Islam’s abominations are too obvious for you to excuse


I have now posted the full video of the 8 December UCL debate on ‘Sharia law negates human rights’. You’ve already read about handshake-gate but there is a lot more to say on this.

What took place at the debate is nothing new.

Our opponents, Ayyaz Mahmood and Jonathan Butterworth, were quick to brush aside any evidence of Sharia law’s negation of human rights by saying that none of it is true Islam nor is it mentioned in the Koran. They say this even though they know full well that Sharia law is based not only on the Koran but the Hadith (sayings and actions of Mohammad) and Islamic jurisprudence.

Stoning is one such example. Proponents will dishonestly say that stoning is not mentioned in the Koran knowing full well that is mentioned in the Hadith and that it is part and parcel of Sharia law:

At the debate, when I asked the speakers and audience whether there is a Hadith on stoning to prove my point, I was given an emphatic ‘no’. But here’s why, according to Ayyaz Mahmood (in comments):

‘Had Maryam asked me, “Has the Holy Prophet (sa) ever ordered that a man be stoned to death?” To this, I would have had to answer yes, and then hope and pray that the moderator would give me a minute or two (which isn’t really enough) to explain the whole background of those specific Ahadith… But of course, at the time, the opportunity did not afford itself to give this entire explanation. So I gave her the direct answer to her question, which was a big, “NO”. Only to silence her. Because I didn’t want to get into this whole issue during the debate…’

Which brings us to the other thing they always do and that is to speak about context and interpretation as if it will help change our minds on stoning, wife beating and the like.

Take the example of the sura in the Koran, which says that men are the maintainers of women and good women are obedient. If men fear desertion, the women can be admonished, confined and beaten (The Women, 4.34).  When this is brought up at the debate, Ayazz Mahmood says that Islam only permits violence as a last resort and requires that there be no marks left on the woman’s body!!!

As Mansoor Hekmat says: ‘I realise that the interests of some require that they rescue Islam (as much as possible) from the wrath of those who have witnessed the indescribable atrocities of or been victimised by Islamists. I also realise that the extent of these atrocities and holocausts is such that even some Islamists themselves do not want to take responsibility for them. So it is natural that the debate on ‘true Islam’ vis-à-vis ‘practical Islam’ is broached over and over again. These justifications, however, are foolish from my point of view (that of a communist and atheist) and from the points of views of those of us who have seen or been the victims of Islam’s crimes. They are foolish for those of us who are living through a colossal social, political and intellectual struggle with this beast. The doctrinal and Koranic foundations of Islam, the development of Islam’s history, and the political identity and affiliation of Islam and Islamists in the battle between reaction and freedom in our era are too obvious to allow the debate on the various interpretations of Islam and the existence or likelihood of other interpretations to be taken seriously.

‘…In Islam, be it true or untrue, the individual has no rights or dignity. In Islam, the woman is a slave. In Islam, the child is on par with animals. In Islam, freethinking is a sin deserving of punishment. Music is corrupt. Sex without permission and religious certification, is the greatest of sins. This is the religion of death. In reality, all religions are such but most religions have been restrained by freethinking and freedom-loving humanity over hundreds of years. This one was never restrained or controlled. With every move, it brings abominations and misery.’ (Mansoor Hekmat, Islam and De-Islamisation)

Enough said for now, though I must come back to other questions raised on Aisha’s age when she ‘married’ Mohammad – 18 and a half not 6 according to them, that ‘there is no compulsion in Islam’, and on the concept of respect, equality and free expression at a later date.

By the way, if you do have time and are bored out of your minds, it would do good to read the full comments made on the blog, Art of Misinformation.

On UCL Debate

On how emotional and deficient in intelligence I am (yes it does sound like the Koran talking – yet again)

Comments

  1. says

    I just listened to your portion of the debate on video. It would have been helpful if you cited to the Qur’an in your debate, as you do in this above blog post. THAT would have been a logical argument.

    To be sure, the questions you bring up in this blog post are legitimate questions, so don’t think I am dismissing your argument. What I am dismissing, is the disingenuous tactic you used in the live debate. That is, you did not cite the Qur’an, but cited corrupted nations who claim to be following the Qur’an. If you can’t see the difference between the two, then this discussion is quite pointless.

    I mean don’t you find it incredible that you bashed Shariah Law without citing a single verse of the Qur’an? Not a single hadith either! Incredible!

    The fact that you admit this has nothing to do with Muslims being more devout, and everything to do with a politicalization of Islam is quite telling. Your issue, obviously, should be with th politicalization of Islam, not with Islam itself. By your logic, therefore, if Muslims were devout, then the corruption would not be happening. We Agree!

    All you did in the video was complain about how women and minorities are mistreated in so called Muslim nations. Great, welcome to the club. The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community has been condemning these acts for 120 years, long before your “enlightenment” 3 years ago when you started your anti-shariah campaign.

    The difference is that Ahmadi Muslims put the blame where it lies, on the individuals committing the atrocities. We don’t give the abusers an excuse. Maybe you should consider doing the same – blame the individual, not the excuse they use. THAT is how you solve the problem. Do you blame the car or the drunk driver?

    All you demonstrated is that nations are corrupt, just like every nation in the world. You think this economic crisis is happening because people were righteous? You think no atheists were involved there? Laughable.

    Perhaps in the next debate against Mr. Khan and Mr. Butterworth, you can bring up Qur’anic verses and hadith to support your issues against Shariah Law. In the meantime, thank you for debating, however, as all you proved yet again is that not a single valid argument exists to denounce Islam.. God bless.

  2. says

    There are no human rights with Sharia as far as I can tell, and Sharia is based the Quran. The sad part is such countries under Sharia are being barbaric when things like this happen: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-12-07/australian-faces-lashes-in-saudi-arabia/3716990

    Yes, he is an Ausie Muslim who was on hajj, but some how he got accused of being disrespectful and sentence to 500 lashes. That can kill a person and often has. As Maryam just showed, it is all based on the Quran, which was transcribed from an illiterate man, pulling things out of his imagination over 500 years ago. Quite frankly, it’s horrid and I can’t fathom anyone would want to live under such inhumane conditions. I don’t see anyone condemning such things in such countries.

    • Uzoozy says

      Read the Cannon Law and the bible.
      Women in Christanity are supposed to be made bald.
      The man rules over the wife.
      The Popes word is law.and not changeable.

      Your article is fear mongering.

      Islam is a great religion of peace and clear understanding of the world.
      FYI All persons if they are devout followers of any good religion are good people.And Islam is no exception. Nothing is bad except thinking makes it.
      God bless

      • says

        Yes, I am well aware that women are property in the O.T. That was not suppose to be fear mongering, that was telling it like it is.

        Islam is a great religion of peace and clear understanding of the world.

        I beg to differ. There is no peace with any Abrahamic religion nor is there clear understanding of the world. If you want understanding of the world, get your head out of story books and learn about REAL science.

        FYI All persons if they are devout followers of any good religion are good people.And Islam is no exception. Nothing is bad except thinking makes it.

        Ah yes, that old adage, don’t think, just accept it. *rolling eyes* That would be gullible not to think for oneself and just accept dogma and superstition.

        • Uzoozy says

          TYry asking the priest to explain the trinity, they will tell you to believe . Like they did to me in school.
          I forgot you have no religion.

      • says

        And BTW, I grew up Xian and read the Bile many times. I know it very well. I’ve also studied many other religions, philosophies, and the various mythologies modern religion evolved from.

        • Uzoozy says

          Mrianabrinson,
          Thank you for your response.
          So you were Xian and you have read the bible many times.
          I studied in a Catholic school and am aware of the basic tenets of Christanity.Its a good religion.
          You seem to be one of the persons which the Holy Quran describes as people who do not do not understand because there is a viel over their eyes they are blind.
          For you to get any kind of understanding you will have to be blessed from above.
          You can read the bible as many times as you want , you will get more and more confused . That is the state you are in right now-confused.Most parts of the bible are man written hence your confusion.
          Islam is not a cult one in five people walking the earth are Muslims. Only a fool would say that they are all confused.
          I need a break from this.

          The only way for salvation in the world is to believe in One God the most merciful and wise.
          One has to be true in thinking .
          Like in many countries Dominionism is the buzz word.
          The whole world must be Christain .

          God did say in the Koran if He wanted He could have made all the followers the same religion. But He did not, He is wise and merciful. To you your religion to me my religion.
          So let us be happy let the Lord do His work.

      • Steven Kraatz says

        Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many {t} devices.

        (t) And so are cause for their own destruction.

    • Uzoozy says

      Mrianabrinson,
      In american courts on Jan 10th ruled that Sharia Law cannot be banned in USA its part of Islamic religion.
      HA HA hate mongers

  3. says

    Quote: ” When this is brought up at the debate, Ayazz Mahmood says that Islam only permits violence as a last resort and requires that there be no marks left on the woman’s body”

    It’s not called violence when there is no physical pain.

    • Uzoozy says

      In the bible, thousands of women were raped by the high officials of the church.
      If the pinishment is difficlt to bear, if you do the crime you pay.I cannot imagine the world where there are no recourse for crime, then crime will be everywhere, people will speed up on the roads etc.
      If the accused person asks for forgiveness it is instructed to be set free.

    • Uzoozy says

      Do not blame Islam, it has nothing to do with Islam.

      Its the individual person or country doing that,
      Sharia law is for Muslims who believe in Allah and his commandments . Sharia law cannot come to USA for sure, so do not worry.

      If you read the Koran it so soothing and enjoyable to read.
      Its the word od Allah.

      Every word has meaning, if the words are twisted as is often done these days, all kinds of mis-understandings can arise.

      After all one in five persons walking the earth are Muslims.

      It would be fun for you to read the Cannon Law and you will realize Islam is the most mildest of all religions.

  4. says

    Maryam blamed Islam and the Quran for the injustices in the Muslim world. It would then be equally valid to blame Christianity, Judaism, Secularism, Atheism, Socialism, Communism, for their respective injustices rather than the people who abuse such laws. In such a case she should fight against ALL of them…and we would be left with no law, no legal system.

    • says

      It would then be equally valid to blame Christianity, Judaism, Secularism, Atheism, Socialism, Communism, for their respective injustices rather than the people who abuse such laws.

      How about we agree to blame bad ideas and the people that act on those ideas? There’s no need to be exclusive in our criticisms.

      So if someone says it is right to stone someone for adultery I think it would be fair to

      a) Criticise the person that says it.
      b) Criticise the idea that we should stone people for adultery
      c) Criticise anyone that actually stones people for adultery.

      In such a case she should fight against ALL of them…and we would be left with no law, no legal system.

      Actually, what we’d have left after we’ve criticised bad ideas and the people that promote and follow them, are the good ideas and the good people.

  5. HumanisticJones says

    When this is brought up at the debate, Ayazz Mahmood says that Islam only permits violence as a last resort and requires that there be no marks left on the woman’s body!!!

    I fully agreed with Anne Marie and Maryam, I don’t care if no marks are left, or no medical damage is done, beating is still beating! I watched him act as though there is no possible way to inflict physical, emotional, or mental pain and anguish without leaving a mark. Utter rubbish.

    • says

      Actually my friend it is not beating when there is no pain. leaving no mark => no pain, otherwise what is the point of that saying of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Tell me, explain to me, why the the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) did not raise even his little finger though he had disagreements with his wives?
      You may come up with that if someone doesn’t do something then it doesn’t show it is impermissible, but I hope you do realize that after the Quran it is the practice of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) that is given the highest authority. so my friend maybe you would like to explain that.

      You said “I watched him act as though there is no possible way to inflict physical, emotional, or mental pain and anguish without leaving a mark”

      Maybe you’d like to give one example how it is possible to inflict physical pain without leaving a mark, considering the fact that no mark => no pain. Your statement quite contradictory isn’t it?

      • Kevin says

        “no mark => no pain”

        Do you really believe this? If so, would you be willing to be water-boarded in order to test your belief?

        • says

          My friend it’s called symbolism to depict how much care you should take with respect to your wife. Please do not take it literally, for it then would be meaningless, I mean what is not leaving mark on the body got to do with anything if it doesn’t imply that you shouldn’t inflict pain.
          Such a stance is also supported by various other statements as said in the video, such as the teaching that the best of men is he who treats his wife best.
          So count out water boarding. Thankyou.

          • 1000 Needles says

            You asked:

            Maybe you’d like to give one example how it is possible to inflict physical pain without leaving a mark…

            …and when your question was answered, you retreated to “don’t take it literally.”

            You had no intention of treating the passage ‘symbolically’ until it was used against you.

          • says

            Sorry, but if you read carefully you would have realized I said earlier :

            “Actually my friend it is not beating when there is no pain. leaving no mark => no pain, otherwise what is the point of that saying of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)”

            Mark the last phrase.

          • Kevin says

            Step one, ask for an example. Step two, example is given. Step three, some retort reinterpreting step one as being irrelevant. Really? If you don’t want to be challenged, don’t ask for counter-factuals. It’s that easy. However, if that is the case, you probably don’t belong on a skeptic’s forum.

            Also, just because you can’t think of an alternate interpretation doesn’t mean that there isn’t one. That would be an argument from ignorance. And, no, it doesn’t become meaningless. Other religions have their adherents put up a facade so a rule of not leaving marks without it meaning not inflicting pain would be a means of achieving this end. I don’t know how parsimonious this would be with Islam, but it doesn’t become nonsense by virtue of your lack of imagination.

      • says

        And for the record, it you are a woman, I feel extremely sorry for you that you accepted such things in life, but if you are a man, maybe you should be glad you are not living in the States. Many places in the U.S. do not take kindly to spousal abuse.

      • HumanisticJones says

        Well, may be getting into the “too much information” territory from experiences with the bdsm culture, but I can personally give you several…

        TENS units or a device commonly known as a violet wand can be used to cause pain through muscle spasm or static arcing… no marks left at all.

        Various methods of choking a person without leaving ligature marks on the neck or bruising.

        Several methods of flat impact hitting exist that leave no lasting bruise but sting very badly.

        …and all that just deals with causing PHSYICAL pain (and the difference there is that in bdsm, all parties are consenting, in your Sharia, consent isn’t even an issue with this subject), I made the express comment that it is possible to also cause emotional or mental anguish without leaving marks. Legally, at least under secular law, this is also spousal abuse.

      • Tsu Dho Nimh says

        Maybe you’d like to give one example how it is possible to inflict physical pain without leaving a mark

        Ask a martial arts expert to show you the various nerve pressure points. No marks, and EXCRUCIATING pain.

  6. Steve Bennet says

    The Islamic apologist said it best. “The vast majority of muslims are not interested in human rights, they are interested in spirituality.” To me that puts the differences between atheists (of which I am happy to be one) and all religions (not just Islam). We care about violence against women, they care about making sure they are spiritually right with their god.

  7. Uzoozy says

    NUmbers 15
    The Stoning

    32

    ¶ And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.

    33

    And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.

    34

    And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.

    35

    And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.

    36

    And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.

  8. steve oberski says

    So apparently that badly written work of fiction known as the Koran never mentions that the equally fictitious, pedophile, genocidal, tribal warlord Muhammad ever raised a pinky against any of his wives therefore Sharia law is not misogynistic, or so the masters of Taqiyya Ayyaz Mahmood and Jonathan Butterworth would have us believe.

    Well the Koran probably never mentions that Muhammad took a dump but I’m sure he did that on a regular basis, when he wasn’t busy fucking his 9 year old wife.

    As well, all those systems of Sharia law out there right now, the ones in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan etc are not the One True Sharia as defined by Ayyaz Mahmood so it’s useless to argue against Sharia using every existing implementation of it, one has to read the Koran, Hadith and every other piece of crap excreted by Muslim “scholars” over the 1400 year period that this cult has infested the world before one can criticize it.

    The point is, all the version of Sharia out there are true to Islam, the holy books are chock full of misogyny, homophobia, xenophobia and genocide. Any behaviour, not matter how disgusting, can be justified using these chronicles of human depravity.

    Not that the Muslim holy books are any less toxic than those of the other desert dogmas, but we’ve managed to push those pieces of shit out of the public square and I look forward to the day when the Koran joins Judeo-Christian hate literature in the cesspool of bad ideas.

    After watching the debate video it made me ashamed to be a male and thus have anything in common with the Ayyaz Mahmoods, Jonathan Butterworths of the world as well as the women hating Sharia apologists who infest this blog and to no ones surprise are male as well.

    • Uzoozy says

      SteveYour blog is blasphmy. You never hear anything bad said about Jesus(peace upon him) by any muslim.
      So honor that and be polite and courtious.

      Take the Koran and read it with an open mind it will do you a lot of good.
      Now a days a man got caught after he sodomized a dog and killed it.
      Father daughter relationship is common in your faith
      Everyday there is rape and mayhem in USA.

      You bring up things which are 1432 yrs old. Things were different . By the way the Esteemed lady you talked about was between 16 to 18yrs old.
      Get your facts right.
      FLDS the branch of Christain faith used to marry 6 to eight wifes mother/daughter/sister in law all at the same time.

      Rape them in the church before the girl of 12 given away to an elderly man over 50ys+
      It it a break and you will be blessed

  9. Dalillama says

    @ steve oberski #10
    This is the second time I’ve personally see you make one of these posts in which you claim that Muhammad is entirely fictitious, like Jesus. You’re not doing your case any good with this, as Muhammad is actually one of the best documented religious founders before the 19th century, and there are quite a lot of documents from both Arab and non-Arab sources discussing his activities during his life, particularly his military conquests. Not that I’m not saying that Islam is true in any sense, as it clearly is not, but there’s no more doubt about the historical existence of Muhammad and his founding of the religion than there is of the existence of Joseph Smith and his founding of Mormonism.

    • steve oberski says

      There are no extant historical sources from the time of Muhammad. The earliest reliable sources are from 100 years after his alleged death, more than enough time for a story telling culture to create and embellish the character of Moe.

      The Koran of course was an oral document and had no written existence for at least 50 years after Moes death and the historical provenance of the Hadiths are a joke.

      Combine this with the fact that it is not possible to apply critical historical methods to the study of the life of Moe without personal risk to ones life and you begin to see the problem.

      So the life of Moe is documented in the same sense that the life of Superman is documented, in fiction designed to entertain the masses.

      Give me a Superman comic any day of the week.

      • Dalillama says

        There are sources discussing Muhammad’s battles dating from 620, 12 years before his death, and coming from multiple nationalities. A discussion of many of them can be found in Seeing Islam As Others Saw It: A Survey and Evaluation of Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian Writings on Early Islam by Robert Hoyland.

        • Uzoozy says

          You are so bigoted and naive.
          Women in Islam are equal but different.
          In Allahs world men have different roles,man looks after his family in everyway and women do their thingy at home.
          Its like a mini corporation.

          There good, bad misguided people everywhere.
          Go to Porkenstein and live there happily we do not need people like you in America.
          God bless you and may He give you guidance in the straight path.

  10. Rafiq Mahmood says

    Please read this report:

    Bangladesh man ‘admits’ cutting off wife’s fingers (BBC News)

    There are many times when I feel ashamed to be a man. I have no words adequate to express the horror every sentient human being with an ounce of empathy must feel. I think we should start a Hypatia Scholarship to give this woman and others who care about their own brains the best education available. That is the best “punishment” for this act of astounding barbarity.

    The man too, although you might not think so, is a victim. He is the victim of the pervasive culture of misogyny that deems that women are inferior beings who have to seek their husband’s or male guardian’s permission for everything they want to do – including getting a divorce. It cuts no ice whatsoever that wife-beating should leave no mark and this “treatment” is “un-Islamic”. The idea behind Islamic “punishment” is to prevent the “criminal” from repeating their crime. That is why hands are cut off – to prevent thieves from stealing. In this case the man, quite logically, applied the same concept to the “crime” of this woman refusing to obey her husband and raise herself above her husband’s level of education, thereby imperilling his god-given superior status.

    Let’s take this as a call to action. Let’s be serious about a Hypatia Scholarship. And let’s join the Big Scream that Aliaa bravely started in Egypt against the pervasive misogyny of “Islamic culture” which is firmly rooted in the teachings and philosophy of Islam and its “sacred” texts. And we can Join the Scream in whichever way we can.

    • Uzoozy says

      I am sure you did not read, Americam soldiers cut off fingers in Afganistan and have kept them as momentos.
      Its like the good days of the Wild west Christains used to cut of the breasts of American Indian to use as a sack for their ill gotten prize.
      In Islamic wars women were never raped all the property were left intact.
      Thats if you have the correct history book(hard to find).
      Read the wikipedia for some truth about Muslim wars in the past.
      Slahuddin Tuglak , wake up to the true world of Islam
      However in the past two hundred yrs Christains have killed over 410 million people in the world.
      Plus the 52 million fetus aborted in this so called C nation.
      People like Jeffrey Daimer used to eat people stored in his fridge.Free country
      Wake up and look at yourself before you try and blame it on Muslims

    • Uzoozy says

      No they are not the same person, we have common religion.
      The right religion the one and only true religion for this world.
      So best of luck, so far you all write whatever you wanted, now people are waking up to the lies and writing back.

      If you do not like what is going on go back to your country Porkenstein we have no place for you here in America.
      May God bless you

  11. nasulam says

    @Ms.Namazie
    in all your debate, you were just mentioning acts of so-called muslims in the so-called muslim nations. ayaz was defending the true islam and the islam the founder of islam brought. he agreed with you that those nations were not doing good. so basically the debate was that if islam should be blamed or the so-called muslims( as mentioned : the drunken driver or the car). you were blaming both while ayaz and jonathan were blaming the drunken driver(the so-called muslims) and defending islam. you were just saying that the so-called muslim nations are doing wrong and you could not prove from anywhere that islamic teachings were wrong. if you think u did, i’d like you to kindly quote it here.

  12. Freddieb says

    There’s a price to pay for anyone who believes in supernatural beings. That price is the loss of reason, rationality and logic.

    Religious people prove to me all the time that they have forsaken humanity for their own road to paradise via their own personal god. All the time that people are under the spell of religion, they are supporting the grossest of men who wield the power and make the rules.

    Men wrote all the “holy” books in the interests of men and to keep power over all people.

    Let’s get rid of religions and gain humanity.

    Chapman Cohen said that religious faith is a mixture of ignorance and insanity. I totally agree.

    • Uzoozy says

      for you your religion to me mine.
      Do NOT say indecent things about Islam, its the best religion only if can comprehend the text.
      Its only for the blessed.

Trackbacks

  1. […] Stoning is not mentioned in the Quran and because of this many people deny that it stems from Islamic teaching. This is dishonest at best. Stoning is not in the Quran but it is in the ahadith and for that reason, is part of sharia law. When Maryam Namazie and I debated a couple of Ahmadiyya Muslims at UCL in 2011, one of our opponents Ayyaz Mahmood insisted that stoning was not a part of Islam. His desperate to believe audience soaked it up, but the next day he was online admitting he had lied. The comments he made have since been removed, but Maryam has discussed them here. […]

  2. […] Stoning is not mentioned in the Quran and because of this many people deny that it stems from Islamic teaching. This is dishonest at best. Stoning is not in the Quran but it is in the ahadith and for that reason, is part of sharia law. When Maryam Namazie and I debated a couple of Ahmadiyya Muslims at UCL in 2011, one of our opponents Ayyaz Mahmood insisted that stoning was not a part of Islam. His desperate to believe audience soaked it up, but the next day he was online admitting he had lied. The comments he made have since been removed, but Maryam has discussed them…. […]

  3. […] Stoning is not mentioned in the Quran and because of this many people deny that it stems from Islamic teaching. This is dishonest at best. Stoning is not in the Quran but it is in the ahadith and for that reason, is part of sharia law. When Maryam Namazie and I debated a couple of Ahmadiyya Muslims at UCL in 2011, one of our opponents Ayyaz Mahmood insisted that stoning was not a part of Islam. His desperate to believe audience soaked it up, but the next day he was online admitting he had lied. The comments he made have since been removed, but Maryam has discussed them here. […]

  4. […] Stoning is not mentioned in the Quran and because of this many people deny that it stems from Islamic teaching. This is dishonest at best. Stoning is not in the Quran but it is in the ahadith and for that reason, is part of sharia law. When Maryam Namazie and I debated a couple of Ahmadiyya Muslims at UCL in 2011, one of our opponents Ayyaz Mahmood insisted that stoning was not a part of Islam. His desperate to believe audience soaked it up, but the next day he was online admitting he had lied. The comments he made have since been removed, but Maryam has discussed them…. […]

Leave a Reply