Leading English Muslim Endorses the Killing and Raping of Non-Muslims

In a startling disclosure from an exchange at an East London mosque, Imam Abdul Makin and a leading Muslim lawyer have supported the killing and raping of non-Muslim, declaring all non-Muslims as guilty and subject to lethal abuse. As the videos show below, moderate Muslims have a considerable fight on their hands to rid their faith of these unhinged characters.

The disclosure occurred in a question-and-answer session with Imam Abdul Makin — as reported at a site called Islam Watch here. He reportedly stated “Because non-Muslims are never innocent, they are guilty of denying Allah and his prophet.” He then called in a legal judgment by saying “If you don’t believe me, here is the legal authority, the top Muslim lawyer of Britain.”

That top Muslim lawyer in Britain is Anjem Choudary, who says “You are innocent if you are a Muslim. Then you are innocent in the eyes of God. If you are not a Muslim, then you are guilty of not believing in God.”

According to Choudary this means that a Muslim can do no wrong by a non-Muslim: “As a Muslim, I must support my Muslim brothers and sisters,” Choudary said. “I must have hatred to everything that is not Muslim.”

For moderate Muslims, such views are as anathema as they are to non-Muslims. Yet, extremists appear to hold control of such mosques and even countries, as shown in Saudi Arabia, here, and Afghanistan, here, and Iran, here.

What is interesting about the lawyer is his standing with the bar. He has an obvious right to free speech, but in the United States lawyers have been denied practicing licenses due to racist or hateful speech. This was the judgment against David Hale, a white supremacist, click here.

In this here, Choudary is shown making this obnoxious argument.

The tension between the first amendment and the responsibility of the bar are magnified in cases like Hale and Choudary. I still tend to favor the first amendment in such conflicts, but it remains a close question.

34 thoughts on “Leading English Muslim Endorses the Killing and Raping of Non-Muslims”

  1. I cant understand who gives these muslims bastards airtime or a stage. Religion is man made, the books were written by men to sheppard men.

    You idiots that believe in them are lost soles looking for something in your life that isnt there.

    Get all muslims out of the west and back to the horrible little caves from which they came.

  2. Salaam

    If the native girls go out in Afghani Burkhs than there is no possibility that they are going to be raped by native youths or by a Muslim youth.

  3. Radi,

    Ahmed ebn Asem Antaki said, “The most useful humility is that which quenches your wrath and expels your pride.”

    also Shebli said, “I asked Yusof Asbat about the extreme limit of humility. He replied, ‘When you come out of your house, you consider everyone you see better than yourself.'”

  4. “If we threw you out for every fanciful or crazy thing you said, you’d have been bounced more times than a basketball during March Madness.”

    That is truly a great line. I have to use that someday (with your kind permission).

  5. Radi:

    The problem with your religion is the same as the problem with mine. Your holy books, the Qur’an and the Hadith, and mine, the Christian Bible, both condone this sort of exclusionistic thinking. Whether intended by the creator of the universe or not, the language, when taken at its literal meaning, lends itself to this kind of inflammatory rhetoric. Makes you wonder why, if the author really is the omnipotent, unerring creator of the universe, would he want this much confusion and strife over his words since he obviously knew it was going to happen. He’s (or She’s) omniscient, too.

  6. No. Who are these people talking on behalf of the noble religion of Islam? They are simply anti-Islamic, mis-quoted or ignorant. In Islam you do not have a jurisdiction on a non-muslim. All will be subject to Allah’s final judgment. Are Muslims then guilty of the rapes & murders committed in dozens if not hundreds by non-Muslim troops in Iraq, or Chechnya & Bosnia in the 1990s!!You’ve just thrown a false statement to stir hate for a noble & great religion and way of life…that is Islam.

  7. niblet:

    By the way, NPR reports that “On the September 18, 2006, edition of National Public Radio’s Fresh Air, Hagee said Hurricane Katrina was an act of God, punishing New Orleans for “a level of sin that was offensive to God.” He referred to a “homosexual parade” held on the date the hurricane struck and this was proof “of the judgment of God against the city of New Orleans.” [2], even though the Southern Decadence parade was scheduled for the following week and the primary gay neighborhoods, the French Quarter and the Marigny, were spared the flooding and destruction.” (quoted in Wikipedia). If true (and I ‘m sure you will dispute it because it was, after all, that “liberal” NPR obviously faking his voice), would you agree that he is a crazy man worthy only of an involuntary commitment to a psychiatric hospital?

  8. niblet:

    If we threw you out for every fanciful or crazy thing you said, you’d have been bounced more times than a basketball during March Madness. I like Human! He annoys you for one reason.

  9. human: Another Christian basher hanging around a left wing web site. What else is new?

    You should be ashamed for comparing a Reverend’s comments regarding hell and the making up a statement he NEVER made about Iran.


  10. In other news Rev. Hagee says those that don’t come to Christ will suffer agonizing death once the Rapture comes. Then he went on to preach how Iran should be bombed to kick of Armageddon’s 1st Quarter.

  11. And if there was ever a case for Wager of Battel…

    Anyway, this guy wouldn’t survive a week in the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan.

    Let’s say this idiot ordered the rape and murder of someone’s mother. And that someone (non-Muslim) happened to be friendly with the Pashtun.

    Well, it just so happens that the Pashtun would be obliged to help the bereaved son seek something known as “Bud-la” (revenge).

    Nonetheless, I think it would save us all some time if they just stoned the bastard to death before he started any trouble.

    ; )



  12. It has been my feeling that religious fanaticism, no matter WHAT the particular faith, has only led to terrible disasters, such as terrorist campaigns against all who were not of that specific religion. No religion has a monopoly on extremism; the way I see it, it has not been on just ONE side, as some would like to claim.

    As a very wise man once said, “religions are cages for the mind.” In too many cases, they are cages for the body as well, especially when we read JT’s other post today about the couple stoned to death for adultery.

  13. “I must have hatred to everything that is not Muslim.”


    Is it any wonder we are in a life and death struggle with the dogmatists of this religion? If the moderates do not step up to repudiate these claims, these extremists will bring down a reckoning on their religion that will seem “Biblical” in its proportions. It is a grave mistake to instill fear in other groups. We know people come to detest what they fear. One would think base self-interest would cowl this rhetoric but as with most fundamentalists they have the courage of their convictions but not the power of their reasoning.

  14. The issue to me does not devolve on the nuances of free speech. It is the consistency which Fundamentalists of every religious stripe will bend the words of their holy books and prophets in the manner that will be most destructive. I hold no brief for Islam, being Jewish, but I know enough of its history to understand that this radical view does not represent the panoply of Islamic thought.

    The crux of this issue to me is that religious extremism, represented by a fundamentalist outlook, have caused most of history’s man made disasters. This is not to say that having fundamentalist religious beliefs is of itself problematic, but when they are compounded by issues like: ego; desire for power/wealth; insecurity in one’s own religious commitment by clergy and laity; bigotry; misuse by politicians/society; etc., these beliefs represent a danger.

    To me the way to deal with this goes beyond silencing individual extremists and looking at the root causes. This radical version of Islam has been fostered by many middle Eastern countries for varied reasons, only a few of which are really about Israel’s existence. Many years of imperialist exploitation by western countries in tandem with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire created instability in that part of the Muslim world.

    The rising importance of oil greased the way towards the installation of despotic governments that worked cooperatively with the oil companies, while keeping their own people in poverty. Democratic initiatives in Iran (Mosedech) were destroyed by cold war interventionism and the installation of a corrupt Shah. The Saudi’s came to power on the strength of Wahabist support and the atypical religious extremism of that sect. There is much more that could be pointed out, but in the end it led to a dispirited Islamic populace that was kept in line by focusing anger outwards: towards the West; towards Israel; towards the infidel; etc., and using its’ precepts to exert internal social control.

    At this point it has gotten so out of hand that it is somewhat beyond the control of its various fomentors. I didn’t mention 9/11 and the unjustified Iraq war since these were results of the anger, not the cause. Politicians used the terrible tragedy of 9/11 for their own particular purposes (see PNAC signatories 1998) which were more about money, power and control, than redress. Their wrong headed reactions make dealing with this situation harder.

    We need to stop exploiting the Middle East for the benefit of the oil monopolies and start dealing with the less radical elements of their governing entities. The Saudi’s must be seen for the troublemakers they are and for their despotism. While I support Israel, a two state solution is a necessity and evacuation of all the West Bank settlements must occur. A majority of Israeli’s support this, however, and AIPAC is unrepresentative of the majority American Jewish and Israeli sentiments. We must get our troops out of the middle east and once done, not restart the “gunboat diplomacy” of the past. It seems hypocritical that our government addresses “human rights” issues in many venues, but does not address those of our “allies” the Saudi’s.

    This is only a beginning of the many years of hard work to be done to combat the rise of Islamic extremism and it begs the question of our own fundamentalist extremism which has driven so much American policy for so many years. Conceptually too, the US must turn from a foreign policy that assumes that we have the right to intervene anywhere in the world, towards one that acknowledges our status as one of many countries. This incidentally is more in line with the Founding Father’s concepts. I am not naive enough to believe that this is something that will be accomplished in my lifetime, but those of us that believe in creating a saner world must keep trying

Comments are closed.