Britain First's Christian Jayda Fransen deputy leader seems to forget about British history and the IRA in a conversation with a Muslim as she tries to minimise the number of non-Muslim terror attacks in the UK.
This video is also uploaded here
A timeline of IRA terror attacks on British soil can be found at Reuters. Here are some examples from that timeless:
February 1974 - Coach carrying soldiers and families in northern England is bombed by the Irish Republican Army (IRA). Twelve people killed, 14 hurt.
October-November 1974 - Wave of IRA bombs in British pubs kills 28 people and wounds more than 200.
July 1982 - Two IRA bomb attacks on soldiers in London’s royal parks kill 11 people and wound 50.
December 1983 - IRA bomb at Harrods department store kills six.
October 1984 - Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s cabinet narrowly escapes IRA bomb that kills five people at Brighton hotel during Conservative Party’s annual conference.
May 1990 - One soldier is killed and another wounded by car bomb in Wembley.
June 1990 - Soldier is shot dead at train station in Lichfield.
April 1993 - IRA truck bomb devastates Bishopsgate area of London’s financial district, killing one and wounding 44.
Showing posts with label Terrorism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Terrorism. Show all posts
Sunday, 19 November 2017
Monday, 28 August 2017
A Refutation of the ISIS is Islam Rhetoric - Tommy Robinson Needs to Read This!
A “Christian” missionary organisation put out an anti-Islam propaganda tweet. It’s standard Islamophobic spiel which one comes across amongst anti-Muslim trolls on the internet. The tweet reads:
ISIL: Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Identified as Muslims. Funded by the Quran and sunnah. Follower of Islam. Enemy of non Muslims
There are a number of issues with this tweet, aside from their misuse of the word “funded”.
1. “Identified as Muslims”. There are Muslims who don’t pray, gamble, steal, eat pork, drink alcohol, go out clubbing and partying, fornicate, watch porn, etc.. Just because an act is done by a Muslim does not mean it’s Islamic. We have to draw a distinction between the actions of Muslims and Islam – the two aren’t always in harmony due to human weakness. Likewise for Christians who drop bombs on people’s heads, carry out terrorist attacks, have gay marriages, divorce, fornicate, gamble etc., are we going to say these actions stem from Christianity?
2. “Funded by the Quran and the Sunnah. Follower of Islam”. The person misused the word “funded” here, I think they were trying to say ISIS’ actions are inspired by Islam. Let’s just analyse ISIS’ actions in he UK. They killed innocent civilians in Manchester and London. Is that allowed in Islam? No:
Dr Timothy Winter of Cambridge University states "terrorism is the arbitrary targeting of the innocent in order to place pressure on governments, which is something which doesn't have origins in Islamic culture or ethics and comes out of the French revolution and certain 19th century anarchist movements that used terrorism. As a doctrine in the Muslim world it's very recent and it's an expression of Westernisation. Terrorism, 9/11 for instance, according to classical Islamic Law is classified as hiraba which carried the death penalty"
An excellent quote from Muhammad Asad's book rebuking evangelical Christians (Jeremiah Johnston and Craig Evans) who parse terrorist attacks in a similar manner to Islamophobic evangelical Christian propagandists "Simply put, every Muslim scholar - whether Sunni, Shia, Salafi, Deobandi - has condemned and spoken out against Daesh. Their arguments against Daesh and its acts are derived from traditional Islamic religious texts and based firmly in Islamic jurisprudence".
So clearly they aren’t acting in accordance with Islam therefore they are not inspired by the Quran and the Sunnah. Now , for sure many of them may feel they are acting in accordance with Islam but the vast majority of Muslims worldwide and all recognised Muslim scholarly bodies denounce their terrorist actions. The question here is who do we allow to interpret Islam, the majority of Muslims and the scholarly bodies of Islam or an obscurantist fringe and minority radical group that has very little traction and support amongst Muslims? The intellectually honest person would opt for the majority of Muslims and the scholarly bodies rather than a terrorist group.
Just to show how problematic extremist fringe interpretations of religious texts can be let's focu on a Bible verse. 1 Samuel 15:3 has been used to support mass violence:
The story of the Amalekites has been used to justify genocide throughout the ages. According to Pennsylvania State University Professor Philip Jenkins, a contributing editor for the American Conservative, the Puritans used this passage when they wanted to get rid of the Native American tribes. Catholics used it against Protestants, Protestants against Catholics. "In Rwanda in 1994, Hutu preachers invoked King Saul's memory to justify the total slaughter of their Tutsi neighbors," writes Jenkins in his 2011 book, Laying Down the Sword: Why We Can't Ignore the Bible's Violent Verses (HarperCollins). [Guardian]
On a similar theme please listen to pastor Brian McLaren:
How Bible Stories Were Used For Genocide, White Supremacy, Racism + Sectarian Violence
Would the same Christian be consistent and say those who massacred the Native Americans were followers of Christianity and backed by the Bible?
3. “ Enemy of non Muslims”. Erm, how about the “ISIS are also the Enemy of Muslims”? ISIS have killed more Muslims than non Muslims.
According to the Counter Terrorism Center at the United States Military Academy at West Point, Al-Qaeda kills over seven times more Muslims than non-Muslims. According to the UN, Muslims are the largest victims of ISIS. According to the State Department, Muslims are the largest victims of terrorism in general [Omar Alnatour – Huff Post]
And how about “Muslims are at the forefront of opposing ISIS”?
Muslims want to defeat terrorism just as much as any other American, if not more. This is why we have Muslim women like Niloofar Rahmani and Kubra Khademi who are at the very frontlines fighting terrorists. This is why millions of Muslim youth are taking a stand against ISIS. This is why tons of Muslim groups and scholars repeatedly issue statements condemning ISIS, many even being beheaded by ISIS for doing so.
This is why more than 120 Muslim scholars from around the world joined together to write an open letter to ISIS, denouncing them as un-Islamic by using Islamic terms. This is why Muslims are being killed by ISIS for publicly opposing this terrorist group’s persecution of Christians. [Omar Alnatour – Huff Post]
Right so how can an intellectually honest, fair and balanced person talk about terrorism committed by extremist fringe Muslim groups? Obviously they are motivated to have effect politically and they are reactionary – reacting to Western imperialism (be it direct of indirect) in most cases. Many of them have clearly adopted interpretations of Islam which depart from mainstream Muslim positions to suit their reactionary and geo-political agendas.
There has to be a two-pronged effort to defeat ISIS:
1. This is something which has been going on for a while. Muslim scholars have been refuting ISIS via the Islamic tradition. Lay Muslims and the MSM should help to disseminate scholarly denouncement and refutation of ISIS in order to stymie their flow of new recruits and to help convince ISIS members that they are in the wrong.
2. There clearly is a correlation with Western foreign policy and ISIS terrorism.
Despite what we might like to think, foreign policy is key to understanding why terrorists attack us. We may hope they only attack us because they’re barbaric or because they ‘hate our freedoms’. But time after time the terrorists clearly state that they attack us because we attack them. And it’s uncomfortable to admit, but these terrorists know they are not lying in saying that our military has been involved in killing and harassing tens of thousands of civilians, whether directly through invasions, bombings and drone strikes, or whether indirectly through propping up oppressive regimes. Our aggressive and utterly selfish foreign policy will always leave us open to attack.[Dr Leon Moosavi, Liverpool University]
There’s a cycle of violence which has to stop. We all (Muslims and Non Muslims) all have to start being more active in lobbying Western governments against unjust military and economic policies. We’ve got seriously try to build a fairer world for everyone.
Jonathan Mclatchie: Gay Marriage is "Madness" but Terrorism is..
What the Jihadists Who Bought ‘Islam For Dummies’ on Amazon Tell Us About Radicalisation
It is forbidden in Islam to kill the innocent - letter to Baghdadi
9/11 was against Sharia - Dr Timothy Winter
Book Review: Jesus, the Fake Jihadis & Evangelical Christians by Muhammad Asad (A Response to 'Jesus and the Jihadis')
The Truth About ISIS - Dr Yasir Qadhi
Russell Brand: Haters of Islam Encourage Muslims towards Extremism
ISIL: Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Identified as Muslims. Funded by the Quran and sunnah. Follower of Islam. Enemy of non Muslims
There are a number of issues with this tweet, aside from their misuse of the word “funded”.
1. “Identified as Muslims”. There are Muslims who don’t pray, gamble, steal, eat pork, drink alcohol, go out clubbing and partying, fornicate, watch porn, etc.. Just because an act is done by a Muslim does not mean it’s Islamic. We have to draw a distinction between the actions of Muslims and Islam – the two aren’t always in harmony due to human weakness. Likewise for Christians who drop bombs on people’s heads, carry out terrorist attacks, have gay marriages, divorce, fornicate, gamble etc., are we going to say these actions stem from Christianity?
2. “Funded by the Quran and the Sunnah. Follower of Islam”. The person misused the word “funded” here, I think they were trying to say ISIS’ actions are inspired by Islam. Let’s just analyse ISIS’ actions in he UK. They killed innocent civilians in Manchester and London. Is that allowed in Islam? No:
Dr Timothy Winter of Cambridge University states "terrorism is the arbitrary targeting of the innocent in order to place pressure on governments, which is something which doesn't have origins in Islamic culture or ethics and comes out of the French revolution and certain 19th century anarchist movements that used terrorism. As a doctrine in the Muslim world it's very recent and it's an expression of Westernisation. Terrorism, 9/11 for instance, according to classical Islamic Law is classified as hiraba which carried the death penalty"
An excellent quote from Muhammad Asad's book rebuking evangelical Christians (Jeremiah Johnston and Craig Evans) who parse terrorist attacks in a similar manner to Islamophobic evangelical Christian propagandists "Simply put, every Muslim scholar - whether Sunni, Shia, Salafi, Deobandi - has condemned and spoken out against Daesh. Their arguments against Daesh and its acts are derived from traditional Islamic religious texts and based firmly in Islamic jurisprudence".
So clearly they aren’t acting in accordance with Islam therefore they are not inspired by the Quran and the Sunnah. Now , for sure many of them may feel they are acting in accordance with Islam but the vast majority of Muslims worldwide and all recognised Muslim scholarly bodies denounce their terrorist actions. The question here is who do we allow to interpret Islam, the majority of Muslims and the scholarly bodies of Islam or an obscurantist fringe and minority radical group that has very little traction and support amongst Muslims? The intellectually honest person would opt for the majority of Muslims and the scholarly bodies rather than a terrorist group.
Just to show how problematic extremist fringe interpretations of religious texts can be let's focu on a Bible verse. 1 Samuel 15:3 has been used to support mass violence:
The story of the Amalekites has been used to justify genocide throughout the ages. According to Pennsylvania State University Professor Philip Jenkins, a contributing editor for the American Conservative, the Puritans used this passage when they wanted to get rid of the Native American tribes. Catholics used it against Protestants, Protestants against Catholics. "In Rwanda in 1994, Hutu preachers invoked King Saul's memory to justify the total slaughter of their Tutsi neighbors," writes Jenkins in his 2011 book, Laying Down the Sword: Why We Can't Ignore the Bible's Violent Verses (HarperCollins). [Guardian]
On a similar theme please listen to pastor Brian McLaren:
How Bible Stories Were Used For Genocide, White Supremacy, Racism + Sectarian Violence
Would the same Christian be consistent and say those who massacred the Native Americans were followers of Christianity and backed by the Bible?
3. “ Enemy of non Muslims”. Erm, how about the “ISIS are also the Enemy of Muslims”? ISIS have killed more Muslims than non Muslims.
According to the Counter Terrorism Center at the United States Military Academy at West Point, Al-Qaeda kills over seven times more Muslims than non-Muslims. According to the UN, Muslims are the largest victims of ISIS. According to the State Department, Muslims are the largest victims of terrorism in general [Omar Alnatour – Huff Post]
And how about “Muslims are at the forefront of opposing ISIS”?
Muslims want to defeat terrorism just as much as any other American, if not more. This is why we have Muslim women like Niloofar Rahmani and Kubra Khademi who are at the very frontlines fighting terrorists. This is why millions of Muslim youth are taking a stand against ISIS. This is why tons of Muslim groups and scholars repeatedly issue statements condemning ISIS, many even being beheaded by ISIS for doing so.
This is why more than 120 Muslim scholars from around the world joined together to write an open letter to ISIS, denouncing them as un-Islamic by using Islamic terms. This is why Muslims are being killed by ISIS for publicly opposing this terrorist group’s persecution of Christians. [Omar Alnatour – Huff Post]
How can we defeat ISIS?
Right so how can an intellectually honest, fair and balanced person talk about terrorism committed by extremist fringe Muslim groups? Obviously they are motivated to have effect politically and they are reactionary – reacting to Western imperialism (be it direct of indirect) in most cases. Many of them have clearly adopted interpretations of Islam which depart from mainstream Muslim positions to suit their reactionary and geo-political agendas.
There has to be a two-pronged effort to defeat ISIS:
1. This is something which has been going on for a while. Muslim scholars have been refuting ISIS via the Islamic tradition. Lay Muslims and the MSM should help to disseminate scholarly denouncement and refutation of ISIS in order to stymie their flow of new recruits and to help convince ISIS members that they are in the wrong.
2. There clearly is a correlation with Western foreign policy and ISIS terrorism.
Despite what we might like to think, foreign policy is key to understanding why terrorists attack us. We may hope they only attack us because they’re barbaric or because they ‘hate our freedoms’. But time after time the terrorists clearly state that they attack us because we attack them. And it’s uncomfortable to admit, but these terrorists know they are not lying in saying that our military has been involved in killing and harassing tens of thousands of civilians, whether directly through invasions, bombings and drone strikes, or whether indirectly through propping up oppressive regimes. Our aggressive and utterly selfish foreign policy will always leave us open to attack.[Dr Leon Moosavi, Liverpool University]
There’s a cycle of violence which has to stop. We all (Muslims and Non Muslims) all have to start being more active in lobbying Western governments against unjust military and economic policies. We’ve got seriously try to build a fairer world for everyone.
Jonathan Mclatchie: Gay Marriage is "Madness" but Terrorism is..
What the Jihadists Who Bought ‘Islam For Dummies’ on Amazon Tell Us About Radicalisation
It is forbidden in Islam to kill the innocent - letter to Baghdadi
9/11 was against Sharia - Dr Timothy Winter
Book Review: Jesus, the Fake Jihadis & Evangelical Christians by Muhammad Asad (A Response to 'Jesus and the Jihadis')
The Truth About ISIS - Dr Yasir Qadhi
Russell Brand: Haters of Islam Encourage Muslims towards Extremism
Thursday, 29 June 2017
American Government Killed More Civilians This Month Than All Terrorist Attacks in Europe Over the Last 12 Years
Every time a terrorist attack occurs in Europe, it is met with an abundance of media coverage, and each victim is mourned by the public on a grand scale. However, the concern for the loss of innocent life appears to be almost nonexistent when the United States kills more civilians in one month than terrorist attacks in Europe have killed in the last 12 years.
A group monitoring the Syrian conflict reported on Friday that airstrikes launched by the United States-led coalition in Syria have killed 472 civilians from May 23 to June 23. [Source]
A group monitoring the Syrian conflict reported on Friday that airstrikes launched by the United States-led coalition in Syria have killed 472 civilians from May 23 to June 23. [Source]
Shaykh Hamza Yusuf Refutes ISIS and their idea of Caliphate
Here are a few resources which have refuted ISIS.
ISIS Refuted by Dr Abdul-Rahman Dimashqia
The Truth About ISIS - Dr Yasir Qadhi
Muslim Response to Yezidi (Yazidi) Girls Rape by ISIS Report
Muslim Imam on Beheading of Journalist, Steven Sotloff (Imam Suhaib Webb)
Muslim Scholar on ISIS and the Jordanian Pilot
Jizya and Reported ISIS Thugs Rape Assyrian Mother and Daughter
Dr Yasir Qadhi and Nouman Ali Khan on Charlie Hebdo Killings
Sh Haitham al Haddad exposes ISIS
Why isn't ISIS a Caliphate?
Russell Brand: Haters of Islam Encourage Muslims towards Extremism
Sharia Law against terrorism
Tuesday, 6 June 2017
Why it's Important for Muslims to Continually Condemn Terrorism
Some Non-Muslims have never heard a Muslim condemn terrorism. It's important for these people to see and hear such condemnation. We can't rely on the media and others, Muslims have to be active in getting the message out to people who are unsure and confused.
Disrespectful Christian Lady Shouting At Adnan Rashid Over Manchester Terrorist Attack
 |
| Lizzie at Speakers Corner
Lizzie Schofield of Pfander Ministries is shouting and getting all obnoxious at a Muslim teacher, Adnan Rashid, whilst taking Islamic texts out of context to argue Islam allows acts such as the Manchester terrorism attack. It's shameful to see her misusing the suffering and deaths of the victims at Ariane Grande's concert. It is equally disrespectful and shameful for her to be shouting all this at Adnan Rashid, whose son has been the target of death threats from ISIS!
Adnan Rashid elucidates Islamic texts, showing Islam does not allow the killing of innocent kids at a concert. In this video, I've also included a clip of Paul Williams asking the member of the Islamophobic "Christian" group whether they condemn 1 Samuel 15:3.
3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy[a] all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’” [Bible]
Anybody can take that Biblical text, which Trinitarian Christians believe is an order from Jesus, and decontexualise it to argue Christianity allows the killing of women and children. This is exactly the approach Lizzie and other Islamophobes take with regards to Islamic texts. It's not fair and serious minded Christians should ask this group of Christians to stop doing - it's intellectually dishonest and putting Christians in bad light.
For any sincere people who have questions as to Islam's stance on terrorism please watch this short condemnation of terrorism by Paul Williams and Mansur using Islamic texts to prove such actions are unislamic.
I hope Lizzie Schofield, Sharon Hoy, Sarah Foster, Hatun Tash and Beth Grove will reflect on why Jay Smith's Pfander Ministries and Pfander Films has accrued such caustic and extremist anti-Muslim followers over the years. I know Jay's group has been barred from speaking at certain venues and universities in the past due to being seen as Islamophobic.
Justin Brierley, do you Believe Jay Smith's "Hyperbole" Excuse? Are Jay Smith and Beth Grove of Pfander Centre Radicalising People to Hate Muslims? Refuting the Claim Petra was the Qibla Before Mecca Christian Polemicist Jay Smith and The Christian Apologetics Alliance Debunked Again Blog: Jonathan McLatchie, yes it is Islamophobic to say what you said... Brief Chat on Andy Bannister's Approach to Evangelism Re Jonathan McLatichie's Facebook Solas CPC Rebuked by Muslim |
Monday, 5 June 2017
Muslims Condemn London Bridge Terrorist Attack and Teach Islam is Against Terrorism
Brother Paul and Mansur speak about the recent events in London and the truth of Islam and what is forbidden and evidence for staunch rules that set rules for all Muslims to adhere to mercy and compassion.
Muslims should interact with non-Muslims with justice. God loves the just people.
Muslims at Speakers Corner Refute ISIS and Condemn Terrorism
ISIS Refuted by Dr Abdul-Rahman Dimashqia
The Truth About ISIS - Dr Yasir Qadhi
Muslim Response to Yezidi (Yazidi) Girls Rape by ISIS Report
Muslim Imam on Beheading of Journalist, Steven Sotloff (Imam Suhaib Webb)
Book Review: Jesus, the Fake Jihadis & Evangelical Christians by Muhammad Asad (A Response to 'Jesus and the Jihadis')
Jonathan Mclatchie: Gay Marriage is "Madness" but Terrorism is..
Muslim Refutes Pastor Steven Anderson's Anti-Gay and Anti-Muslim Propaganda
Term Dar Al Harb Explained - Dr Musharraf Hussain and Justin Parrott
Cenk Uygur Proves Mulims Are not More Violent than Christians
Sharia Law against terrorism
Monday, 29 May 2017
Hadeeth about the blind man who killed his slave woman for blasphemy explained
This video is also uploaded here
For a Muslim scholar explaining this Hadith, see the following
This story is indicative of the justice with which the Muslims dealt with the people of the Book, which was brought by sharee’ah as a mercy to the worlds. The rights of the Jews who had entered into a treaty with the Muslims were guaranteed and protected, and it was not permissible to transgress against them by annoying them or harming them in any way. Hence when the people found a Jewish woman who had been slain, they were upset and they referred the matter to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), who had given them that covenant and promise of safety, and had not taken the jizyah from them. He got angry and adjured the Muslims by Allaah that the one who had done this deed should show himself, so that he might determine his punishment and issue a ruling concerning him. But when he found out that she had broken the covenant time after time, by insulting the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and reviling him, all her rights were denied, and she deserved the punishment of execution which sharee’ah imposes on everyone who reviles the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), whether he is a Muslim, a dhimmi or a mu’aahid, because transgressing against the status of the Prophets is disbelief in Allaah Almighty, and it invalidates every sanctity, right and covenant; it is a major betrayal which deserves the most severe punishment.
Blasphemy Law in Islam and insulting Prophet Muhammad p - Dr. Yasir Qadhi
Qur'an Seminar 2017: Learn about Quranic Preservation
Tovia Singer: Does the New Testament Teach Jesus is God?
Why Islam
Blasphemy Law in Islam and insulting Prophet Muhammad p - Dr. Yasir Qadhi
Qur'an Seminar 2017: Learn about Quranic Preservation
Tovia Singer: Does the New Testament Teach Jesus is God?
Why Islam
Monday, 22 May 2017
Muslim Scholar Reacted to Manchester Arena Terror Attack
Muslim scholar Abu Eesa writes:
To my friends, students and followers in our peerless city of Manchester:
- Taxi drivers and those with cars, please get close to the police cordon near Deansgate, Cheetham Hill Rd and Bury New Rd, and the surrounding area. There are hundreds of terrified people who just need to get home, and I saw myself personally that junctions on the M60 and M61 are closed to get in to the city. If you are inside the inner ring, please go and help.
- For those with flats/rooms in the city centre, especially down Cheetham Hill Rd and even Rusholme including students with digs at the Universities, please post online with #RoomforManchester just to take in those who need shelter and help.
- Medics in the city centre, please contact your department heads asap.
- The many Muslims living around Khizra Masjid, the police cordon is near the Green Quarter and there are many confused affected people who need comfort, refreshments and support. It is just a 20 minute walk straight down, please go if you can.
- This is an essential time for us to donate blood for specific and general needs. The main donation centre is on Plymouth Grove, Manchester, M13 9LL, right opposite the MRI. It opens at 9am.
- At all times please remember the dignity of the injured and terrified, please don't post photos and videos of them online.
The people of Manchester are scared and shocked right now, but this great city will never bow to terrorism. Our job is to comfort and help. And remember not to lose heart: the perpetrators *will* pay, whether in this life or the next.
#ManchesterStrong
Update:
Abu Eesa writes:
Thank you so so much to everyone who responded to our call for help last night, showing to the world that our #ManchesterStrong spirit is not just a convenient hashtag but a reality that will help everyone get through this tragedy.
The latest advice below now abrogates everything from last night so please read and share.
- A note to especially our taxi drivers of whom many will have been in the vicinity of the MEN Arena last night: if you can remember anything or recorded anything that might not have made sense to you then but could help now - as well as *anyone* else that might be seeing this unfold and the suspicious behaviour of a family member or friend in the past might be making sense now - please contact the Anti-Terror Hotline on 0800 789321 or upload any relevant footage to www.ukpoliceimageappeal.co.uk or www.ukpoliceimageappeal.com
- There is no need for blood donations at the moment, the services are being overwhelmed and only those with pre-booked appointments should attend ESPECIALLY if you have blood type O negative
- There is no need in the immediate vicinity for any help and people should remain clear of the area
- The best and most efficient way of finding about those missing and affected is by calling 0161 856 9400 and 0161 856 9900. A help centre for anyone needing assistance has also been set up outside Gate 11 of The Etihad Stadium on Ashton New Rd, Manchester.
- Please open your hearts even wider and donate to this appeal to support the families of those who were killed and injured in the attack https://mydonate.bt.com/fundraisers/muslimsformanchester - I also hope that if you are free, you will support our great city at the vigil this evening which will be held in Albert Square, in Manchester, at 6pm.
We are grieving, we are shocked, but we must remain focused and united to get through this test of our humanity. Thank you all again for your love and support!
Similarities Between Catholic Terrorist Group IRA and Muslim Terrorist Group ISIS
A Response to Adam Deen's 'Exodus to ISIS - a Tale of Two Dars'
About 20% of British Muslim Women Feel Unsafe in Britain
Britain First's Jayda Fransen and Paul Golding Learn About Anti-Semitism and Christianity
British Muslims in Preston Helping to Save Lives
Sharia Law against terrorism
Christians having dreams and converting to Islam
Learn about Islam
Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
A Response to Adam Deen's 'Exodus to ISIS - a Tale of Two Dars'
About 20% of British Muslim Women Feel Unsafe in Britain
Britain First's Jayda Fransen and Paul Golding Learn About Anti-Semitism and Christianity
British Muslims in Preston Helping to Save Lives
Sharia Law against terrorism
Christians having dreams and converting to Islam
Learn about Islam
Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
Monday, 1 May 2017
Cenk Uygur Proves Mulims Are not More Violent than Christians
Murder rates in Muslim countries are lower than those in non Muslim countries.
Friday, 17 February 2017
Term Dar Al Harb Explained - Dr Musharraf Hussain and Justin Parrott
If this video does not play, it's also uploaded here and here
Justin Parrott on his FB writes: One of the Islamic terms misused by extremists, either for or against Islam, is the classical legal designation of a territory as “the land of war” (dar al-ḥarb). The conventional and mistaken thinking among Orientalists was that the “land of Islam” (dar al-Islām) was perpetually at war with the outside world of unbelievers until they came under the political control of Muslims.
Jihadist extremists like ISIS copied this kind of thinking and they reinterpreted classical Islamic legalese in highly-ideological terms and under the influence of Marxist and fascist revolutionaries, which is how they put a pseudo-Islamic veneer over their open call on the internet to commit acts of terrorism against nearly anyone in the world for any reason. In reality, the term dar al-ḥarb, besides being a derivative not stated in the Quran or Sunnah, was more *descriptive* than it was *prescriptive*.
That is, dar al-ḥarb was the description of a land in which it was unsafe to practice Islam. It was telling Muslims it was dangerous to go there. It was NOT a prescription to attack a peaceful neighboring country just because they had a different religion. The majority of jurists said non-Muslims are only fought if they declare war (ḥirābah) first, as per verse 2:190. Moreover, the jurists frequently employed the term “land of conciliation” (dar al-ṣulḥ) to describe neighboring lands that had peaceful relations with Muslims.
The abuse of archaic terms like dar al-ḥarb are key principles in both the Islamophobic and Jihadist ideologies. Although their goals are ostensibly opposed, they both are working towards a “clash of civilizations” as a means to bolster their own domestic agendas. We’ll keep trying to dismantle this ideology in our writings, piece by piece, God willing.
Why Islam
Justin Parrott on his FB writes: One of the Islamic terms misused by extremists, either for or against Islam, is the classical legal designation of a territory as “the land of war” (dar al-ḥarb). The conventional and mistaken thinking among Orientalists was that the “land of Islam” (dar al-Islām) was perpetually at war with the outside world of unbelievers until they came under the political control of Muslims.
Jihadist extremists like ISIS copied this kind of thinking and they reinterpreted classical Islamic legalese in highly-ideological terms and under the influence of Marxist and fascist revolutionaries, which is how they put a pseudo-Islamic veneer over their open call on the internet to commit acts of terrorism against nearly anyone in the world for any reason. In reality, the term dar al-ḥarb, besides being a derivative not stated in the Quran or Sunnah, was more *descriptive* than it was *prescriptive*.
That is, dar al-ḥarb was the description of a land in which it was unsafe to practice Islam. It was telling Muslims it was dangerous to go there. It was NOT a prescription to attack a peaceful neighboring country just because they had a different religion. The majority of jurists said non-Muslims are only fought if they declare war (ḥirābah) first, as per verse 2:190. Moreover, the jurists frequently employed the term “land of conciliation” (dar al-ṣulḥ) to describe neighboring lands that had peaceful relations with Muslims.
The abuse of archaic terms like dar al-ḥarb are key principles in both the Islamophobic and Jihadist ideologies. Although their goals are ostensibly opposed, they both are working towards a “clash of civilizations” as a means to bolster their own domestic agendas. We’ll keep trying to dismantle this ideology in our writings, piece by piece, God willing.
Why Islam
Ben Shapiro Refuted by Ali Ataie and James White: "The Myth of the Tiny Radical Minority"
James R White, a Christian apologist, responds to Ben Shapiro by appealing to consistency by stating most Christians would be considered radical too if the poll asked if they believed Jesus would return and everybody would worship Jesus.
James White Rebukes Ben Shapiro For Saying That The Majority Of Muslims Are Radical
Note: James White called the type of Sharia practiced in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan "frightening and barbaric". I suppose, out of consistency, James believes the law in the Old Testament is "barbaric and frightening" too (a law which he believes was given by the Father, the Son (now known as Jesus) and the Holy Spirit)
Dr Ali Ataie on FB writes in response to Ben Shapiro's "The Myth of the Tiny Radical Muslim Minority" by also appealing to consistency and differing interpretations of texts:
Here's something I disagree with Ben on. It's amazing how that intellect can suddenly take a dive. This video is a smokescreen. Shari'ah law is part and parcel of every single Muslim's identity. Ben doesn't bother to define what exactly shariah is because he is fully satisfied with your perception of it as being a Draconian penal code from 1400 years ago. Ben is an orthodox Jew who no doubt also believes in the Torah and Talmud.
The five books of Moses are dripping with violence BUT... Ben has his own way of dealing with those texts... right? So what leads him to believe that the vast majority of Muslims do not deal with their violent texts in a similar fashion? How many stonings and hand amputations are happening right now in the Muslim majority world? Where's the data? Thus to say that a Muslim who believes in shari'ah is a radical is like saying a Jew who believes in halakhah is a radical... ALL of them.
Ben fails to define the nuances, immutables (thawabit), variables (mutaghayyarat), contexts, and interpretations of shari'ah that Muslims understand just by being Muslim. Have you read the Talmud? LORD have mercy! How does Ben deal with the homicidal, pedophilic, anti-Christian, racist rants of its rabbis? It seems that whoever considers the Talmud to be sacred is a radical. According to Pew (2013) most American Jews feel somewhat or very emotionally attached to Israel. Israel. A country that has ethnically cleansed its indigenous population since its inception and is now building on occupied territory. This is illegal according to international law. I guess all of those American Jews are radicals. Nice try Ben
Was there "Taqiyyah" in the Dr Yasir - James White Discussion?
Why Islam
James White Rebukes Ben Shapiro For Saying That The Majority Of Muslims Are Radical
Note: James White called the type of Sharia practiced in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan "frightening and barbaric". I suppose, out of consistency, James believes the law in the Old Testament is "barbaric and frightening" too (a law which he believes was given by the Father, the Son (now known as Jesus) and the Holy Spirit)
Dr Ali Ataie on FB writes in response to Ben Shapiro's "The Myth of the Tiny Radical Muslim Minority" by also appealing to consistency and differing interpretations of texts:
Here's something I disagree with Ben on. It's amazing how that intellect can suddenly take a dive. This video is a smokescreen. Shari'ah law is part and parcel of every single Muslim's identity. Ben doesn't bother to define what exactly shariah is because he is fully satisfied with your perception of it as being a Draconian penal code from 1400 years ago. Ben is an orthodox Jew who no doubt also believes in the Torah and Talmud.
The five books of Moses are dripping with violence BUT... Ben has his own way of dealing with those texts... right? So what leads him to believe that the vast majority of Muslims do not deal with their violent texts in a similar fashion? How many stonings and hand amputations are happening right now in the Muslim majority world? Where's the data? Thus to say that a Muslim who believes in shari'ah is a radical is like saying a Jew who believes in halakhah is a radical... ALL of them.
Ben fails to define the nuances, immutables (thawabit), variables (mutaghayyarat), contexts, and interpretations of shari'ah that Muslims understand just by being Muslim. Have you read the Talmud? LORD have mercy! How does Ben deal with the homicidal, pedophilic, anti-Christian, racist rants of its rabbis? It seems that whoever considers the Talmud to be sacred is a radical. According to Pew (2013) most American Jews feel somewhat or very emotionally attached to Israel. Israel. A country that has ethnically cleansed its indigenous population since its inception and is now building on occupied territory. This is illegal according to international law. I guess all of those American Jews are radicals. Nice try Ben
Was there "Taqiyyah" in the Dr Yasir - James White Discussion?
Why Islam
Friday, 29 July 2016
Explanation Hadith of Blind Man Killing His Slave for Insulting Prophet Muhammad
You may have come across a Hadith where a blind man kills his female slave with an axe after she reviles (abuses/insults) the Prophet p. There are different versions but the basis of the story is authentic.
Sadly, at least one anti-Islam critic on the internet has began to use the Hadith, which he found in Bulugh-al-Maram, for an explanation for an axe attack on people on a train in Germany by a teenaged Afghan refugee. It's so disingenuous or ignorant to misuse such a Hadith to lend Islamic validity to such a terrorist attack.
Watch this video to see his claims and a response to his claims with regards to the motives of the terrorist and concerning the Hadith itself.
If the video does not play, this video is also uploaded here
Quick focus on the possible motives of the Afghan refugee terrorist
The critic links a flag which the refugee had in his home to his motives. The flag is not evidence for the motive of the attack. Why not focus on the more realistic speculation (i.e. he is a traumatised refugee who had mental problems)?
In fact, investigators are even speculating the man had psychological problems:
Investigators have speculated that the death of a close friend in Afghanistan may have left him traumatised and psychologically vulnerable.A psychiatrist currently treating traumatised refugees, many of whom have fled war zones and endured perilous journeys of thousands of miles, said that currently clinical evidence does not support a connection between traumatisation and vulnerability to the messages of extremists.
A 2015 report by Germany's chamber of psychotherapists found that half of refugees who entered the country are experiencing psychological distress and mental illness resulting from trauma.
These figures are reflected in the sample Richter is working with.
"More than 40% of them have psychological illnesses due to their experiences while fleeing their home countries," she said, with post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and insomnia among the most common problem [IBTIMES]
In fact, Germany has had a similar attack recently in which no evidence was found that the attacker was motivated by religion but rather it was due to his psychological and drug problems (see the video above for the news report on this event)
How about the Hadith in Sunan Abu Dawud?
Looks like the critic did a key word search for "axe" in a Hadith database as the attacker used an axe.
The critic finds one Hadith, for which he completely overlooks the context, in his haste to try and link this suspected mentally disturbed person with Islamic teaching. If he had looked at the longer Hadith of the same event he would have got the context.
When the woman was found there was a public investigation into the matter in order to punish the one who killed her...
This story is indicative of the justice with which the Muslims dealt with the people of the Book, which was enjoined in the sharee’ah of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), who was a mercy to the worlds. The rights of the Jews who are under Muslim rule are guaranteed and protected, and it is not permissible to transgress against them by causing them any annoyance or harm. Hence when the people found a Jewish woman who had been killed they were alarmed and referred the matter to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), who had made the covenant with them and guaranteed them security, and who did not take the jizyah from them. He got angry and adjured the Muslims by Allaah to find out who had done this deed, so that he could determine his punishment and judge his case. But when he found out that she had transgressed the covenant several times by reviling the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and impugning him, she forfeited all her rights and deserved the hadd punishment of execution which is imposed by sharee’ah on everyone who reviles the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), whether he is a Muslim, a dhimmi or a mu’aahid (non-Muslim living under Muslim rule), because impugning the status of the Prophets is kufr or disbelief in Allaah the Almighty, and a transgression of every sacred limit and right and covenant, and a major betrayal which deserves the greatest punishment. [IslamQA]
When the man confessed and explained what happened the Prophet simply made a pronouncement on whether blood money/retaliation for her was due.
The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not choose to kill her in this manner, but because she deserved to be executed as a hadd punishment for breaking the covenant and reviling the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), he did not demand qisaas* from her killer.
*Qisaas is retaliation in kind
That's all - he was not endorsing vigilante killings and encouraging people to chop up random people on trains (it's so ignorant/disingenuous to try and link it as such).
And in any case, think about it.
The Afghan refugee started killing random people in a non Muslim state Even if one was to try and link his act of terror to that Hadith it fails for three reasons:
1. That act was a terrorist attack on random people - terrorism is forbidden in Sharia
2. It was in a land where Sharia Hadd punishments would not apply
3. It would have been a vigilante attack (there was no trial or judge involved) - vigilantism is not allowed in Islam
Killing Dhimmis?
As for killing a dhimmi unlawfully, it is major sin, and the warning concerning that is very stern, as was proven in Saheeh al-Bukhaari (3166) from ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Amr (may Allaah be pleased with him) who narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever killed a mu’aahid will not smell the fragrance of Paradise, although its fragrance may be detected from a distance of forty years’ travel.” Imam al-Bukhaari included this report in a chapter in his Saheeh entitled “Chapter: the sin of one who kills a mu’aahid unlawfully.” [IslamQA]
Follow this discussion on IslamQA for more information:
https://islamqa.info/en/111252
Is Salafism Behind ISIS Terrorism - DR YASIR QADHI
Russell Brand: Haters of Islam Encourage Muslims towards Extremism
Sharia Law against terrorism
[QURAN MIRACLES] The Miracles of the Number 19 in Quran | Dr. Shabir Ally
Christians having dreams and converting to Islam
Learn about Islam
Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
Thursday, 30 June 2016
Jonathan Mclatchie: Gay Marriage is "Madness" but Terrorism is..
 |
Jonathan McLatchie calls gay marriage "madness" yet when it comes to terrorist attacks such as the Orlando shootings, it's not called madness. It's called Islam - this is the message we get based on the videos of one of his colleagues, David Wood*, which he shares on his FaceBook page. All this despite there being more support from Christian authorities for gay marriage than support from Muslim authorities for terrorism!
You have the modern phenomena of indiscriminate killings of civilians which all Muslim scholastic bodies have condemned to be against the spirit of Islam. Dr Timothy Winter of Cambridge University states "terrorism is the arbitrary targeting of the innocent in order to place pressure on governments, which is something which doesn't have origins in Islamic culture or ethics and comes out of the French revolution and certain 19th century anarchist movements that used terrorism. As a doctrine in the Muslim world it's very recent and it's an expression of Westernisation. Terrorism, 9/11 for instance, according to classical Islamic Law is classified as hiraba which carried the death penalty"
An excellent quote from Muhammad Asad's book rebuking McLatchie's fellow evangelical Christians (Jeremiah Johnston and Craig Evans) who parse terrorist attacks in a similar manner to McLatchie and his friend David Wood:
"Simply put, every Muslim scholar - whether Sunni, Shia, Salafi, Deobandi - has condemned and spoken out against Daesh. Their arguments against Daesh and its acts are derived from traditional Islamic religious texts and based firmly in Islamic jurisprudence".
The evangelical Christian inconsistency
Contrast that with the equally modern phenomena of gay marriage. Although there is a growing number of churches, Christian leaders and lay Christians accepting gay marriage as being within the spirit of Christianity, Jonathan would dismiss gay marriage as "madness".
More Christians who are involved in the CoE believe gay marriage is right rather than wrong. A recent survey by YouGov suggested 45% of Church of England followers felt same-sex marriage was right, against 37% who believed it wrong [stats sourced from Huffington Post]. According to the Huff Post, the Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ and now the Presbytarian Church (USA) sanctify the marriage of two men or two women.
Rev. Dr. Mark Achtemeier, who has served the Presbyterian Church (USA) since 1984 as a minister, theology professor, and writer states there's an overwhelmingly positive case for gay marriage in the Bible:
Fortunately, the church across the centuries has developed guidelines for interpreting Scripture that help keep our use of particular passages in touch with the true portrait of God’s love in Christ. When we apply these guidelines, the Bible’s teaching about gay people and their relationships appears in a whole new light. In my book I show how the application of these time-tested principles of biblical interpretation produces an overwhelmingly positive biblical case in favor of gay marriage. I came to realize how my former reliance on fragmentary, out-of-context quotes from Scripture had led me to lose touch with the “big picture” of God’s love that lies at the heart of the Bible’s witness.
All this in the eyes of Jonathan McLatchie is "madness". Yet if he would just step back for a few moments he would observe the huge inconsistency he and his evangelical colleagues operate on. There's actually much more support for gay marriage from Christian authorities, churches and lay Christians alike than there is for terrorist acts such as Orlando.
If McLatchie was consistent he would say, that gay marriage is CHRISTIAN not "madness". I'd imagine for him, Christian proponents of gay marriage decontextualize and rely on fragmentary readings of the Bible. BUT he and his colleagues are not even cognisant to this being the case for Muslim terrorists despite:
In 2008, a classified briefing note on radicalisation, prepared by MI5’s behavioural science unit, was leaked to the Guardian. It revealed that, “far from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could . . . be regarded as religious novices.” The analysts concluded that “a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation”, the newspaper said. [Mehdi Hasan]
I recently heard rabbi Tovia Singer, a man who has no horse in this race, say terrorists abuse texts from the Quran and Hadith. Ask yourself why a Jewish rabbi can be more scholarly, consistent and fair than Jonathan McLatchie and his evangelical Christian colleagues - a crowd who claim to be guided by the Holy Spirit?
There's clearly an agenda at play here. Perhaps Jonathan McLatchie will enlighten us on this glaringly obvious inconsistency and why it is operated on. For now, smart and fair-minded people are not impressed.
* David Wood, in pretty much the immediate aftermath of the Orlando shootings made a video effort claiming Omar Mateen's actions were in line with Islamic texts. Maeten's former gay lover has now come out and said he thinks it was nothing to do with religion but a revenge attack concerning a sexual liaison with a man/men who did not inform him of a HIV positive status - see the Independent. David Wood has a history of hurdling over facts and fair-minded analysis.
More Christians who are involved in the CoE believe gay marriage is right rather than wrong. A recent survey by YouGov suggested 45% of Church of England followers felt same-sex marriage was right, against 37% who believed it wrong [stats sourced from Huffington Post]. According to the Huff Post, the Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ and now the Presbytarian Church (USA) sanctify the marriage of two men or two women.
Rev. Dr. Mark Achtemeier, who has served the Presbyterian Church (USA) since 1984 as a minister, theology professor, and writer states there's an overwhelmingly positive case for gay marriage in the Bible:
Fortunately, the church across the centuries has developed guidelines for interpreting Scripture that help keep our use of particular passages in touch with the true portrait of God’s love in Christ. When we apply these guidelines, the Bible’s teaching about gay people and their relationships appears in a whole new light. In my book I show how the application of these time-tested principles of biblical interpretation produces an overwhelmingly positive biblical case in favor of gay marriage. I came to realize how my former reliance on fragmentary, out-of-context quotes from Scripture had led me to lose touch with the “big picture” of God’s love that lies at the heart of the Bible’s witness.
All this in the eyes of Jonathan McLatchie is "madness". Yet if he would just step back for a few moments he would observe the huge inconsistency he and his evangelical colleagues operate on. There's actually much more support for gay marriage from Christian authorities, churches and lay Christians alike than there is for terrorist acts such as Orlando.
If McLatchie was consistent he would say, that gay marriage is CHRISTIAN not "madness". I'd imagine for him, Christian proponents of gay marriage decontextualize and rely on fragmentary readings of the Bible. BUT he and his colleagues are not even cognisant to this being the case for Muslim terrorists despite:
In 2008, a classified briefing note on radicalisation, prepared by MI5’s behavioural science unit, was leaked to the Guardian. It revealed that, “far from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could . . . be regarded as religious novices.” The analysts concluded that “a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation”, the newspaper said. [Mehdi Hasan]
I recently heard rabbi Tovia Singer, a man who has no horse in this race, say terrorists abuse texts from the Quran and Hadith. Ask yourself why a Jewish rabbi can be more scholarly, consistent and fair than Jonathan McLatchie and his evangelical Christian colleagues - a crowd who claim to be guided by the Holy Spirit?
There's clearly an agenda at play here. Perhaps Jonathan McLatchie will enlighten us on this glaringly obvious inconsistency and why it is operated on. For now, smart and fair-minded people are not impressed.
* David Wood, in pretty much the immediate aftermath of the Orlando shootings made a video effort claiming Omar Mateen's actions were in line with Islamic texts. Maeten's former gay lover has now come out and said he thinks it was nothing to do with religion but a revenge attack concerning a sexual liaison with a man/men who did not inform him of a HIV positive status - see the Independent. David Wood has a history of hurdling over facts and fair-minded analysis.
It is forbidden in Islam to kill the innocent - letter to Baghdadi
9/11 was against Sharia - Dr Timothy Winter
Book Review: Jesus, the Fake Jihadis & Evangelical Christians by Muhammad Asad (A Response to 'Jesus and the Jihadis')
The Truth About ISIS - Dr Yasir Qadhi
Russell Brand: Haters of Islam Encourage Muslims towards Extremism
Monday, 20 June 2016
Ex Muslim Introverted Smiles Corrected by Muslim on Terrorist Attack on Homosexual Club
Ex Muslim vs Muslim on Orlando Massacre
If the video does not play, please see here
This is an ex Muslim who is inconsistently and ignorantly attacking Muslims for the Orlando massacre.
Introverted Smiles begins by rattling off 3 or 4 attacks by Muslim in the West yet for some reason ignores all the other attacks. What are these other attacks and are Muslims the perpetrators of these other attacks? As Russell Brad points out, the majority of terrorist attacks in the West are carried out by non-Muslims. Only 2% are carried out by Muslims.
Is it possible this man's antagonism towards Muslims is fuelled in part by irresponsible and disproportionate media coverage? It seems so, otherwise he would not be so angry with Muslims, he'd be angry with all groups!
It seems a media bias has led him to overlook the irony in rallying "white people" against Muslims. WHITE men are disproportionately responsible for most of the shootings! David Sirota points this fact out in the video.
So what's the problem here? Obviously there's an issue with the media. Is there also an issue of low self-esteem where this man (Introverted Smiles) feels he should/can pick on the Muslims as
Muslims are deemed as an acceptable target for bigotry and ire when a Muslim carries out a
shooting but, he as an obviously ethnic minority male, feels the white American male is a demographic which warrants special and superior treatment?
And what of this man's family, are they Muslims? If so, if he rallying a bunch of white Americans against them too?
He claims some Arab Muslims were happy about the killing of the people at the gay club in Orlando
OK, I haven't seen Muslims celebrating the Orlando massacre but there are ignorant and immature
people in the Muslim community too - as with all groups. However, once again, this ex-Muslim inconsistently zones in on silly Muslims for doing exactly what others are doing, including Jews,
American military personnel and Christian leaders. The video shows Christian pastors, orthodox Jews and American marines were doing the same thing he berates some Muslims on social media for!
Of course, it's easier to zone in on Muslims and African Americans. If one is suffering from self-hatred and/or low self-esteem the demographics which are socially and politically stronger are especially more difficult to criticise.
He tries to link the criminality by Omar Mateen in Orlando with Sharia
This is anti-intellectual. Sadly, this is all too common amongst Islamophobes where they try to link any action a Muslim does with Sharia. The fact is clear, this act would not be considered an act of Sharia by any Muslim scholar.
Introverted Smiles was appealing to Sharia which is irrelevant to America and the massacre itself in an attempt to try and frame Islam for this massacre.
1. Sharia law is not aplicable in non Muslim lands
2. The most popular jurisprudence school does not call for execution
of convicted homosexuals.
3. Under Sharia, 4 witnesses to the ACT are required for somebody to
be convicted of homosexual sex
4. Vigilanties are not allowed to take matters into their own hands
Here are some further points from Dr Jonathan AC Brown:
It is not same-sex attraction or desires that the Shariah prohibits. It is acting on them.
Yes, the main position in the Hanafi school of law for many centuries was that someone convicted of sodomy (which in all the schools required four witnesses to the act of penetration) was not executed but only given a milder punishment or perhaps only disciplined by a judge.
The ex Muslim critic also intimated Muslims do not respect the law of America. This paragraph from Dr Brown may also be of use:
According to the Shariah, Muslims living in the West (or other non-Muslim states) are essentially visitors from the perspective of the sacred law. The standard definition amongst Muslim scholars for the Abode of Islam (Dar al-Islam) was those lands where the Shariah reigns.[7] Muslims outside that space reside in lands and countries as guests of whatever legal or religious system reigns there. If the law of the land were to prohibit Muslims from carrying out a duty required by the Shariah, such as prayer, or require them to do something clearly forbidden in Islam, such as drinking alcohol, the standard opinion amongst classical Muslim scholars was that Muslims could no longer reside there (a second opinion was that they should remain so that the religion of Islam would not vanish there). Otherwise, Muslims must respect the law of the land. Their decision to reside in those lands represents their agreement to a contract with the governments ruling them. As the Quran commands Muslims, “be true to your agreements” (Quran 5:1), and as the Prophetﷺ taught, “Muslims are bound by the conditions [of their agreements].”[8] The Shariah continues to govern Muslims’ private worship and whatever areas of law the local system leaves open (such as contracts, inheritance and marriage in the US), but Muslims must respect and abide by the restrictions, duties and regulations placed upon them.
Muslim Refutes Pastor Steven Anderson's Anti-Gay and Anti-Muslim Propaganda
Ex Muslims And Self Hatred!
Growing Problem of Islamophobia in Britain What in the world is Ex Muslims of Scoland? EXMUSLIM PAWNS? Muslim Complains About BBC The Big Questions - Nicky Campbell
Difference Between Ex Muslims and Ex Muslim Extremists About 20% of British Muslim Women Feel Unsafe in Britain [QURAN MIRACLES] The Miracles of the Number 19 in Quran | Dr. Shabir Ally
People converting to Islam
Sharia Law against terrorism
Christians having dreams and converting to Islam
Learn about Islam
Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
Muslim Refutes Pastor Steven Anderson's Anti-Gay and Anti-Muslim Propaganda
Steven Anderson, a pastor in Arizona, has put forward some anti-Muslim and anti-gay propaganda in the wake of the Orlando massacre.
If the video does not play, please see here
His first bout of propaganda was to equate homosexual people with paedophiles. The research does not support his assertions. See these citations from Dr Gregroy Herek's paper (there are more citations in the video refutation of Steven Anderson):
As an expert panel of researchers convened by the National Academy of Sciences noted in a 1993 report: "The distinction between homosexual and heterosexual child molesters relies on the premise that male molesters of male victims are homosexual in orientation. Most molesters of boys do not report sexual interest in adult men, however" (National Research Council, 1993, p. 143, citation omitted).
The empirical research does not show that gay or bisexual men are any more likely than heterosexual men to molest children. This is not to argue that homosexual and bisexual men never molest children. But there is no scientific basis for asserting that they are more likely than heterosexual men to do so. And, as explained above, many child molesters cannot be characterized as having an adult sexual orientation at all; they are fixated on children.
Steven Anderson also attacked Muslims and Islam. He sad Islam was a wicked religion. However, just to show how shallow and nconsistent his claim is we can look at which religion has the better teachings on alcohol; Christianity or Islam. Islam forbids alcohol while Christianity allows it. Alcohol is linked to certain types of cancer even in moderation as well as other societal and health problems. Clearly Islam has the better teachings. Pastor Steven Anderson is confronted with a dilemma here, if Islam is wicked how did it come with better teachings than the religion you believe to be the true and holiest religion?
In the video we have a well known Islamophobe who admits Islam leads to many Muslims living upright and fine lives. How can a "wicked faith" lead to that?
Prophecies of the Messiah - Reza Aslan
British Muslims Protested to Defend Jesus p
Sharia Law against terrorism
Christians having dreams and converting to Islam
Conversions to Islam
Learn about Islam
Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)