Geert Wilders: "The Lights Are Going Out All Over Europe"

The trial of Dutch MP Geert Wilders resumed today. Here's Geert's speech:

The lights are going out all over Europe. All over the continent where our culture flourished and where man created freedom, prosperity and civilization. Everywhere the foundation of the West is under attack.

All over Europe the elites are acting as the protectors of an ideology that has been bent on destroying us [for fourteen centuries]. An ideology that has sprung from the desert and that can produce only deserts because it does not give people freedom. The Islamic Mozart, the Islamic Gerard Reve [a Dutch author], the Islamic Bill Gates; they do not exist because without freedom there is no creativity. The ideology of Islam is especially noted for killing and oppression and can only produce societies that are backward and impoverished. Surprisingly, the elites do not want to hear any criticism of this ideology.

My trial is not an isolated incident. Only fools believe it is. All over Europe multicultural elites are waging total war against their populations. Their goal is to continue the strategy of mass-immigration, which will ultimately result in an islamic Europe - a Europe without freedom: Eurabia.

The lights are going out all over Europe. Anyone who thinks or speaks individually is at risk. Freedom loving citizens who criticize islam, or even merely suggest that there is a relationship between islam and crime or honour killing, must suffer and are threatened or criminalized. Those who speak the truth are in danger.

The lights are going out all over Europe. Everywhere the Orwellian thought police are at work, on the lookout for thought crimes everywhere, casting the populace back within the confines where it is allowed to think.

This trial is not about me. It is about something much greater. Freedom of speech is not the property of those who happen to belong to the elites of a country. It is an inalienable right, the birthright of our people. For centuries battles have been fought for it, and now it is being sacrificed to please a totalitarian ideology.

Future generations will look back at this trial and wonder who was right. Who defended freedom and who wanted to get rid of it.

The lights are going out all over Europe. Our freedom is being restricted everywhere, so I repeat what I said here last year:

It is not only the privilege, but also the duty of free people - and hence also my duty as a member of the Dutch Parliament - to speak out against any ideology that threatens freedom. Hence it is a right and a duty to speak the truth about the evil ideology that is called islam. I hope that freedom of speech will emerge triumphant from this trial. I hope not only that I shall be acquitted, but especially that freedom of speech will continue to exist in the Netherlands and in Europe.

The lights are indeed going out all over Europe. With Christians being harassed and taken to court in Dearborn, Michigan, things are no picnic here in the U.S. either.

Dearborn Terror Case Update: Sunni Convert Roger Stockham Rejects Shia Attorney

I'm almost speechless.

Almost.

The world quickly rushed to defend Dearborn Muslims against another anti-Muslim hate crime (and we rushed to condemn this apparent act of terrorism as well, and we still do). Dawud Walid, Executive Director of CAIR-Michigan, wasted no time in connecting the attempted firecracker attack to anti-Muslim bigotry:

"I believe it is a mixture of the two, between a person being mentally unstable within a society context of a lot of anti-Muslim rhetoric floating around. People can be on the edge and when they're exposed to enough negative information about a group of people... it may be enough to push them over the edge." (Source)

Imam Sayed Hassan Al-Qazwini (Imam at the Islamic Center of America) was quick to point out American hypocrisy:

"We always hear about Muslims being terrorists, we always hear about Muslims attacking innocent person. When America only talks about Muslims being terrorists, they will turn a blind eye on their own terrorists." (Source)

Dearborn Police Chief Ronald Haddad attributed Stockham's rage to a hatred of Arabs and Muslims:

"He picked Dearborn as a stop because of the huge Arab and Muslim population." (Source)

Numerous Muslims in the blogosphere were even declaring that Stockham is a "Christian terrorist." For instance, a Muslim who calls himself "thegrandverbalizer19," elated that he finally had evidence that Christianity is violent, posted an article titled "Christian Terrorist Arrested for Attempted Attack on Mosque," where he said:

"Thank God that the Christian terrorist who was planning an attack against a Muslim Mosque was thwarted by the very good citizens and policeman of the United States. Praise the Lord!"

There's just one problem with all these cries of "Islamophobia!" Like so many other anti-Muslim hate crimes, this turned out not to be an anti-Muslim hate crime at all.

I'll still need more information to make any definitive conclusions regarding this case, but here's how things look now. Roger Stockham is a convert to Islam. But he's a Sunni Muslim, and he wanted to toss some M-80s at the largest mosque in America, because he hates Shia Muslims. Stockham was given a court-appointed attorney (Mark Haidar), whom he rejected for supposedly being a Shia. Stockham speaks fluent Arabic and quotes the Qur'an during interviews.

Here's the latest from Fox News. (Note: This is the same courtroom where we spent five days on trial for having a peaceful discussion with Muslims in Dearborn. The Judge you see in the video is Judge Mark Somers, whose bias in favor of Dearborn police got Negeen convicted.)

New Lawyer for Dearborn Mosque Threat Suspect Roger Stockham: MyFoxDETROIT.com

The Dearborn Press and Guide adds more:

DEARBORN — The preliminary examination Friday for the man accused of making terrorist threats toward the Islamic Center of America was adjourned until next week.

Attorney Matthew Evans cited a lack of preparation in requesting the adjournment. Evans was thrust into the defender role just minutes before the request, after defendant Roger Stockham rejected his initial court-appointed attorney, Mark Haidar. The rescheduled exam is set for next Friday.

Stockham, a convert to Islam, said in court he wouldn't accept Haidar because — according to Stockham — Haidar is a Shi'ite Muslim who worships at the Islamic Center.

“I reject my appointed counsel. He is a Shi'ite and I am not. And he attends the mosque I am attempted of accusing (sic),” he said, before he was cut off by 19th District Judge Mark Somers.

Somers interjected, saying he wanted things to get off on the right foot and subsequently appointed Evans, who was already at the courthouse.

Haidar was not at the hearing. His stand-in, attorney Jeffrey Schwartz, said he was taken by surprise with the comments. He said Haidar is a Muslim, but was not sure if he was Shi'ite or if he worshipped at the Islamic Center.

“I don’t know what (Haidar) disclosed to him,” Schwartz said. “This kind of caught me by surprise, to be honest.”

Haidar could not immediately be reached for comment, but credible court sources said Stockham spoke fluent Arabic during their interview and quoted Qur’anic verses. (Read more.)

Now here's what's interesting. As soon as word got out of an attempted attack against a Dearborn mosque, people started accusing us (i.e. Acts 17) of causing the attack (through our "hate speech," "Islamophobia," etc.).

Our old friend Jem sent me this message:

hello, david; its been a while since i posted a comment.....but i feel the time is appropriate...to post my comment..... "this man's actions are both directly and indirectly a result of you work.... promoting hate towards muslims and islam......if you recall....sometime ago i posted several comments of the dire consequences that would occur for your irresponsibility...
1) hate speech/rhetoric
2) insensitivity
3) lack of moral responsibilty as a in a leadership position....

i'm afraid more hate crimes will continue to occur if you dont have a change of heart...and have the love, tolerance. patience, of G-D in your heart......
i pray the All Mighty give you guideance;;;;;

best regards,

jem

ps i dont mean to offend you...merely rebuking you as the scripture commands the believer to do....

It seems that our hate speech (i.e. drawing attention to disturbing facts about Islam, while maintaining our love for Muslims) somehow caused the Sunni-Shia split. Perhaps Jem believes that Nabeel and I constructed an Acts 17 time machine, travelled back to 632 and caused division in the Muslim community right after Muhammad died. Perhaps I went to Abu Bakr and said, "Hey! You should be leader!" Then Nabeel went to Ali and said, "You're better than Abu Bakr!" Fourteen centuries later, the division we caused led a Sunni convert to attack a mosque. Acts 17 must be even craftier than we thought!

A Muslim who goes by the name "Someone" left this comment:

May Allah guide us to the Truth.

Actually, sites like this are directly responsible for anti-Muslim feelings and Islamophobia rising in America and elsewhere; so, please, claim credit where credit is due, Mr. David Wood and bloggers and readers for yourselves for giving rise to terrorism against Muslims.

We're "directly responsible" for "giving rise to terrorism against Muslims." I guess Nabeel and I should be ashamed of ourselves for causing so much Shiaphobia among Sunnis with all our anti-Shia, pro-Sunni hate speech. In order to prevent future Sunni-Shia attacks, I'll go ahead and erase all of our anti-Shia hate speech. . . . There, done! (It didn't take long, since we've never posted any.)

The infamously deceptive Yahya Snow wrote:

OK, we have seen Islamophobic rabble-rousers on the internet hate-mongering against Muslims and distorting the realities in Dearborn. Some Islamophobes even take their fear-mongering to the level of presenting sex hoaxes about Muslims and some specifically target Dearbon by claiming there is "Sharia in Dearborn" and even visit the city looking for controversy under the guise of evangelsim.

Well, it seems Islamophobic lies and propaganda have affected a 63 year old man, Roger Stockham, to the extent that he attempted to BLOW UP a mosque in Dearborn. Apparently, he travelled all the way from the San Diego area to do so. This man has been buttered up by the Islamophobic propaganda - I would not be surprised if this fella was donating cash to the self-styled internet warriors against "jihad" and "sharia".

I just hope this chap learns it's a business - he was taken in by their Islamophobic rhetoric - a rhetoric which is designed to fear-monger and generate donations ($$$). Some folk are just so gullible!

Well, Yahya and I can at least agree that "some folk are just so gullible." Mr. Taqiyya himself accused us of "distorting the realities in Dearborn" and "buttering up" Stockham with our "Islamophobic propaganda." I wonder if we should return all the donations we got from Stockham. Perhaps he can use the funds to hire a Sunni lawyer.

Here's the interesting thing about our critics. Let me put it into dialogue form.

DAVID: "Is there any connection between (a) Muhammad's clear commands to fight unbelievers, and (b) Muslims fighting unbelievers?"

CRITICS: "No connection at all!!!"

DAVID: "Is there any connection between (a) Muhammad's sexual relationship with a nine-year-old girl, and (b) the fact that sex with young girls is so prevalent in the Muslim world?"

CRITICS: "Absolutely no connection whatsoever!!!"

DAVID: "Is there any connection between (a) a Sunni Muslim attempting to blow up a Shia mosque in Dearborn, and (b) our demands for equal rights and Constitutional protections in Dearborn?"

CRITICS: "YES! There is a clear connection! Acts 17 directly caused this Sunni to attack a Shia mosque!"

Get my point? If a man with mental problems were to be somehow inspired by us, this would be clear proof that we promote violence. But if a man with mental problems is inspired by his religious beliefs . . . well, that has absolutely nothing to do with his religion! I guess it's easy to be illogical if consistency doesn't mean much to you.

By the way, how long do you think it will be before one of the lying and corrupt police officers in the Dearborn Police Department convinces Stockham to say that we somehow inspired him? Given what I've seen over the past year, I wouldn't put anything past the likes of Chief Haddad, Sergeant Mrowka, and Corporal Kapanowski (not to mention City Prosecutor William DeBiasi). "Hey, Inmate Stockham, you want some cigarettes? We just need you to say a little something in court . . ."

(Click here for a complete summary of our experience in Dearborn.)

German State, Hesse, Bans Burka in Public Sector

I can't say I'm a fan of telling women what they have to wear, but it's becoming increasingly clear that Europeans are fed up with Islam.

A German state yesterday became the first region in the country to ban Muslim women from wearing burkas.

The country has been gripped for several months by an angry debate on multiculturalism with many Germans voicing their concerns over immigration.

Hesse, a state run by Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats, has now became the first German region to ban Muslim face veils for public sector workers.

Hesse Interior Minister Boris Rheinsaid it was 'not acceptable' for a teacher in Frankfurt to wear a face veil because 'public sector workers are obligated to have neutral religious and political views'.

The decision was prompted by a local teacher who had told her school she wanted to wear a burka in the classroom after returning from maternity leave. She had not previously worn one.

Only a small minority of Muslim women in Europe cover their faces, but their veils have become symbols for Europeans troubled by problems such as the economic crisis, immigration and Muslim integration.

A poll last year showed 61 percent of Germans favoured a burka ban. Ban supporters include a Catholic bishop in Bavaria, and also the country's most prominent feminist, Alice Schwarzer. (Read more.)

*****UPDATE*****

A friend from Germany emailed me this morning, noting some inaccuracies in the above article. He had some corrections to suggest:

Dear David,

I just looked at your latest blog entry, stating:

"Hesse Interior Minister Boris Rheinsaid it was 'not acceptable' for a teacher in Frankfurt to wear a face veil because 'public sector workers are obligated to have neutral religious and political views'."

Frankly, that is nonsense. It is not your fault, since you are simply quoting another source, but this report is not accurate.

Public service employees have to behave religiously neutral (i.e. not push a certain religious conviction in public) but it does certainly NOT mean that they cannot HAVE a religious or political view / conviction. That is utter nonsense. There are Christians, Muslims, atheists, etc. among them who hold their views with full conviction, but they cannot bring that conviction into the workplace and subject others to it while at work.

Then the report continues:

"The decision was prompted by a local teacher who had told her school she wanted to wear a burka in the classroom after returning from maternity leave. She had not previously worn one."

She was definitely NOT a school teacher, but working in the city administration (I do not know exactly what position). Here is a German report about it:

http://www.pi-news.net/2011/02/burka-frau-gibt-auf-debatte-geht-weiter/

Shaykh Abdallah Adhami Loses Ground Zero Mosque Spot

Muslims wanted an extremely moderate Muslim Imam for their mosque at Ground Zero. After all, the only way to hide the fact that such a mosque would be a symbol of Islamic supremacy is to pretend that it's a symbol of moderation and tolerance. Imam Rauf was first named for the position, but he turned out to be far too radical, saying peaceful words to American audiences, while raising an Islamic supremacist voice in the Arab world. When people found out that Imam Rauf was not what he appeared to be, plans changed.

He was replaced by Shaykh Abdallah Adhami, who gladly took up the cloak of moderation. Unfortunately for mosque proponents, Shaykh Adhami is quite a fan of Sharia, and it didn't take much digging to figure this out. His views simply don't line up with the Taqiyya-brushed picture the mosque leaders want us to see.

How is it that Muslims are having so much trouble finding a truly moderate Imam (or one who can do a good job pretending to be moderate)? Who's next for the position? Major Nidal Malik Hassan?

Associated Press--A Muslim scholar recently named as the new senior imam at the Islamic center being built near the World Trade Center has parted ways with the project.

Shaykh Abdallah Adhami said Friday in a joint statement with the center's developer that he will no longer serve as a religious adviser to the center.

Adhami says he wants to devote his time to completing a book on the Quran.

The 44-year-old had been announced as the imam at the center last month after the departure of project co-founder Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf.

His appointment was followed by news reports questioning his views on homosexuality.

Islamic center developer Sharif El-Gamal says he still hoped Adhami would lead prayers at the facility from time to time. (Read more.)

Young Iraqis Losing Faith in Islam

After Saddam Hussein's regime fell, it was saddening to see so much violence and terrorism in Iraq. But there has, at last, been one positive outcome to the carnage. Young Iraqis, who finally see first-hand the violence being promoted by their leaders, are losing their respect for Islam.

BAGHDAD — After almost five years of war, many young Iraqis, exhausted by constant firsthand exposure to the violence of religious extremism, say they have grown disillusioned with religious leaders and skeptical of the faith that they preach.

In two months of interviews with 40 young people in five Iraqi cities, a pattern of disenchantment emerged, in which young Iraqis, both poor and middle class, blamed clerics for the violence and the restrictions that have narrowed their lives.

"I hate Islam and all the clerics because they limit our freedom every day and their instruction became heavy over us," said Sara Sami, a high school student in Basra. "Most of the girls in my high school hate that Islamic people control the authority because they don't deserve to be rulers."

Atheer, a 19-year-old from a poor, heavily Shiite neighborhood in southern Baghdad, said: "The religion men are liars. Young people don't believe them. Guys my age are not interested in religion anymore."

The shift in Iraq runs counter to trends of rising religiousness among young people across much of the Middle East, where religion has replaced nationalism as a unifying ideology. While religious extremists are admired by a number of young people in other parts of the Arab world, Iraq offers a test case of what could happen when extremist theories are applied.

Fingers caught smoking were broken. Long hair was cut and force-fed to its owner. In that laboratory, disillusionment with Islamic leaders took hold.

It is far from clear whether the shift means a wholesale turn away from religion. A tremendous piety still predominates in the private lives of young Iraqis, and religious leaders, despite the increased skepticism, still wield tremendous power. Measuring religiousness furthermore, is a tricky business in Iraq, where access to cities and towns that are far from Baghdad is limited.

But a shift seems to be registering, at least anecdotally, in the choices some young Iraqis are making. Professors reported difficulty recruiting graduate students for religion classes. Attendance at weekly prayers appears to be down, even in areas where the violence has largely subsided, according to worshipers and imams in Baghdad and Falluja. In two visits to the weekly prayer session in Baghdad of the followers of Moktada al-Sadr last autumn, vastly smaller crowds attended than had in 2004 or 2005.

Such patterns, if lasting, could lead to a weakening of the political power of religious leaders in Iraq. In a nod to those changing tastes, political parties are scrubbing overt references to religion. (Read more.)

The Future of Egypt: Sharia, Segregation, and Stonings

Many in the West are drawing attention to the fact that most Egyptians favor democracy, as if this means that we can all look forward to a little Muslim America right there on the bridge between Asia and Africa. But a democracy is only as good as the views of the majority. Which laws will be put in place when Egyptians vote? According to a recent poll, the situation doesn't look good. Here's a breakdown of Egyptian views:

Democracy

59%: Say democracy is preferable to any other form of government.

22%: Say a non-democratic system can be preferable in certain circumstances

Islam in politics

95%: Say it’s good that Islam plays a large role in politics

85%: Say Islam’s influence on politics is good

48%: Say Islam currently play a large role in Egyptian politics

Islamist extremism

80%: Think suicide bombings are never or rarely justified.

20%: Think suicide bombings are sometimes or often justified

70%: Are concerned or very concerned about Islamist extremism in the world

61%: Are concerned or very concerned about Islamist extremism in the Egypt

Traditional Muslim practices

54%: Believe men and women should be segregated in the workplace

82%: Believe adulterers should be stoned

84%: Believe apostates from Islam should face the death penalty

77%: Believe thieves should be flogged or have their hands cut off

(Source)

Muslims Massacre Eleven Christians in Egypt

The Qur'an commands Muslims to fight non-Muslims.

Qur’an 9:73—O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination.

Qur’an 9:111—Surely Allah has bought of the believers their persons and their property for this, that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain.

Qur’an 9:123—O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

Qur’an 48:29—Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves.

In Egypt, Muslims are using the confusion to carry out Muhammad's commands.

(AINA) -- News of a massacre of two Christian Coptic families by Islamists just emerged from Upper Egypt with the return of the Internet connections after a week of Internet blackout by the Egyptian regime. The massacre took place on Sunday, January 30 at 3 PM in the village of Sharona near Maghagha, Minya province. Two Islamists groups, aided by the Muslim neighbors, descended on the roof of houses owned by Copts, killing eleven Copts, including children, and seriously injuring four others.

Anba Agathon, Bishop of Maghagha, told Coptic activist Dr. Mona Roman in a televised interview on Al-Karma TV that the killers are their neighbors, who seized the opportunity of the mayhem prevailing in Egypt and the absence of police protection to slaughter the Copts. He said that he visited today the four injured Copts, who escaped death despite being shot, at Maghagha General Hospital and they told him that they recognized the main attackers as they come from the same village of Sharona. They gave the Bishop details of what happened.

"The two families were staying in their homes with their doors locked when suddenly the Islamists descended on them," said Bishop Agathon, "killing eleven and leaving for dead four others family members. In addition, they looted everything that was in the two Coptic houses, including money, furniture and electrical equipment. They also looted livestock and grain." (Read more.)

Robert Spencer, Zuhdi Jasser, and Michael Scheuer on the Egyptian Revolution

I'm not sure what to think about the revolution in Egypt. Mubarak is obviously no picnic. But anything would be better than having the Muslim Brotherhood take control of the country. We'll see what happens.

Refuting three common Muslim misconceptions about Christianity

I want to make the readers aware of three common and rather typical Muslim claims purposely promulgated to subvert and undermine the crediblity of Christian faith and character.

It amazes me how these deceivers manage to distort a book and text, which they hardly know nor understand:

Did the Apostles believe Jesus to be insane?

The first relates to the personality of Jesus Christ. In the Gospel of Mark, chapter 3, verse 21:

'When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, "He is out of his mind"'

Some Muslims apologists have mistakenly been swayed toward the opinion, that Mark depicts Jesus as a mad personality.

However, noticing that Mark is simply pointing to a sentence uttered by Jesus' own family this claim hardly supports the claim that this constitutes an apostolic perception.

Mark is neither confirming nor stating that Jesus was insane. The passage makes even more sense when perceived within it's context. There was indeed a reason why his family uttered the sentence: 'He is out of his mind'.

Verse 20 clarifies this:

'Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat'

Hence the 'He is out of his mind' utterence was not a specific reaction to Jesus as a person, but rather it records a blaze reference, to an occasion in which he set aside his physical need to minister to the people.

Did Jesus portray Christianity as a violent religion?

A second claim relates to the judgement of the nations; when Jesus in his second coming brings judgement upon his enemies.

But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them her and kill them in front of me (Luke 19: 27).

Muslim apologists have ignorantly purported the passage to portray a violent Christianity. However, the passage ascends the Christian religion.

Firstly, the passage belongs to the parable of the 'Ten Minas', and does not reveal direct description of an event.

Furthermore, despite the fact that the parable includes Christians, e.g. the 'three servants', those executing the judgement appear to be a group distinguished from these and are referred to as ‘those standing by’.

Finally, the parable does not refer to a Christian event, but a futurist, imminent and divine judgement; the closest analogy is Luke 9: 26:

‘If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels’.

Both Mark and Matthew relate to this event as a time of future judgement:

The Son of Man will send out His angels and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of sins (Matthew 13: 41-42)

As in Luke 19 these angels executing the judgement are distinguished from the actual servants (Jesus followers), about which Matthew records Jesus saying the following:

‘Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the Kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear’ (Matthew 13: 43)

Here, these Muslim apologists seem to confuse Christianity on earth, in the Christian era with future and divine judgement, executed by divine coming and angelic intervention.

Did Paul the Apostle encourage deception?

A third misconception is rooted in the Muslim failure to understand a Pauline saying in Philippians 1: 17-18:

'The former preach Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing they can stir up trouble for me, while I am in chains. But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice.'

Some Muslim apologists reiterate that Paul is encouraging Christians to utilize deceptive tactics and lies in their propagation of the Christian message. However, this is not what Paul is indicating.

Paul refers to certain individuals who preach the Gospel from a wrong motive; he is not describing deception or lies; but rejoices that at least the Christian message spreads among the people; after all, it’s the Christian message, the response of the listener and God who saves and transforms the sinner which matter, fairly much more than the actual messenger.

Fifteen-Year-Old Hena Begum Dies after Receiving 100 Lashes

According to the Qur'an, the penalty for fornication is 100 lashes.

Qur'an 24:2—(As for) the fornicatress and the fornicator, flog each of them, (giving) a hundred stripes, and let not pity for them detain you in the matter of obedience to Allah, if you believe in Allah and the last day, and let a party of believers witness their chastisement.

Notice that the verse commands Muslims not to be swayed by "pity" when they inflict Allah's punishment. Then notice that, according to the following report, teenage Hena Begum was beaten "mercilessly." She later died from the injuries inflicted by Muslims obeying the Qur'an.

BANGLADESH—Bangladeshi police arrested four people including a Muslim cleric today after a teenage girl, who was accused of having an extra-marital affair with her cousin, was whipped to death.

Fifteen-year-old Hena Begum died in hospital on Monday after a village court in the southern Bangladesh district of Shariatpur sentenced her to 100 lashes, said local police chief A.K.M Shahidur Rahman.

"We have arrested one of the clerics (who sat on the village court) and three villagers including the wife of the man who Hena Begum had an illicit relationship with," Mr Rahman told AFP.

According to Mr Rahman, the teenage girl was "beaten mercilessly" by the family of the married man, who was also Hena's cousin, after the affair was discovered.

The teenager was then handed to the village court, which publicly whipped her until she passed out and was taken to hospital, where she died seven days later, he said.

In conservative rural parts of Muslim-majority Bangladesh, rights groups say it is common for women to be publicly whipped for "crimes" such as adultery despite a ban on such religious punishments.

In some documented cases, rape victims have been flogged for being a "participant" in their sexual assault.

Last July, Bangladesh's High Court outlawed punishments handed down by religious edict, or fatwa, following a series of public interest litigation cases lodged by local human rights groups.

But the ruling has had little effect, rights groups say, pointing to a case in December where a woman died after being whipped 40 times after she was accused of sleeping with her stepson by a similar village court.

Some 90 per cent of Bangladesh's 146 million people are Muslims and most live in rural areas. (Source)

And yet it's "racist," "bigoted," and "Islamophobic" to object to Sharia law.

***UPDATE*** It turns out that Hena wasn't guilty of fornication or adultery. She was raped. As happens so often in the Muslim world, the rape victim was punished for being raped. Doctors tried to cover up what happened, but a second autopsy revealed what happened.

A second autopsy showed that a 14-year-old rape victim who was publicly flogged for adultery bled to death, Bangladeshi officials said today.

Hena Begum was sentenced under Islamic Sharia law to receive 100 lashes. She collapsed after enduring about 80 lashes. Her family took her to a hospital, where she died Jan. 31.

Police have opened a murder investigation into the case, which has caused shock and outrage both in Bangladesh and abroad, the BBC said.

An initial autopsy conducted after Hena's death said the girl suffered no external or internal injuries. The Daily Star, a Bangladeshi newspaper, made the results public and suggested there was a cover-up in the teen's death. The High Court subsequently ordered her body exhumed for a second autopsy.

That examination was carried out by a team of doctors at a hospital in Dhaka, the capital.

"Multiple injuries were found. The girl died because of bleeding," Deputy Attorney General Altaf Hossain told the BBC's Bengali service.

Hena was sentenced to the public whipping for adultery after she was accused of having sex with a 40-year-old married cousin named Mahbub Khan. But Hena's family and neighbors said the girl had been raped.

Khan was also found guilty of rape by elders in the village of Chamta, in Shariatpur district, about 55 miles from Dhaka, the BBC said. But despite this finding, Hena was flogged. Khan was sentenced to a whipping but he escaped.

Khan has now been arrested by the authorities, the BCC and Daily Star reported. He is expected to be charged with rape and could face murder charges if the court finds his actions led to his young cousin's death, the BBC said.

Four other people, including a Muslim cleric, have been arrested in the case, and more arrests are possible.

Bangladesh's high court last year outlawed punishments under Sharia. Hena is the second person to die since that ruling. A 40-year-old woman died in December after she was publicly beaten for allegedly having an affair with her stepson. (Source)

***2ND UPDATE*** It took Hena six days to die of the injuries she suffered.

A Bangladeshi girl who was publicly whipped for an alleged affair with a married man bled to death, according to a fresh post-mortem examination.

Doctors in Dhaka found multiple injuries on the body of Hena Begum, the deputy attorney general told the BBC.

The High Court ordered her body to be exhumed and taken to the capital after a local autopsy recorded no injuries.

Miss Begum died in hospital six days after last month's beating, which has caused shock in Bangladesh and abroad.

Police have opened a murder investigation.

The doctors who carried out the initial investigation have been summoned to explain their findings in the High Court on Thursday.

The second post-mortem examination was carried out by a team of doctors at Dhaka Medical College Hospital.

"Multiple injuries were found. The girl died because of bleeding," deputy attorney general Altaf Hossain told the BBC Bengali service. (Read more.)

British Airways Employee Rajib Karim "Conspired to Blow Up Plane"

The Qur'an commands Muslims to "fight those who believe not in Allah" (Qur'an 9:29). As we read about more and more terrorist attacks and attempts in the media, we're slowly learning that some Muslims actually take Muhammad's teachings seriously.

A British Airways employee conspired with a radical preacher to blow up a US-bound aeroplane, a court has heard.

From his Newcastle home, Rajib Karim shared details of his BA contacts in e-mails to Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, Woolwich Crown Court was told.

The computer expert worked for the airline in the city and had access to BA offices there and at Heathrow.

Mr Karim, 31, denies plotting to blow up an aircraft and gaining a UK job to exploit terrorist purposes.

The Bangladeshi national has already pleaded guilty to three other terror charges, the jury was told.

On the first day of the trial, the court heard how Mr Karim came to the UK in 2006 and got a job with BA.

The jury was told that Mr Karim established a "deep cover", joining a gym, playing football and never airing extreme views.

It is alleged that he was communicating with a terror cell as well as Anwar al-Awlaki, who has never been caught and is believed to be hiding in the mountains of Yemen.

Jonathan Laidlaw QC, prosecuting, said the defendant was preparing himself or others for terrorist attacks.

He said the court would hear that Mr Karim was an extreme jihadist.

"He believes that terrorism, including the murder of civilians, is permissible to establish a true Islamic state.

"The defendant was anxious himself to carry out such an attack and he was determined to seek martyrdom - to die and to sacrifice himself for his cause," Mr Laidlaw said. (Read more.)

Hmmm. Now where would this guy get the idea that martyrdom is important in Islam?

Sahih al-Bukhari 2785—Narrated Abu Hurairah: A man came to Allah’s Messenger and said, “Guide me to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward).” He replied, “I do not find such a deed.”

Sahih al-Bukhari 2787—Allah guarantees that He will admit the Mujahid in His Case into Paradise if he is killed, otherwise He will return him to his home safely with rewards and war booty.”

Sahih al-Bukhari 2795—Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet said, “Nobody who dies and finds good from Allah (in the Hereafter) would wish to come back to this world, even if he were given the whole world and whatever is in it, except the martyr who, on seeing the superiority of martyrdom, would like to come back to the world and get killed again (in Allah’s cause).”

Sahih al-Bukhari 2796—Narrated Anas: The Prophet said, “A single endeavor (of fighting) in Allah’s cause in the afternoon or in the forenoon is better than all the world and whatever is in it.”

Sahih al-Bukhari 2797—Narrated Abu Hurairah: The Prophet said, . . . “By Him in Whose Hands my soul is! I would love to be martyred in Allah’s Cause and then come back to life and then get martyred, and then come back to life again and then get martyred and then come back to life again and then get martyred.”

Sahih al-Bukhari 2810—Narrated Abu Musa: A man came to the Prophet and asked, “A man fights for war booty; another fights for fame and a third fights for showing off; which of them is in Allah’s Cause?” The Prophet said, “He who fights that Allah’s Word (i.e., Allah’s religion of Islamic Monotheism) be superior, is in Allah’s Cause.”

Sunan An-Nasa’i 3099—It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Prophet said: “Whoever dies without having fought or having thought of fighting, he dies on one of the branches of hypocrisy.”

Sunan Ibn Majah 2763—It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Messenger of Allah said: “Whoever meets Allah with no mark on him (as a result of fighting) in His cause, he will meet Him with a deficiency.”

Roger Stockham Arrested for Attempting to Blow Up Dearborn Mosque

***UPDATE*** This story turned out to be even stranger than I had anticipated. Click here for more details.

Sixty-Three-Year-Old Roger Stockham is off his rocker on two levels. First, he apparently wanted to blow up the Islamic Center of America in Dearborn, Michigan. This makes him a terrorist, and if reports turn out to be true, he should be sent to prison for a long, long time. Second, it seems Stockham believed that he could do serious damage to America's largest mosque using fireworks (M-80s make quite a loud bang, but they're not going to make much of a dent in a building). Hence, Stockham is even more inept than the many failed terrorist plotters we've heard so much about over the past few years (shoe bomber, underwear bomber, etc.). We can only hope that terrorists continue to make such blunders.

FOXNEWS—A 63-year-old Southern California man who had explosives in his vehicle was arrested outside one of the nation's largest mosques in the Detroit suburb of Dearborn, authorities in Michigan said.

Dearborn police said Roger Stockham was arraigned Wednesday on one count of making a false report or threat of terrorism and one count of possessing explosives with an unlawful intent. Stockham had a large but undisclosed quantity of class-C fireworks including M-80s, which are outlawed in Michigan, Chief Ronald Haddad said.

"I was comfortable with the fact that we had taken him off the street -- he isn't going anywhere," Haddad told The Associated Press Sunday afternoon. "I think the society he wanted to impact is safe." (Read more.)

Terrorist Threat At Local Mosque: MyFoxDETROIT.com

On a different note, it's good to know that Dearborn Police Chief Ronald Haddad will get a break from harassing Christians, and will be able to go after a real criminal. Similarly, Judge Mark Somers and the Prosecuting Attorney's office will be able to spend taxpayers' money dealing with people who are actually a threat to public safety. (Click here for a complete summary of our experience in Dearborn.)

I confess that I am confused by the comments in the above video. The Muslim condemned all acts of hatred, and said that he believes in tolerance, peace, etc. I wonder how he interprets the following teachings of Muhammad:

Qur’an 5:51—O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.

Qur’an 9:29—Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Qur’an 9:73—O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination.

Qur’an 9:111—Surely Allah has bought of the believers their persons and their property for this, that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain; a promise which is binding on Him in the Taurat and the Injeel and the Quran; and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? Rejoice therefore in the pledge which you have made; and that is the mighty achievement.

Qur’an 9:123—O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

Qur’an 47:35—Be not weary and fainthearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost: for Allah is with you, and will never put you in loss for your (good) deeds.

Qur’an 48:29—Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves.

Qur’an 98:6—Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islam, the Qur'an and Prophet Muhammad) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikun will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.

Sahih Muslim 33—It has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah b. Umar that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.

Sahih Muslim 4366—It has been narrated by ‘Umar b. al-Khattab that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.

Al-Bukhari, Al-Adab al-Mufrad 1103—Abu Hurayra reported that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, “Do not give the People of the Book the greeting first. Force them to the narrowest part of the road.”

*****UPDATE***** When I said Stockham is off his rocker, it turns out I was absolutely correct. Here's what the media have uncovered about him:

1. Vietnam veteran, "typical surfer"

Stockham was a Vietnam veteran who reportedly flew more than 600 combat helicopter missions in Vietnam. According to an online VFW profile he apparently updated, Stockham described himself "a typical surfer" who went to Vietnam in 1968 "and flew Huey slicks with an assault helicopter company, saw a lot of action, got a lot of air medals, but not much else."

2. Served time for threatening President Bush, veterans clinic

Stockham served time in federal custody after threatening to kill President George W. Bush and bomb a Vermont veterans clinic in 2002, according to The Detroit News. He reportedly threatened Bush because of something the president said in a speech about Iraq. Separately, he told a local newspaper he was going to explode bombs in a neighborhood near a Veterans Affairs Department complex. In one call to the newspaper, he identified himself as "Hem Ahadin" and described himself as "a local Muslim terrorist on a roll."

3. Pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity

Stockham pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity in 2004 and served time in the U.S. Medical Center for Federal Prisoners, where he was released in late 2005. A psych examination prior to his incarceration indicated he suffered from bipolar disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder and personality disorder with anti-social features.

4. Local authorities tipped off by bar employee

Before parking his car outside the mosque, the Dearborn Press & Guide reports Stockham spent time at a local bar. It's not clear what Stockham said there, but apparently it was suggestive enough to lead an employee to call the police, expressing concern Stockham might carry out an attack on local Muslims or Arabs. That call led police to search the area, where they found Stockham.

5. Trouble at California VFW

California VFW post 5477 was in the process of revoking Stockham's membership after a series of troubling incidents, according to The News. Stockham had been caught smoking pot, referred to a post commander with a racial slur and rarely socialized with other members. "He's a nut,' co-chair Richard Schmitz told the newspaper. "He flipped out lately." (Read more.)

*ADDENDUM FROM NABEEL*: I think this is the perfect opportunity for me and David to lay out our official policy on terrorism. Regardless of the creed of the victim or terrorist, Acts 17 categorically denounces terrorism. We condemn Roger Stockham's actions and we urge all people everywhere to treat Muslims as our neighbors. We wholeheartedly follow and promote the words of Jesus: "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven." We follow Paul's example in pointing to Jesus, for when he said, "With humility of mind, regard one another as more important than yourselves," he intimated that we should be willing to die for others, even if they sin against us, as the Lord did for us while we were still sinners. That is why Paul says "have this attitude in yourselves, which was also in Christ Jesus."

In sum, we promote love for Muslims. This is our whole purpose for doing what we do, i.e. we discuss Jesus and share the Gospel with Muslims to tell about them the gift of Truth (Jn 14:6), Life (Jn 17:3) and Love (1 Jn 4:16). We unreservedly condemn hatred and violence towards Muslims.

Pat Condell: The Criminal Truth

Robert Spencer vs. Imam Moustafa Zayed: Muhammad, Violence, and Subjugation

Russians Name Muslim Convert Vitaly Razdobudko as Prime Suspect in Moscow Bombing

Well, I tried to avoid drawing premature conclusions when I posted news of the Moscow bombing. I did note, however, that Muslims are commanded to fight and violently subjugate non-Muslims, which makes a Muslim attack more likely. It looks like things are pointing in that direction. Our Westernized Muslim friends tell us that Muslim terrorists are misinterpreting Islam. Isn't it strange that so many Muslims, from countries around the world, seem to misinterpret Islam in exactly the same way?

Security sources have named an ethnic Russian Christian who converted to Islam as the prime suspect in Monday's deadly suicide bombing at a Moscow airport.

Sources close to the investigation said that Vitaly Razdobudko, a 32-year-old from the southern Russian city of Stavropol, was being sought in connection with the attack, the Kommersant newspaper reported yesterday. It is not known whether Razdobudko is suspected of being the actual suicide bomber or an accomplice.

Razdobudko went missing in October last year, with his wife, according to police sources in Stavropol. He is believed to have been an Orthodox Christian, of Slavic appearance, who later converted to Islam.

The bomb, which ripped through the arrivals hall of Domodedovo Airport on Monday afternoon, killed 35 people including one Briton and left 180 injured. Russian authorities have released little information, and eyewitness accounts diverge wildly. Some speak of a male suicide bomber, some of a female bomber; in some testimonies, the bomber detonated a suicide vest, while in others the bomb was in a suitcase. (Read more.)

Robert Spencer vs. Imam Moustafa Zayed Tonight on ABN!

The debate will take place at 8:00 P.M. (Eastern Standard) tonight on ABN. If you don't get ABN via satellite, you can watch live via the internet here.

Thomas More Law Center Files Appeal on Behalf of Negeen Mayel

In the United States of America, citizens have rights. The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Unfortunately, the U.S. Constitution seems to have little weight in Dearborn, Michigan. Officer Brian Kapanowski (the officer who arrested Negeen) admitted, during the trial, that he had no reason at all to believe that she had committed a crime of any kind when he approached her. Hence, he had no right to put his hands on her, seize her property, or throw her in jail.



Since Officer Kapanowski did not have "probable cause" (or any reasonable suspicion that Negeen had committed or was about to commit a crime), it was illegal for him to seize Negeen or her property. After violating Negeen's rights and grabbing her, Officer Kapanowski should have been fired from the police force and charged with assault and battery (if not abduction). Yet Judge Mark Somers, who presided during our trial, wouldn't allow our lawyer, Robert Muise, to argue the "probable cause" issue in front of the jury. The judge's erroneous ruling was therefore the main reason Negeen was convicted (more on the judge's blunder here).

I'm happy to announce that a court outside of Dearborn will now be handling the appeal. The Thomas More Law Center filed a massive appellant brief today on Negeen's behalf. Those who are interested may read the brief in its entirety (if your screen is small, you can click here for a PDF file):



I'm no legal expert, but this looks like a slam dunk to me. William DeBiasi, Prosecuting Attorney for the City of Dearborn, was clearly outmatched during our trial. We'll see how he does in front of a judge who won't bend over backwards for a corrupt police department.

For a full discussion of the events in Dearborn, click here.

Hamas Imam Calls on Allah to "Kill All Jews," Muslims Say "Amen"

Perhaps Aldersgate United Methodist Church would like to invite this imam into their church to lead prayers.

WomanForTruth101 on "Laughable Reinterpretations" of the Qur'an

Today marked the return of WomanForTruth101 to the comments section. She wasted no time in making the standard groundless complaints. Let's examine one of them.

I quoted four extremely clear, self-explanatory passages from the Qur'an, and one from Sahih Muslim. In response, WomanForTruth101 said:

"Aside from your laughable re-interpretations in which many of us have had the honor to refute, it'd be good for you to know that militants in Russia are not motivated by religion but by occupation in Chechnya. I can't find the article at the moment but I will post a link to it soon."

This would be a good place to compare my "laughable reinterpretations" with WomanForTruth101's Westernized, watered down, Walt Disney interpretations. Since I don't recall reading anything by WomanForTruth101, I'll see how accurately I can guess her interpretations.

Qur’an 9:29—Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

My Interpretation: When the Qur'an commands Muslims to "fight those who believe not in Allah," it means that Muslims should "fight those who believe not in Allah." Is there anything in the immediate context that suggests another interpretation? No. Anything in the historical context that suggests another interpretation? No. Hence, I take the obvious meaning to be the literal meaning of the words.

WomanForTruth101's Interpretation: When the Qur'an commands Muslims to "fight those who believe not in Allah," it means that Muslims should live in peace, harmony, and tolerance with everyone. Anything in the immediate context that suggests this interpretation? No. Anything in the historical context that suggests this interpretation? No. Hence, WomanForTruth101's interpretation is totally at odds with the clear meaning of the words. If Allah meant to say that Muslims should live in peace, harmony, and tolerance with everyone, why didn't he just say this?

Qur’an 9:111—Surely Allah has bought of the believers their persons and their property for this, that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain.

My Interpretation: When the Qur'an says that Muslims "fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain," it means that Muslims "fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain." Is there anything in the immediate context that suggests another interpretation? No. Anything in the historical context that suggests another interpretation? No. Hence, I take the obvious meaning to be the literal meaning of the words.

WomanForTruth101's Interpretation: When the Qur'an says that Muslims "fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain," it means that Muslims only fight in extreme cases of self defense. Anything in the immediate context that suggests this interpretation? No. Anything in the historical context that suggests this interpretation? No. Hence, WomanForTruth101's interpretation is totally at odds with the clear meaning of the words. If Allah meant to say that Muslims should only fight in self defense, why didn't he just say this?

Qur’an 9:123—O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

My Interpretation: When the Qur'an commands Muslims to "fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you," it means that Muslims should "fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you." Is there anything in the immediate context that suggests another interpretation? No. Anything in the historical context that suggests another interpretation? No. Hence, I take the obvious meaning to be the literal meaning of the words.

WomanForTruth101's Interpretation: When the Qur'an commands Muslims to "fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you," it means that Muslims should hold interfaith dialogues with unbelievers. Anything in the immediate context that suggests this interpretation? No. Anything in the historical context that suggests this interpretation? No. Hence, WomanForTruth101's interpretation is totally at odds with the clear meaning of the words. If Allah meant to say that Muslims should hold interfaith dialogues, why didn't he just say this?

Qur’an 48:29—Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves.

My Interpretation: When the Qur'an says that Muslims are "severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves," it means that Muslims are supposed to be "severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves." Is there anything in the immediate context that suggests another interpretation? No. Anything in the historical context that suggests another interpretation? No. Hence, I take the obvious meaning to be the literal meaning of the words.

WomanForTruth101's Interpretation: When the Qur'an says that Muslims are "severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves," it means that Muslims are merciful towards everyone. Anything in the immediate context that suggests this interpretation? No. Anything in the historical context that suggests this interpretation? No. Hence, WomanForTruth101's interpretation is totally at odds with the clear meaning of the words. If Allah meant to say that Muslims should be merciful towards everyone, why didn't he just say this?

Sahih Muslim 33—The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.

My Interpretation: When Muhammad said that he had been commanded to "fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah," he meant that he had been commanded to "fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah." Is there anything in the immediate context that suggests another interpretation? No. Anything in the historical context that suggests another interpretation? No. Hence, I take the obvious meaning to be the literal meaning of the words.

WomanForTruth101's Interpretation: When Muhammad said that he had been commanded to "fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah," he meant that he had been commanded to peacefully complain about "Islamophobia" until people stop persecuting Muslims. Anything in the immediate context that suggests this interpretation? No. Anything in the historical context that suggests this interpretation? No. Hence, WomanForTruth101's interpretation is totally at odds with the clear meaning of the words. If Muhammad meant to say that he should peacefully complain about Islamophobia, why didn't he say this?

So here's what we have. In each of the above cases, I go with the clear meaning of the text, while WomanForTruth101 concludes that the text means, in effect, the opposite of what it actually says. Yet this gives rise to another problem. The Qur'an claims, again and again, to be "clear":

Qur'an 5:15—O followers of the Book! indeed Our Apostle has come to you making clear to you much of what you concealed of the Book and passing over much; indeed, there has come to you light and a clear Book from Allah.

Qur'an 12:1—Alif Lam Ra. These are verses of the clear Book.

Qur'an 15:1—Alif Lam Ra. These are the verses of the Book and (of) a Quran that makes (things) clear.

Qur'an 26:2—These are the verses of the Book that makes (things) clear.

Qur'an 36:69—We have not instructed the (Prophet) in Poetry, nor is it meet for him: this is no less than a Message and a Qur'an making things clear.

(See also 4:174, 10:15, 16:103, 19:73, 22:16, 22:72, 24:1, 24:34, 24:46, 26:192-195, 27:1, 28:2, 34:43, 43:2, 44:2, 46:7, 57:9, 58:5, 65:11, etc.)

So it seems that Westernized Muslims are in a bit of a pickle. If the Qur'an really is "clear" (as it claims over and over), then when it commands Muslims to fight unbelievers, to subjugate unbelievers, to be harsh towards unbelievers, it must mean what it says. Hence, the Qur'an promotes violence and oppression. If, on the other hand, the Qur'an really means the opposite of what it says (e.g. when it commands Muslims to "fight," it really means that they should "hug"), then the Qur'an is not clear, and is therefore wrong when it repeatedly claims to be clear.

On a different note, if WomenForTruth101 is correct, I don't see how she can call people to Islam. If the Qur'an frequently means the exact opposite of what it says, then perhaps when it commands people to reject the Deity of Christ, it actually means that they should accept the Deity of Christ. Maybe when the Qur'an says that Jesus didn't die, it actually means that he did die. When the Qur'an denies the Trinity, it could be affirming the Trinity. Once Muslims have destroyed the clear meaning of the Qur'an, aren't all interpretations equal?