Wednesday, 31 December 2014

Punishing Adultery in Muslim Countries - Benefits to Society

This is an interesting point Sheikh Moustafa Zayed puts forward in his support for the punishment of adultery in Islam.

The conditions for prosecuting, and stoning married adulterers, however, are so difficult that it is more of a deterrent of such a crime than it is a capital punishment in itself. Evident by the historical fact that in the first 1000 years of Islam, stoning for committing adultery was applied only three times upon voluntary insistent confessions of the committers, and not due to catching adulterers in the act itself. The fact remains that it is - even though in reality more theoretical than practical - a part of Islamic Law for 1400 years and to date. How the rule is applied; justly or not, accurately or not, is a responsibility upon the shoulder of rulers applying the law and their integrity.

But in over a millennia of Islam, which I might add a closer millennia to successful application of Islamic Law than the second millennia, there was not one single case of executing a couple by stoning caught during the act of adultery.

...How much do sexually-transmitted diseases cost every year the secularly-ruled countries that do not punish for adultery? How many millions of lives lost to AIDS alone so far worldwide? How many families were destroyed because of the irresponsible no-punishment of the "two consenting adults"?

How many children suffered the lack of one of their parents or both around them in their upbringing because of adultery? More importantly, look at the vast gap between the cost and the devastation of adultery in the West, versus their counterparts in Muslim countries even the poorest of them.

I want to ask pragmatically, practically and even from an absolute scientific secular standpoint: are these gigantic, devastating costs and ordeals worth three stonings by confession every 100 years? [The Lies About Muhammad, Moustafa Zayed, p342, 343]

The Bible does teach the killing of adulterers, see Deuteronomy 22:22

If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.

Psychological aspects of adultery

These include:
  • intense guilt or depression in the person who has committed adultery
  • deep distress in the 'betrayed' partner
  • violence (people still do sometimes kill unfaithful partners!)
  • marriage break-up
  • unhappiness for the children of the people involved.
In contrast, it has to be said that adulterous sex is often the consequence of marriage troubles, rather than the cause of them.  [Dr David Delvin, NetDoctor]

How common is adultery?

It's difficult to say how common adultery is, since many people will lie about their own experiences.
The most recent studies conducted in America have reported that around 15 per cent of wives and 25 per cent of husbands have had extramarital affairs.

However, various surveys conducted in Western countries have suggested that perhaps 40 per cent of married people may have had adulterous sex. There seems to be general agreement that it's more common for husbands to stray than wives – though in the 21st Century, wives appear to be 'catching up' a bit. [Dr David Delvin, NetDoctor]

Adultery resulting in divorce

In fact, although adultery used to be the 'standard' legal reason for divorce in the UK, it is now much less commonly cited than it used to be.

Nevertheless, in 2012 some 17,000 divorce petitions citing adultery were filed.  [Dr David Delvin, NetDoctor]

Muslims give most charity and have least sex outside of marriage - statistics

Learn about Islam:

Female Pastors and The Baptist Faith and Message

The Baptist Faith and Message 2000 does not allow female pastors, stating:

While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.

It's important to recognise that the Christians you will come in contact with are not homogenous and they will have a spectrum of views which may or may not be in line with orthodox Christian beliefs. However, it's of use to know such details about the Southern Baptist Convention's views on female pastors to point out the widespread liberalism in churches is not representative of all Christians.

Learn about Islam:

Tuesday, 30 December 2014

The Truth About ISIS - Dr Yasir Qadhi

Taken from Sheikh Yasir Qadhi's FB:

The Islamic Caliphate of ISIS claims to stand up in the face of oppression and defend the Muslims & the values of Islam, yet the recent beheadings and attacks on innocent civilians show that the actions of ISIS contradict the most basic notions of sacred value for innocent life that Islam teaches.

While it is true that the base cause of such extremisms is the chaos and bloodshed caused by the foreign policies of Western powers in Muslim lands, it is also an undeniable reality... that these groups have done more to damage the beauty of Islam and to distort the reality of the teachings of its Holy Prophet more than even the enemies of Islam have done.

In this highly controversial yet scintillating interview, Shaykh Dr. Yasir Qadhi gets into the mindset of radical "Islamic" movements and unveils the psychological framework that leads to terrorism.
He academically analyses the three primary combinations that must exist before radicalism is resorted to. He also talks about the 'Shami Witness' Twitter account, and comments on the Sydney lone gunman who held a cafe hostage.

A highly insightful and profound conversation - an absolute *must* to listen to for every Muslim in light of today's sensitive circumstances.

The Reality of ISIS: Modern Muslim Fundamentalism ~ Dr. Yasir Qadhi


Learn about Islam:

Muslim Women and Mosques Being Attacked - Austria

Islamophobes in the media and on the internet need to realise their hate propaganda against Muslims is motivating people to attack Muslim women and mosques in Europe - Austria in this case.

Muslim women attacked in Austria

Earlier this month, an elderly Austrian Muslim woman has been seriously injured after a man attacked her, insulting and knocking her on the floor.

Suffering a spinal injury, the woman has also suffered a lumbar fracture and had to spend seven days in Hanusch hospital.

The attack is the latest in several incidents where women wearing headscarves have been insulted and attacked in Vienna recently.

Last month, another Muslim woman was attacked with her friend in the street, calling them Taliban and ISIL, the so-called Islamic State.

A few weeks ago, another Muslim woman was attacked in the subway.

Mosques Attacked in Austria

In one of the latest anti-Muslim attacks in Austria, a Vienna mosque was vandalized with body parts of a pig on Christmas Day, reflecting a growing anti-Muslim sentiment in the European country.

Similar attacks, in which pig’s body parts were used, have repeatedly targeted other Austrian mosques and Islamic schools over the past months.

Read more:

Learn about Islam:

Monday, 29 December 2014

Why Muslims Kiss the Black Stone in Mecca

Following the Abrahamic ritual that Muhammad had taught his followers, the wheeling throng circumambulated the Kaaba seven times. The persistent among them tried to press through the crowd toward the Kaaba and kiss the smooth Black Stone embedded in one of its corners. This was not required of the pilgrims, but as Shah WaliAllah wrote in his own instructions on Hajj, it was done 'out of imitation of the Prophet'. Indeed, one of the Hadiths that Ibn Hanbal had included in his Musnad quoted the Caliph Umar's words as he had approached the Black Stone: 'I know you are but a stone that cannot hurt or help, and if I had not seen the Messenger of God kiss you I would not kiss you'  ['Misquoting Muhammad', Jonathan A.C Brown, Kindle, Loc 1066]

Muslim Act of Stoning the Devil During Hajj is Abrahamic

Misconceptions about the Black Stone

Christian accuses Muslims of pagan practices

 Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam

Learn about Islam


Muslim Act of Stoning the Devil During Hajj is Abrahamic not Pagan!

Sheikh Yasir Qadhi teaches us that the practice of stoning the Devil during the Hajj pilgrimage is Abrahamic. Whilst Abraham was attempting to fulfil God's order of sacrificing Ishmael Satan appeared and tried to prevent Abraham from obeying the command of God - Abraham pelted Satan with 7 stones.

Thus the act of pelting the Devil during the Hajj is Abrahamic. It's not a pagan act.

Stoning the Devil at Hajj is Abrahamic not pagan

Misconceptions about the Black Stone

Christian accuses Muslims of pagan practices

 Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam

Learn about Islam


Reza Aslan on the Council of Nicaea

While engaging in discussions with Christians we must ensure that the Council of Nicaea is not misrepresented. It really is not a centre-piece in picking apart Trinitarian Christianity.

The balding, gray-bearded old men who fixed the faith and practice of Christianity met for the first time in the Byzantine city of Nicaea, on the eastern shore of Lake Izmit in present-day Turkey. It was the summer of  325CE. The men had been brought together by the emperor Constantine and commanded to come to a consensus on the doctrine of the religion he had recently adopted as his own. Bedecked in robes of purple and gold, an aureate laurel resting on his head, Rome's first Christian emperor called the council to order as though it were a Roman Senate, which is understandable, considering that every one of the nearly two thousand bishops he had gathered in Nicaea to permanently define Christianity was Roman.

...After months of heated negotiations, the council handed to Constantine what became known as the Nicene Creed, outlining for the first time the officially sanctioned, orthodox beliefs of the Christian church. Jesus is the literal son of God the creed declared...

As for those who disagreed with the creed, those like the Arians who believed that "there was a time when [Jesus] was not", they were immediately banished from the empire and their teachings suppressed.

It may be tempting to view the Nicene Creed as an overtly politicized attempt to stifle the legitimate voices of dissent in the early church. It is certainly the case that the council's decision resulted in a thousand years of more bloodshed in the name of Christian orthodoxy. But the truth is that the council members were merely codifying a creed that was already the majority opinion, not just of the bishops gathered at Nicaea, but of the entire Christian community. Indeed, belief in Jesus as God had been enshrined in the church centuries before the Council of Nicaea, thanks to the overwhelming popularity of the letters of Paul. Zealot, The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth, Reza Aslan, The Westbourne Press, 2013, p213-214

It's interesting that the Church in the 4th century was not in line with the thinking of liberal Christians today who preach a pacifist and pluralistic Christianity which allows for a spectrum of diversity in belief. The Church back in the 4th century clearly did not share such views.

The Islamophobes amongst such Christian groups today would do well to remember this before they decide to bang on about ISIS and link them with orthodox Islamic practice.

Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam

Learn about Islam


Sunday, 28 December 2014

Was Winston Churchill Interested in Converting to Islam?

Allah knows best if Winston Churchill died as a Muslim. However, the research fellow, who found the letter urging him not to convert to Islam, insists Winston Churchill was not seriously interested in Islam.

Here's an excerpt from The Independent:

The Prime Minister who led Britain to victory in World War Two was apparently so taken with Islam and the culture of the Orient that his family wrote to try and persuade him not to become a Muslim.
In a letter dated August 1907 Churchill’s soon to be sister-in-law wrote to him: “Please don’t become converted to Islam; I have noticed in your disposition a tendency to orientalise, Pasha-like tendencies, I really have.

“If you come into contact with Islam your conversion might be effected with greater ease than you might have supposed, call of the blood, don’t you know what I mean, do fight against it.”
The letter, discovered by a history research fellow at Cambridge University, Warren Dockter, was written by Lady Gwendoline Bertie who married Churchill’s brother Jack.

"Churchill never seriously considered converting," Dr Dockter told The Independent. "He was more or less an atheist by this time anyway. He did however have a fascination with Islamic culture which was common among Victorians."

Even if Churchill did convert to Islam, he would not have been the first Brit to convert to Islam:

William Abdullah Quilliam, a solicitor and son of a Methodist preacher. In 1887, he became the first Christian to convert to Islam in Victorian England.

Born William Henry Quilliam, he turned to the religion after a trip to Morocco, and adopted the name Abdullah.

"William Abdullah Quilliam was brought up as a devout Christian and was part of the Temperance Movement which promoted abstinence from alcohol. One of the reasons he was attracted to Islam was that alcohol is forbidden for Muslims. He also had theological concerns about Trinitarian Christianity," he said.


Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam:

Invitation to Islam

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother/sister of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim.

Learn about Islam:

How old was Khadija at the time of marriage to Prophet Muhammad p, 28 or 40?

It's popularly written that Prophet Muhammad was around 25 when he married his first wife, Lady Khadija, and she was around 40 at the time of the marriage. However, as Sheikh Yasir Qadhi points out, there seems to be stronger evidence that she was around 28 years old at the time of her marriage to Prophet Muhammad (p). The reports of the age of 28 were greater in quantity and quality as well as making more sense based on the number of children Lady Khadija had with the Prophet Muhammad (p).

How old was Khadija at time of marriage - Sheikh Yasir Qadhi

Sharia Law against terrorism:

What is Isnad in Hadith Studies

The Isnad, or chain of transmission, would be used to verify Hadiths and guarantee the authenticity of scared knowledge. Muslims need not accept Hadiths blindly. In fact, they should not accept any instruction or claim uncritically. Rather, they only had to obey a Hadith if they found an Isnad demonstrating that it had been transmitted reliably from the Prophet.

'The Isnad is part of the religion' proclaimed a Sunni contemporary of Shafi'i. 'If not for the Isnad, whoever wanted could say whatever they wanted'. Another early Sunni wrote preserving unbroken chains of transmission for their scriptures and sacred knowledge was what set Muslims apart from the followers of other religions. Shah WaliAllah devoted a whole book to celebrating this. 'If the Isnad had not been a basic principle' he wrote of Islam, 'then the Shariah would not have survived'.

In order to determine if an Isnad was reliable, Shafi'i proposed a critical method that had been developed by a network of ulama in Mecca, Medina, Iraq and northeastern Iran, all of whom specialized in Hadiths. Among them was Shafi'i's own teacher, Malik. Although not himself an important contributor to this science of transmission criticism, Shafi'i gives a useful summary of its methods. 'If a trustworthy person transmits [a Hadith] from another trustworthy person until the chain ends with the Messenger of God, then it is established as being from the Messenger of God'. To be trustworthy, Shafi'i explains, a Muslim had to be well known as honest, transmit a Hadith they had heard exactly as they heard it and be clear about the source from whom they heard it.

More importantly the Hadiths that this person recounted to others had to be corroborated by what other respected Hadith scholars also transmitted. If this person narrated Hadiths that broke with what others narrated, he or she could not be trusted. A chain of these reliable transmitters, each reporting the Hadith from their teacher, et cetera, had to extend unbroken to the prophet himself. During Shafi'i's time, these chains usually stretched from three to five or six people back to Muhammad. A break in the chain, like a person not remembering who told them the Hadith or quoting a person they never met, made the Hadith unreliable.

A Hadith that met these requirements was considered 'sound' (sahih). If it was widely transmitted through many circles of Hadith scholars, then it was also deemed 'well known' (mashhur). A Hadith with some flaw in its chain of transmission was termed 'weak' (da'if). It was the strength of the Isnad chain that determined if a Hadith should be heeded, since it meant that the Hadith had been authenticated as the words of Prophet. 'Misquoting Muhammad', Jonathan A.C Brown, Kindle, Loc 1020.

Sharia Law against terrorism:

What the Chinese Emperor said about Prophet Muhammad p

Muhammad and  the Ming Dynasty Emperor - 100 word eulogy

A translation of The Hundred-word Eulogy and a short description from Wikipedia:

The Hundred-word Eulogy (百字讃 bǎizìzàn) is a 100-character praise of Islam and the Islamic prophet Muhammad written by the Hongwu Emperor of China (r. 1368-1398). Copies of it are on display in several mosques in Nanjing, China.[1]

Since the creation of the universe
God had already appointed his great faith-preaching man,
From the West he was born,
And received the holy scripture
And book made of 30 parts (Juz)
To guide all creations,
Master of all rulers,
Leader of the holy ones,
With support from the Heavens,
To protect his nation,
With five daily prayers,
Silently hoping for peace,
His heart directed towards Allah,
Giving power to the poor,
Saving them from calamity,
Seeing through the Unseen,
Pulling the souls and the spirits away from all wrongdoings,
Mercy to the world,
Transversing to the ancient,
Majestic path vanquished away all evil,
His religion Pure and True,
The Noble High One.

Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam

Learn about Islam


What is Ahl al Sunna wal Jama'a?

Ahl al-Sunna wa'l-Jama'a, 'The People of the Sunna and the Collective'

The abbreviated name is Sunni Islam.
Sharia Law against terrorism:

Saturday, 27 December 2014


It appears this Christian author believes Kaaba was built by Abraham and Ishmael!
Reverend Charles Augustus Goodrich a Christian, was an American author and Congregational minister comments on Kaaba and Mecca, although, he is not fond of the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh), but he is sincere in admitting that Ka’bah existed at the time of Patriarchs. He writes:
“Among the variety of fabulous traditions which have been propagated by the followers of Mahomet, concerning the origin of this building, we find it asserted, that its existence is coeval with our parents, and that it was built by Adam, after his expulsion from paradise, from a representation of the celestial temple, which the almighty let down from heaven in curtains of light and placed in Mecca, perpendicular under the original. To this the patriarch was commanded to turn his face when he prayed, and to compass it by way of devotion, as the angels did the heavenly one. After the destruction of this temple by the deluge, it was rebuilt by Abraham and his son Ishmael on the same spot, and after the same model, according to directions, which they received by revelation; and since that time, it has continued to be the object of veneration to Ishmael’s descendants. Whatever discredit we may give to these, and other ravings of the Moslem imposter concerning the Caaba its high antiquity cannot be disputed; and the most probable account is, that it was built and used for religious purposes by some of the early patriarchs; and after the introduction of idols, it came to be appropriated to the reception of the pagan divinities. Diodorus Siculus, in his description of the cost of the Red Sea, mentions this temple as being, in his time, held in great veneration by all Arabians; and Pocoke informs us, that the linen or silken veil, with which it is covered, was first offered by a pious King of the Hamyarites, seven hundred years before the time of Mahomet.” [1]

Quote from:

Thursday, 25 December 2014

Muslim Scholar Responds to TTP Video of Army Public School Peshawar Attack

From the FB of Muslim scholar, Dr Yasir Qadhi

So, the leader of the TTP, the 'mastermind' of the gruesome, deadly, inhumane, barbaric attack against over a hundred schoolchildren has released a video explaining why he wanted to kill these innocent and pure souls.

As Allah is my witness, I swear I feel disgusted even looking at him much less publicizing his voice. But I have a higher motive. I want you to listen carefully to his arguments and justifications, and realize that th...ese are EXACTLY the same arguments that Daesh and al-Qaeda and other groups use to justify their gruesome killings of innocents as well.

As I have said before, when you open the door to extremism, it will only get worse, and those whom you considered extremists (e.g., al-Qaeda) will become innocent pacifists when you compare them to the next splinter group (eg., Daesh), and just when you thought it couldn't get worse, you realize you were wrong all along, and that it is possible to get fanatics who are simply beyond the scale of human understanding (eg., TTP).


But our religion teaches us that we cannot just randomly kill innocents in retaliation for the wrong done to us.

I reiterate: opening this door WILL lead to acts like those of the TTP.

"Fight for the sake of Allah those who have fought you, but do not go beyond the bounds, for Allah does not love those who go beyond the bounds." (Al-Quran 2:190). An innocent soul, such as (as per explicit hadith) a woman, a child, a worshipper, and (based on qiyas) in our times a civilian, is simply off-limits. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

May Allah guide us to act with wisdom and maturity, and save us from ever using His beautiful religion to spread evil and bloodshed in this world, even if people are unjustly killing us.

Sharia Law against terrorism:
Learn about Islam:

Muslims are Slaves of Allah

Nowadays, shallow Christian apologists present arguments against the Muslim title of  'slave of Allah'. They think the title is not grand. They think there's something better than this. They are mistaken due to their misunderstanding of the title.

For Muslims the title of 'slave of Allah' is an honour. We love it. We want to be good slaves of Allah. Mufti Islam Menk explains this title. An important short clip for Muslims and Christians.

Title 'slave of Allah' explained by Mufti Ismail Menk

Clip from the lecture: Qualities Of A True Worshipper Mufti Ismail Menk  

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam:

Invitation to Islam

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother/sister of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim.

Learn about Islam:
tags: shabir ally, debates, james white, William lane craig, nabeel qureshi, Samuel green, zakir hussain, nazam guffoor, ahmed deedat, zakir naik,

Response to Muhammad and the Death of Kinana ibn al-Rabi ABN

A couple of Christians are refuted on their claim that Prophet Muhammad (p) tortured a man for money


More info on this:

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam:

Invitation to Islam

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother/sister of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim.

Learn about Islam:

Germany Terrorist Threat, Muslim Education to Possible German Terrorists

Any Muslim German who is thinking of conducting a terrorist attack on Germany should stop. Islam does not allow terrorist attacks. The Sharia is against it!

Here is a news report (ZeeNews) highlighting concerns in Germany that some misguided and ignorant Muslim/s may carry out a terrorist attack in Germany.

Berlin: German security forces are on high alert as fears grow that terror attacks by radical Islamists might be carried out in any part of the country, according to a leaked report published Tuesday by the Bild newspaper.
According to the confidential report seen by the paper, Germany`s participation in the fight against the Sunni radical group Islamic State (IS) may be used as a justification for terrorist activities.
Security forces believe about 150 German Muslims, out of the 550 or so who travelled to Syria and other areas with a strong presence of jihadis, have by now returned to the country, the daily said.
Possible perpetrators could be individuals or as members of small groups, the report added.

As Muslims we need to get the word out there that actions of possible extremist attacks in Germany are indeed against Islam (they are not allowed by Islam). If we fail to do so there will be more ignorant crimes such as the bombings in Madrid and London as well as more hatred of Muslims (Islamophobia) around the world.
While the right wing misuse horrific terrorist acts to hate-monger against Muslims, informed Muslims are denouncing the attacks, considering the families of those lost ones as well as getting the word out that Islam does not allow such terrorism in order to stop this type of ignorant crime taking place in the future.
Terrorist acts on Germany would be a CRIME according to Sharia (Islamic Law)

Here's a Muslim scholar clearly stating the Sharia does not allow terrorist acts. He states, according to Sharia, terrorism is classified as Hiraba (Hirabah) which is punishable by death. Thus we learn, Sharia is against terrorism.

What is Hirabah?

The term hirabah refers to public terrorism in a war against society and civilization.  In legal terminology it is defined as “spreading mischief in the land,” but its precise meaning, as defined by Professor Khalid Abou el Fadl, is “killing by stealth and targeting a defenseless victim in a way intended to cause terror in society.”  This is the Islamic definition of terrorism.  It is the very opposite of jihad.
The term hirabah comes from the root hariba, a verb that means to become angry and enraged.  By derivation the nown harb (pl. hurub) means variously “war” and “enemy.” 
[Dr. Robert D. Crane, Hirabah versus Jihad,]

Here's Sheikh Abdal Hakim Murad informing us that terrorist acts such as those carried out on the World Trade Center are actually seen as a crime punishable by death according to Sharia. He distinguishes between Jihad and terrorism - the two are not the same thing. The Sheikh highlights another important point to take away; terrorism does not have its origins in Islam, it's something that was borne from the French revolution and 19th century anarchist movements as well as pointing out that terrorism is an expression of westernization!

Terrorism is an expression of Westernization - Abdal Hakim Murad

Muslims against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam:

Invitation to Islam

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother/sister of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim.

Learn about Islam:
tags, Robert spencer, refuted, Pamela geller refuted, david wood refuted, sam shamoun refuted, fox news, jihad watch, atlas shrugs, answering muslims, ground zero mosque, usama dakdok, walid shoebat, kamal saleem, ergun caner, emir caner, iran, Pakistani, death penalty, 9.11, Madrid bombing, boston bombing, London 7/7, 9/11, conspiracy, sharia law, shariah, anjem choudary, abu qatada, omar bakri muhmmad, prophet, Christians, Nigeria, Kenya terrorist attack, al shabab, alqaeda, bin laden, hamas, suicide, Islamic jihad, Palestine, muslim brotherhood, tea party,

The Hitler Propaganda on Muslims

You can tell Islamophobes lack sophistication and are superficial in their approach to research and analysis of historical events. For them it's just a case of running with isolated truths and using those such isolated truths as the foundation for their propaganda. Effectively they heap manure on a lawn.

Here's the Hitler picture which Islamophobes use in their quest to convince the hateful and naïve of their wishful parallelisms between Nazism and Muslims.

That's a Muslim meeting Hitler -  a picture which Islamophobes pass around in their attempts to malign Muslims. Every picture has a story, what's the real story behind the Mufti of Palestine and Hitler? Read on and you will see a ton of Islamophobic hypocrisy and misrepresentation exposed!

This highlights the utter hypocrisy and the dark  propaganda machine of the Zionists.

And Skurnik was not the only Jew fighting on the side of the Germans. More than 300 found themselves in league with the Nazis when Finland, who had a mutual enemy in the Soviet Union, joined the war in June 1941. 
The alliance between Hitler and the race he vowed to annihilate — the only instance of Jews fighting for Germany’s allies — is one of the most extraordinary aspects of the Second World War, and yet hardly anyone, including many Finns, know anything about it.

What am I talking about? I'm talking about 2 groups fighting FOR Hitler - 1 group is vilified, besmirched and even used to smear the religion of that group and to tarnish all the co-religionists of this group whilst the 2nd group who fought for Hitler are not even mentioned widely (until now) and when they are mentioned their circumstances are explained with balance, empathy and context

So here we have a group of Finnish Jews who fought FOR Hitler yet they are not vilified whilst the Mufti of Jerusalem who sided with Hitler is unfairly presented in an unbalanced and negative light by the Zionists' propaganda machine. Interesting.

It gets even more interesting; the reason why the Mufti and the Finnish Jews chose to side with Hitler was because they had a common enemy (the British for the Mufti and the Russians for the Finnish Jews).

So why the hypocrisy? Why have the Zionists, for years, publicised the actions of the Mufti, ignored the context and presented him to be an ogre when he was only looking to oppose a common enemy (the British who had occupied his land) WHILST doing a combination of ignoring, understanding, contextualising the actions of the Finnish Jews who sided with Hitler for the same reason (a common enemy)? Why one rule for the Muslim and another for the Jew? Zionist propaganda!

Here is a post which I produced some time ago concerning the Zionist misuse of the actions of the Mufti of Jerusalem:

Bishop Friedrich Coch saluting Hitler in 1933
Anti-Muslim propaganda has no regard for humanity, context and truth. Of course it serves the interests of the Zionists, rogue Christian missionaries and the extreme far-right to portray Muslims as folk who are ready to butcher innocent Jews at the drop of a hat. This bout of anti-Muslim propaganda also distorts history and context with regards to Hajj Amin al-Hussaini (Mufti of Jerusalem).

The interesting thing here is, those very advocates of this propaganda against Muslims re the Mufti of Jerusalem's support of Hitler do not bat an eye-lid when it comes to Italy, the home of the Vatican (the centre of Catholic Christianity) nor do they bother to ponder upon Protestant Christian Germany which was the birthplace of Martin Luther (who initiated the Protestant Reformation). We could find a ton of Christians who sided with Nazi Germany at one point in time. Would it be fair to label these folk as Jew-hating racists? No.

Having said, the Islamophobes pluck out the example of the Mufti of Jerusalem without offering any context and even offering deception. Right wing propaganda is geared towards people who are bigoted in some capacity, poorly educated and/or those who have little inclination to research further - that's the right-wing in a nutshell.

Why did the Mufti of Jerusalem side with Hitler against Britain and the Allies?

The answer is partly in the question: 'Britain'. Britain had occupied the Arab territories (specifically Palestine) for decades at that time. There was a growing Zionist movement which was pushing for a Zionist stateas well as a growing Arab nationalist movement which championed a Palestinian state.

The Mufti, seeing that Britain (the country occupying his land) was at war with Germany, chose a side - he chose Germany. Think about it, this seemed to be an opportunity for him to free his people of British hegemony and realise the Arab Nationalist movement's goal of a Palestinian state. There was no anti-Jewish motivation.

In fact he even told local Jews that he had no enmity towards them:
A more rational explanation for the work  of this man was that he was an Arab National. Initially he was against the British occupation of Palestine, and fought against this occupation, leading to his subsequent arrest and exile. When the British gave amnesty to all exiled nationals, he returned and found that the Zionist movement was gaining momentum, and he fought against the movement to try to protect Palestine. There are records of him addressing the local Jews, who had resided there for centuries, telling them that he had no enmity towards them. The big issue hat he had was with the loss of Palestinian land in an unjust land-grab.
Sadly, the Islamophobes and those who have been duped by this Muslim Nazi SS Division propaganda are oblivious to the  facts and context concerning Haj Amin al-Husseini's support of Germany

The propaganda: ‘Muslims aided the Nazis in World War II against the Jewish people’
Have the Islamophobes been offering forgeries in their attempts to make more out of the Mufti of Jerusalem's support of Germany? Well, the following claim is not even backed up by the transcript records:

This is one of the most horrific accusations against the Muslims. This is based upon the allegations that the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem colluded with Hitler during the Second World War to exterminate Jews. There is also allegations that during post war trials against the Nazis, the Mufti ‘s name was mentioned in testimony alleging his support of the Nazis.

The aforementioned Pamela Gellar mentions in an article:

During the Nurmeberg Trials in July 1946, Eichmann’s assistant, Dieter Wisliczeny, testified that Mufti was a central figure in the planning of the genocide of the Jews

However, court transcripts of the Nurmeburg trials show no mention of the Mufti in Wilsliczeny’s testimony.
Hmm, no court transcripts. Interesting. Do Islamophobes even ask for evidence or do they just run with stuff that supports their agenda of hatred?

Muslims Saved Jews From Hitler - Some Information for the Islamophobes

It had been built by the French government to honour the Muslim forces that fought alongside the French in World War I. The history of the beautiful mosque does not stop there. During World War II, the imam of the mosque was well-known to have distributed falsified certificates to Jews to fool the Nazi forces into thinking that they were Muslims.

The Grand Mosque of Paris: A Dtory of How Muslims Rescued Jews During the the Holocaust by Karen Gray Ruelle and Deborah Durland Desaix. - According to this book, the Jews as well as downed Allied forces were sheltered in the mosque until they could escape safely.

For more examples of Muslims saving Jews during World War II, please see:

Quotes in red from, Islam: Silencing the Critics, Zia Sheikh, 2nd Edition, 2012


Yes, the Mufti of Jerusalem did side with Hitler's Germany (just like millions of Christians in Italy and Germany) but the Mufti did not side with Hitler for reasons of anti-Semitism. He wanted freedom from British rule and a Palestinian state - this was his motivation in siding with Germany. He was even on record telling local Jews he had no enmity towards them - his enemy was Britain and Zionism (there are a number of Jews who oppose Zionism)

One wonders why the Islamophobes don't make mention of such. Intellectual dishonesty, deception, spin and distortion of facts are the hallmarks of Islamophobes who want folk to hate Muslims.

My message to the Islamophobes and those who in contact with their material is, think and research!

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:

Are Muslims allowed to have sex slaves?

The net is really tightening on Anti-Islamic folk who propagate the deception of Muslims being allowed to rape slave women. I have already posted this interesting number to counter their falsehood and expose their propaganda:
And of course there's this little piece highlighting what Muslim scholars think of rape:
It’s commonly claimed by some critics that Islam allows Muslims to have sex slaves. Their reasoning behind this argument is that there are verses from the Quran that talk about Muslims being allowed to have right hand captives, for example the following verse:
33:50 O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee..
And then from the hadith:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri that during the battle with Bani Al-Mustaliq they (Muslims) captured some females and intended to have sexual relations with them without impregnating them. So they asked the prophet about coitus interruptus.  The prophet said, “It is better that you should not do it, for Allah has written whom He is going to create till the Day of Resurrection”.Qaza’a said, “I heard Abu Said saying that the prophet said, “No soul is ordained to be created but Allah will create it.”” (Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, number 506)
So from such Quranic verses, and hadiths, the critic makes the argument that this is proof of sexual slavery and that Muslims are allowed to rape their right hand captives.
Now if you actually read the verse, and hadith again, nowhere does it say anything about raping, or forcing a female captive to have sex. This is something the critic has literally made up, they have jumped and made the argument, that since the hadith talks about sex, it must mean rape. So the argument actually says more about their minds and what they’re thinking, rather than what the Quran and hadith are saying.
Not only do these texts say nothing about raping your captives, we do in fact have Quranic verses, hadiths, and scholarly opinions that forbid such acts. The Quran for example says:
“Let those who find not the wherewithal for marriage keep themselves chaste, until God gives them means out of His grace. And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them: yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which God has given to you. But force not your slave-girls to prostitution when they desire chastity, in order that ye may make a gain in the goods of this life  (The Noble Quran, 24:33)”
This verse was revealed after the following incident:
Narrated Jabir ibn Abdullah:  “Musaykah, a slave-girl of some Ansari, came and said: My master forces me to commit fornication. Thereupon the following verse was revealed: “But force not your maids to prostitution (when they desire chastity). (24:33)”  (Translation of Sunan Abu Dawud, Divorce (Kitab Al-Talaq), Book 12, Number 2304)”
So here we have a direct and explicit refutation to the precise argument of the critic. A man was forcing his slave girl into fornication, and so the Quran revealed a verse that said that you are not allowed to force slave girls, i.e. right hand captives, into fornication.
Hence the Quran completely refutes the argument of Muslims supposedly being allowed to rape or force their right hand captives into sex, this is a figment of the critics own warped imagination.
Now from the hadiths, and we read the following and very interesting hadith concerning how a Muslim must treat their right hand captive:
Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him ordered his followers to be kind to their slaves: Narrated Al-Ma’rur: At Ar-Rabadha I met Abu Dhar who was wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a similar one. I asked about the reason for it. He replied, “I abused a person by calling his mother with bad names.” The Prophet said to me, ‘O Abu Dhar! Did you abuse him by calling his mother with bad names You still have some characteristics of ignorance. Your slaves are your brothers and Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears.  Do not ask them (slaves) to do things beyond their capacity (power) and if you do so, then help them.’   (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 2, Belief, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 29)”
According to this hadith, the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said that slaves are like our brothers; basically they are to be treated properly, and not to be abused. They are to be fed and clothed by the same things we eat and dress with. Now how on earth can one make the argument that Islam allows Muslims to rape their right hand captives when you have a hadith telling Muslims their right hand captives are like family and that they are not be abused?
Last but not least, we now turn our attention to what the classical scholars of Islam have said about the issue.
Imam Malik, founder of the Maliki School of jurisprudence said:
In our view the man who rapes a woman, regardless of whether she is a virgin or not, if she is a free woman he must pay a “dowry” like that of her peers, and if she is a slave he must pay whatever has been detracted from her value. The punishment is to be carried out on the rapist and there is no punishment for the woman who has been raped, whatever the case.  (Imam Maalik, Al-Muwatta’, Volume 2, page 734)
Imam Shaafi founder of the Shaafi School of jurisprudence said:
“If a man acquires by force a slave-girl, then has sexual intercourse with her after he acquires her by force, and if he is not excused by ignorance, then the slave-girl will be taken from him, he is required to pay the fine, and he will receive the punishment for illegal sexual intercourse. (Imam Al Shaafi’i, Kitaabul Umm, Volume 3, page 253)
So in conclusion, Islam does not allow Muslims to rape their right hand captives, no such texts exist, on the contrary from what we have just seen, Islamic texts clearly forbid such acts. 
Sharia Law against terrorism:
Learn about Islam:

Wednesday, 24 December 2014

Richard Dawkins VS Muslim

This is further encouragement for women in Canada (and the rest of the West) to wear the Hijab

The hijab has liberated me from society's expectations of women - Nadiya Takolia

Polish women in Britain and British Christian Islamophobes

Muslim scholars on rape

Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to IslamLearn about Islam


Western Scholars Affirm Quran Textual Integrity

The majority of Western scholars also affirm the Quran's date of origin and overall textual integrity. See Behnam Sadeghi and Mohsen Goudarzi, 'San'a' 1 and the Origins of the Quran'. Misquoting Muhammad, Jonathan A.C Brown, Kindle, Loc. 868

This video gives a brief summery of how the Quran was preserved and is unchanged till today.

The preservation of the Quran - Adnan Rashid - LDM Show

Here are just a few examples of non-Muslim religious and textual scholars who testify to the preservation of the Qur’an:

 A.T. Welch, a non-Muslim Orientalist, writes:
“For Muslims the Qur’an is much more than scripture or sacred literature in the usual Western sense. Its primary significance for the vast majority through the centuries has been in its oral form, the form in which it first appeared, as the “recitation” chanted by Muhammad to his followers over a period of about twenty years… The revelations were memorized by some of Muhammad’s followers during his lifetime, and the oral tradition that was thus established has had a continuous history ever since, in some ways independent of, and superior to, the written Qur’an… Through the centuries the oral tradition of the entire Qur’an has been maintained by the professional reciters (Qurraa). Until recently, the significance of the recited Qur’an has seldom been fully appreciated in the West.” [26]
Leading Orientalist Kenneth Cragg reflects that:
“…this phenomenon of Qur’anic recital means that the text has traversed the centuries in an unbroken living sequence of devotion. It cannot, therefore, be handled as an antiquarian thing, nor as a historical document out of a distant past. The fact of hifdh (Qur’anic memorization) has made the Qur’an a present possession through all the lapse of Muslim time and given it a human currency in every generation, never allowing its relegation to a bare authority for reference alone.” [27]
Quotes taken from Many Prophets, One Message

Learn about Islam:

Tuesday, 23 December 2014

Hijab and Without Hijab - the difference in sexual harassment levels

It's amazing to see how effective the Hijab is in keeping a woman from getting sexually harassed on the streets of Christian America. However, it's sad to see the level of sexual harassment a lady receives for wearing the regular American fashion.

Clearly the regular fashion in Christian America is somehow attracting undesirable men and leading them to harass young ladies on the street.

Watch this video in which a young lady walks in the streets of Manhattan whilst wearing a t-shirt, jeans and a cardigan. You will be shocked by the amount and type of sexual harassment the lady was facing.

Contrast it with the same lady wearing the hijab, walking in the same area for the same amount of time.

It's clear that Christian Americans can learn from Muslims about the teaching of the hijab. The other sad element here is that due to the propaganda war against Muslims taking place in America, this teaching of Hijab will not receive as much positive attention and traction. If Christians were wearing the Hijab and had an experiment such as this they would be broadcasting it all around the world. However, Western Christians (on the whole) do not observe Hijab despite Paul appearing to support the Hijab

5 Hours of Walking in NYC as a Woman in Hijab and 5 Hours Without Hijab

Another thought that comes to my mind,  seen as the lady was wearing regular American fashion one must worry as to the sheer number of Non-Muslim women being sexually harassed by men in Christian America.

I hope some American Christian leaders will see this and end up teaching the Hijab to all of America. Muslim Americans should be doing more to promote this teaching.

This is further encouragement for women in Canada (and the rest of the West) to wear the Hijab

The hijab has liberated me from society's expectations of women - Nadiya Takolia

Polish women in Britain and British Christian Islamophobes

Muslim scholars on rape

Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to IslamLearn about Islam