Ann Marie Waters – You Are Not Helping By Supporting Condell

No Really.

Pat Condell’s stances are widely pushed among racist circles because Mr. Condell speaks with of conspiracy theories of Muslims. One of his most recent statements was fear for Sweden for granting asylum to 2 MILLION Syrians. A little bit of googling and you find out that the real story was “Sweden gives 8000 Syrians Unlimited Leave To Remain and a chance to become Swedish because they are unlikely to be able to return to Syria”.

A humanitarian gesture.

Mr. Condell was more worried not about a horrific war where millions are displaced and thousands have died and we have seen the use of Chemical Weaponry but over Sweden Importing 2 Million Muslims And Destroying Themselves.

Never mind the reality. This was pushed across the Internet. This view was defended by many of his followers. I pointed out how silly it was and honestly? I got a fair amount of flak. 

After all? As atheists and secularists should we not care about the truth? No. I am aware of a more dangerous statement made by Pat Condell.

At one point Mr. Condell has stated that he did not find the English Defence League to be racist and indeed upholding the values of democracy.

I am afraid the EDL are quite racist. Mr. Condell and his supporters may think you cannot be racist against Muslims but frankly the EDL detect Muslims by harassing Brown People. The EDL have reacted violently and while their claims of “non-violence and British” values are high, one specifically told me that anyone who doesn’t speak “English” shouldn’t be allowed into the UK.

To which my response was “If we wish to protect English we would have to ban the average EDL member from speaking it. Muslamic is not a real world”. and to point out that the “True Languages” of the UK are three in number and that “English” was actually harming the other two (Gaelic and Welsh).

If we are to protect “British Culture” then why on earth are we leaving in the hands of thugs brawling on the street and harassing Muslims. Seriously? Muslim Commits Crime! Let’s Go harass some other Muslims! Let’s Make Streets Safer By Fighting In the Streets!

This is just some of his fans and the disturbing Pat statement that he didn’t see them as far right. Of course not, they don’t follow him around yelling things like “Go Home Paki”. He doesn’t have to worry about gangs of white blokes in bad tracksuits who may decide to erase 6 years of medical education through assault and battery.

Yesterday I had dozens of people insist that I am incorrect. That I shouldn’t fear my own hate group. A hate group that has assaulted asians and harassed Asian Business owners. The modern Klan may not have killed any black people in the traditional fashion  (And frankly? Anti-Indian racism has never required a stupid outfit) but if I described it as a organisation dedicated to celebrating caucasian and European culture I would be laughed at and called an idiot.

I had plenty of Americans defend a hate group that attacks people who looks like me and who’s members have yelled some rather nice things about me. Go Home Paki! Maybe they want me to take a day off?

But now we come to the crux of the argument.

You don’t think we do anything on the “big” issues. Well frankly I don’t see you doing anything to stop the mainly Hindu issue of gender selective abortions and the horrors of caste! Why aren’t you lot doing that? Why on earth are you lot getting together to whinge about Muslims when there are other horrible Issues out there? Won’t someone think of the abandoned widows?

I know what your problem is. You see we are more interested in things that are within our monkeysphere. What we are invested in. I don’t know and do not care who wins the Superbowl. I am British. It’s the Premier League and we play football. You Americans play  Advertisements with shoving matches in the middle. Or some sort of handegg. But likewise you lot don’t care about the Caste System as much as you do about women in Niqabs because women in Niqabs are a visible entity in the UK and we are speaking about the UK. Mr Condell is after all British as is Ann Marie.

As am I.

You don’t think we fight any of those important fights. Well frankly from where I am sat neither do you two. Not so fun sitting on that high horse when I ride the bloody giraffe. Eventually though someone will top me and I will have to shut up!  That’s the curse of playing experience one-upmanship.

Now I know that the “so-and-so follows so-and-so on Twitter who once retweeted so-and-so who once agreed with so-and-so and therefore they’re all bigots” brigade will label me a fellow racist of Condell’s, but they shouldn’t bother.  I cottoned on to that dirty little game a long ago and I refuse to play it.  I don’t agree with every word Condell says, but amazingly that doesn’t stop me recognising that he has raised a solid point here, and that calling him a racist for doing so is grossly dishonest, and yet another attempt to silence criticism of anything related to Islam or Islamism. 

I am ex-Hindu. I don’t have any cultural attachment to Islam.

And after all that we did not see any retraction from Mr. Condell. He did not condemn the EDL after making a statement that flew in the face of all reality. Democratic? They create a culture of fear and provoke tension. Not-Racist? Are we going to be playing no true EDLeaguesman?

Yeah I get it. You don’t think we do enough to support your particular style of fighting Islam.

Anyway, on with the story.

Earlier this week, PZ Myers offered a rather disingenuous analysis of Pat Condell’s latest video “The Curse of Progressive Feminism”.  He began by calling Pat a “racist cretin”, thereby devaluing the once-powerful word racist even further than it already has been by people like him.

No I think the idiots who spent all day trying to defend the EDL to a brown guy who has run afoul of them in real life and who knows that the sandwich is not filled with delicious creamy nutella but rancid faeces. AKA they are a bunch racist wankers who think that the correct response to Islamic Terror and Fundementalism is to go harass random law abiding Muslims.

Pat’s videos have often been very simplistic views and takes on Islam and various events in the world. In particular I think his stance on Palestine is frankly abhorrent and tarnished by his distaste of Islam to the point he is unwilling to recognise or even understand the reason why Palestinians are for want of a better phrase “Fucking Pissed Off” (In their eyes they have lost their homeland to western colonialists for a crime committed by someone that was so horrific we felt guilty over our racism to the Jews but not enough about the racism to Muslims).

When Pat discusses the tarnishment or destruction of culture it is an argument of racists. It is the argument of fear that white Americans used to demonise Jazz music. And the arguments used by the BNP when they harass and scare and attack Asians and Black people.

It is a conspiracy theory that Mr. Condell flogs. The notion that Islam will become so widespread either due to converts or due to them having so many children that all Muslims will vote in lockstep and elect a majority government of Muslims only and bring in Sharia Law.

No! What we should fear is the rising influx of Eastern Europeans! Eventually we will all be speaking Polish, Praying to the Pope and eating polish sausages and sour cucumber soup.

I too can make up a highly irrational hypothetical fear about people!

Condell: ”progressive” feminists who confidently challenge everyday sexism but who are struck deaf and dumb by Islamic misogyny…they turn a blind eye to religiously endorsed wife-beating, forced marriage, honour killing, genital mutilation, organised rape gangs, sharia courts that treat women as less than fully human, and little girls forced to dress like nuns”.

Myers: “I really don’t know of any feminists who think anything on that list is at all acceptable. Who are these mysterious feminists who have no problem with honor killing or rape gangs?”

Pat didn’t quite say that though, did he?  At no point did Condell state that “progressive western feminists” have “no problem” with the horrors listed above, but that the majority of them remain silent and do absolutely nothing about it.  Simultaneously, all over Twitter you will find campaigns to stop Tesco/Asda/Whoever from stocking magazines that might contain a picture of a woman’s breasts.

Condell’s question is a good one, and I wouldn’t mind an answer either – where are all those feminists on matters concerning Islam?

As I said. Where are all these feminists on the side of Indian women? Why are feminists not fighting for my personal things that I care about?

Oh right! Ann’s personal fight for the things she cares about are what she thinks we should all be fighting for.

That’s probably because most feminist know precious little about Islam and even then wouldn’t know where and how to start an argument against something as harmful as the Niqab.

Your argument is harmful it’s as harmful as if I said

“Chronic Starvation of Women is endemic in India due to religion and culture resulting in women eating incorrectly and less resulting in a variety of health issues and we should be focussed on feeding these hundreds of millions of women than on some rich muslim women in western nations in relatively good conditions”.

This is Harmful. This is Not Helping.

Let me tell you from vast experience, if you ask your average politically active feminist whether she condemns domestic violence, forced marriage, genital mutilation or any of the rest of it, she will insist that she does – and then she will do precisely zero.

Oh yes.

For the same reason that Ann Marie Waters is NOT fighting against Vit A deficiency and blindness. Most people don’t know enough about the issues to physically do something about it. For all the sad people who read my reports from the front lines of the Rape Protests in India there was just support rather than any physically concrete donation.

However the difference is that I don’t consider support as a bad thing. Support from my readers got them passing around my work and got more people paying attention and got more voices heard and got more discourse and more ideas on how to fight Rape in India.

Ann Marie Waters is powerless to stop a mob from attacking a inter-caste marriage couple in India. I am not. In the same way I am unable to help women in the UK while she is able to and that applies to many people.

This does not mean that we should ignore those who cannot help physically.

Even worse than that is the demonization of those of us who do.  I have personally sat through many meetings of “feminists” who spend endless hours agonizing about Page 3, and I have myself been reprimanded by those very same “feminists” for raising the issue of FGM.  “We don’t want to alienate the Somali community” I’ve been told.  The maiming of Somali girls doesn’t seem to feature on their radar.  By “Somali community” who they actually mean are Somali patriarchs who (it seems) should be able to rule over their women-folk and mutilate them at will.  Anything else would be culturally insensitive and stir up division (that’s a big favourite – it never seems to occur to them that FGM itself may be stirring up division).

Actually? There is a trick to fighting FGM without alienation. That involves the utilisation of Somali role models and indeed Somali voices to fight FGM through them. You are just some white lady who shouts a lot and is demonising a black culture just like every other goddamn white person in their history. Now to fight this issue you need a dialogue to understand the culture and what FGM means to the Somali Woman. Then you need to figure out how to change what it means and you need allies or indeed the Somali women who fight this need allies in you.

Not by screaming bloody murder about FGM. You need compromise because compromise is change to the positive and change to the positive will continue.

On another occasion, I sat with a “women’s forum”, a body specifically set up to promote an “inclusive” feminism.  Having suggested that the burqa, and what it respresents (“the covering of women prevents rape”), might not be an entirely positive step forward; I was told that the burqa “must be looked at in a cultural context” and to shut up about it.  The obligatory racist implication wasn’t far behind when I was asked, quite sternly, whether I condemned thongs as well.  I’m still not sure quite what the two things have in common but I had grown too weary to argue.

Yes, some women find the Burkha empowering. Fine. I have no problem with that. The Burkha has a lot more cultural issues than “Stops Rape”. To many women it’s a symbol of womanhood and indeed part of their culture and it’s hard to fight something if people don’t see it that way. I have no issues with women CHOOSING to wear the Burkha free of coercion and fear. In an ideal society if you wanted to dress that way then “go nuts”. But without understanding the issues of culture and what it means you don’t come off as someone who wants to eliminate the Burkha from Islam but who just doesn’t want to see anyone wearing it around.

In April, the BBC screened a Panorama episode featuring an undercover reporter who attended the Islamic Sharia Council in east London and told a senior cleric there, Suhaib Hasan, that her husband had been violent towards her.   Hasan was quick to ask the reporter just what she had done to deserve such treatment.  He suggested that she ask her husband “is it because of my cooking?  Because I see my friends?”.  He then advised that she “correct” herself in accordance with his response.

Sharia Council/Councilling is a daft fucking idea but unfortunately perfectly legal.

There is no law in a free society that prevents you from accepting judicial outcomes that are not ideal or beneficial to yourself willingly. Sharia Law Councilling operates under that disguise.

Basically? A “good” Muslim obeys Sharia. So he goes to his council for advice. As long as the advice is perfectly legal in British Law and the plaintiff and defendant are willingly signing that contract then there is no law broken. AKA If a woman agrees to the boundaries of Sharia divorces or whatever there is nothing you can do to stop her because it’s her choice no matter how bad it is.

Basically? Imagine a divorce settlement where you willingly sign yourself a bad settlement. There is no law against it, you picked to do something harmful to yourself.

NOW the actual problem is that the very nature of “A Good Muslim” Means that Sharia Courts are coercive. With the known understanding that Islam is not great at giving women freedom this means that women’s agency in demanding a genuine court of law is harder because they are encouraged to solve their problems via mediation by these councils.

In short? Women either are being coerced or genuinely believe that they should have a bad deal. Now you cannot ban these since as I said, there is no law about accepting contracts that are not beneficial to yourself. If for example you purchased sweets for £1 and sold them at £0.5 and willingly signed that contract even though  you knew that you could sell em for £1.5 then it’s kind of legally your fault.

Now we know women are being forced into these courts or think these courts offer a fair deal. So how do we change these councils and make them irrelevant? By empowerment of women and making it clear that arbitration must be properly fair and can be contested in a court of law and that Sharia Law is not “binding”. Because banning them is impossible. They aren’t breaking any laws, they are just distasteful and should be fought precisely as that. That they are giving men and women bad advice and trying to get them to sign to unfair mediations.

You might expect feminist organisations the length and breadth of Britain to immediately launch a plethora of campaigns and demand that the Government take firm action against such vile and dangerous misogyny.  But no, no they didn’t.

I wrote to the Campaign Against Domestic Violence to ask them when I could expect the launch of their crusade to end sharia-approved domestic violence.  They didn’t answer. “They’re probably too busy with the campaign” I thought, so I went to their website to check.  Nothing there either.

 You mean like the National Zakat foundation which is an Islamic Charity that provides shelters for abused women in the UK?

The CADV also is a secular charity and fights all domestic violence. It doesn’t need the special Islamic Seal of Approval to leap into action against domestic violence.

Of course I agree with every word, but there was no statement from Refuge following the Panorama broadcast, nor has there been one on sharia law generally.  This is despite the fact that sharia law allows men to beat their wives (provided they leave no marks of course).

Except Domestic Violence Laws Apply To These Women Too.

Sharia is just a moderation. If the overarching British Law is broken and you seek help then the overarching law applies.

When Maryam Namazie and I debated Ahmaddiyya Muslims at UCL in 2011, part of the debate centred around domestic violence.  There was no dispute from the other side about whether a man may hit his wife, but how hard.  This is sharia law; but do a search for sharia on the website of Refuge and you’ll find zero results.

Again? Why should Sharia be  singled out? All Domestic Violence Is Bad! It is at it’s core assault and battery. It doesn’t matter what religious law you use it is still illegal and Refuge’s specific stance covers it.

Similarly, Women’s Aid, another otherwise admirable organisation that fights domestic violence, has issued no statement, launched no campaign, and the only mentions of sharia on their website are on their forum (3 examples) which are written by users, not the campaign group itself.

Again see above.

The Fawcett Society, “working for women’s rights since 1866”, has zero to say about sharia either – search their site for yourself.

See above.

This is not limited to feminist organisations either.  Other groups, and mainstream parties, are completely silent on the misogyny (and the homophobia) of Islamists.  When was the last time Labour, or the Lib Dems, condemned sharia-based sexism and brutality?  They haven’t.  They let it carry on with absolute impunity while condemning domestic violence elsewhere.  None of the main parties had anything to say about Mr Hasan’s comments on Panorama either.

Yes, of Islamicists. Pat Condell repeatedly claims that All Muslims are like that. And when was the last time you condemnded Hindu sexism and domestic violence?

In fact not one of these organisations and not even Ann Marie Waters has said anything about it.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, leader of the Liberal Democrats, was forced to issue a statement on Nigella Lawson saying he condemned “all forms of domestic violence”.  He did so after he was criticised for his reply on a radio show when asked what he would have done if he had seen the incident involving Lawson and her husband; he answered “When you see a couple having an argument…most people, you know, just assume that the couple will resolve it themselves. If of course something descends into outright violence then that’s something different”.

Who jumped to criticise Clegg?  Yvette Cooper of the Labour Party.  She said “Nick Clegg revealed how little he understands violence against women this morning. Far too often violence against women is dismissed as fleeting or unimportant. Too often public institutions don’t take it seriously enough. Domestic violence is still a hidden crime, and victims suffer or are ignored as a result”.  Get that?  “Victims suffer or are ignored”.  Now, see if you can find Yvette Cooper speaking out against the Islamic Sharia Council.  I’ve tried.  I couldn’t.

I looked and couldn’t find Ann Marie Waters speaking out about Hindus Sexism.

Because I know that Refuge would offer a shelter to a Hindu or a Muslim irrespective of belief and that Refuge would not hand over a woman who was abused simply because of “Sharia”.

In his post, Myers later says: “I do see plenty of conservative racist dorks turning a blind eye to the fact that the majority of the victims of Islamic misogyny are Muslim women”.

False again.  Condell did not turn a blind eye to this at all.  He clearly addresses the fact that women in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia “who get beaten every day, will continue to be beaten and treated as a piece of property, as will their daughters and granddaughters”.  I think Condell does acknowledge that Muslim women are the ones who suffer, it is Myers who doesn’t.  He added “You know that backward, ugly attitude? Islam didn’t invent it. We’ve got plenty of it to go around in the western world as well”.

This is a gross insult to every single suffering woman in every single Islamic state on the planet.

No. What is a gross insult is Pat Condell utilising the actions of Islamic Nations and the Muslims who live often in poverty, corruption and religious fundamentalism to local Muslims. Pat Condell is not helping. Which is why I was told yesterday that as a brown person I am too sensitive to Mr. Condell’s Truth and am quick to cry racism! How can we be racist to brown people?

In one case I had someone tell me that the EDL don’t sound racist despite being from the USA and having no Idea who the hell they are. These are Condell fans and people who fear that Muslims are all secretly working together in some Muslim Agenda (MUSLAMIC!) to destroy  us all.

Yes, there is misogyny and violence against women in the west but to compare it to what women face in Islamic states demonstrates total ignorance, and is a crass belittlement of the true horror of life for females under sharia law.  I wonder if Mr Myers has ever tried to help a woman escape from Saudi Arabia, or find a safe place in Pakistan.  I’m guessing he hasn’t, but I have, and I can tell you it is nothing short of a nightmare.  I wonder if he has ever had a phone-call from a frightened girl escaping a forced marriage but who can’t turn to a woman’s shelter because they might turn her over to her father.  I’m guessing he hasn’t, but I have.

The correct thing to do is to not ignore either. Not declare that “These Women Have it Worse so Gonna Ignore Those Women”.

And that doesn’t give you the right to tell women that they should stop whinging about their inferior problems to your awesome ones.

And indeed I have not done that. I have however provided healthcare that these women may have been denied, trained personnel to work in regions where they are and get healthcare to these women. So if you think Myers is unsuitable to commenting on how to fight sexism in Islam because of your personal experiences then I am just as valid at dismissing Pat Condell’s claims through my experiences doing the same things as you do.

When women in west face violence, the law – though imperfect – tends to be on their side.  Try finding a safe house in Pakistan or Saudi, or a police station women can turn to without the risk of being handed over to their families, or punished for running away. They often have absolutely nowhere to turn and to compare their plight to western sexism is nothing short of disgusting; not to mention a kick in the teeth for the brave women across the Islamic world who risk their lives every day fighting for the basic rights and freedoms that most western women take for granted.

So that doesn’t mean western feminists should “shut up” because they have it better than them. Can you imagine how stupid that is?

I am sorry women of India. You may be in the 5th worst nation to be a woman but Afghanistan is the worst. Until we solve that and the other 3 nations in the middle you are all privileged and whiney and your whining is a kick in the teeth to the Brave Women in Afghanistan who risk their lives everyday! Glass Ceiling getting you down? At least it’s not rape!

No wait… that’s stupid. It’s a harmful way of thinking.

Condell is absolutely right about this.  Most “western progressive feminists” do ignore misogyny carried out in the name of Islam (in the case of sharia), or any misogynist practice rightly or wrongly associated with Islam.

I see it over and over again.

I don’t know what world PZ Myers lives in, but he needs to spend more time with some “progressive western feminists” and see exactly what the majority of them are thinking. They’re not thinking about Islam, that much I can promise him.

And if you spent time with a varied group of people you would realise that people have different things in life they are passionate about.

And if I don’t count as a feminist then count me as someone willing to “do something positive”. And I don’t bash Muslims to do it.

See it’s easy to take someone away from an abusive husband. We must think of how to stop the husband being abusive. WE must think on how to change Islam and the ideas and the culture to be not misogynistic and make that the mainstream. We need to change how Muslims think about women. And we aren’t going to do that by tarring Muslims with the same brush and ignoring progressive Muslims and only begrudgingly accepting their assistance or statements.

Pat does not help the dialogue. If PZ is not qualified to speak then Pat really is not qualified either.


  1. Al Dente says

    Now I know that the “so-and-so follows so-and-so on Twitter who once retweeted so-and-so who once agreed with so-and-so and therefore they’re all bigots” brigade will label me a fellow racist of Condell’s, but they shouldn’t bother. I cottoned on to that dirty little game a long ago and I refuse to play it.

    Waters doesn’t need to be called a follower of Condell to achieve the racist label. Her own words show her racism.

  2. Pen says

    I wonder if Mr Myers has ever tried to help a woman escape from Saudi Arabia

    I think this sums up what bothers me most about the whole Condell/Waters rhetoric as far as Britain is concerned. Because what? You’re going to ‘rescue’ a woman from Saudi Arabia and give her a nice safe home where the EDL can hurl insults at her? Send a victim of domestic abuse down to the police station where those masters of cultural nuance and sensitivity can tell her that she’s practically asking for it by being Muslim – and we don’t want any Muslims here anyway? Lock up some Somali parents, and foster the kids out in a village far from anything Islamic, say Orkney, perhaps?

    Every single problem Waters wants dealt with requires the ability to interact with Muslims, as individuals and institutions, at grassroots and other levels, in a way that doesn’t throw their whole religion or identity into question or demonstrate a general hostility towards them. It seems like a lot of what Condell says is guaranteed to make sure Muslim women – and men for that matter, stay away from sources of help, support and alternative cultural influences – and that said sources will be horrifically unsuited to supply any help worth having.

  3. J. J. Ramsey says

    At one point Mr. Condell has stated that he did not find the English Defence League to be racist and indeed upholding the values of democracy.

    I sat through the video where Pat Condell had said that he had looked at the EDL site and didn’t find any hate, and that reminded me of an old TV Nation segment about the KKK’s attempt to remake its public image. The Klan members that Louis Theroux interviewed were very nice to his face and said all the right things about how they didn’t hate black people, etc., and it seems the EDL have done something similar with their web site and their official public statements.

    (At the end of the TV Nation segment, they showed bits of footage where KKK members made “careful” statements that put forth a nice image, followed by footage of them being openly racist.)

  4. StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return! says

    Typo note in case its helpful – second line, first full sentence :

    Mr. Condell speaks with of conspiracy theories of Muslims.

    Emphasis added – needless to say, which, needless to say, is itself needless to say if something really is needless to say but will say anyway.

  5. says

    …and to point out that the “True Languages” of the UK are three in number and that “English” was actually harming the other two (Gaelic and Welsh).

    It’s a bit more complicated than that, depending on how exactly one defines ‘true language’. It’s not really accurate to refer to Scottish Gaelic and Irish Gaelic as a single language. (I’m ignoring Manx as it’s not spoken within the UK.) And you’ve missed out Cornish entirely.

    Quibbles aside, you were right of course.

  6. C. Nilsson says

    You children will never understand the extent to which you have been brainwashed until it is too late. This bullshit about racism has got to end. You know why white people go out of their way to avoid blacks, and arabs, and others? Because they don’t want to be robbed, raped or killed. If white people are the ones who are really the baddies why aren’t all these colored people afraid to live in white neighborhoods? Why don’t they fear whitey? Because the white man has never done anything to make them fear him. Look at the crime statistics. Oh, but you won’t. You can’t bear to. Read the book “White Girl Bleed A Lot”. Oh but you won’t, you don’t know how to deal with reality. You don’t know how to deal with what is really happening on the streets. Google white genocide south africa, look at the photos of white women who are being dissected alive and raped on a regular basis by their friendly non-racist black neighbors. Oh, but you just can’t bear to look, can you. YOU ARE A STUPID WHITE GIRL. Nothing but a stupid ignorant sheltered white girl. It is because of people like you that the western world now faces a future of pure hell. So happy to embrace misogyny violence and terror so long as it doesn’t wear white skin. IDIOTS. Luckily there are people in this world like Condell who understand what is actually going on and what is actually at stake and are willing to speak out. Luckily there are true feminists in this world like Brigitte Gabriel who are trying to wake people up and educate them. Unfortunately so many idiot liberals would rather lay down and die than grow a brain and stand up and fight.

  7. Drager says


    I may be misunderstanding, but are you calling Avicenna, a brown man who works in India as a medic, an ignorant sheltered white girl?

  8. Z says

    Avicenna, I think you should promote C. Nilsson’s comment to a post – just to demonstrate the hilarous level of ignorance that is endemic in EDL supporters.

    Oi, “Nilsson”, let me guess – you think that Avicenna is a female name? :D :D :D :D

  9. B-Lar says

    …you don’t know how to deal with reality…

    Says the guy who’s solution is for us all to assume people with brown skin are thieves, rapists, and murderers.

    Statistically speaking, white western men are more likely to be angry, deluded, self important racists with no understanding of societal nuance. They make me embarrassed of my skin tone.

    Read that Nilsson? You are a fucking embarrassment. It would be comical if your views weren’t so catastrophic for us all. Fuck off back to your swamp.

  10. says

    You know how much they care about muslim women when you see their proposed policies: no mkore immigration, deportation of immigrants and maybe a little genocide. Because they don’t care those things happen, they care that they have to see brown people.

  11. smrnda says

    Nilsson, I live in the States, and I’ve lived in Chicago and heard all about those neighborhoods where it’s dangerous for *white people* to go. Guess what? They’re equally, if not more dangerous for Black people too.

    You also seem to be unaware of the historical reality of ghettos, segregation and redlining. Black neighborhoods are often lousy places to live because there’s been a conspiracy of white businesses, white politicians to pretty much cut them off from all the resources they would need to be livable, whether it’s stores that sell actual food, financing for business ventures, jobs that pay a living wage, educations that don’t suck or basic public services. People dump *toxic waste* in Black residential neighborhoods.

    Do minorities target white people for violence? Do Muslims commit acts of violence? Yeah, but I can’t really understand those without a decent understanding of the historical reality of those groups of people being pissed and shat on. I’m against all sorts of violence, but white people going on about how Blacks, Arabs and Muslims are subhuman animals and shoving them in ghettos and whatnot has certainly not fixed anything, so on top of being racist it’s ineffective.

  12. ... says

    “Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation, are people who want crops without ploughing the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning; they want the ocean without the roar of its many waters. The struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, or it may be both. But it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.” – Frederick Douglas.

    I know there are many people in the skeptic and atheist circles, who are just fine with opposing Islam as long as it is done non-controversially and without offending people and when there’s no risk. Tell us how that works out for you.

    I’m wondering how you can seriously pretend that Western feminists are worth shit when it comes to the menace of Islamic misogyny. Waters is quite right – I’ve seen it all the time. They prefer to stab and betray those, like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who actually do take this fight on. This is why “feminist” is a bad word – feminists aren’t just worthless in the struggle for women’s emancipation, they actively retard it.

    As to the argument – “why don’t you focus on the Hindu sexism”, please be serious. The Hindus aren’t the ones threatening me or mine. It isn’t Hindus calling me and mine kuffar or the rest of it. Islam’s achilles heel is its treatment of women, so that will attract a lot of attention. Yes, Hindu sexism will need sorting out, and I respect you immensely for taking it on, but please be serious here.

  13. ... says

    “Again? Why should Sharia be singled out? All Domestic Violence Is Bad! I”

    This, though, is just pathetic, and you must know its pathetic. As Waters points out, Sharia is being singled out – to be specifically ignored. To claim that misogyny in Islam and in the West is equal is such a transparent dodge, it is hard to know where to begin. Furthermore, by using this dodge, domestic violence becomes sanctioned. Want to beat up your wife? Recite the shahada, pop by your local mosque, and Western feminists will not just leave you alone, but protect you. What a deal!

  14. says

    As to the argument – “why don’t you focus on the Hindu sexism”, please be serious. The Hindus aren’t the ones threatening me or mine.

    Well, thank you for showing everybody clearly that you actually don’t care about women and their rights but only about yourself. Just like Condell and the rest of them. As long as the abuses happen where you don’t see them, who cares?

  15. ... says

    Oh, run along now, and leave this to the adults, why don’t you? Common enmity and common cause are the great drivers of solidarity. The ANC wasn’t closely involved the Czech struggle against Communism. The civil rights movement didn’t side with the students in Tiananmen square. The abolitionists were notably silent on the subject of the Indian colonies.

    Run along. You’re complaining that solidarity is necessarily imperfect, while you come from a chunk that has no solidarity whatsoever. Who cares about your affectation of caring? What could you do, even if you had the capacity to want to feel solidarity with the oppressed? Hold your breath until you turn blue? Thrash out one of your crummy blog posts? Tell the world how hurt you are personally by this?

    Run along.

  16. ... says

    There’s also another thing which you don’t know because you can’t know without first caring. Islam accounts for the overwhelming majority of honour killings, and honour killing enjoys Islamic sanction, all the way from the Al Azar. FGM, the same. There is no other religion that punishes rape victims with death in the courts of law. In our world, Islamic misogyny is off the charts. It’s a completely different beast. It’s pathetic to pretend otherwise.

  17. says

    1. Honour Killing DOES NOT enjoy Islamic Sanction and is outright banned in large parts of the Muslim Population.

    2. FGM is actually a MINORITY Islamic practice.

    It’s a cultural practice of Africa that is justified by Christianity AND Islam. In fact the “worst” (the infundibulations) are mainly in Christian areas of Central Africa rather than the north. FGM is a cultural rite of passage between girl to woman and so was protected by the religions present there.

    The majority of Muslims would consider it deeply unethical. This is a practice EXCUSED by Islam in order to subvert it an make it seem like it was “their idea all along”.

    If a husband kills his wife for sleeping with another man or abuses his kids it’s because he is a monster.

    If he is Muslim it’s because he is a Muslim. Honour Crime is a real problem but let’s not assume we are all smelling of roses here.

  18. ... says

    Ever read a little book called “Umdat al-Salik”? Fascinating little thing. You can buy it on Amazon. It enjoys the sanction of the Al Azar. And in it, it goes into detail that parents killing their children is A-OK if it is due to faithlessness and it also why FGM is a good thing. I poked around and found the following text:

    “Circumcision is obligatory (O: for both men and women. For men it consists of removing the prepuce from the penis, and for women, removing the prepuce (Ar. Bazr) of the clitoris (n: not the clitoris itself, as some mistakenly assert). (A: Hanbalis hold that circumcision of women is not obligatory but sunna, while Hanafis consider it a mere courtesy to the husband.)””

    There’s lots of stories like that in the Hadith.

    And so on.

    Cultural practice right. Never mind that the early Muslim Arabs had such racist contempt for black Africans that I very much doubt they would have borrowed freely from them.


    “Honour Crime is a real problem but let’s not assume we are all smelling of roses here.”

    Who, exactly, is assuming that? Look, a good way to think of this is in terms of racism. There’s the residual racism of Western societies, there’s the racism that existed in Apartheid South Africa, and there is the racism of the Janjaweed in the Sudan and the Interahamwe in Rwanda and the Congo. Yes, you find it everywhere, but it’s insanity to believe all these are the same.

  19. ... says

    Oh, re:Pat Condell’s awful, terribly mean discussion of Syrian refugees, try the following on for size. As a result of mass Islamic immigration, we now have this:

    So. Where is your humanitarian concern for them then? But, just to return to my prior point about common enmity driving solidarity, you may wish to look at that documentary “Undercover Mosque” where the Imams describe what they are going to do with the Jews and the Hindus. Do you care to guess what they’d like to do to a Hindu-Atheist?

  20. ... says

    And since rape is in the headlines, it took me five seconds to find the following story:

    And another five like this:

    We could go on and on, through the fact that Sweden has now one of the highest rape rates on the planet, through les banlieues in France where gang-rape is a right-of-passage by Muslim gangs, through the grooming scandal in Britain – and then we could go all the way back through the Islamic figures excusing this stuff.

    So, let’s see now. Who are the rape apologists now?

  21. says

    8000 refugees from a civil war are going to cause all this? Funny mate, learn compassion.

    Did you even pay attention to the recent Hindu on Muslim attacks in India? Or did you simply ignore that?

    No see you keep quoting arseholes. I can quote survivalists who “reckon the black president of America has gone too far and make analogies likening him to an ape and fondly remember the times when black people were legally property or livestock”. Does that make all white people like that?

    The Westboro Baptist Church are not representative of Christianity any more than

    And your book is a 14th Century translation and “not followed by many Modern Muslims” Bear in Mind the Majority of Muslims in the world do not live in Africa or the Middle East but in Asia within India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia.

    Nearly 70% infact who do not pay any attention to this ethos. And not all of the Shafi school of Sharia believe in the rigid notion of this.

    No, see I am afraid you want to see anger.

    Oh as for the hatred of Jews?

    Muslims see it as a colonialist expansion in the Middle East since they see “Jews” as Americans OR the more educated see it as a punishment for western guilt over years of anti-semiticism that they are paying the price because “Muslims Didn’t Care”.

    Seriously mate, you are arguing with someone who has read this book in Arabic. I collect medieval muslim art, do you not think I would have this book?

    If I quoted the Bible or the Torah we can see that Christians and Jews have no problem with genocide, rape and slavery and in fact treat rape victims the same if they are married. If they aren’t well then sucks to be raped because you have to marry your rapist.

    Turns out modern Christians simply ignore those bits as do many moderate Muslims who make up the BULK of the Muslims.

    Know something? Not one Muslim demanded the death of Nirbhaya in India. Not one Christian demanded she Marry Her Rapist .Why?

    Because like it or not most Humans Are Pragmatical when their religion is being stupid.

  22. says

    1. Catholic Priest Molestations
    2. Nirbhaya
    3. Hassidic Jewish Molestation Rings which were actually broken up by a Rabbi who then received death threats for “shaming Jews”.

    All stuff I have noted.

    And the CII are not the lord and masters of forensic science.

    You mean rapes happen in Pakistan? OH NOES!

    As for Sweden? Sweden has one of the most progressive societies when it comes to rape reporting and a system by which rapes are recorded even if prosecution is hard. In addition better sex education means women are more likely to come forward with incidences of rape and more likely to know what does and what doesn’t constitute rape.

    If you want I can show you Pakistan and Afghanistan where the rape rates is one of the lowest on the planet.

    Sweden’s definition of rape is firstly extremely wide compared to other nations. Secondly it’s record rate is extremely high and even if prosecutions do not occur the rape is recorded on official statistics. And finally when Sweden’s rape rate is compared between official data and survey the rates are similar indicating high veracity and when rates are compared on anonymous survey, Sweden’s rates are pretty average.

    It’s not that Sweden’s rape rate is high, it’s that everyone else doesn’t report their rapes.

  23. ... says

    Yeah, the Jews brought in on themselves! Israel is mean, so beating up kids in Malmo is okay!

    “They were asking for it” – doesn’t that sound familiar?

    Sorry, where’s that compassion you’re talking about? Or is it “compassion but not for Jews”? Yeah, those Jews, always gotta make trouble…

    Speaking of making trouble:

    “Did you even pay attention to the recent Hindu on Muslim attacks in India?”

    Actually, I was paying attention to the Buddhist on Muslim attacks in Myanamar. However, I have covered the Hindu fascist beat for a while now. As you are well aware, the Shiv Sena and the like rose by copying the Islamic fanatics – hence their hounding of MF Hussain. Ditto the Buddhist fanatics. Ditto the EDL – which, as you know, was formed in reaction to Al Muhajiroon.

    When the mainstream decides to run away from criticism Islam, it doesn’t mean nothing happens, it means that other forces move into that vacuum.

    ” And your book is a 14th Century translation and “not followed by many Modern Muslims”” – Is the argument now that because the bulk of believers ignore texts that those texts are of no importance? Why then are you arguing against religion at all?

    This used to be 101: yes the bulk of believers of any faith aren’t crazy enough to go along with its tenets, but the effect of their acquiescence provides the water for the predators to swim in. The bulk of Catholics ignore the pope. Fact. However, their acquiescence allows the hierarchy to get away with the institutionalized cover up of child rape. Now it isn’t for some random reason, but for hudood, that the Pakistani government is arguing about whether DNA is allowable in a rape trial, and, as you know, it is because of Aisha’s testimony that the matter of many witnesses to prove rape is important.

    You prove my point for me:

    ” Not one Muslim demanded the death of Nirbhaya in India. Not one Christian demanded she Marry Her Rapist .”

    I didn’t either. Do I get browny points too? You make my point – what is absolutely standard, unquestionable morality for morally normal people is something to be celebrated with the seriously religious.

    You go further in proving my point:

    “Nearly 70% infact who do not pay any attention to this ethos. ”

    Wow. So 30% – 480 million – do, by your standards. That’s actually a higher, much higher, percentage than the one I would have named.

    You are quite right, if we look at the texts in the Bible and the Torah, if people were following those, we would be still stuck in the Dark Ages. The problem with Islam is that way, way too many of its adherents still take this stuff seriously. 30% by your lights.

  24. ... says

    “1. Catholic Priest Molestations
    2. Nirbhaya
    3. Hassidic Jewish Molestation Rings which were actually broken up by a Rabbi who then received death threats for “shaming Jews”.”

    You make my point for me, _again_. It is hard enough to sort this out in Western societies. Just how the hell are they supposed to cope with the troubles in a society that has a habit of not just covering this stuff up but killing people who try to investigate it?

    Don’t take my word for it. Mohammed Shafiq said he tried to shine some light on the grooming scandal before it got too big to control, and he was rewarded with serious threats on his life.

  25. says

    1. Seriously? Can you not understand that large numbers of Muslims effectively see Jews as a genocidal force of thieves who have stolen land from honest and peaceful Muslims then proceeded to ghettoise them because of a stupid book and genocide? You have to be blind to not realise the fact that in “Israel” Muslims got the WORST deal ever. We literally fucked them over for our own conscience because “It didn’t matter, they are Muslims”.

    2. The Pakistani Government’s problem is that it has repeatedly marginalised sane people instead having a constitution that promotes “Faith” rather than “Sensibility”. You see the same sort of thing in the USA. Where blind faith beats sense.

    3. There are roughly 1,000,000 Muslims in Asia. 480 million in the rest. You would ignore 1 billion for that? Oh and I can point out quite easily that Christianity has a part in FGM too. In fact a lot of Muslims have banned FGM. The practice is primarily female driven and is a rite of passage for many young girls which is why it’s been hard to fight.

    30% of Muslims who live in some of the least progressive and poorest nations on earth without any access to real education and infrastructure.

    Or do you think ignorance exists in a vacuum?

  26. ... says

    Yes, yes, yes. It’s those evil genocidal Jews. So what’s done to the Jews doesn’t matter. Never mind that Muslims have persecuted Jews for over a millenium, never mind that we know where anti-semitism leads, never mind that only a complete fool thinks that anti-semitism is only a threat to the Jews.

    Though I find this interesting. Apparently because Israel is genocidal (it isn’t, but since when have facts ever mattered when it comes to bashing the jews?), what’s done to the Jews is okay. Well, Muslim fanatics murdered, what – two million Christians and animists in the Sudan, and who knows how many in East Timor. So, Christians can do whatever they want to Muslims, right? After all – they are GENOCIDAL!!!!! ™. Hey, didn’t Muslims kill something like eighty million Hindus during their domination of the subcontinent? So, then, by your standards, the Hindus can do whatever they want to the Muslims, right? Because, GENOCIDAL!!!! ™

    How’s that logic taste now?

    As to the rest of this – comparing Pakistan to the US is so silly I really do not know where to begin.

    And, yes, 480 million people who are pretty much inclined to kill me weigh more heavily in my mind than the one billion who don’t care if I am murdered. I’m funny that way.

  27. ... says

    I think I’ve made my point. When you start making excuses for one brand of fanatical violence, you automatically make excuses for others. And we both know that this isn’t speculation – there are many End of Days types in the US who would just love for the United States to wage a final war against Islam, and there are many Shiv Sena who would be happy to see not a Muslim left alive in the entire subcontinent.

    Dunno about you, but that’s the sort of future I’d rather avoid. It’s why I don’t go around excusing fanatical thugs.

  28. says

    Neither do I. But I also see cause and effect.

    Can you tell me why Palestinians should be happy? Can you tell me one reason why they shouldn’t be so miserably hacked off? If your answer is “Islam Be Crazy” then you don’t understand that there are underlying reasons for fundies existing. There has to be a pre-existing reason for this. Islam is a common denominator but there are underlying problems that we simply refuse to acknowledge.

    For instance? Afghanistan? We refuse to acknowledge that we broke the damn system by encouraging a downfall of society in the 70s. Iraq? Stupid war destabilised nation.

    And Israel? We created a Jewish state based on historical ownership of land, forcibly evicted the Arabs and turned them either into second class citizens or ghettoised refugees and excused every break of International law by Israel.

    These are the conditions that caused the rise in fundies. In some cases we actively encouraged them like Iran and Afghanistan.. In some cases we didn’t give a fuck so we effectively alienated and marginalised people who’s only salvation were fundies. In some cases we ham fisted our way through and created conditions that enshrined religion such as the usage of divide and conquer which lead to the formation of Pakistan.

    In short? I am aware that Islam doesn’t exist in a vaccuum. Blaming fundies is fine but if you don’t solve the root causes then you are just going to breed more of them.

  29. ... says

    First of all, whaddya mean “we”, white man? As it were.

    Sorry – but this is the same thing all over again. If Israel’s treatment of Palestinian Muslims justifies the murder of Jews in Sweden, the Muslim treatment of Christians justifies retaliatory murder. “Root causes” – that’s a kicker. Well, maybe the EDL thinks they have some “root causes” of their own and a few burned mosques and destroyed madrassas might convince others to address their “root causes”?

    Quit making excuses for this stuff and we might have a lot less of it.

  30. says

    So by that logic the USA was founded by terrorists? After all… They did the same things.

    As did many Indians who fought for Independence and Black people.

    I keep pointing out. You see them as terrorists.

    They see them as Freedom Fighters fighting for a stolen homeland. Because you are more likely to give credence to the Israeli Claim and they are more likely to see it as Bullshit Flavoured Bullshit dreamt up by white colonialists who have been doing this sort of bullshit for ages.

    Do you not grasp this problem? They are demonising Jews in the same way that we demonised Muslims post 9/11 and demonised Vietnamese soldiers.

  31. ... says

    Right, “freedom fighters” attack jews in Paris and Malmo. “Freedom fighters” are who make Jews afraid to walk the streets of Copenhagen and Berlin.

    But even in those territories – don’t freedom fighters need to be fighting for… freedom? We know what HAMAS and Hezbollah are fighting for. It’s not freedom. Go ask ‘em. I really find myself quite sickened that you can seriously compare such movements with those fighting for Indian independence.

    “stolen homeland”… “white colonialists”. Well, in point of actual fact, the oldest and most vicious form of colonialism, or rather, imperialism in that part of the world is Islamic imperialism. That’s why that part of the world is not longer Christian. So, I take it you think the Crusaders were the good guys and a modern Crusade would be justified, right?

  32. ... says

    Bluntly, when I see the Muslim world caring maybe a tenth as much about the Darfur genocide, the East Timor genocide, the other sudanese genocide, the genocide of the Armenians and of the Serbs in the world wars, as they do about the Palestinians – then I might be brought to give a damn about their whining. Not before.

  33. says

    Not your definition of freedom. At a time when no one would stand up for those people Hamas and Hezbollah did. Hence their support. If we were more willing to have a dialogue, if we were more willing to cut a deal we would have seen a similar effect to the devolution in Ireland where the IRA was effectively neutered from it’s support structure and many of it’s members went legit.

    We didn’t compromise. We kept screwing over Muslims and blindly supporting Israel to the point of even covering up massacres.

    Do you even grasp how fucking pissed off those people are and how legitimate they see their cause? Israel’s illegal settlements have effectively destroyed thousands of livelihoods and it’s draconian laws have jailed and killed children for something as minor as rock throwing.

    Honestly? The Palestinians were not a nation. They were not given rights accorded to a nation and Israel has not followed International law or is even willing to correct it’s own mistakes. The West is unwilling to actually make an ultimatum to destroy the illegal fences and force Israel to remove settlements and restore the UN line.

    And the only thing that got us listening was terrorism. They tried peace and we threw it in their faces. The only way we listened was when they killed random people.

    Now realise that in context. To the Palestinians the only way to gain any leverage politically has been to behave like this because frankly we didn’t listen to them when they were being reasonable. We ignored the reasonable people so now we must deal with the arseholes. By restarting dialogue and actually restating the very sensible stuff they want and indeed paying the damn compensation we can do more to gain peace than demonising Muslims as a group.

  34. says

    And your argument is stupid. Not one white person gave a flying fuck about the dead of India. When 2 million Indians starved to death the response was “If Indians are Starving then why is Gandhi still alive”. In fact if we total up starvation in India during WW2 and under British Rule you would quickly notice that it was a very very large number.

    No one cared.

    Hold yourself to a higher standard than those you criticise. It’s easy to go “All Muslims Are Dicks” but then what does that achieve apart from divisions and not improving any fucking thing. Instead recognising that many Muslims don’t like the fundies and starting discourse with them does more to achieve anything.

    We are in this fucking mess because we refused to talk to them and we didn’t listen. We aren’t going to get out of the mess by staying the course.

  35. ... says

    Right, we have the supposedly vocal atheist defending HAMAS and Hezbollah. That’s all I needed to know. Why don’t you start defending the Shiv Sena and the EDL next, and then maybe throw in the KKK and the BNP for good measure? Same logic would apply there.

    The ANC had it a lot worse than the Palestinians did, and they didn’t turn to these tactics. The international brigades who fought the Nazis during the spanish civil war didn’t do this. It’s an absolute insult to try to justify it.

    Who the fuck is this “we”? Because when I Iook around the world, the people doing the most killing of Muslims are… other Muslims. Gee, whoda thunk?

    Anyway, enough of this. You want to make excuses for movements of the religious ultra-right, don’t be surprised when the rest of us write you off as being on their side.

  36. says

    You fail to understand the basics of this.

    I am not defending Hamas and Hezbollah. I am just saying that I KNOW WHY THEY EXIST. And I know what caused them to exist and I know what we should do to remove their power.

    And that involves not being like them and goddamn TALKING TO PEOPLE. Do you even understand how much we fucked up? We effectively displaced a group of people based on ethnicity and religion to house another group of people because their fairytale said so because white people were guilty about anti-semitism and the Holocaust and so we punished an entirely random group of people who didn’t have rights for that.

    We have effectively sidelined complaints and ignored reasonable demands and requests. Instead we encouraged Israel and poured vast amounts of money into infrastructure and tech. Palestinians were effectively pauperised and ghettoised and their freedom reduced by an invader who’s claim effectively mirrored Manifest Destiny.

    Do You Understand Why They Are So Pissed Off?

    Palestinians were massacred at Shabra and Shatillah. The Israeli commander in charge at the time who allowed it to take place and indeed enforced barricades was Ariel Sharon. Rewarded with Prime Minsitership.

    Should have been rewarded with the Hague and a prison cell.

    All these little little events, layed the foundation for what ensued. We refused to talk and the only way they would get us to listen was through random violence. Hamaas and Hezbollah are symbols of that.

    There were people willing to talk to the ANC. Remember Mandela had fans from India and was fighting the same fight than Indians fought in the 1910s against Apartheid. Gandhi laid that foundation in South Africa. And there were violent anti-white sentiments. They were just technologically powerless since they were in effect angry mobs versus an entire state who’s army was designed to quell insurrection by black people.

    You don’t get it. I pointed out that most Muslims are rather peaceful people and that if you concentrate on Arseholes you will see the entire group as that. Christians aren’t all Lord’s Resistance Army members.

  37. abear says

    Avicenna wrote;

    I am not defending Hamas and Hezbollah. I am just saying that I KNOW WHY THEY EXIST. And I know what caused them to exist and I know what we should do to remove their power.

    I also can understand why many Palestinians are pissed off at the Israelis, settlements, checkpoints, etc.
    However I have some sympathy for the Israeli side as well.
    Jews existed side by side with Muslims and Christians in Palestine for many years, When pogroms in Europe in the early 20th century started immigration of Jews to Palestine, many Arab Palestinians resented this immigration, much like those horrible EDL racists are doing now. In fact, Yasser Arafat’s uncle, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem met with Hitler more than once, allied with the Nazis, and pledged to eliminate all Jews from Palestine.
    In this situation, with many hostile people in their midst, the 1948 War and creation of Israel is at least somewhat understandable. Remember that not all Arab Muslim and Christians were expelled at that time.
    Although Muslim society has been relatively tolerant of Jews over the years, remember though that Muhammad had the relatively sizable Jewish community in the Arabian peninsula either forcibly converted, sold into slavery, or murdered.
    As someone who is familiar with the Koran do you recall the surah where the sneaky Jew is hiding behind the tree that alerts the approaching Muslim so that he is able to kill the Jew? Hatred of Jews by Muslims did not begin in 1948, it’s been around for as long as Islam has existed.
    As far as your statement that white skinned folks like Anne Marie aren’t being helpful by criticizing Islam and this should be left to brown skinned people, have you thought it unhelpful for a brown skinned person like yourself to criticize the BNP and other white racists?
    Personally I think that white and brown people standing together against racism and other evils is a good way to go.

  38. abear says

    Avicenna wrote:


    October 3, 2013 at 9:52 PM (UTC 5.5)

    And your argument is stupid. Not one white person gave a flying fuck about the dead of India. When 2 million Indians starved to death the response was “If Indians are Starving then why is Gandhi still alive”. In fact if we total up starvation in India during WW2 and under British Rule you would quickly notice that it was a very very large number.

    No one cared.

    Bullshit. My father was on air crews that made air drops of food over India during WW2 to help feed civilians during this terrible crisis.
    Sounds to me like you’re just parroting anti-western propaganda you heard from some brown skinned bigot.

  39. Bukhari says


    The infinite superiority of the Biblical God over that of the Quran is most evident in the teaching regarding the status of women, especially as it relates to marriage, divorce, and the world to come. A brief comparison between the two can be instructive. It will help us to see that, in spite of what the Papacy and Ecumenists say the Biblical God cannot be legitimately compared to Allah.
    The God of the Bible created woman out of man to be his counterpart (Genesis 2:18), corresponding to him mentally, physically, and spiritually, and making him a larger person than he would have been alone. The same holds true for man. He brings to his wife a perspective that enlarges her life, making her a more complete person than she could be without him. Thus, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman (I Corinthians 11:11).
    The Bible consistently teaches that marriage is a sacred and permanent covenant which God Himself witnesses and protects. For this reason, marriage is effectively used in the Old Testament to portray God’s relationship with Israel, and in the New Testament to represent Christ’s relationship with His Church.
    The high esteem that the Biblical God places on the role of women in the home and in the Church is foreign to the Quran. According to Allah, women exist primarily for the sexual gratification of men. To ensure this goal, the Quran allows an ordinary Muslim to marry four wives, though wealthy Muslims can fill their harems to the extent of their wealth and lust. The latter practice has been encouraged by the example of Muhammad himself, who did not follow the Quranic limitations of four wives.
    After the death of his first wife, Khadija, he married nine wives. One of them, Aisha, was only nine years old. She was the daughter of Abu Bakr As Siddiq, who was a close friend of the Prophet and in charge of his books. Muhammad was 53 years old when he insisted on marrying Aisha, a nine-year-old child, immature, and obviously ignorant of married life. This criminal act of child abuse alone, suffice to discredit Muhammad’s claim to be the greatest prophet sent by Allah, even greater than Jesus Christ Himself.
    Sahih Muslim

    Book 008, Number 3311:

    ‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

    Aisha owned dolls (which as we know is NOT allowed in Islam (if you have reached puberty)


    Sahih Muslim

    Book 031, Number 5981:

    ‘A’isha reported that she used to play with dolls in the presence of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and when her playmates came to her they left (the house) because they felt shy of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), whereas Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent them to her.


    Book 41, Number 4914:

    Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin:

    When the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) arrived after the expedition to Tabuk or Khaybar (the narrator is doubtful), the draught raised an end of a curtain which was hung in front of her store-room, revealing some dolls which belonged to her.

    He asked: What is this? She replied: My dolls. Among them he saw a horse with wings made of rags, and asked: What is this I see among them? She replied: A horse. He asked: What is this that it has on it? She replied: Two wings. He asked: A horse with two wings? She replied: Have you not heard that Solomon had horses with wings? She said: Thereupon the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) laughed so heartily that I could see his molar teeth.
    (This is where Muhammad got the idea for his flying donkey, Al-Buraq).

    It amazes me how Muslims can accept Muhammad as the greatest prophet who ever lived, in spite of the fact that he had full sexual intercourse with a nine-year-old girl. If the Quranic God sanctions the abuse of children for sexual gratification, then He should be exposed as a criminal God, rather than worshipped as a Holy Being. Perhaps the Papacy and Ecumenists are not distressed by the sexual misconduct of the Prophet, because of Christendom’s own share of sexual scandals.

    The fact that the Quranic God permits special people like Muhammad to do things forbidden to others, raises serious questions about His moral character and consistency. Muhammad claims that Allah gave him the permission to marry any other woman he fancied. Here is the relevant text from the Quran:
    “Oh Prophet, we have made lawful for thee thy wives whom thou hast given their wages and what thy right hand owns, spoils of war that God has given thee, and the daughter of thy uncles paternal and aunts paternal, thy uncles maternal and aunts maternal, who have emigrated with thee, and any woman believer, if she give herself to the Prophet and if the Prophet desire to take her in marriage, for thee exclusively”.
    Surah, The Confederates, vs. 49 ff.

    The special provision granted by the Quran to a man like Muhammad to take any woman as wife, even those captured in warfare, without any regard to the will of the women, clearly shows that Allah treats women as lambs to be led to the slaughter by the whims of men. After a man has obtained whatever he desires from a woman, he is free to keep or dismiss her without fear of injustice. This is clearly taught in the same Surah:
    “Thou mayest put off whom thou wilt of them, and whom thou wilt thou mayest take to thee; and if thou seekest any thou hast set aside there is no fault in thee.”
    Surah, The Confederates, v. 50.

    It is evident that Allah has no respect for a woman’s emotions and rights. He treats women as disposable objects. By contrast the Biblical God teaches that husbands should
    “love their wives as their own bodies” (Ephesians 5:28).
    “The wife does not rule over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not rule over his own body, but the wife does” (I Corinthians 7:4).
    This mutual equality and complimentarily taught by the Biblical God, is foreign to the Quranic God. The polygamy and servile concubinage taught by the Quran, destroys the dignity of woman, the beauty of the home, besides discrediting the morality of Allah’s character.


    A most compelling example of the glaring difference between the Biblical and Quranic Gods, is to be found in the teachings of the Koran regarding the role of women in the afterlife.
    It came to me as a shock to read in the Quran and the Hadith, the traditional teachings of Muhammad, that in the afterlife, most women are consigned to hellfire to suffer eternally. Only some chaste maidens, known as hur, will live in the garden of Paradise, in order to provide sexual gratification to faithful Muslims.
    The teaching that the majority of women will be consigned to hellfire is said to have come from a vision of the Prophet Muhammad. This vision is reported in several traditions (Hadith).
    According to one tradition, the Prophet related:
    Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: Once Allah’s Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o ‘Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, “O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women).” They asked, “Why is it so, O Allah’s Apostle?” He replied, “You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you.

    A cautious sensible man could be led astray by you.” The women asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?” He said, “Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?” YES! He said, “This is the deficiency in her intelligence.
    Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?” YES!.
    He said, “This is the deficiency in her religion.” Bukhari (Book #6, Hadith #301)
    The same vision is reported with minor variations in other traditions (Hadith), which speak also of the sin of breaking of confidence. Frankly, I find it appalling that the Quranic God consigns most women to hellfire because allegedly they are all ungrateful and untrustworthy. This teaching is insulting not only to women in general, but to devout Muslim women in particular.
    A visit to any Christian church shows that women outnumber men in church attendance and religious piety. It is hard to believe that Muslim women are less religious and trustworthy than their Christian counterparts, and consequently they deserve to be consigned to hellfire.
    The problem is not the Muslim women, but the teaching of the Quran that treats women as mentally and morally deficient. The low esteem of women is especially evident by their absence at the worship service at the mosque in most Muslim countries.


    Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 132:
    Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Zam’a:

    The Prophet said, “None of you should flog his wife as he flogs a slave and then have sexual intercourse with her in the last part of the day.”
    Ideally when you flog one of your wives, let her recuperate that day and sleep with your other wives or your slave girls


    Islamic way of beating or flogging wives is striking at their padded areas to avoid breaking any bones. Here is an example how considerate our prophet was when he beat his wives on their padded parts.

    Muslim Book 004, Number 2127:
    Ayesha narrated. “He struck me on the chest which caused me pain.”
    (However if your wife is breast feeding, prefer to strike on her buttocks


    It was customary to cut the external female genitalia completely when circumcising women. The Prophet instructed to do cutting in moderation. That showed his kindness and concern for women’s pleasure in love making.

    Sunan Abu Dawud B 41, N5251:

    Narrated Umm Atiyyah al-Ansariyyah:

    A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said to her: Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband.


    33.50 Mohammed, any woman who offered herself to you is halal for you.
    Obligation to practice this aya made logistics a big problem for Muhammad who already had nine wives, his concubines, and a regular supply of captured women from jihadi raids. But Allah’s wishes had to be carried out.
    Bukhari,Volume 7, Book 62, Number 24:
    A woman came to Allah’s Apostle and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! I have come to give you myself.

    Bukhari,V 7, B 62, N 48:
    Narrated Hisham’s father:
    Khaula bint Hakim was one of those ladies who presented themselves to the Prophet. ‘Aisha said, “Doesn’t a lady feel ashamed for presenting herself to a man?”
    Bukhari,V 7, B 62, N 53:
    Narrated Thabit Al-Banani:
    “A woman came to Allah’s Apostle and presented herself to him, saying, ‘O Allah’s Apostle, have you any need for me?’ “Thereupon Anas’s daughter said, “What a shameless lady she was! Shame! Shame!” Anas said, “She was better than you; she had a liking for the Prophet.


    While most women are consigned to hellfire, some chaste maidens, known as houri, will live in the garden of Paradise to delight the faithful Muslim. The Quran refers four times to these chaste maidens whom no man has ever touched (Surah 52:20; 56:22; 55:72; 44:54). They are described in the Quran as chaste, with glancing eyes like pearls, lovely, virginal, and of the same age of male believers (about 30 years old) for whom they are intended as a reward. Later traditions offer a great deal of elaboration.


    The houri are mentioned in several places in the Quran, although in plural no specifics are given as to the number of houries available. Likewise it does not appear from the Quran that they are only women; both sexes are mentioned (although their descriptive qualities are feminine, as alluded to, by the hadiths). They are made available to all believers, not just martyrs.
    Thus shall it be. And We shall pair them with companions pure, most beautiful of eye.
    —Quran, sura 44 (Ad-Dukhan), ayah 54

    In these [gardens] will be mates of modest gaze, whom neither man nor invisible being will have touched ere then.
    —Quran, sura 55 (Ar-Rahman), ayah 56

    [There the blest will live with their] companions pure and modest, in pavilions [splendid]
    —Quran, sura 55, (Ar-Rahman), ayah 72

    reclining on couches [of happiness] ranged in rows!” And [in that paradise] We shall mate them with companions pure, most beautiful of eye
    —Quran, sura 52 (At-Tur), ayah 20
    And full-breasted [companions] of equal age
    —Quran, sura 78 (An-Naba’), ayah 33
    Here are verses that refer to one’s spouse recreated in the hereafter:
    And [with them will be their] spouses, raised high: for, behold, We shall have brought them into being in a life renewed, having resurrected them as virgins
    —Quran, sura 56 (Al-Waqiah), ayat 34-36

    And among His wonders is this: He creates for you mates out of your own kind so that you might incline towards them, and He engenders love and tenderness between you: in this, behold, there are messages indeed for people who think! … And He it is who creates [all life] in the first instance, and then brings it forth anew: and most easy is this for Him, since His is the essence of all that is most sublime in the heavens and on earth, and He alone is almighty, truly wise.
    —Quran, sura 30 (Ar-Rum), ayat 21…27
    There are also verses regarding both genders explicitly:
    Allah has promised the believers, both men and women, gardens through which running waters flow, therein to abide, and goodly dwellings in gardens of perpetual bliss: but Allah’s goodly acceptance is the greatest [bliss of all] -for this, this is the triumph supreme!
    —Quran, sura 9 (At-Taubah), ayah 72

    As for anyone – be it man or woman – who does righteous deeds, and is a believer withal – him shall We most certainly cause to live a good life, and most certainly shall We grant unto such as these their reward in accordance with the best that they ever did.
    —Quran, sura 16 (An-Nahl), ayah 97
    A verse regarding other companionship:
    And, O our Sustainer, bring them into the gardens of perpetual bliss which Thou hast promised them, together with the righteous from among their forebears, and their spouses, and their offspring – for, verily, Thou alone art almighty, truly wise
    —Quran, sura 40 (Ghafir), ayah 8


    The Islamic traditions (hadith) also mention the houris. The hadith are divided into several types by hadith scholars, and among them, there are groups that have been poorly documented and therefore, are not valid as a reference.
    Muhammad al-Bukhari (810 – 870) was a famous Sunni Islamic scholar most known for authoring the most authentic hadith collection named Sahih al-Bukhari
    “…everyone will have two wives from the houris, (who will be so beautiful, pure and transparent that) the marrow of the bones of their legs will be seen through the bones and the flesh.”
    —Muhammad al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, Book 54 “The Beginning of Creation”, hadith 476)

    They will not urinate, relieve nature, spit, or have any nasal secretions. Their combs will be of gold, and their sweat will smell like musk. The aloes-wood will be used in their censers. Their wives will be houris. All of them will look alike and will resemble their father Adam (in stature), sixty cubits tall.
    —Muhammad al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, Book 55 “Prophets”, hadith 544
    Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj Nishapuri (821 – 875) was a famous Sunni Islamic scholar most known for authoring the authentic hadith collection named Sahih Muslim
    Muhammad reported that some (persons) stated with a sense of pride and some discussed whether there would be more men in Paradise or more women. It was upon this that Abu Huraira reported that Abu’l Qasim (the Holy Prophet) said: The (members) of the first group to get into Paradise would have their faces as bright as full moon during the night, and the next to this group would have their faces as bright as the shining stars in the sky, and every person would have two wives and the marrow of their shanks would glimmer beneath the flesh and there would be none without a wife in Paradise.
    —Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj Nishapuri, Sahih Muslim, Book 40 “Pertaining to Paradise”, hadith 6793

    Jabir b. ‘Abdullah reported: I was shown Paradise and I saw the wife of Abu Talha (i. e. Umm Sulaim) and I heard the noise of steps before me and, lo, it was that of Bilal.
    —Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj Nishapuri, Sahih Muslim, Book 31 “Pertaining to the Merits of the Companions”, hadith 6012

    FATWA NO. 10053

    – Basic Tenets of Faith » Belief » Belief in the Last Day and the Signs of the Hour » Paradise and Hell.
    Will men in Paradise have intercourse with al-hoor aliyn?
    I’m wondering will the men from amongst the human race that enters paradise, will they have sexual intercourse with the “HOURIS” women in the paradise.
    Praise be to Allaah.
    Allaah has prepared for His believing slaves in Paradise that which no eye has seen, no ear has heard and has never even crossed the minds of men, such that even the person who has the least blessings in Paradise will think that he is the most blessed among them. Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (may Allaah be pleased with him) said that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The lowest of people in status in Paradise will be a man whose face Allaah turns away from the Fire towards Paradise, and shows him a tree giving shade. He will say, ‘O Lord, bring me closer to that tree so that I may be in its shade… Then he will enter his house [in Paradise] and his two wives from among al-hoor al-‘iyn will come in and will say to him, ‘Praise be to Allaah who brought you to life for us and brought us to life for you.’ Then he will say, ‘No one has been given what I have been given.’” (Narrated by Muslim, no. 275)
    Among the blessings that Allaah has prepared for His slaves are al-hoor al-‘iyn. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
    “So (it will be). And We shall marry them to Hoor (fair females) with wide lovely eyes”
    [al-Dhukhaan 44:54]
    “They will recline (with ease) on thrones arranged in ranks. And We shall marry them to Hoor (fair females) with wide lovely eyes
    [al-Toor 52:20]
    Al-hoor al-‘iyn are extremely beautiful, such that the marrow of their shins will be visible from beneath their garments. Every man who enters Paradise will have two wives from among al-hoor al-‘iyn. Allaah says, describing them (interpretation of the meaning):
    “Therein (Gardens) will be Khayraatun Hisaan [fair (wives) good and beautiful];
    Then which of the Blessings of your Lord will you both (jinn and men) deny?
    Hoor (beautiful, fair females) guarded in pavilions;
    Then which of the Blessings of your Lord will you both (jinn and men) deny?
    With whom no man or jinni has had Tamth [opening their hymens with sexual intercourse] before them.
    Then which of the Blessings of your Lord will you both (jinn and men) deny?
    Reclining on green cushions and rich beautiful mattresses.”
    [al-Rahmaan 55:70-76]
    “And (there will be) Hoor (fair females) with wide lovely eyes (as wives for Al-Muttaqoon – the pious).
    Like unto preserved pearls”
    [al-Waaqi’ah 56:22-23]
    It was narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The first group will enter Paradise looking like the moon on the night when it is full, and those who follow them will be like the brightest shining star in the sky. Their hearts will be as one, and there will be no hatred or jealousy among them. Each man will have two wives from among al-hoor al-‘iyn, the marrow of whose calves can be seen from beneath the bone and flesh.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, no. 3014)
    It was narrated that Anas ibn Maalik (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “I heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: ‘Going out and coming back for the sake of Allaah is better than this world and all that is in it. And a spot the size of the bow of one of you in Paradise – or a spot the size of his whip – is better than this world and all that is in it. If a woman from among the people of Paradise were to look at the people of this earth, she would light up all that is in between them and fill it with fragrance. The veil on her head is better than this world and all that is in it.’” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, no. 2587)
    A man will have intercourse in Paradise with his wives from among al-hoor al-‘iyn and his wives from among the people of this world, if they enter Paradise with him. A man will be given the strength of a hundred men to eat, drink, feel desire and have sexual intercourse. It was narrated from Anas (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The believer in Paradise will be given such and such strength for sexual intercourse.” He was asked, “O Messenger of Allaah, will he really be able to do that?” He said, “He will be given the strength of one hundred (men).” (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, no. 2459. He said, (it is) saheeh ghareeb).
    It was narrated from Zayd ibn Arqam that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “A man among the people of Paradise will be given the strength of a hundred men for eating, drinking, desire and sexual intercourse. A man among the Jews said, ‘The one who eats or drinks needs to excrete!’ The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to him: ‘The excretion of any one of them will be in the form of sweat which comes out through his skin, then his stomach will reduce in size again.’” (Narrated by Ahmad, no. 18509; al-Daarimi, no. 2704)
    The mufassireen said concerning the phrase “busy in joyful things” (Yaa-Seen 36:55 – interpretation of the meaning):
    ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood and Ibn ‘Abbaas (mayAllaah be pleased with them both), and Sa’eed ibn al-Musayyib, ‘Ikrimah, al-Hasan, Qutaadah, al-A’mash, Sulaymaan al-Taymi and al-Oozaa’i said concerning the aayaah (interpretation of the meaning),
    “Verily, the dwellers of Paradise, that Day, will be busy in joyful things” [Yaa-Seen 36:55]
    they said, (it means) they will be busy deflowering virgins. Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) said, according to a report narrated from him, that “busy in joyful things” means listening to stringed instruments. Abu Haatim said: he misheard the phrase iftidaad al-abkaar (deflowering virgins) and thought it was samaa’ al-awtaar (listening to stringed instruments). In fact the correct phrase is iftidaad al-abkaar (deflowering virgins). (Ibn Katheer, 3/564)
    With regard to children, the scholars differed as to whether children would be born as a result of this intercourse or not. Some said that there would be children if the man wants them, but the pregnancy and birth would take just one hour. Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (may Allaah be pleased with him) narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “If the believer wants a child in Paradise, the pregnancy and delivery will take only an hour, then the child will be the age that the man wants.” (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, no. 2487; al-Daarimi, no. 2712; Ahmad, no. 11339; Ibn Maajah, no. 4329). And Allaah knows best.
    We ask Allaah to admit us to Paradise and to keep us far away from the Fire. May He bless us with the highest Firdaws, for He is the One Who is Able to do that. Praise be to Allaah the Lord of the Worlds.

    Islam Q&A
    Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid

    In the hadiths [traditions] details of their description differ, but they are generally said to be composed of saffron from the feet to the knees, musk from the knees to the breast, amber from the breast to the neck, and camphor from the neck to the head. Working often with multiples of seven, the traditionalists have described them as wearing seventy to 70,000 gowns, through which even the marrow of the bones can be seen because of the fineness of their flesh, reclining on seventy couches of red hyacinth encrusted with rubies and jewels, and the like. The houris [chaste maidens] do not sleep, do not get pregnant, do not menstruate, spit, or blow their noses, and are never sick. References to the increased sexual prowess of those male believers for whose pleasure the houris [chaste maidens] are intended are numerous; the reports make it clear that the houris are created specifically as a reward for males of the Muslim community who have been faithful to God.

    The sensual element that pollutes even the Quranic vision of Paradise, shows the immense difference that exists between the sexual obsession of Allah and the holiness and purity that characterizes YHWH.
    The foregoing comparison between the teaching of the Quran and that of the Bible, suffice to show that the Papacy’s and Ecumenists attempt to equate the God of Biblical revelation with that of the Quran, may be politically correct, but it is Biblically wrong. The two Gods differ like day from night in their nature, character, and plan for human life and destiny. The Biblical God offers salvation as a gift by grace; the Quranic God teaches that salvation is a human achievement.


    In the light of the radical differences we have found between the Biblical and Quranic Gods, one wonders: How can the Papacy work toward a new partnership with Muslims by praising their faith as being the same faith of Abraham? Could it be that the Pope feels drawn to Islam more than to any other non-Christian religion, because there are significant similarities between Islam and Romanism? To test the validity of this assumption, let us take a brief look at some significant similarities between the two religions.


    In the first place both Islam and Romanism have a similar autocratic form of church government where the seat of authority resides in one person: the Pope in Romanism and Muhammad in Islam. What the Pope is to Romanists, Muhammad is to the Muslims. Both of them are accepted as God’s representatives on earth. The Pope claims to be the vicar of Christ, and Muhammad proclaimed himself to be Allah’s greatest prophet, superseding Jesus Christ Himself. What this means is that both the Romanists and Muslims share the same admiration and veneration for a human leader who dictates their beliefs and practices.


    A second striking similarity between Islam and Romanism is their respective understanding of the importance of good works to earn salvation. Both in Romanism and Islam salvation is the result of a combination of grace and works. In Romanism, God’s grace is infused into believers to enable them to do the necessary good works to merit salvation on the day of judgment.
    On a similar vein in Islam, salvation is a combination of Allah’s grace and Muslims’ works. On the Day of Judgment, if a Muslim’s good works outweigh their bad ones, and if Allah accepts their good works, then they may be forgiven of all their sins and enter into Paradise. Therefore, Islam is a religion of salvation by works because it combines man’s works with Allah’s grace.
    A few verses from the Quran suffice to exemplify the importance of works:
    “To those who believe and do deeds of righteous�ness hath Allah promised forgiveness and a great reward”
    (Surah 5:9).
    “Then those whose balance [of good deeds] is heavy, they will be successful. But those whose balance is light, will be those who have lost their souls; in hell will they abide”.
    (Surah 23:102-103).
    The Muslims understanding of good works is largely determined by the performance of the Five Pillars of Islam. These are:
    (1) the recitation of the creed that there is only one true God, Allah, and Muhammad his prophet;
    (2) Praying five times a day;
    (3) Fasting and abstaining from sexual relations during the daylight hours of the month of Ramadan;
    (4) Almsgiving to the poor;
    (5) Pilgrimage to Mecca, if possible, at least once in the lifetime.


    The Romanist understanding of good works is strikingly similar. Like the Muslims, the Romanist’s recite the Apostles Creed in their church service. The recitation of prayers is also an important part of their piety. I vividly recall my reciting the prayers in the evening. I held a rosary in my hand to count the number of Hail Marys and Our Father (Lord’s Prayer) I had recited.

    Fasting also is recommended in Romanism, especially as a form of penance to expiate sins confessed to a priest. Almsgiving is also an important aspect of piety. Alms are usually given in the form of charitable contributions to various religious organizations that minister to the orphans and the poor.
    Like the Muslims, Romanists are also encouraged to make a pilgrimage to Rome, especially during the Anno Santo, that is, the Holy Year, which is now celebrated every 25 years. During the last Jubilee (Holy) Year of the year 2000, it was estimated that over 40 million Catholics made their pilgrimage to Rome, seeking remission of their sins, and indulgences for their loved ones in Purgatory. An indulgence is the remission of the temporal punishment for sins on behalf of loved ones, that can be obtained through prayers, pilgrimages, and special masses. These can shorten the duration of the punishment experienced by loved ones in purgatory.

    It is evident that the methods of salvation in Islam and Romanism are strikingly similar. Unfortunately, both religious systems ignore that salvation is a divine gift of grace (Ephesians 2:8) and not a human achievement. Works of obedience are not the basis of our salvation, but a loving response to the gracious provision of salvation. It is because “the love of Christ compels us” (II Corinthians 5:14), that we observe His commandments (John 14:15).

    John 14
    Jesus Promises to Send the Holy Spirit
    14 “Don’t be troubled. Believe in God, and believe in me. 2 My Father’s house has many rooms. If that were not true, would I have told you that I’m going to prepare a place for you? 3 If I go to prepare a place for you, I will come again. Then I will bring you into my presence so that you will be where I am. 4 You know the way to the place where I am going.”
    5 Thomas said to him, “Lord, we don’t know where you’re going. So how can we know the way?”
    6 Jesus answered him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one goes to the Father except through me. 7 If you have known me, you will also know my Father. From now on you know him through me and have seen him in me.”
    8 Philip said to Jesus, “Lord, show us the Father, and that will satisfy us.”
    9 Jesus replied, “I have been with all of you for a long time. Don’t you know me yet, Philip? The person who has seen me has seen the Father. So how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Don’t you believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? What I’m telling you doesn’t come from me. The Father, who lives in me, does what he wants. 11 Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and that the Father is in me. Otherwise, believe me because of the things I do.
    12 “I can guarantee this truth: Those who believe in me will do the things that I am doing. They will do even greater things because I am going to the Father. 13 I will do anything you ask the Father in my name so that the Father will be given glory because of the Son. 14 If you ask me to do something, I will do it.
    15 “If you love me, you will obey my commandments. 16 I will ask the Father, and he will give you another helper who will be with you forever. 17 That helper is the Spirit of Truth. The world cannot accept him, because it doesn’t see or know him. You know him, because he lives with you and will be in you.
    18 “I will not leave you all alone. I will come back to you. 19 In a little while the world will no longer see me, but you will see me. You will live because I live. 20 On that day you will know that I am in my Father and that you are in me and that I am in you. 21 Whoever knows and obeys my commandments is the person who loves me. Those who love me will have my Father’s love, and I, too, will love them and show myself to them.”
    22 Judas (not Iscariot) asked Jesus, “Lord, what has happened that you are going to reveal yourself to us and not to the world?”
    23 Jesus answered him, “Those who love me will do what I say. My Father will love them, and we will go to them and make our home with them. 24 A person who doesn’t love me doesn’t do what I say. I don’t make up what you hear me say. What I say comes from the Father who sent me.
    25 “I have told you this while I’m still with you. 26 However, the helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything. He will remind you of everything that I have ever told you.
    27 “I’m leaving you peace. I’m giving you my peace. I don’t give you the kind of peace that the world gives. So don’t be troubled or cowardly. 28 You heard me tell you, ‘I’m going away, but I’m coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would be glad that I’m going to the Father, because the Father is greater than I am.
    29 “I’m telling you this now before it happens. When it does happen, you will believe. 30 The ruler of this world has no power over me. But he’s coming, so I won’t talk with you much longer. 31 However, I want the world to know that I love the Father and that I am doing exactly what the Father has commanded me to do. Get up! We have to leave.”


    A third striking doctrinal similarity between Romanism and Islam is the intercessory role of human agents. In Romanism, believers pray to Mary and the Saints to intercede with God on their behalf, or on behalf of their loved ones. In the new official Catechism of the Roman Church, it acknowledges that Muslims venerate Jesus as a prophet, his virgin Mother they also honor, and even at times devotedly invoke.
    For Muslims, the supreme intercessory role is reserved for Muhammad. On the final Day of Judgment, the Prophet will prostrate himself before God who, according to tradition, will say to him:
    “O Muhammad! raise up your head, and speak, it will be heard; and ask, it will be given; and intercede, and it will be approved.”
    A. N. Matthews, Translator, Mishcat-ul-Masabih, The Tibrizi Collection, (Calcutta, 1810), vol. 1, p. 607
    The text continues indicating that God will pull out of the hellfire those for whom Muhammad will intercede.
    The notion of human mediators interceding with God on behalf of others, is foreign to Scripture. The Bible teaches that
    “There is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus”
    (I Timothy 2:5).
    “It is only Jesus Christ, who died, yes, who was raised from the dead, who is at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us “
    (Romans 8:34).


    The two doctrines of purgatory and hell are remarkably similar in both Romanism and Islam. Both religions believe that the souls of penitent sinners need to go through a purgation or purification process before they can be admitted to Paradise. In Roman teachings the suffering of purgatory is needed to pay for the temporal punishment of sins committed on this earth. In Islam the suffering is inflicted as punishment for sins of omission.
    In Islamic teaching the suffering of purgatory is needed, because despite all that the pious believer may have done according to the commandments of God while on earth, he still may have committed some transgressions, however slight, or failed to do certain things that he should have done. Many of the traditions suggest punishment for single sins of omission.


    Purgatory (Araf)
    Araf is the name given to the high castle and tower separating Paradise and Hell. In other words, Araf is a buffer zone between Paradise and Hell, separating them. There are some disputes over who will be the people of Araf; there are two views that became prominent.
    1. People who were not informed about the call of any prophets and children of polytheists who died very young.
    2. Believers whose good deeds and bad deeds are equal. They will have to wait between Paradise and Hell before they enter Paradise.
    The followings is stated in the Quranic verse about the people of Araf:
    “Between them shall be a veil, and on the Heights will be men who would know everyone by his marks: they will call out to the companions of the Garden “peace on you” they will not have entered, but they will have an assurance (thereof.) When their eyes shall be turned towards the companions of the Fire, they will say: “Our Lord! Send us not to the company of the wrong- doers.” (al-Araf 46-47.).
    However, Araf is not a place of permanent resident. After making the people of Araf wait there for a while temporarily, Allah will make a decision for them and send them to Paradise with his blessing.


    Who are the companions of Araf, which is mentioned in the Surah Al-Araf?

    Let us first give the interpretations of the verses about Araf and people entitled to Araf, which reads in the Surah Al-Araf before explaining Araf itself. There are some verses about Araf in the Holy Book Quran after the verses, which are made mention of the conversations between the companions of Hell and the companions of Paradise.

    And when their eyes are turned towards the companions of Hell, they say (in dread of that state): “Our Lord! Do not include us among the people of the wrongdoing!”

    The people of the Heights call out to some men (who were the leaders of unbelief in the world, and) whom they recognize by their marks (on their countenances), saying: “(Now you see that) neither your numbers and the wealth you amassed nor your growing arrogance and vanity have availed you!”

    (Pointing to the companions of Paradise, they continue): “Are those not the ones of whom you swore that God would not favor them with mercy?” (For now it is they who have been told:) “Enter Paradise; you will have no fear, nor will you grieve.” (Al-Araf Surah, 7:47-49)

    Araf is the plural form of the word Arf. There are so many explanations about Araf in the interpretations. However, the common conception mostly accepted by the annotators is Arafs being a curtain, a high wall, and a hill between Hell and Paradise. According to Ibni Abbas, it is a balcony (surrounding minaret) up on the Sirat Bridge (bridge, which is thin, straight, and sharp will be laid across Hell with Gods command).

    Hazrath Hasan Basri says;

    These are the people who were assigned by the command of God to allocate the companions of Hell and the companions of Paradise. I swear it is true, they might be among us today.

    The reason why the people in the Araf are called as Araf is their recognizing humans for their actions. And again as it is explained in the interpretations, when God balances good and evil deeds in the scale (Mizan) and distinguishes companions of paradise from companions of Hell, He will make those wait for quite some time whose good and evil deeds are equal. Those who are going to be next to the Sirat Bridge will know the companions of Hell and the companions of Paradise. When they will see the companions of Paradise, they will say, Gods peace and blessings be upon you. When theyll turn to the left side theyll see the companions of Hell and by seeking refuge in God will supplicate as, O God do not let us be among those atrocious. After done with companions of Hell and companions of Paradise, God will forgive them with His Mercy and will put them into the Paradise. (3)

    As a matter of fact when Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) once asked as who are the companions of Araf?:

    The Prophet said, “When the people of Paradise will enter Paradise and the people of Hell will go to Hell, rest will be told as, you are saved from Hell for your good deeds but did not deserve Paradise. But you are saved from Hell by My mercy, you may enter Paradise.

    Besides, there are some accounts, which reports that the companions of Araf are not humans but they are angels. All these explanations are in conformity with the conception and the interpretation of the verses.

    However, Ibrahim Hakki in his work Marifetname claims that insane and children of unbelievers who are not held responsible of religious duties are entitled to Araf. When they see people of Paradise just because they cannot reach those blessings, they are in sadness, but when they see people of Hell, they are thankful to the God for where they are and they stay there forever.

    Nevertheless, every explanation about Araf and People of Araf is only at the level of interpretation of the verse. Only God knows the truth.


    1. Surah Al-A`raf , 47-49.
    2. et-Tefsirul-Kebir, 14:87.
    3- (Taberi Tefsiri) 8:136-139.
    4. A. g. e.
    Mehmet Paksu

    The notion of believers suffering in purgatory to pay for the punishment of their sins before they are admitted into Paradise negates the all sufficiency of Christ’s substitutionary sacrifice to pay the penalty of our sins. Scripture clearly teaches that
    “Christ has appeared once for all at the end of the age to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself”
    (Hebrews 9:26; cf. I Corinthians 15:3).
    The Good News of the Gospel is that God showed His love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us (Romans 5:8). There is no need for penitent sinners to suffer the punishment of their sins in this present life or the next, because Christ’s atoning sacrifice has paid the penalty for our sins.
    The Islamic vision of Hell is remarkably similar to the Roman one. In fact, some writers suggest that the seven stories Inferno of Dante Alighieri, was inspired by the Islamic hell with seven stories, each of which is for a distinct class of wicked.
    Hardly a cruder or more barbarous picture of hell could be conceived than that depicted in the Quran and Hadith. The fires of hell are seventy times the intensity of terrestrial fire. The wicked who will suffer in it throughout eternity, will forget that they ever enjoyed any pleasure on this earth. Their tongues will drag out and men will stamp upon them. They will suffer hunger and when given food it will stick in their throats. They will be given hot water served to them, with iron hooks; and when it comes near their faces it will scorch them, and when it goes into their bellies will tear every thing there into pieces.
    Scorpions as big as mules and snakes like camels torment them; stinking rivers full of vile creatures entrap them; the damned have black charred skins, huge long tongues, mouths vomiting pus and blood, entrails filled with fire; their bodies will be greatly enlarged so that they can more adequately experience the torture. All suffer by fire, although the degree of punishment differs according to one’s sins. The damned attempt to escape, but each time the guardians of the Fire seize them and throw them down again.
    The gruesome and barbarous description of hell, that is common to both Islam and Romanism, may serve the cause of promoting the worship of their awful God, a God to be feared rather than loved, but it defames the Biblical God.
    Galatians 6:8
    8 If you plant in the soil of your corrupt nature, you will harvest destruction. But if you plant in the soil of your spiritual nature, you will harvest everlasting life.
    2 Thessalonians 1:9
    9 They will pay the penalty by being destroyed forever, by being separated from the Lord’s presence and from his glorious power.
    1 Thessalonians 5:2-3
    2 You know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. 3 When people say, “Everything is safe and sound!” destruction will suddenly strike them. It will be as sudden as labor pains come to a pregnant woman. They won’t be able to escape.


    The preceding comparison of some of the beliefs shared in common by Romanism and Islam, helps us to understand why the Papacy is working toward a new partnership with Muslims by acknowledging the commonality between their respective faiths. We have seen that the basis for such partnership is not merely a generic view of God, but a similar autocratic form of church government, as well as similar beliefs in such areas as the role of good works in salvation, the intercessory role of human agents, the immortality of the soul, the coercive methods of evangelism, and the vision of purgatory and hell.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>