koran and the Sunnah is VERY bigoted; that it’s followers are enjoined to be bigots to all non-believers.
Back to my point: You start and end your rebuttal of the article, or rather its writer, with insults. (I’ve notice that rebuttals composed by Mohammadans and their apologists often do start and end with name-calling.) And then you close with invented dialogue!?! Do you really believe you are going to be taken seriously? I recommend you stick to the facts.
In my reading of this article I found no bigotry expressed by the author, either explicitly or implicitly. The author was cautioning the reader about a pundit whose motives are not explicitly disclosed. I did, however, find your comment bigoted.
Saleem Smith says
Hi Libel, your hyperbolic mud throwing won’t stick to me. I am neither a bigot nor laying down the groundwork for genocide. Read the article again. In the article I am critiquing the efforts of a Muslim activist and exposing the falsehood and harms of Islam.
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
The first time I saw Mubin Shaikh on the CBC, I did not trust him. The believer-unbeliever boundary is, for me, a hard line. You are either on one side or the other.
I like the article so far; well written and well researched. I look forward to further installments.
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
Regarding apostasy: it is a well hidden Ikwan statistic that 75% of all new converts to Mohammadism leave within the first two years.
David says
bee ber on the wall. Who a true Musilm of all?
Terry Gain says
I think this one of the most important articles to be posted on this site, which in my opinion is invaluable if we are not to be conquered by Islam. I think that Islam is not only false but vile. It is obviously the most serious threat to freedom and peace on earth. I am curious as to what possessed Smith to become a Muslim.,
Phil Copson says
“….Of course, the only Muslim acceptable for you and your ilk is an ex-Muslim and that is why he is absolutely right to call you and yours, bigots and anti-Muslim. This is how the groundwork for genocide is laid….”
————————————————————————————————————
Then state which parts of Islam you reject ?
If you don’t reject all the parts that are inimical to my society, then I don’t want you in it. Why would I ?
To go right back to the beginning, Mohammed was obviously one of the worst human beings who ever lived, so how could anything good come from anything he put his name to? The whole idea is absurd.
Islam appeals because it offers a template for the most violent, stupid, and unpleasant people to take control, rather than simply being the criminals they are regarded as in civilised societies.
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
“Islam appeals because it offers a template for the most violent, stupid, and unpleasant people to take control, rather than simply being the criminals they are regarded as in civilised societies.”
It also appeals to many because it is or seems exotic and esoteric. Some amazingly intelligent people are drawn to it because of this. Most steer away just in time.
Naildriver says
It is a male entitlement system too, that also favors the rich over the poor, the powerful over the weak, such that women in the polygamous system are out of reach to poor males; and, they in turn can be manipulated to further Islam’s imperitives as thugs, murderers, rapists, soldiers, and slave holders of non Muslim women; or garner power with such devotion.
There is no possible peace with Islam, and one can see this in all cultures they infest — and consequently destroy.
LeftisruiningCanada says
nailed it
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
“It is a male entitlement system”
But it isn’t promoted that way in the West, is it?
Benedict says
“I am a Canadian ex-Muslim male; I converted to Islam and stayed in the religion for approximately four years, before leaving it due to disbelief and moral disgust.”
……….
It’s difficult to understand how a “male” who can write such a lucid article as this first had to convert to Islam and stay in this religion for about four years before he was able scrutinize Islam. Didn’t he read the Quran verses, he quotes here, before he converted? And were these verses not sufficient repulsive to make him stay away from Islam?
Terry Gain says
I agree.
MFritz says
He reminds me of certain BLM-activists (and founders) the liberals like to pass around in the US to show their good “will” – mostly liars, racists, bigots, criminals and domestic terrorists in the making.
AP says
If a person believes in Islam, he is commanded to be your enemy. I think I will pass on anyone who claims to be Muslim, starting with Keith Ellison.
Midnite Rider says
Thank you for speaking the TRUTH about islam Mr Smith..Many Americans understand the threat to our country and our Freedoms by islam…Voices such as yours NEED to be heard so those sleeping awake..Watch your back,jihadist cowards will be looking to stick a large knife in it..
Semper Fi
Richard Courtemanche says
The RCMP had to pay Mubin Shaikh $1 million to get his cooperation against the Toronto-18. So much for the loyalty of a want-to-be Canadian.
TKF says
Great article. The so-called prophet Mohammad was certainly one of histories most evil villains. If he was alive today he would be imprisoned for life or a permanent resident of a lunatic asylum.