Thursday, February 17, 2011

Anjem Choudary vs. David Wood: "Would Sharia Help the West?"


Anonymous said...

Now this debate I am looking forward too. This will be eye opening to many. I only hope that it gets a wide audience

By the way I have a new blog

Haecceitas said...

I can't wait to see this one! Give him the intellectual beating he deserves and make him feel subdued. :-)

Haecceitas said...

However, what I'd really like to see would be Anjem Choudary debating against you or some other competent Christian debater on a subject like "is Islam the true religion" or "was Muhammad a true prophet". It was Choudary himself who said during his first appearance on ABN that he would be willing to defend the truth of Islam. So I think it would be only fair that you'd give him a chance. :-)

Radical Moderate said...

ABN switched to Flash, so if you have a Droid and unlimited data plan you can watch it on your phone.

GreekAsianPanda said...

After this debate, you should stay out of retirement, in my opinion.

Now go out there and destroy his arguments!! Our prayers are with you!

armand said...

David, please don't quit ABN. We love seeing you on it! You have changed many people's lives through this show.

Gabriella Oak said...

Retiring? What on earth for ???

Better have the 'mute' button ready. Anjem Choudary doesn't have an 'off' function.

Anonymous said...

I do hoe that David will show that Chuadary is not an extemist is is the true amd perfect Muslim. People need to pay attemtion to Chaudarys words/ We have a true picture of what it would be like to live in an Islamic society.

Radical Moderate said...

I already have my question ready, I so hope there will be a Q and A section

Hazakim1 said...


I think that one mistake others who have debated this issue have made is that, in their attempts to argue that sharia is NOT in the best interest of the West, they are not clear enough in stating the case for what IS good for the West ... and that is not more moral relatavism & liberalism. Sometimes the Christian proponent of freedom does not address the moral faliures of our secular culture and the need for the Law of JESUS - His Torah - to reign in the heart through the Gospel. The Law that causes us to love the Lord with all of our hearts and our neighbor as ourselves, which is the opposite of sharia YET addresses the ills of our secular, morally bankrupt society.

At any rate, I am excited to see what the Lord will do through you with this debate. Blessings in the name of our risen Messiah. - Tony of Hazakim

Hazakim1 said...

Haecceitas said:

"what I'd really like to see would be Anjem Choudary debating against you or some other competent Christian debater on a subject like "is Islam the true religion" or "was Muhammad a true prophet"

I second that!! This topic, while important, has been done before and probably the only one that Anjem feels confident enough to even face David on. He knows Muhammad's closet is full of skeletons (literally) and would probably like to avoid such a debate at all costs. May Messiah be known to Anjem before it is too late!

cmclvr said...

One cannot have pointed debate with Anjam Choudary. He is almost ignorant about civilized concepts like freedom, liberty and human rights. His is being totally brainwashed by the supremacist concept of Islamic cult. His mental state is such that he cannot help but to say total good bye to logic, reasoning and rationality. These important aspects of human intelligence will be completely destroyed in the brain itself at the hardware level once it is infected by this cult belief system. Hence, he cannot see anything better beyond the barbaric rules and regulations as defined in Sharia. He is ignorant of the fact that Sharia was originally conceived to control and administer a criminal army making a living committing heinous crimes like murder, loot and rape of so called unbelievers. Obviously, what is meant for administering thugs and criminals has nothing to offer to Western civilization.

His talks will be one way and his arguments will be circular. He will never answer to the point or question raised. One cannot have a debate with him unless there is a strict moderator. In that case there can be no debate as Chodary can neither understand nor respect rules of moderation! David Wood is too intelligent, knowledgeable and as such it is difficult to understand how he can have a semblance of debate with a Frog in a well. His talks will be taxing on listeners as they will be subjected to boring and repetitive arguments by him like a stuck gramophone needle.

Haecceitas said...


"I had to come out of retirement for this one."

Was this a retirement from ABN or retirement from debating Muslims?


Yeah, this is probably the only subject where Choudary even has a chance. But he did say on one of earlier ABN programs that since his views are based on the presupposition that Islam is true, he's willing to defend that as well. So there should be no reason for him to run away when challenged on those topics. In fact, it would be good if during the course of this debate, David could briefly present him a challenge to debate the prophethood of Muhammad (or some similar topic) at some later time. This would tie in nicely with the current debate topic since just about the only conceivable reason to think that Sharia would help the West is if Islam happens to be true.

Gabriella Oak said...


I don't think Choudary minds about the skeletons in Mohammed's closet one little bit.
I think they fill him with pride.

Kayra Noel said...

Glad this debate is happening... hope it is filmed.

Jabari said...

Haecceitas said...

"I had to come out of retirement for this one."

Was this a retirement from ABN or retirement from debating Muslims?

It was a retirement from debating Muslims.

BluePenny said...

Sharia law wouldn't change anything. The whole problem is that many people just don't want to follow any laws, whether moral or civil.

The problem isn't the law system, it's the people in it.

ned said...

Dear Brother David,

May God give you His Wisdom so that His Name alone is Glorified and Jesus is witnessed. I pary to God for His Holy presence around you and lead and guide you.

Haecceitas said...

Great job, David. As the debate progressed, it became increasingly clear that Anjem is desperately defending the indefensible. It was also funny how he ran away from dealing with the Muslim sources.

I hope this debate gets distributed widely. And it looks like Anjem was agreeable to the idea of having another debate about the prophethood of Muhammad. The 2 vs. 2 format with you and Sam vs. Choudary and Bakri would be awesome, though it would probably require a lot more time.

Jabari said...

You did a very great job David!! You really kicked Anjem's tail. All he just did was talk about how depraved the West was and he never showed any consistency.

I don't think he (Anjem) would like to talk about the fact that if Sharia entered the west, sexual assualts and rape would skyrocket by 40% to 70%; it would look just as bad or even worse than muslim countries.

David made a great point that in the West we deal with the problems in our societies. Whereas in the Muslim countries people aren't dealing with them.

Also who knew that David Wood and Sam Shamoun were returning to ABN in March? I hope you guys do more Jesus or Muhammad episodes when you get there.

God Bless U!!!!!!!!!

JBaker45 said...


As James White might have said, the sign of a failed argument was when Anjem held up that sign to his camera during your closing statements - LOL

God bless,

David Wood said...

What sign? (I can't see Anjem while I'm talking into the camera.)

Haecceitas said...

"What sign? (I can't see Anjem while I'm talking into the camera.)"

I think it said "load of rubbish".

But in my opinion, that should have been the title page for Anjem's opening presentation.

JBaker45 said...

Anjem held up a sign that said something like "this is rubbish" while you were talking.

Very unprofessional of him.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

I have spent of my time debating members of Choudary's camp. Funny because they all sound the same, debate the same, say the same, respond the same and appear the same.

I don't think Choudary has ever met such an effective opposition. In the UK he enjoys 'political correctness' of these liberals and socialists, who even pay him and his gang money for staying out of work.

I wish we had more of these hard-core Christian debaters like Wood in the UK. Praise God for Jay Smith.

Anyway these Choudary types (which constitute most of the Islamic debating style) have certain rules when engaged in debating: 1) Do not listen (he or she is a kuffar anyway), this was rather obvious, I wonder if Choudary heard or even listened to what Wood was saying, 2) do not answer questions, but ask quesions, accuse or raise negative points, this was also obvious in the debate; Choudary seems scared or confused mainly because he was constantly pushed to break with these rules 3) break the person off when he answers, again Choudary could not practice this rule, which confused him tremendously, 4) ridicule prior to his answer, or ask anoher question (due to a moderator Choudary was unable to do that), 5) throw out numerous fabricated or highly exaggerated points, 6) elevate the Muslims world (reject or leave out negative facts) and depict the West as a third world war society.

Good job David

Koala Bear said...

Has Anjem Choudry EVER read his own "holy" books? I doubt. The load of rubbish sign was laughable.

getrealman said...

DAVID, the debate last night was the best I have seen in a long time. I greatly enjoyed ABN and financially support the network, but a lot of the material is emotional and sometimes degrades into a mudslinging event. This however, was different, as it was rational and methodical in its approach to refuting the false claims of Islam presented by AC. DAVID, I know this is hard work and it takes away from your other endeavors, time with your family, and is financially costly, but please consider continuing this type of engagement with moderate frequency. Pick your spots. Choose your topics. Choose your opponents. But please keep the process rolling. Not only does it benefit the immediate viewers, but it creates a lasting catalog of material for others to view for years to come. I want to learn so I continue to watch much of this material over and over, particularly when it is logically and respectfully presented with consistency. GREAT JOB, brother in Christ.

getrealman said...

Just a few additional comments and questions: as was so forcefully demonstrated, if Islam is the answer to man's needs, where do we look for a single example among the majority Muslim nations of economic and social development and progress, health and human rights flourishing, prosperity and the eradication of poverty? One, just one example, would be enough. Come on, surely there is at least one that can be pointed to as a "template", evidence of the benefits sharia would bring. Has ONE… a single one EVER existed, and if so, why was it either overthrown or abandoned? "I wish I may, I wish I might…", but wishing and pretending does not make it true. Instead, the opposite is clearly evidenced. I have just enough money for one plane ticket to such a country, so please direct me where to go as I will not be able to get a second chance. Please give me the name of the country AC believes best represents the pseudo-utopia sharia can deliver. Please remember, I only have enough for one ticket, so I need to make sure I get this right. I will wait for the reply before booking the flight. Thanks for your rightly guided directions. Waiting excitedly and expectantly…

alekhine said...

great job david ! i woke up early in the morning to watch this debate happen...and it was worth it! Anjem didn't address the points that you brought up from the Koran and the Hadeeth...instead the whole debate for him was somehow finishing the long list of statistics before the time ended..don't retire from debating..carry on the good work!

Anonymous said...

Anjem's tatics were

1. the west is corrupt
2. the Muslims are the victems
3. Sharia is the solution.
4. ignore the facts and
5. call David a liar

Allahu Akbar

Toyin O. said...

Looking forward to hearing this, thanks for sharing.

Traeh said...

Always great to see David in debate.

One thing about Anjem seems clear. Like Islam itself, Anjem is will divorced from reason and subtly subordinating it. For him, reason and evidence are only things to be manipulated as bludgeons in a propaganda jihad to spread Sharia and get people to submit to Muhammad's despotic alter ego.

Anjem hasn't a shadow of doubt that he has his finger on Allah's pulse. Not even the slightest doubt appears to touch his mind in matters that are obviously full of doubts, to say the least (e.g., Sharia is "perfect", everything bad comes from the West, we must get rid of freedom and democracy). Anjem's statements make him seem unmoored to reality.

He subtly gives the impression of an automaton controlled by something other than himself. He doesn't so much disagree with what David says, as ignore it, paper it over, drown it in a vomit of half-phony statistics.

I call it vomit because Anjem doesn't really even seem to care if his flood of statistics contains anything really true or not, nor does he really care if he is distorting the meaning of those statistics. If I read him right, he doesn't care, because he already "knows" without an atom of doubt that Islam is right, and because of that, he need not actually enter into debate with anyone. He is permitted, as someone who knows with absolute certitude God's will, to say any nonsense and falsehood, provided Islam is furthered thereby.

One can see that Anjem is not really open to reason, but only uses it as a means of domination. He is single-minded in subjecting evidence and reason to his underlying Islamic goals, i.e., to get people to submit to Muhammad's despotic alter ego/pseudo-God. It is strange.

aussie christian said...

Well that was interesting to watch to say the least.
David did a great job showing that only those who want to abuse others would benifit from sharia and pretty much anyone who wasnt a light skinned male muslim would suffer.

anjem on the other hand, well what can be said about a man who puts up a sign that says "what a load of rubbish" (which was about 2 minutes from Davids closing remarks, for those wanting the time line it is about 1/2 way through the video). he made many claims that sharia was good, yet gave no argument for it, also as David correctly stated, if its so good why does he claim that of the 56 OIC countries does not one have sharia, can't be that great if even islamic countries run by muslims govt headed by muslims under the immams won't impliment it but rather use western laws. and his point of the pots of gold in the streets and noone touching them, he kind of sort of forgot to mention that the king had armed guards stationed to behead anyone who touched a single item, it was not about how well off they were but proof that he had total control and the populace had total fear nothing more.

Well done David for distroying this anjem's argument from the word go. But like you I believe we need to get more of people like him into the public debate, on record that they can't distroy to totaly expose islam and make it totaly unaceptable in modern society.

Haecceitas said...

Did you talk off-air after the debate broadcast ended? If you did, was there any change in his attitude or tone of voice? And did you discuss the possibilities for another debate? He did give a small nod when you brought it up in your last answer to an audience question.

Apparently Choudary is planning to come to the US less than 2 weeks from now, so I guess there would even be a chance to debate him in person. (Perhaps you'd need to wear a kevlar suit when debating the prophethood of Muhammad with him in person.)

Radical Moderate said...

Haecceitas said...

"Apparently Choudary is planning to come to the US less than 2 weeks from now, "

Im pretty sure he is on a no fly list. I would be surprised if he's not

celeste said...

muslims are a gang of criminals that needs to be eliminate from this world the sharia should be for radical muslims only.and the west is better of with out islam and muslims because muslims and the mexican drug cartel LOS ZETAS are sister faith they all worship the same GOD=ALLAH=SATAN,

celeste said...

all coments should be publish not only the ones muslims like you should be unanimous and if they dont like it they need to go back to arabia or wherever they come from,

Geoff and Kat said...

Thank you for the debate and posting it. My friend and I have been praying for awhile for the local MSA to begin dialogue/debates. This has been educational for how to dialogue with them. God bless.

donna60 said...

David you did a great job with this debate!

simple_truth said...

Anjem showed his true colors by waving that sign in front of his camera. Not classy. Even if you think that the other side is wrong, why not just dialogue and get your point across?

Anjem and other Muslims would be better served focusing upon the problems with Islam and trying to understand why the West is against it. Many of the reasons for rejection are legit. They carry a lot of weight in evaluating the state of Islam. Simply listing stats is not going to rebut David's opposition. I wonder if Anjem has actually understood why the problems of the West exists in the first place.

minoria said...

Though off-topic this is in reply to an article by Yahya Snow:

I believe it was an argument by Bassam Zawadi also.It goes:

1.Jesus said "Satan can not drive out Satan,he can not be divided against himself".

2.So for Jesus:exorcisms can not be done:

A) by Satan or

B)by False Prophets(who would be with Satan).

3.Muhammad did exorcisms,so according to the Gospel he can not be a false prophet.

4.Some Muslims say the Koran has been used to effect exorcisms,so the same thing.

minoria said...

In a Bassam Zawadi and David Wood debate,Bassam said,I am almost certain,that Muhammad had driven out a devil and he mentioned

Mark 3:22-23:

"And the teachers of the law who came down from Jerusalem said, “He is possessed by Beelzebul! By the prince of demons he is driving out demons.”

So Jesus called them over to him and began to speak to them in parables: “How can Satan drive out Satan?"

So Jesus was WRONG,for Bassam.

Jesus was using a METAPHOR.He often did it,read:

(which can be translated using GOOGLE TRANSLATE):


He was saying:"Satan will NOT go against HIS INTEREST."

Notice in Mark Jesus even says:"began to speak to them in parables: “How can Satan drive out Satan?"


If one takes the position that it is in X interest to have people believe in the Koran then that being could decide to tell his subordinates to leave in order to convince people regarding the Koran's truth.

About MATTHEW 11:11/LUKE7:28 which has:here I gave an answer to another objection I found by a Muslim in the same blog.

"Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist."


Matthew and Luke BOTH tell us Jesus was God:



An answer to the AHMEED DEEDAT question:"Where does Jesus say:"I am God,worship me?"

(In fact read Matt's version where Jesus always says:"It is WRITTEN.",in MATT 4:1-11,and he applies what speaks of God as referring to HIMSELF)


Matt and Luke understood Jesus to be saying:"Born of a woman in the ORDINARY WAY",since:

1.They would not mean JOHN-BAPTIST is GREATER than GOD.

2.Since they both say Jesus was VIRGIN BORN.

Unknown said...

what is the price of going out from islam?

check it out:)

Radical Moderate said...

Gregor Alfonsin C. Pondoyo said...
what is the price of going out from islam?


celeste said...

thats because islam is a satanic sect allah is not god is satan lucifer the coran is lucifers word I KNOW IT because our god the lord jesus say in the holy bible that his.144,000.prophets are from the 12 tribes of israel 12 thousand from each tribe of israel.not from arab tribes not arab nations is the muslims who dont want to exccept that,and the holy bible say in the book of revelation that this.144,000.prophets have not all arrive yet it means that the rest of this prophets still yet to come,

celeste said...

what do muslims mean's when they say putting jesus in his place.because I tell muslims that the lord and god jesus is who will put muslims in their place for denying him for blasphemy against him and his holy word the bible.

Kangaroo said...

Just look at David's arrogant sly smile....lmao.

So you're supposed to represent the "Lord Jesus" by behaving arrogantly and by spreading lies against Islam.
Raping 9 yr olds? Murdering? Seriously...

Even non-muslims scholars have great things to say about prophet Muhammad's (pbuh) personality and justice. If the image of the Prophet Muhamamd was truly like that, i highly doubt there would be ANY Muslims on this planet at all.
David continues to prove his dishonesty. Funny, Anjem Choudry tells David he won't even bother refuting those allegations, which can be applicable to every Biblical prophet.

illuzillu said...

I just liked the debate. I think you are the winner. I live in Bangladesh which is a so called Muslim country. Sharia is not followed here legally. There is influence of sharia in our personal life. My sister would live Italy with her husband. But after her husband died she decided to live in so called Christian Italy. Many of our family members request her to live Bangladesh leaving Christian Italy. My sister said “In Bangladesh I cannot even go to buy medicine when I shall become sick. I have to depend on males. There is no problem in Italy”. She also thinks that Italian Christian men are more helpful than Bangladeshi Muslim men. It is clear to me that Western society is better than those Muslims.

Anonymous said...

Anjem, is going on and on about the bad things in the USA / UK like rapes, beatings and pedophilia, which are very Evil, but in his Islamic culture it happens all the time, the reason why you might hear more about it in the western countries, is because the victims will speak up.
If the women / children try to speak up in the islamic culture then they get sent to prison, or marry their rapist or stoned / be-headed..!!
Evil Anjem does not mention this though does he ?

And why do all these muslims side track the questions ? Because they don't have answers. When they are backed into corners they just lie lie lie, it's ok for them to do this in the koran..!!

Unknown said...

I think that Anjem Choudary dominated this debate. Because he had the best statistics and the best statements. Thats why David run out of words in the end and he had to think about what to say he had ten seconds left that a little bit too much time left if you ask me if it was 4 or 3 seconds okay but 10 he lost the debate everyone would agree except for christians because they deny everything.

Jama said...

David wood you are the best !!!! its a great debate as a muslim i came from muslim country to see freedom, democracy.Anjam himself come to escape the sheria. why do not go to his country Pakistan and impliment sheria there. What is said was a a lie.Why all over the world muslim immigrate to the west? David you hammer him very badly thanks for sharing

Anonymous said...

Anjem Choudary is spouting off all these statistics of crime in Western Society, but neglects to mention that women under Sharia Law, RARELY REPORT CRIME - oops, but of course ... it isn't criminal to rape and beat your wives and have sex with young children so there wouldn't be any POLICE REPORTS to make a fair and comparable statistics with! ugh.

Archangel said...

Jesus has Risen...!!!
Praise the Lord....!!!!

Muslims are even fleeing their countries to the West...

Have you heard of Christians and Jews FLEEING their countries to the islamic world where persecution of non-muslims prevails...???

Good job Brother David...
May God continue to shower His immaculate Love, Peace and Grace upon you...

Anonymous said...

Choudary hates western values but lives on welfare paid for by the British taxpayer. Truly he is a man of double standards and blatant lies.

Anonymous said...

Incredible that Anjem sniffs so dismissively at an achievement like the Moon landings when it is that very same forward-looking, inquisitive, individual-centric freedom-based western civilization that has at the current pinnacle of thousands of years of oh-so-incremental struggle produced everything that enables his life of utter luxury today – to include the computers, cameras, microphones and oh yes global INTERNET – from micrometer-ground fiber optic cables to kilometer high orbital satellites – that enabled his worldwide infamy in the first place.

I mean, fine. One might grant it's really all for naught. That what's the big deal about visiting an airless rock. That computers are worthless wastes of social networking time. But at least have the principle of one or the other.

If he truly feels that way, why isn't he living large in the sands of the Middle East right now with a couple of camels to help him fetch his water and a goat or two to sate his inevitable lonesomeness when he can't get any human women at all to stick around, due precisely to the siren call of air-conditioned makeup-ridden western civilization.

Anonymous said...

Anjem said that Sharia'h means "oaisis". That is quite different than "path" or "way" is'nt it?
It would certainly be nice if some of these clerics could get the meaning of a word to actually mean the same.

Anonymous said...

Second Rebuttal: Anjem is talking about rape of women which would not be found in Islam.

Under Islamic law, rape can only be proven if the rapist confesses or if there are four male witnesses. Women who allege rape without the benefit of the act having been witnessed by four men who subsequently develop a conscience are actually confessing to having sex. If they or the accused happens to be married, then it is considered to be adultery.