Allen West is on a crusade, no doubt about it. The video for his interview with Shalom TV is insane, it seems as though he puts Israel first even ahead of America.
Allen West: Keith Ellison ‘The Antithesis Of Principles’ Upon Which Country Was Founded (VIDEO)
(Huffington Post)
Freshman Tea Party-backed Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) recently got personal in an attack on one of the House’s two Muslim representatives, declaring that Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) represents “the antithesis of the principles upon which this country was established.”
During an interview with “The Shalom Show,” West also said that he plans to “defeat” Ellison, an outspoken Democrat who “supports Islam,” according to host Richard Peritz, “intellectually in debate and discourse.”
As ThinkProgress notes, West has repeatedly sought to connect Islamic religious beliefs to supposedly anti-American views.
At a town hall meeting during his campaign, West claimed that people who display the popular “Coexist” bumper stickers, which use various religious symbols as font, are those who would “give away our country” and “our rights and freedoms and liberties because they are afraid to stand up and confront that which is the antithesis, anathema of who we are.”
If the connection between the bumper sticker and Islam wasn’t made clear by that statement, West went on to drive home his claim that Islam is a “very vile and very vicious enemy that we have allowed to come in this country because we ride around with bumper stickers that say ‘coexist.’”
For more on West’s controversial views of Islam, check out ThinkProgress’s report here.
January 24th, 2011 at 4:39 pm
Allen West pretends to be for American values… I’d rather have televisions Adam West calling the shots than this schmuck-
January 24th, 2011 at 5:10 pm
Why act so vengeful??? It”s just making him look bad. Why not just disagree??
January 24th, 2011 at 5:29 pm
Let’s hope this guy gets the boot in 2012. The real reason why this psychopathic freak got into office was on fault of those who stayed home last November, myself included. 2010 should be a lesson to us in how much elections, even at the local level, matter and affect their daily lives. I really hope my generation wakes up and realizes that a politician has more power over their lives than the winner on American Idol will ever have.
January 24th, 2011 at 5:45 pm
Islam is vile? Allen west is vile! Anytime I see this pile of garbage on tv I cant help but spit at it. If this pig had it his way, this country would be a theocracy that exsists only to meet Israels every need. And he dares to call anyone Anti-American? What a joke. Also it should never be forgotten that this piece of vile crap was a disgrace to the United States Army.
January 24th, 2011 at 5:50 pm
Well if he’s going to play the smear game, somebody should dish it back to him. “Mr. West, why do you hate America and freedom?”
January 24th, 2011 at 5:52 pm
This is Allen West’s alter-ego.
http://www.captisrael.com/
January 24th, 2011 at 5:53 pm
This Guy is all kinds of crazy any solution from him could never be positive.
January 24th, 2011 at 6:15 pm
NassirH, that comic is hilarious. Apparently, Palestine was sparsely populated and the Jews didn’t displace anyone. Right..I suppose Palestinian refugees came out of nowhere.
We know what’s really happening:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_jHuooQTCYXc/R85CtO5d5JI/AAAAAAAABIw/s4MMaq0fWf8/s400/Latuff4.jpg
January 24th, 2011 at 6:17 pm
I don’t get it. If Keith Ellison had said Allen West was the ‘antithesis of American values’, this would have been lauded here and the rest of the conformist blogs.
Instead, it happens to be someone who doesn’t tote the party line who said something to someone who does that makes this story ‘scornworthy’.
The conformist circle jerk never ceases to amaze me.
January 24th, 2011 at 6:22 pm
Nice hyperlink you got there, Bob. It perfectly typifies your worldview.
January 24th, 2011 at 6:39 pm
Only jihadbob would not understand.. Then again he is just a racist pedophile..
January 24th, 2011 at 6:50 pm
Only jihadbob would not understand.. Then again he is just a racist pedophile..
I heard the same about Keith Ellison.
That Keith Ellison is a racist pedophile.
January 24th, 2011 at 7:02 pm
Take a chill pill Bob and calm down. No need to get angry just because you hate Muslims. I didn’t think the article was particularly hard to understand either. Allen West is an anti-Muslim loon who hates on Keith Ellison and claims that he is anti-American simply because Ellison is Muslim. Sheesh, you would think someone like you who shares West’s bigoted world-views would understand right away. But alas, I guess basic comprehension skills aren’t common traits amongst loons.
January 24th, 2011 at 7:03 pm
Nice to see everyone here is following the Quranic commandment:
“Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best.Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is [rightly] guided.” [16:125]
January 24th, 2011 at 7:23 pm
Guys I need some help. There was an article on here that showed how terrorists in Russia aren’t motivated by religion. I need help finding this artice please and thanks!!
January 24th, 2011 at 7:39 pm
The hypocrite NassirH, who started to cry when an oil embargo was suggested as a solution to the Allen West problem now tries to blame Israel for Allen West.
This is a typical hypocritcal stance that anti Zionists make to delegitimise Israel. I wonder if the likes of NassirH are not our real enemies. they have an agenda to sanitise crimes by Americans by pretending that it is Israel to blame. They try to deflect and cast diversion from the country responsible for spawning the Allen West’s to Israel.
This is so that they can justify their anti Zionism and blame Isreal for a problem which is 100% american.
Nobody buys this crap for a minute Mr Obfuscator NassirH. Allen West is an Evangelical American not an Israeli. He is an Armeggonite Evangelical, and not a Zionist in that he supports a homeland for Jews in Israel, his support for Israel is to hasten the Armeggedon only which initself is a form of anti-semitism, as so many Jewish Zionists will tell you,
Why does NaSSIRh consider cutting oil supplies to a country led by an Islamophboe like Allen West, to be a capital crime?
Evangelical Islamophobia as American as Apple Pie
http://www.religiondispatches.org/books/politics/3766/evangelical_islamophobia_as_american_as_apple_pie/
The 2010 Elections and the deep history of American antipathy towards Islam
By Shalom Goldman
In his timely and perceptive book, American Christians and Islam, Kidd insists that there is something unique about American antipathy to Islam that differs substantially from earlier American Protestant campaigns against Catholics, Jews and other religious minorities. Arguing that “the recent American Christian hostility towards Islam derives from a long historical tradition,” Kidd points out that even before the American Revolution Anglo-Americans were predisposed to hostility towards Muslims.
Two elements were chiefly responsible for the hostility: the widespread notion that all Muslims had to be brought to Christianity and the rampant speculations about the End Time that saw Islam as the Antichrist. Humphrey Prideaux’s 1697 book The True Nature of Imposture Fully Displayed in the Life Of Mahomet was printed and preached about many times in the American colonies. As Kidd sees it, an imagined Islam became the foil which American Christian legitimacy and ‘authenticity’ challenged.
January 24th, 2011 at 7:49 pm
“they have an agenda to sanitise crimes by Americans by pretending that it is Israel to blame. They try to deflect and cast diversion from the country responsible for spawning the Allen West’s to Israel.
This is so that they can justify their anti Zionism and blame Isreal for a problem which is 100% american.”
You’re Pro-Israel but Anti-American? What about the crimes committed by Israel? Will you stand with Israel after what it has done to the Palestinians?
Why do you support Israel. I’ve asked you before, how do you reconcile your Muslim beliefs with supporting a country that is currently involved in a conflict with your brothers and sisters.
And how is it 100% American. What about the Islamophobia in Israel.
January 24th, 2011 at 7:51 pm
Mossizzle
“Apparently, Palestine was sparsely populated and the Jews didn’t displace anyone. Right..I suppose Palestinian refugees came out of nowhere.”
didn’t the Pakistanians displace Indians? i’m sure India would love have to have her land back, after all pakistan is a colonially created country.
in any case, there was a Jewish exodus from Middle Eastern Muslim lands, that Israel absorbed,
but none of the above has anything to do with Allen West as much as NassirH and others may like to pretend it does.
I remind you that Allen West is an American not an Israeli.
January 24th, 2011 at 8:06 pm
“didn’t the Pakistanians displace Indians? i’m sure India would love have to have her land back, after all pakistan is a colonially created country.”
What a lie. The Muslims and Hindus decided to separate the country. No one stole it. Just one population (Indian Muslims) moved to the West whilst another (Hindus, Sikhs mostly) moved to the East. The Muslims were already there and just decided to move apart because the Muslims didn’t feel safe being a minority in a majority Hindu country. Pakistan, the modern-state of India and Bangladesh were created from British India. Your lack of knowledge on this subject is astounding.
“didn’t the Pakistanians displace Indians?”
Lol. Did the Pakistanis just jump out of nowhere and forced the Indians of their land. The Pakistanis are just Indian Muslims who migrated towards the West of the land that was British India to form their own country where they would be the majority. Again, your lack of knowledge on this subject is astounding.
Israel is different. Jews immigrated to Palestine with the intention of forming a country. They came from all over the world and populated Palestine, buying land from the Arabs to form new Jewish communities. As tensions rose between the Arabs and the new Jewish arrivals, the UN decided to partition the country to prevent further violence. Terrorism by groups such as the Irgun helped the founding of Israel significantly by forcing the British to leave by committing atrocious acts on their soldiers.
I can understand some Muslims who allow Israel the right to exist. But you go overboard and support them fully. I ask you again, does your support of Israel mean you support the oppression of the Palestinians.
January 24th, 2011 at 8:07 pm
Nothing new here, shabbos goyim have to prove their loyality to the fascists. Allen West just wants to a bigger house. I see BMD has a new troll identity : “PatriotsQuestion911.” As usual up to his/her usual hasbaRat tactics of whitewashing the role of “israel” in anti-Muslim propaganda.
January 24th, 2011 at 8:11 pm
Naturally, it’s all about kowtowing to almighty Israel!
January 24th, 2011 at 8:15 pm
“but none of the above has anything to do with Allen West as much as NassirH and others may like to pretend it does.”
Then stop ranting about Pakistan. It is a legitimate country and you, as a Muslim, should support it. It is a country created for Muslims and is thus unique amongst the other Muslim countries in the world who were instead created for different ethnic groups and nationalities. Did you know it was founded on 27th Ramadan (also known as Laylatul Qadr).
To call it a “colonially created country” is an insult. Apparently you love Israel more than a country founded by Muslims.
Why do you get so defensive about someone linking American Islamophobia to Zionism when it was you who was constantly demanding that Loonwatch write an article about Aubrey Chernick.
http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/09/the-connection-between-zionism-and-organized-islamophobia-the-facts/
January 24th, 2011 at 8:18 pm
@Mosizzle
BMD aka “patriotsQuestion911″ aka 1001 schizo trolls is simply repeating a failing “israeli” hasbaRat talking point justifying the invasion, occupation and annexation of Palestine with the British partition of India. Comparing apples to fish. Before its the annihilation of the Native American Indians. Watch how badly this Zionist bottom feeder got slapped around by the facts :
http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/09/the-connection-between-zionism-and-organized-islamophobia-the-facts/
Oh and BMD, it’s Pakistani, not “Pakistanian,” buffoon.
January 24th, 2011 at 8:23 pm
“…Already has He sent you word in the Book, that when ye hear the signs of Allah held in defiance and ridicule, ye are not to sit with them unless they turn to a different theme: if ye did, ye would be like them. For Allah will collect the Hypocrites and those who defy faith―all in hell―…”
an Nisa 140 (Yusaf Ali translation)
It bothers me alot when I see Muslims diverting the conversation to argue with anti Muslims like JihadBob.
I have to ask you…what exactly does it teach them or us if hearts are hardened already to an open dialouge, civil exchange, and a mutual learing experience.
I thought this site was created to counter the media and those who have made an industry of Islamophobia. It seems however that the commenters give audience to the idiots that simply come here to spread hate and propagada.
It is what they do…it is thier job to divert a learning experience into an arguement about ideology, and keep people fearful and hateful, so that they can justify thier own cowardly and bigotous nature.
Please brothers and sisters of Islam…WE KNOW BETTER THAN THIS. We simply share with them the truth, nothing more. We dont defend the lies they tell, and we dont let them define Islam, or Muslims.
Most of all, do not let them take over the conversation.
What angered me most of all, is that one of the rugular hatemongers in this forum posted that horrid film ‘The Third Jihad’. They knew it would incite anger here, and it did.
It is time now to BAN people who are overly bigotous and hateful towards Islam. They serve no purpose in a civil dialouge. These ‘people’ have plenty of places to go to spread thier hate and bigotry. We (the Muslims) need a respite from it.
January 24th, 2011 at 8:33 pm
Whoa, just cool it down, Questioning Patriot. I thought the picture was funny, that’s all. No need to interject yourself in a hostile way every time the word “Israel” gets mentioned.
Nur Alia:
Bob didn’t really try to define Islam on this thread. He simply pretended that he couldn’t comprehend the article and claimed that everyone who didn’t agree with him was part of a “conformist circle jerk”. I know he sounds rather crude, but I don’t really expect anything better from the loons and neither should you.
January 24th, 2011 at 8:39 pm
What’s with BMD always cooking up a storm whenever somebody mentions Israel. Chill out, it’s just a picture.
January 24th, 2011 at 9:33 pm
@NassirH, at first I thought that the comic was satire.
…
It’s freaky o_o.
January 24th, 2011 at 10:36 pm
“very vile and very vicious enemy that we have allowed to come in this country because we ride around with bumper stickers that say ‘coexist.’”
Hey Uncle Tom….This was the battle cry in the 60′s against blacks…Too bad you weren’t born a generation earlier you scumbag. You need a taste of your own medicine you dog
January 24th, 2011 at 11:01 pm
well said nur alia. Wallah i couldnt agree more with what you said. What those hatemongers are doing is the oldest trick in the book…. Lie and insult or do anything just to deflect the truth or even, god forbid, to look at things with common sense and reason…. I know what your doing jahilboob wallah i do and honestly, i truly feel sorry for you…
January 24th, 2011 at 11:14 pm
NassirH…
With all due respect, people like JihadBob do try to re define Islam. It is part of the reason he, and those like him are in this forum.
The problem I see is this…we let them control the topic. They put out a ‘pejoritive’ statement, and Muslims flock to it like moth to flame. No matter if what they put out is true, or even relevent to the conversation.
Brothers and sisters…there is no need for us to ‘defend Islam’. The words of Allah stand alone. They have stood before were were ever thought of and will stand long after we are forgotten.
JihadBob and those like him have a purpose in mind where ever they go. It is to spread hate, division, and anger. It is why they wake up each morning. It is thier industry, no better than the well known ‘loons’ this website exposes every day. When we flock to defend thier lies and purposeful ignorance, it justifies thier existance. It validates thier hatred, and they dont have to self reflect and address thier own faults and failings as human beings…simply because we give them a reason to ‘blame us’ for them.
NO productive person on earth engages in hate, bigotry. Nor does any thinking person simply repeat blindly every excuse for them not reaching thier full potencial. It is time to send people like JihadBob, either to his own kind, or to a place where he will answer to himself why he is so bitter…and why he expresses it towards Islam and Muslims.
JihadBob is not here to have meaningful, civil dialouge and adds absolutly nothing but lies and propaganda to the discourse. Niether is his co-apologists.
It is time to be productive now, and find ways to reach BEYOND those who are like these hateful bigots. We need to pay more attention to those who are SEEKING TRUTH, rather than spend any time or effort with those who are only here to excuse thier own fear, hate, and bigotry in a mob mentality idustry of fear.
JihadBob has plenty of companions on other hate sites on the vast internet. Leave JihadBob and those like him to stew in thier own hate. Leave them alone, and they will go away.
Better yet…BAN THEM FROM THIS FORUM.
January 24th, 2011 at 11:43 pm
NurAlia – I agree with you fully. It seems to be a matter of pride that causes people to bite at the bait that JB and ilk spit on a frequent basis. Banning them would help… but more will come.. whining that we are against free speech…. Only way to get around that…. is to ban comments altogether.
January 25th, 2011 at 12:36 am
Nur Alia, you don’t understand. JihadWatchers monitor the comments section on Loonwatch and follow JihadBob (and Ahni at Spencerwatch). If a single comment by JihadBob is ignored by us, it might even be for a good reason, they will interpret it as a victory.
It’s not harming anyone if we respond. Of course no one expects JihadBob or HalalPork to suddenly change their opinions but if they leave a negative comment, we must respond.
Even Loonwatch has told its readers to do so:
“Monitor the comments on our website, and if you see an Islamophobe saying something outlandish, respond….Take the initiative, and go the extra mile to help out, so that we absolutely dominate in the comments section of this site.”
http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/03/do-you-love-loonwatch-if-so-do-your-part/
Think of it this way. If you comment at JihadWatch and disagree with them, you’ll have about 10 loons responding to you. They’ve scared off any commenter who will disagree with them by deleting the stronger comments and allowing JWers to destroy the Muslims who come on the site with poor arguments.
January 25th, 2011 at 12:51 am
[quote]If a single comment by JihadBob is ignored by us, it might even be for a good reason, they will interpret it as a victory.[/quote]
And there is something else they would interpret as a victory: a banning.
I know I consider my three bans from Atlas Shrugs victories.
January 25th, 2011 at 10:23 am
I’m going to chance being consigned to hell by Allah and respond to Nur Alia in hopes of having open dialogue, civil exchange, and a mutual learning experience. I will attempt to do this without straying into idiotic, hate-mongering, bigoted, cowardly, pejorative, divisive, angry, ignorant, bitter, untrue, propagandistic, or loony waters. If I fail in this endeavor, please correct me, while keeping in mind that I do this as an exercise in SEEKING TRUTH. Let’s begin: Some Muslims believe that the Koran is the final, inerrant word of a supreme being they call Allah. I contend that the Koran is nothing more than a human-authored jumble of a book filled with superstitious ramblings so common among people in the 7th century. Some Muslims believe that the proper punishment for blasphemy is death. I contend that questioning the Islamic faith and its supposed prophet is a duty of all free-thinking humans, Muslims or not, and that it should be welcomed, not met with execution. Some Muslims believe-in fact I believe that all of the major schools of Islamic thought demand-that sane, adult males who renounce their faith and turn towards apostasy are to be put to death. I contend that such thinking is cruel and barbaric beyond the pale. Now, if I have stayed within my own guidelines outlined above, should I or people holding similar views be banned from this forum? You say we (the Muslims) need a respite from it; we (the non-believers) aren’t going to give you said respite until you answer the questions posed above.
January 25th, 2011 at 10:38 am
Maybe instead of stooping to insults just answer straight and maybe the combat will be rational…. I dunno… but I really do notice a lot of butthurt pride and insult hurling here. On both sides.
January 25th, 2011 at 11:35 am
@ Hopper
No one’s saying that people wishing to engage in meaningful dialogue, even critical dialogue, should be banned from the site. There are some regulars to LW that don’t want to discuss anything, constantly repeat the same mindless nonsense over and over again, despite being presented with answers and counter arguments over and over again, and do nothing but troll out incendiary comments with the hope of sidelining any rational, productive discussion. I’m not sure if you are new here or not, but this is the frustrating pattern that is being referenced in these posts.
Also, the questions you’ve posed above have been answered on LW in numerous articles and comment threads. The issue of the death penalty for apostasy is pretty straight forward. At one point in time, religion and nationality were essentially the same thing (this was not exclusive to Islam). Thus, apostates were thought to have committed an act of treason. Our understanding of nationality and identity are vastly more complex now than during the early years of Islam. However, even in the ahadith that mentions the death penalty for apostasy, the punishment is further qualified by the condition of the apostate’s attempt to cause harm or inflict damage upon the community. You can read a very in-depth article on this here: http://www.loonwatch.com/2009/09/apostasy/
You have every right to criticize any ideology or belief system you choose. No one here would tell you otherwise. But, there is a line between criticism and spreading hate. And unfortunately, there are a few people that cross that line on a regular basis. If there was an organized campaign trying to marginalize your belief system, make people afraid of you, stifle your ability to participate in society and even hold leadership positions in the community, then you might be a bit more sensitive to the distinction between criticism and fear-mongering.
I don’t think haters should be banned from this site or ignored. But we do need to address all people with a certain level of intelligence and civility. It’s what makes us better than the loons.
January 25th, 2011 at 12:35 pm
Well said, Sunnishine.
January 25th, 2011 at 1:00 pm
Well, sunnishine, we can agree that the issue of death for apostasy is pretty straight forward, though that agreement may lead us in different directions. One need not be a racist or Islamophobic bigot, nor study in depth articles on the antecedents of this position or its provenance, to realize what a cruel, barbaric, and inhuman practice it is. The same reasoning applies to blasphemy laws currently on the books of some Islamic countries.
Have you ever heard of the “cannibals next door” logic? It refers to the apocryphal next door neighbor family who are normal in every sense of the word-pleasant people, good neighbors, fine upstanding citizens. The one problem is that once a month, the folks next door like to head to a cemetery, dig up a freshly buried body, and eat it for dinner. Can such behavior be excused? Can it be overlooked? Would you feel it is your duty to act in such a way that this practice be ended? Likewise, we have Islam’s stance on apostasy and blasphemy. It cannot be excused, it cannot be overlooked, and it is good peoples’ duty to act to stop those practices.
Until Islam renounces these iron age horrors, and ban them forever, it must be held up for ridicule and criticism. I simply do not think such views are intelligent or civil, nor will I respect or tolerate individuals or religious ideologies that support them.
January 25th, 2011 at 2:07 pm
Hopper:Islam’s stance on apostasy and blasphemy…..Until Islam renounces these iron age horrors, and ban them forever……
Is Islam a walking, talking entity that can take action? Your analogy of the cannibals next door logic is fallacious simply because the cannibals are people whereas Islam is a concept, not an actual living, breathing organism. Its like comparing apples and clocks.
January 25th, 2011 at 2:21 pm
“Until Islam renounces these iron age horrors, and ban them forever, it must be held up for ridicule and criticism. I simply do not think such views are intelligent or civil, nor will I respect or tolerate individuals or religious ideologies that support them.”
Islam is a religion, of which there are multiple interpretations. Are you going to attack every single Muslim just because someone far far away is using their religion for a bad purpose?
You can hold your belief about Islam, so long as you don’t use that to justify violence against Muslims or use it to limit their civili rights, as nearly every Islamophobe shown on this site does. People aren’t featured on this site just for not agreeing with Islam, they are featured here for bigotry, racism and Islamophobia. For example, Allen West is attacking Keith Ellison only because he is Muslim, even though Keith Ellison is a fairly liberal Muslims and he supports gay rights. Obviously, Allen West isn’t attacking Keith Ellison for Islam but just because of who he is.
You want a civil dialogue so take a look at the Loonwatch article on apostasy:
http://www.loonwatch.com/2009/09/apostasy/
January 25th, 2011 at 2:46 pm
Hopper:
READ MY LIPS!
The First Amendment to the Constitution states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
So Keith Ellison is free to worship Satan or Ganesh (the Hindu elephant God) or Hanuman (the Hindu monkey God) or Lingam (the Hindu penis God) or Allah (the Muslim God) or he could just worship his pet hamster, he is protected and there is nothing you can do about it.
IF you don’t honor the First Amendment, leave this country but before that please leave this board!
January 25th, 2011 at 2:48 pm
@ Hopper
In my previous post I was not justifying this practice. I was explaining why it is no longer relevant and that it was never an aspect of the religion but a matter of governance (human societies evolve, so do the way we govern ourselves). In the early years of Islam, apostasy was conceived of in exactly the same way people view treason today. Treason is still a criminal offense punishable death in many “modern” countries. The mainstream, moderate Muslim stance on apostasy is that it should not be punishable by death because religion is no longer tied to nationality and one can easily change his or her religion without being a traitor or a danger to the Muslim community. There is no longer such thing as a united Islamic nation, so the notion that one can commit treason against it is outdated and irrelevant. SO, you’re right. People who believe apostates should receive the death penalty do not have my support or respect and since the vast majority of Muslims do not believe this, you have no reason to speak so venomously of us. Comparing my religion to cannibalism is ridiculous and unwarranted and your analogy was extremely WEAK.
In addition, I second IbnAbuTalib’s question to you. What does it mean to say “when Islam renounces, or supports or denies such such and such”? This is like saying “when history or science acknowledge or state or believes such such and such.” This is a vague statement that reinforces your lack of conceptual knowledge about the issue. I’m a Muslim, and I’m telling you that death penalty for apostates is NOT part of the religion. There are close to 2 billion Muslims in this world, do you expect us all to think and speak in unison. It’s impossible. People who espouse the same traditions, customs and religion will naturally have their own personal opinions and beliefs and will interpret these belief systems in different ways. I am not responsible for the extremist Muslim anymore than you are for someone who does something crazy and believes the same thing you believe (whatever it is that you believe).
And despite what you claim, examining cultures and religions that aren’t your own is a complex task that requires a complex approach (and mind for that matter). If you don’t want to engage the topic in this manner then don’t expect understanding that exceeds the most rudimentary of levels.
January 25th, 2011 at 3:11 pm
“It refers to the apocryphal next door neighbor family who are normal in every sense of the word-pleasant people, good neighbors, fine upstanding citizens. The one problem is that once a month, the folks next door like to head to a cemetery, dig up a freshly buried body, and eat it for dinner”
Previously, on Loonwatch:
“I will attempt to do this without straying into idiotic, hate-mongering, bigoted, cowardly, pejorative, divisive, angry, ignorant, bitter, untrue, propagandistic, or loony waters”
Great fail by our new loon, Hopper.
January 25th, 2011 at 3:23 pm
“Until Islam renounces these iron age horrors, and ban them forever, it must be held up for ridicule and criticism. I simply do not think such views are intelligent or civil, nor will I respect or tolerate individuals or religious ideologies that support them.”
Oh come how. I’m sure you can find other reasons to hate and ridicule 1.6 billion muslims. There’s that whole terrorism thing, right? Or the silly burqa? Man, you must hate that. Oh and ‘honor killings’. That just yells out “Muslim” like nothing else.
After just two posts, you managed to make a loon analogy using cannibals and state that muslims should be ridiculed. That was one short exercise in SEEKING TRUTH.
January 25th, 2011 at 3:30 pm
Hopper:
Firstly, in most Muslim-majority countries, the crimes of blasphemy and apostasy are not punished by death. Secondly, Muslims living in the United States–or any other country for that matter–are forbidden by Islamic law to resort to vigilantism. This fact is highlighted to the 13th century Islamic scholar al-Qurtubi when he says, “No one should carry out the hadd punishments without the permission of the ruler. If there is no ruler who rules according to sharee’ah then it is not permissible for the ordinary people to carry out the hadd [corporal] punishments”. Thus, even if a radical Muslim wanted to kill an apostate from Islam, he would be forbidden to do so because that right is solely for the state.
Also, it’s not as if other religions and their respective theocracies ( i.e. Judaism and Christianity) didn’t punish apostasy or blasphemy with death. Does that mean we shouldn’t respect Jews or Christians and instead compare the cannibals? Again, read the article on Loonwatch’s article on apostasy.
January 25th, 2011 at 3:31 pm
*compare them to cannibals…
Here’s the Loonwatch article:
http://www.loonwatch.com/2009/09/apostasy/
January 25th, 2011 at 6:03 pm
@NassirH – “Firstly, in most Muslim-majority countries, the crimes of blasphemy and apostasy are not punished by death”
That is true. While some have – but rarely or never carry out – the death penalty, most others either jail or fine the offender. There are no Muslim majority countries that regard either offence as a civil right.
January 25th, 2011 at 6:03 pm
Hopper…
You said this. “… I contend that the Koran is nothing more than a human-authored jumble of a book filled with superstitious ramblings so common among people in the 7th century…”
If you have already made up your mind about Islam, it isnt up to me to change it.
We (the Muslims) only have the duty to tell you the truth. We cant force you accept it. My posistion is, once you have stopped asking questions and start telling us what ‘you contend’ the Qur’an (or Islam is), you have stopped ‘seeking truth’ and started ‘defining’ Islam, or Muslims, and that is when I feel my obligation to you has ended.
Now, if you want to ASK questions, and civilly express and discuss your concerns, exchange ideas (your own of course…as it is hard to argue with apologist web sites) and share information, I am with you.
However, I will not engage in punditry and will not answer questions about what ‘some Muslims’ have concerns about.
I am sure that many of my brothers and sisters in Islam have addressed those issues you have expressed. I am sure that the best answer for you, if you are seeking truth from this site (LoonWatch) is to archive into the many…many…many comments about the topics you have raised.
Hopper…
Then you posted this statement.
“…Until Islam renounces these iron age horrors, and ban them forever, it must be held up for ridicule and criticism. I simply do not think such views are intelligent or civil, nor will I respect or tolerate individuals or religious ideologies that support them…”
After reading this, it is my personal opinion that you have made up your mind about Islam. There is nothing to teach you that you will accept that does not fit your peconcieved notions about Islam and Muslims. My obligation to your learning experience has ended.
May Allah guide us rightly.
January 25th, 2011 at 6:24 pm
Islam is the disease, Rep. Allen West is the cure!
January 25th, 2011 at 6:25 pm
Everything I wanted to say has been said I believe, I just wanted to say I am glad we can have a civil discussion about a subject we don’t agree on here. It’s the only way forward. As was said, it is our duty to tell the truth, not make people believe and that is that.
All I’ll say on the issue at hand is that as far as I am concerned, the death sentence for renouncing one’s faith is against Qu’ranic teachings and the word of the Qu’ran. It was, as was stated, a thing that was used in the past but that is not so relevant now.
Same goes for so called ‘blasphemy’, if someone could tell me what ‘right’ Pakistan has to implement such laws without foresight and without correct interpretation then I’d be most obliged. If they are going to implement such laws to satisfy the whims of a certain group of people then they should do it in an Islamic way, i.e. make accusing someone falsely of ‘blasphemy’ punishable by death and let the Federal Court deal with it, we’ll see how many people are confident enough to accuse then. Left in the hands of local clerics, courts and whatnot just means that it will be used as a weapon and to settle grudges as it has been recently.
January 25th, 2011 at 9:05 pm
Jack…
The problem is, that is what happened in Pakistan. The women who have been sentanced to death under Pakistani law. They did go to court and were found guilty.
From what I understand, apostasy and blasphamy cant be presecuted under a rule of law that doesnt allow it according to the Hadiths.
My personal opinion…as long as they dont make ‘industry’ (lie, claim to be an ‘expert’, join Islamophobe groups…etc) of thier loss of faith they should be left alone. If they do make ‘industry’ of thier loss of faith in public, they should be humiliated for the lies they tell in public.
My personal opinion again is that Muslims should speak out against such punishments because a person changes his or her mind. I think we should be beyond that as humanity, and open to other thoughts and ideas.
These kinds of punishments in my opinion are legislated by the weak of mind and spirit. Those who think that Islam is weak, and they must defend it by blocking out other ideas, and learning about other religions and ideologies. I think Islam is much stronger than that.
However, most of the ‘loons’ noted here who make industry of thier ‘ex Islam’ status are not fooling many people. Notice they never talk, or debate with Muslims?
January 26th, 2011 at 11:28 am
sunnishine, we seem to be drifting further apart. In a spirit of civility, I’ll attempt to tone down my venomous language, refrain from using extremely weak analogies, and of course, I’ll no longer compare your religion to cannibalism.
Now, I’m a non-Muslim, and I’m telling you that the death penalty for apostates is part of your religion. Every single major branch of Islamic jurisprudence calls for the death penalty for sane, adult males who publicly renounce Islam. That is simply a fact. There is debate as to what is to be done with women, those who renounce their faith in private, etc, but for sane, adult males there is no equivocation. Death is called for. So, to get past the most rudimentary understanding of the dictates of Islam, please explain how one can subscribe to any ideology-religious, political, ethical, etc. that has this barbaric practice as one of its bedrock pillars?
January 26th, 2011 at 11:37 am
“Now, I’m a non-Muslim, and I’m telling you that the death penalty for apostates is part of your religion. Every single major branch of Islamic jurisprudence calls for the death penalty for sane, adult males who publicly renounce Islam”
Are you going to read the article on apostasy or not? I’ll give you an important quote but you should still read the rest.
“The Ottoman Caliphate, the supreme representative of Sunni Islam, formally abolished this penalty…The Shaykh al-Islam, the supreme head of the religious courts and colleges, ratified this major shift in traditional legal doctrine. It was pointed out that there is no verse in the Qur’an that lays down a punishment for apostasy (although chapter 5 verse 54 and chapter 2 verse 217 predict a punishment in the next world). It was also pointed out that the ambiguities in the hadith (the sayings of the Prophet) suggest that apostasy is only an offense when combined with the crime of treason…
The debate triggered by the Ottoman reform was continued when al-Azhar University in Cairo, the supreme religious authority in the Arab world, delivered a formal fatwa (religious edict) in 1958, which confirmed the abolition of the classical law in this area.”
Don’t respond until you’ve read the article
http://www.loonwatch.com/2009/09/apostasy/
January 26th, 2011 at 11:47 am
“that has this barbaric practice as one of its bedrock pillars”
Islam for Dummies:
http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/islam-for-dummies-cheat-sheet.html
Shahada (Belief), Salat (Prayer), Zakat (Charity), Saum (Fasting) and Hajj (Pilgrimage).
Note how the death penalty for apostasy is not one of the 5 “bedrock” pillars of Islamas you claim. The 5 pillars of Islam are taught in the first lesson on Islam in most primary schools.
January 26th, 2011 at 12:47 pm
@Mosizzle
Apostasy, criminal law, and jihad are all not pillars of Islam. Muslims forget that too.
Narrated Abu Huraira: an Arab (Bedouin) came to the Messenger of Allah and said: “Messenger of Allah, show me a deed by which I may enter Paradise.” The Prophet said: “Worship Allah and never associate anything with Him, establish the obligatory prayer, and pay the Zakat which is incumbent upon you, and observe the fast of Ramadan.” The Bedouin said: “By Him in Whose hand is my soul, I will never add anything to it, nor will I lessen anything from it.” When the bedouin turned his back, the Prophet said: “He who is pleased to see a man from the people of Paradise should look to him.”
[Sahih Muslim, Book 1, Number 14]
عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ أَنَّ أَعْرَابِيًّا جَاءَ إِلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَقَالَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ دُلَّنِي عَلَى عَمَلٍ إِذَا عَمِلْتُهُ دَخَلْتُ الْجَنَّةَ قَالَ تَعْبُدُ اللَّهَ لَا تُشْرِكُ بِهِ شَيْئًا وَتُقِيمُ الصَّلَاةَ الْمَكْتُوبَةَ وَتُؤَدِّي الزَّكَاةَ الْمَفْرُوضَةَ وَتَصُومُ رَمَضَانَ قَالَ وَالَّذِي نَفْسِي بِيَدِهِ لَا أَزِيدُ عَلَى هَذَا شَيْئًا أَبَدًا وَلَا أَنْقُصُ مِنْهُ فَلَمَّا وَلَّى قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ مَنْ سَرَّهُ أَنْ يَنْظُرَ إِلَى رَجُلٍ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْجَنَّةِ فَلْيَنْظُرْ إِلَى هَذَا
January 26th, 2011 at 4:12 pm
“The Ottoman Caliphate, the supreme representative of Sunni Islam, formally abolished this penalty…The Shaykh al-Islam, the supreme head of the religious courts and colleges, ratified this major shift in traditional legal doctrine. It was pointed out that there is no verse in the Qur’an that lays down a punishment for apostasy (although chapter 5 verse 54 and chapter 2 verse 217 predict a punishment in the next world). It was also pointed out that the ambiguities in the hadith (the sayings of the Prophet) suggest that apostasy is only an offense when combined with the crime of treason…
That would be interesting if true. But I’ve read apostasy was still punishable under the Ottoman empire even after the Tanzimat reforms.
January 26th, 2011 at 6:28 pm
Really Bob? From what I’ve read, the death penalty for apostasy was abolished in the Ottoman Empire.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanzimat
January 26th, 2011 at 7:00 pm
Mo, Nassir, Justin and the rest…I give you credit, you guys keep on trying with this Jihad guy although he is never going to absorb anything or learn anything unless Allah wishes…JazakAllah Khayran for your efforts.
January 26th, 2011 at 7:05 pm
“But I’ve read apostasy was still punishable under the Ottoman empire even after the Tanzimat reforms.”
Sure. Keep telling yourself that.
http://www.tvcrazy.net/image/data/media/8/x-files-I%20want%20to%20believe.jpg
January 26th, 2011 at 7:42 pm
JihadBob…
You seem to know alot about Islam. Now tell us why you are not so ‘against’ what Christianity has in its book. Talk to us about the concept not found in Islam but found in the Bible about ‘war without mercy’.
Nowhere in Islam are we commanded to ‘kill everyone…men, women, children’ Even when soldiers killed all the men and took prisoners of the women and children, they were punished by thier leaders…the children and women who had ‘been with men’ (being nice) were slaughtered, and the women who had not were raped and abused.
Tell us JihadBob, how can you riticule islam, and not riticule Christianity. Lets talk about ‘war without mercy’ in the concept of what you in the west call ‘collateral damage’.
January 26th, 2011 at 7:43 pm
JihadBob…
This was taken from my quote in the above post. Understand that this is from the BIBLE, and not from the Qur’an.
“…Nowhere in Islam are we commanded to ‘kill everyone…men, women, children’ Even when soldiers killed all the men and took prisoners of the women and children, they were punished by thier leaders…the children and women who had ‘been with men’ (being nice) were slaughtered, and the women who had not were raped and abused…”
January 26th, 2011 at 7:45 pm
Jihadbob…
Please answer the question I asked you. Tell us something about your beliefs, rather than your interpretation of ours.
January 26th, 2011 at 11:06 pm
One day a man who had an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father got into a fight with one of the Israelite men. During the fight, this son of an Israelite woman blasphemed the LORD’s name. So the man was brought to Moses for judgment. His mother’s name was Shelomith. She was the daughter of Dibri of the tribe of Dan. They put the man in custody until the LORD’s will in the matter should become clear. Then the LORD said to Moses, “Take the blasphemer outside the camp, and tell all those who heard him to lay their hands on his head. Then let the entire community stone him to death. Say to the people of Israel: Those who blaspheme God will suffer the consequences of their guilt and be punished. Anyone who blasphemes the LORD’s name must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel. Any Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the LORD’s name will surely die. (Leviticus 24:10-16 NLT)
your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB)
Of course, Bob will tell you this is only for Jews…..because God was pretty angry back then, always ticked off. Then, He decided to cool down a bit, and wanted some peace and quite. So he created a new covenant with Christians. Unfortunately, they broke that covenant and ticked Him off again, but not as much as before. And that’s where the Quran comes in.
January 27th, 2011 at 6:33 am
To Mosizzle and Nur Alia:
Mosizzle: I’m offended that you insist other Muslims should support Pakistan just bc it is a Muslim country. Support a country that committed genocide on their fellow humans and Muslims in Bangladesh. I consider myself a human being first. There is yet to be a legitimately genuine remorseful apology from Pakistan instead of using the typical Israel line “but both countries did bad things” to avoid guilt. Pakistan did the first blow when its army killed multitude of civilians and intelligentsia systematically to weaken Bangladesh’s youth and future so that Bangladeshis were tortured into changing their mind about seceding from Pakistan. Pakistan to this day deny what it did, and lower the death toll and rapes on its part. To this day Pakistanis are the ones who get angry at Bangladeshis for asking for an apology and at least an acknowledgment of what its government did. But you won’t see that in their history books. Pakistan can’t act like the victim when it was retaliated against for its actions. If someone is threatening your life you don’t just sit there waiting to die, you fight back in a war that was started just bc your country wanted to secede from another. Pakistan’s atrocities can not be compared to that of Bangladesh’s. Pakistan and the attitude of many Pakistanis remind me of Israel. Not Muslim like at all. I support the good people of Pakistan but not Pakistanis who support their government and military’s actions by denying the atrocities.
Nur Alia, I strongly believe in the “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”. Banning and censoring people is going backwards. Freedom of Speech is a human right.
BTW your grandma story gave me goosebumps and made me cry. What an honorable woman. It was very inspirational and beautiful. And example of what humanity should be like.
January 27th, 2011 at 1:46 pm
Sure. Keep telling yourself that.
I posted, yesterday, the quotation and citation of the author who claims that apostasy was not repealed unlike the other Hadd punishments the Turks abolished.
In any event, in the case of the Tanzimat reforms isn’t an issue of re-interpretation of Islamic sources of law but outright rejection of Islamic law in favor of European positive law – chiefly Napoleonic and English common law.
January 27th, 2011 at 1:49 pm
^ The above, please refer to Dawud’s and JLC’s previous comments on those who proof-text scriptures from holy books and tell those how they are to properly adhere to the teachings of their religion.
January 27th, 2011 at 3:04 pm
“…those who proof-text scriptures from holy books and tell those how they are to properly adhere to the teachings of their religion.”
Throwing stones from glass houses, again?
January 27th, 2011 at 3:09 pm
JihadBob is a master of irony, though doesn’t see it.
January 27th, 2011 at 3:23 pm
“I posted, yesterday, the quotation and citation of the author who claims that apostasy was not repealed unlike the other Hadd punishments the Turks abolished.”
Would it hurt you to post it again?
“In any event, in the case of the Tanzimat reforms isn’t an issue of re-interpretation of Islamic sources of law but outright rejection of Islamic law in favor of European positive law – chiefly Napoleonic and English common law.”
I’ll admit intense Western pressure on the Ottoman Empire at the time influenced its decision. The Western World wanted to “reform” Islam in the Ottoman Empire to “destroy” it. The death penalty for apostasy would be removed and Christian missionaries would be free to convert the Muslims, that was the plan and they were quite open about it.
However, in the end, the Shaykh-Ul-Islam himself approved of the reforms which means that he felt there was nothing in Islam preventing them from doing so. If you read the passage you can see that he justifies the decision using Quran and Hadith. Even today, scholars like Javed Ahmed Ghamidi use the Quran when arguing against the death penalty for apostasy and blasphemy.
And since no new Khalifa has been chosen to change the ruling, the effects of the reform still stand.
“outright rejection of Islamic law in favor of European positive law – chiefly Napoleonic and English common law.”
I thought that was EXACTLY what Islamophobes want –for us to get rid of our Sharia Law and replace it with theirs. You’re still not happy even if that does happen!
January 27th, 2011 at 3:30 pm
Touche Mosizzle!
And it’s not just Javed Ghamidi arguing for this position. Well-known authorities such as a number of late Shaykh al-Azhar’s, a number of high-ranking Muftis past and present in the world (including the Grand-Mufti of Egypt currently), and others such as Mohammad Hashim Kamali all support this position.
January 27th, 2011 at 4:29 pm
According to Islamophobes it’s okay to quote one Shaykh’s views as representative of all Islam and all Muslims if it makes Islam look bad. But if a lone Shaykh says something that makes Islam look good, well that’s just his personal opinion and not representative of Islam at all.
Allahu A’lam
January 27th, 2011 at 5:58 pm
@Mosizzle, DrM
“Patriots Question 9/11″ also attempted to equate the immigration of Jews from Arab countries to Israel with Palestinians who were forced out of Palestine by Zionist militias. This is a common whitewash Zionists like to use, but it’s so disingenuous. Jews from Arab countries were not ethnically cleansed the way Palestinians were during the Naqba. Many Jews left for their own Zionist desires to live in a “Jewish state”. Many also left due to the panic resulting from Mossad terrorist operations in countries like Iraq. This is something the hasbaraists won’t mention though. But according to him/her, the fact that Arab Jewish “refugees” emigrated to Israel (which is what Zionists wanted anyways… mostly to do labor that the Ashkenazi elite didn’t want to do), this justifies Israel’s expulsion of Palestinians in ’48 and Israel’s ongoing ethnic cleansing policies in Palestine today.
And there’s a definite connection between Israel and Islamophobia. To bring that up is not at all unfair. Israeli propagandists came up with many of the false, dehumanizing lies about Islam and Muslims. A lot of the anti-Islam explanations for terrorism came from Israeli academics and writers. The theory that sexually frustrated Muslim/Arab men have to blow themselves up so that they can get sex in the afterlife started in Israel during the intifada. It was then picked up by Western media and people still believe it. Why does “Patriots Question 9/11″ want to protect Israel so much? What has this racist settler state done for her/him? It’s not wrong to mention Christian Islamophobia — that’s valid. But why try to ignore the Israeli/Zionist role in all of this?
And I agree with your comments about Pakistan/India. How silly to compare that partition to Israel/Palestine!
January 27th, 2011 at 6:02 pm
“^ The above, please refer to Dawud’s and JLC’s previous comments on those who proof-text scriptures from holy books and tell those how they are to properly adhere to the teachings of their religion.”
Why would I need their comments when I have yours?
January 28th, 2011 at 11:35 am
I’ll admit intense Western pressure on the Ottoman Empire at the time influenced its decision.
That’s an interesting belief you have there, but reality says the pressure to replace one set of law with another was internal.
If you read the passage you can see that he justifies the decision using Quran and Hadith.
Without direct access to the original article this quote was copy/pasted from, I can make no determination whether this is indeed an actual justification the Shaykh himself made.
In any event, it seems a bit of a moot issue since *all* Hadd laws were abolished in Turkey, including the ones that clearly are found in the Koran.
According to my source, all Hadd laws were abolished except the punishment for apostasy.
January 28th, 2011 at 2:29 pm
“That’s an interesting belief you have there, but reality says the pressure to replace one set of law with another was internal.”
Reality? How would you know? I’m sure you were standing there in Istanbul as the reforms were being carried out, advising the Shaykh-ul-Islam on how to follow his religion. And although he insisted that Islam was a religion of peace and that he didn’t want to kill you, you were persistent, telling him that Muslims must be in a state of permanent warfare with non-Muslims and it is compulsory upon him to kill you.
No, the reality is that we cannot make wild assumptions and instead read about the events from trusted sources. Whilst some Turks who were pushing for reform were doing so because they were Western-educated, the big pressure was coming from Britain, France and Russia who were eager to advance Christianity in the Ottoman Empire and take back some European lands through what is effectively a stealth crusade.
E.J. Brill’s First Enclyclopedia of Islam 1913-1936
“There were also periods when foreign intervention suddenly called for new efforts; this was notably the case during the deliberations which preceded the peace conference in Paris. Turkey’s allies then wanted the Sultan to bind himself by an international agreement to carry out the reforms which were still in abeyance. The result was the Hatt-i-Humanyun of February 1856…One further point in this act is the right conceded to foreign powers to possess landed property in Turkey. The intervention of European powers did not cease, however, after 1856; thus in 1859 they demanded an enquiry into the European provinces. In 1867 the Ottoman government was again taken to task by the powers…
It seems like the West has a long history of meddling with Muslim governments. Thankfully something is being done about that in Tunisia and Egypt (and hopefully Pakistan
).
Anyway, as you can see, the Western countries were telling the Sultan what to reform. This went so far as the Sultan signing some of the reforms in Paris!
But let’s forget the “Leftist-Dhimmi” E.J. Brille, let’s hear it from the big man himself Sheikh Spencer! (during a debate):
“Robert Spencer: The lingering question in the disagreement here between Dr. Bostom and Mr. Akyol is whether when the Ottoman Empire, in Mr. Akyol’s words, “gave full citizenship rights to Jews and Christians and accepted the right of apostasy,” it was doing so as an Islamic state and based on Islamic principles, or whether it was doing so as an exercise in realpolitik in the face of its own growing weakness and Western pressure…Overall, attempts within the nineteenth-century Ottoman Empire to abolish the dhimma generally resulted from Western influences (both within and outside the Sublime Porte) and political calculation, not the elaboration of Islamic principles.”
See. The “Western influences” were responsible for much of the reforming. Spencer does also go on to state how many Muslims continued to disagree with the decree of the Ottoman Empire. However, Muslims have to obey the decree of the Khilafa especially one approved by the Shaykh-ul-Islam. Perhaps the reforms were done for entirely the wrong reasons, but technically they still stand.
January 28th, 2011 at 3:04 pm
“According to my source, all Hadd laws were abolished except the punishment for apostasy.”
Does your source happen to be the Ottoman Caliph?
I found something better to refute both your arguments — that the death penalty for apostasy was not abolish by the Ottoman Empire and that the Western powers had nothing to do with it. Samuel Marinus Zwemer. Perhaps the most famous Christian missionary to the Muslim world who managed to get himself an impressive “probably less than a dozen [converts] during his nearly forty years of service”. But the books, magazines and articles the man published are huge. He was kind of like a 19th and 20th Century Spencer. If you read his works they are exactly Spencer-style. In this article (rant) about Apostasy, he is incensed that some Ahmadis in Britain had sent a paper to the House of Commons in which they said that Apostasy was not punishable by death and then he went on a long rant, picking out Quranic verses and Hadith to say that apostasy is punishable by death and that they were not telling the truth. (Zwemer had heard of taqqiya but hadn’t learnt how to randomly use that concept to imply a Muslim spokesman is lying)
In any case, I wouldn’t use him as a source on Islam but I assume you might like him. Even he acknowledges that the death penalty was abolished by the state. “In Turkey the Law of Apostasy was naturally the law of the courts for many centuries, until, on November 3rd, 1839, Sultan Abdul Medjid issues an imperial rescript named the Hatti Sherif, promising to protect the life, honour and property of all Ottoman subjects irrespective of religion. This was a great step forward.”
Even though the death penalty was no longer the punishment, an Armenian was beheaded in Instanbul for the crime a few years later. As usual, the Western powers pounced upon this incident, using it for propaganda and increased the pressure on the Ottoman Empire to abolish their laws. (Reminds me of what’s going on with Asia Bibi).
“The execution aroused the ambassadors of England, France, Russia and Prussia, who united in a formal demand upon the Sultan to abolish the death penalty for change of religion.”
The Sultan responded:
“Under pressure brought to bear by the before-named ambassadors, led by the British, the Sultan, on March 21st, 1844, gave a written pledge as follows:–”The Sublime Porte engages to take effectual measures to prevent, henceforward, the persecution and putting to death of the Christian who is an apostate”.
The text is long and typical Christian missionary propaganda, and despite admitting the Sultan had abolished it he continues to prove that apostasy is punishable by death, even though he wants abolition of the law. And guess what? It includes theories of creeping Sharia and stealth Jihad from 1924! I kid you not.
http://www.muhammadanism.org/Zwemer/apostasy.pdf
January 30th, 2011 at 10:04 am
Thank you for your comments, but as author Hunt Janin explains, the Turks abolished Hadd laws following an internal need to catch up with Europe – certain pashas and statesmen believed the key to modernizing was by introducing positive (man-made law) and rejecting much of Islamic law that was viewed as primitive and backwards (stoning, lashing, crucifixion, beheading, amputation, etc).
Do you join me and these enlightened pashas who believed Hadd punishments are a relic of the past and best left in the dust bin of seventh century Arabian society?
January 30th, 2011 at 10:22 am
“Do you join me and these enlightened pashas who believed Hadd punishments are a relic of the past and best left in the dust bin of seventh century Arabian society?”
Yes. I don’t agree with how you phrased it but yes, they are outdated and cruel by modern standards. But at the time they were justified.
But you forget that even Spencer admitted the role of outside Western pressure and inside Western pressure (from Western-educated pashas). And it wasn’t the just the introduction of “man made law”, it was the use of the same religious reasoning that allowed Jewish scholars to ‘remove’ the death penalty.
Do you join me in condemning the unnecessary Western interference in Muslim governments that has in the past led to the destruction of Muslim countries such as the Ottoman Empire, oppression of Muslim people through colonialism, the exploitation of natural resources owned by Muslims and is now preventing Muslims from obtaining freedom and democracy in Egypt?
January 30th, 2011 at 10:27 am
The Pashas were Western (French) educated following Napoleon’s invasion and brief occupation of Egypt resulting in the abundantly clear view that Turks had that the Ottoman empire was a paper tiger.
No one forced Turkish statesmen to travel to France and study there.
January 30th, 2011 at 10:31 am
That’s not what I said. I said that Western influence from Western governments pressured the Ottoman government until it changed its laws.
“Overall, attempts within the nineteenth-century Ottoman Empire to abolish the dhimma generally resulted from Western influences (both within and outside the Sublime Porte) and political calculation, not the elaboration of Islamic principles.”
–Robert Spencer.
Do you admit there was outside Western intervention in the Ottoman Empire, as there is today?
February 1st, 2011 at 4:28 pm
Jihadbob, when you’re done refusing to acknowledge your defeat on the other thread, you might want to answer some stuff on this one.
February 1st, 2011 at 4:53 pm
@JihadBob
I’ll still wait, patiently, for the citations from the teachings of Ecclesiastical Law on perpetual holy war so that we may compare it to Islamic Law on perpetual holy war.
Medieval Sourcebook:
Pope Urban II (1088-1099)
Speech at Council of Clermont, 1095
“On this account I, or rather the Lord, beseech you as Christ’s heralds to publish this everywhere and to persuade all people of whatever rank, foot-soldiers and knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends. I say this to those who are present, it meant also for those who are absent. Moreover, Christ commands it.”
Sounds like divinely sanctioned genocide to me. At least the Abbasids let the Jews and Christians keep their religions.
February 3rd, 2011 at 8:38 am
It is really frightening to see that the political resources of the Republicans are so depleted as to introduce to the Congress a big failure like Allen West. This big fiasco wouuld certainly weaken their status in the Congress. The man doesn’t know what subbjectivity or objectivity are. If he has the slightest idea about politics or foreign affairs, he would have not attacked Islam, a religion that is embraced by 7 millions in his own country, and one billion and 500 mllion Muslims living in the four corners of the world.
Because of his ignorance, Allen West raised himself as an enemy to Muslims and Islam. The man willingly surrouded his neck with a rope. The man wants to hang himself with his own hands, who cares to stop him? Let him disappear in the paganism of ignorance.
Dr. Mohsen El-Guindy