The Spittoon’s sources tell us that the Home Office has issued an exclusion order on Zakir “Every Muslim should be a terrorist” Naik. This decision pulls the chain conclusively on the controversial PeaceTV tele-evangelist’s lecture tour in the UK. The itinerary included Sheffield Arena, London’s Wembley Arena and Birmingham’s LG Arena.
We discussed the nature of Naik’s hate incitement here. We also discussed the agenda of certain centre-right Islamists who support, for extremist muslim clerics, the right to preach religious hatred under the pretext of free speech and liberal values, but subvert those same values by employing lawfare to silence their critics by libel action here.
You can get a taste of the type of racist material and conspiracy theory dressed up as theology that Naik would have delivered had he been allowed to lecture here from this video snippet:
“Today America is controlled by the Jews. Whether it be the banks, whether it be the money, whether it be the power.
No one can become a president of the USA without walking [sic] the Star of David. Though the Jews are a minority, less than 5% in America, but they are controlling the economy, they are controlling America.”
This is a sensible and correct decision delivered by the Home Office. Well done to Baronnes Pauline Neville-Jones for not flinching and standing firm, essentially for Britain and for liberal democratic principles.
55 Comments
terrorism is against terrorism. zakir naik is being quoted out of context. the true context is….
if a Muslim sees a rapist, the rapist should get terrified, if a robber sees a Muslim he should get terrified. in this sense every Muslim should be a terrorist who terrorizes the anti-social elements of the society.
for example when a robber sees a police man, he gets terrified, for the robber the policeman is a terrorist!
Suhaib
I don’t see how Zakir Naik is being quoted out of context. Many apologies for terrorism are based on the idea that all members, including children (and not just the “anti-social” elements), of a target society are guilty of the perceived crimes the society commits. The way I see it, Naik and yourself are just trying to justify mass murder. Also, terrorism affects primarily Muslims, because most victims of islamists are Muslims and it affects negatively the relations and trust between Muslims and non-Muslims, generally to the disadvantage of the minority of the two in any given society.
A shame Ulema Sheikh Zakir Naik is banned . A sad day.
A sad day for Islamic extremism in the UK.
Paul Goodman:
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thetorydiary/2010/06/theresa-may-bars-hate-preacher-and-makes-a-good-start.html
Brilliant news.
A concerted campaign needs to be run to get his “Peace TV” off the airwaves of India too.
Someone with strong Urdu needs to go through the material posted online of speeches from his “Peace TV” by Israr “kill apostates and renegades” Ahmed.
He calls for non-Muslims to be treated as second class citizens in an Islamic state which isn’t exactly lovely pluralism and peace teachings:
http://pkpolitics.com/discuss/topic/dr-israr-ahmad-pakistan-kay-khatmay-ki-ultee-ghantee
He has a series on Jihad run on “Peace TV” which I’d say based on his general output isn’t too “peaceful” in its message:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8856122157314136810#
Glad the tosser has been banned. He does try to be clever and play around with words at times but ultimately his bigotry and narrow-mindedness shines through.
“He does try to be clever and play around with words at times but ultimately his bigotry and narrow-mindedness shines through.”
Yes enough about Bunglawala, what about Zakir Naik?
Good.
We need to make it very clear that the UK is now a zero-tolerance zone as far as bigoted, racist clerical fascists are concerned.
I take back everything I ever said about Theresa May!
sometimes two different labels is given to the same person for the same purpose.
baghat singh who fought the freedom struggle of india was called terrorist by the british but the indians call him as freedom fighter.
nelson mandela was called no. one terrorist by the Americans and was and is a hero for the blacks and truly was fighting for the right cause.
A disgraceful decision by the British Govt. to ban Dr. Zakir Naik. As far as I’m concerned, banning anyone and curbing their freedom of speech is the cowards way out. We should stand up and challenge the ideology of those we disagree with through discussion, not shut them up because we have the power to do so. I maintained this stance when it came to Anjem Choudhary and Geert Wilders and they are far more extreme than Dr. Naik. The new Govt. has made a big mistake and this sends out the wrong message to Muslims in the UK.
zakir naik’s lecture :: is terrorism a Muslim monopoly?
“ in the Book of Numbers it is written that whoever worships other than God should be killed,” he said, referring to the Bible, yet such militant verses were conveniently ignored by the Western media.
“In every religion there are black sheep and the media keep putting these people forward. This is a media conspiracy and a way of pushing people away from Islam.” he added.
On Islam, terrorists and terrorism
Dr. Zakir Naik said, “No religion encourages terrorist acts or violence. The word ‘Islam’ itself means ‘Peace, obtained by submitting yourself to the Almighty’. Anyone, be it Muslim or non-Muslim, who kills an innocent Muslim or a non-Muslim, kills the entire humanity. However, Islam goes a step further to say that if one saves innocent lives, the whole of humanity is saved. Injustice is the root cause of terrorism…”
He continued, “Palestinians are called terrorists just because they are fighting to get their land back.” By citing examples of LTTE (in Sri Lanka), IRA (in UK), Lord’s Salvation Army, which trains the young children to conduct terrorist attacks, and many other non-Muslim terrorist outfits he further said that, the lives claimed by these outfits are more than the ones by the Muslim terrorists.
Dr. Zakir said Naxalites/Maoists across India and the LTTE in Sri Lanka were non- Muslim terror organisations, which had had developed pan regional bases beyond national boundaries. Other such non-Muslim terror outfits included the United Liberation Front of Asom, National Democratic Front of Bodoland and All Tripura Tiger Force in the Northeast, Naik noted.
Drawing on international examples, Dr. Zakir said that the Japanese Red Army, Lord’s Salvation Army and the ETA in Spain were also non-Islamic in character and composition.
“So nothing is more removed from truth as to suggest that Muslims have monopolized terrorism,” said Dr. Naik. He said the Irish Republican Army, which was considered to be terrorist group, has a history of 100 years of violence against the British, but the British government doesn’t seem to be scared about them as they are about radical Islamic groups.
Besides, he also mentioned, “Even a single killing by a Muslim is condemned by Islam, whatsoever the reasons.”
Bullcrap.
AFAIK, Nelson Mandela never advocated the mass-murder of other nationalities, did not preach religious intolerance, did not demand that women remain the chattel-slaves of men, did not celebrate acts of terror aimed at the civilian population…
In fact, it seems to me Nel;son Mandela was engaged in a struggle against exactly the sort of racist, barbarian, medieval scum that Naik and fellow clerical fascists celebrate.
More bullcrap.
The government has sent the right message to Islamists in the UK.
Islam is not the same as Islamism.
More bullcrap.
The government has sent the right message to Islamists in the UK.
Islam is not the same as Islamism.
———————————————————————-
I never said Islam is the same as Islamism but if we’re going to ban moderate scholars like Dr. Naik, someone seen as a well respected authority by Muslims and non-Muslims across the world then it clearly sends out a wrong message to Muslims in the UK. I’m not talking about Islamists, just Muslims who value and respect Dr. Naik’s knowledge of Islam, Christianity and many other religious texts. They are the ones who are most upset by this news.
“They are the ones who are most upset by this news.”
That’s debatable. There are also many muslims who are very happy with the news.
http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/Split-over-TV-39peace39-preacher.6337979.jp
“Another Muslim, Amias Rafnaz said: “There is an extremely large number of Muslims who have voiced their anger at having this man come in to the UK to speak about peace when he himself creates divisions within the Muslim community by attacking their beliefs of advocating peace within all walks of life..”
so he thinks that by playing with the semantics, he can somehow rehabilitate the word “terrorism” and get his heroes off the hook? it’s a bit like saying:
“if a fireman needs to break down a door, he must use an axe, which he would not normally do under most circumstances, that would be acting like the axe-wielding maniac in ‘the shining’ so all i am doing is essentially calling for firemen to behave like axe-wielding maniacs”.
i don’t think he’s going to win “rhetorical technique of the year” with that one.
perhaps because when anyone mentions them, it is immediately pointed out that those verses can only be applied to the seven nations of canaan during the period of the israelite conquest.
to paraphrase ronald reagan, “circumstances are stubborn things”.
b’shalom
bananabrain
No, you directly implied as much.
Stop right there. Moderate scholars like Dr. Naik!?!?!?!
And what does an extremist look like if Naik is a “moderate”?
BB
Naik does this a lot – he is a past master of making false analogies. One of my favourites concerns his defence of state intolerance of non-Muslim faith communities in Muslim-majority countries. It runs like this:
(1) If you were running a school then you would not appoint a maths teacher who believed 2 + 2 = 5, because this is clearly not true.
(2) All other religions are false – that is, by false analogy, they are like the bad maths teacher who thinks and teaches that 2 + 2 = 5
(3) Only Islam is true – that is, by false analogy, it is like the good maths teacher who thinks and teaches the truth, that is that 2 + 2 = 4.
(4) So, in false conclusion, just as the school would be within its rights only to appoint the maths teacher who knows and teaches the truth, so the Muslim state is correct to ban or otherwise restrict the preaching and activities of faiths and their believers other than the Islamic faith – as all other faiths are false and only Islam is true.
Fascist nonsense, of course – and a measure of the disgusting sophistry and ignorance of even the basics of reasoning at the heart of so much Islamist “scholarship”.
Stop right there. Moderate scholars like Dr. Naik!?!?!?!
And what does an extremist look like if Naik is a “moderate”?
An extremist has a long beard and wants to blow himself up in the name of his religion. Dr. Naik is a moderate because he believes in values of peace, equality and justice and doesn’t have extreme views. Listen or read his comments. He is saying he wants to stand up against injustice. It’s easy for you to anyone here to call him an extremist but he is not taking sides. Why can’t American be an extremist for killing and being extreme in killing so many innocent civilians all in the name of WMD. Dr. Naik is saying he is on the side of the oppressed fighting the oppressor and in many parts of the world, America is seen as the oppressor.
My stance is simple. If we disagree with him, why don’t we allow him in and discuss with him. This banning rubbish is just anti-human, it shows the Western powers are scared that they may be exposed. Lets have frank discussion with the BNP, right-wing and Islamic extremists instead of just banning them. Rational dialogue is the way forward and if we allow that then Dr. Naik will come out on top time and time again.
That’s debatable. There are also many muslims who are very happy with the news.
Interesting link Faisal. I would suggest the majority of the Muslims in the UK, those that live honest and simple lives, pay their taxes, serve their communities and go to the mosque regularly are against this ban. Even in your link, only one comment is supporting the ban. Either way, divided opinion is there so lets have a poll.
http://www.umaronline.com/2010/06/news-dr-zakir-naik-banned-from-uk-poll.html
Feel free to vote and pass this link around.
Umar Farooq,
If you are suggesting that the “majority of the Muslims in the UK” are opposed to the ban of Zakir Naik and support him then the onus is on you to explain two points:
1) Where is your data to back up this claim.
2) If what you are saying is true, and I very much doubt it is, then you are claiming that the majority of muslims in the UK are extremists with views similar to Naik. This is tantamount to saying all Muslims are
a) Sectarianists – as per his views on Shia and the Ahmadis
b) Antisemites – as per Naik’s views on Jews
c) Homophobes – as per his views on gays
d) Conspiracy theorists – as per his views on 9/11
e) Supporters of terrorism – as per his views on terrorism
And please don’t now claim that I am putting words in your mouth. You’re he one who’s claiming to have the data and know that the weight of opinion in the muslim community supports and agrees with Naik to be a fact.
If that is the case, the situation is very dire indeed.
That’s absurd Faisal. I’m sorry mate but you’ve gone on a tangent and you are, even though you don’t want me to say it, putting words in my mouth. At the most simple level, we’re asking whether Dr. Naik is a extremist and has extreme views. I’m saying he’s not as extreme as you are making him out to be (he certainly doesn’t glorify terrorism, to the contrary, he’s one again standing for justice). You clearly think he is. I don’t have any data for you, other than real life experience. I’m from Bradford (although I live in London now) and today I’ve been to mosques in and around Bradford asking the people about the ban, the outright majority are against the ban. Why? The answer is simple. For them and for most Muslims, he can rationally debate Islam and is like a Human computer. Most people that I know, from the communities in Bradford watch him on Press TV and have his DVD’s at home. He speaks on Islam and speak well enough to give rational guidance to young and old. In this human being, we’re picking up a couple of quotes and saying – that’s it, ban him! he’s an extremist. It’s ridiculous.
I acknowledge that he has some controversial comments but in most cases, it is a balancing exercise. In this case, the good he brings outweighs the bad pretty comprehensively so he should be let in. On a personal note, I don’t think he should be banned at all, just like the other extremists we’ve mentioned. We need to debate with them if we disagree with them. That’s clearly something we’re not interested in.
Faisal!
are you a jew?
Umr Farooq,
You went to a mosque in Bradford and asked people about the ban and they disagreed with it. Naik is a like a “Human computer”. All very good but so what?
I discussed the high regard that Naik is held in by millions of muslims here. But again, this is not a defence of his record of preaching hate.
None of this detracts from the fact that we are dealing with a hate preacher. As bad as Stephen Donald Black, Mike Guzovsky, Abdul Ali Musa, Fred Waldron Phelps Snr and Shirley Phelps-Roper, Amir Siddique and others on the UK Exclusion list.
An extremist has a long beard and wants to blow himself up in the name of his religion.
You have it the wrong way round, trying to make a definition out of an inverted commonplace. Someone with a long beard who wants to blow himself up in the name of his religion is an extremist, but there are other kinds of extremists too.
Fair enough. It’s not very difficult to be able to decipher, in general, what the Muslims in the UK feel and through my experiences I know the majority are against this ban. I’m not going to spend time on here arguing with you and trying to convince you. I’ve put up a poll on my website open to the internet-surfing world, feel free to vote on it. http://www.umaronline.com/2010/06/news-dr-zakir-naik-banned-from-uk-poll.html
Many Thanks.
Umar.
An extremist has a long beard and wants to blow himself up in the name of his religion.
As a quick rule of thumb, how many terrorists involved with 9-11, 7-7, Madrid, Umar Farouk Abdulmuttalab, the Times Square bomber, the Mumbai gang etc had long beards?
he can rationally debate Islam
No, he can’t. He is a dormitory debater – cousin of the barracks lawyer – who can only score sophomoric brownie points with bad analogies, question begging and semantic games in front of credulous audiences. (Abu Faris has already posted a paradigmatic example of his style of “debate”.)
Slash and fizzle, is our friend Zakir.
Hilarious! Terrorism is a fashion statement! So, nothing to do with religious-political convictions, then?
Dr. Naik does have extreme views, as Faisal indicates directly below your post. All people say they believe in peace and justice. And your point is, exactly?
Actually, I have. He is at best a self-deluded, extremist bigot – at worst he is a cheerleader and propagandist for terrorism.
Your next line of argument is hilarious in its self-contradiction. It starts:
So, you are saying that Naik is not taking sides. That is interesting, because you next argue exactly the opposite!
Most bizarre. You are saying that a man who is not taking sides (your first claim) in fact is taking sides – and just to completely prove it, you argue that he himself says so!
Hilarious – and rather pathetic.
I listen to zakir nahik regular n he has got some intresting talk which are fairand good. any person who does not understand islam will think every muslim is extremist and one more thing peace tv has been on for years n no one says uff but now he if coming in person its a problem the government wants 2 control muslims that’s it muslims need 2 b strong in their faith
lol, if this shitstain zakir and that eygptian rectal scar Yousuf al-Qaradawi are moderate muslim clerics, priests in another garb, muslims in Britain are doomed, most likely to be expelled in an orgy of efficient violence and only themselves to blame. collectively ingrate delusional traitors. It’s going to be Nasty, think Gujrat but legal and official. Colonization is rightly resisted, muslim colonists deserve nothing but a bullet or a noose.
abu faris
ya dumb twat….. love all your “so much diversity in islam crap”
even though all the major schools of islamic jurist prudence disagree with you and shit on your pointy head. Some one who has to advertise a wife from outside his own ethnic group reveals a person trying to conceal deeply suppressed, repressed racist tendencies, a man who married a woman just out of love would never advertise his wife’s ethnicity because as irrelevant it would never occur to him that such might be important.
must run…. have fun kids muslims buy your burial plots don’t be a burden to your families … mass graves are so ….anonymous.
It’s going to be Nasty, think Gujrat but legal and official.
You have issues. Get help.
A disgraceful decision by the British Government to ban Dr. Zakir Naik. But it is not unusual or shocking. This could always be expected by the Western countries. And they talk about freedom of speech… wow! Do they think that this way they would be able to stop the truth (Islam) from growing and spreading across the world? They draw cartoons in the name of freedom of speech and thought, ban Hijab in the name of liberating women, let Geert Wilders propagate his hatred towards Islam openly to the extent of dishonouring the holy book of Allah (Quran), …….. and then they misquote Dr. Naik who stands for peace and ban him. They don’t want non muslims to come to the truth. I believe this would definitely make people from different religions to look into Dr Naik’s views to see why they are “extreme and unacceptable” as claimed. Injustice and oppression is becoming the trend of the world. During the rule (oppression) of the British Government in India, Bhagat Singh was a patriotic hero to the Indians, but for the British he was a terrorist and they sent him to the Gallows. After the British oppression ended in India, India got its freedom and had to get a new vision for its future. Mahatma Gandhi quoted that “If India has to improve it should be ruled by a dictator as honest and upright as Hazrat Umar (radhiAllahu anhu)”. Who was this person? He was the best of leaders of the muslim nation. He was an emblem of justice. He ruled as a true slave of Allah, treated muslims and non-muslims alike when it came to justice. We need the leaders of today to follow Umar’s footsteps.
http://navedz.wordpress.com/2010/06/19/quote-or-misquote-dr-zakir-naik-banned-in-uk/
What the flying fuck are you raving about, you lunatic?
Is there any real point in allowing Cameron to continue this vendetta of insane insults and poorly spelled streams of lunacy?
Is it necessary that Cameron be allowed on this site? He has absolutely nothing to offer.
Watch this video and find the truth stop following media please
shame on UK
http://searchoftruth.com/videos/442/zaki-naik-ban-in-uk-watch-and-find-the-truth!
hey Non Muslim brothers I can understand u people can never bear that Islam developed but u people will see that Dr Zakir naik will again went to UK without any restriction becze he is on the path of truth And if the court of UK have the justice He will obviously preach Islam again in UK
Dr Zakir Naik, one of great scholars on different religion scriptures should not be banded.
His speech had been distorted by media.
He is a very knowledgeable and learned person ever I have seen.
He is talent as well as brilliant.
Tamim
An awful lot of very well-educated Islamic scholars seem to fundamentally disagree with your assessment of Naik.
yes, perhaps he’s not as talent as all that and should be banded. oh, well, what can you expect when someone’s words had been distorted by media.
i mean, imagine if you couldn’t speak english properly. you might even think what zakir naik says makes sense.
imagine that, eh.
b’shalom
bananabrain
The lesser-known banded jihadi-coot, known locally as the Naik-Naik.
The saddest news i have ever heard is Dr.Z.N. ban to U.K. it seems like U.K. gov. is affraid of him or may be his intellect. WHAT A SHAME.
Isnt it against their own idea of FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION?
In reallity they are affraid of nothing but the truth.
My God! Illiteracy appears to be spreading throughout the Islamist community. Quick! Someone call a doctor…. no, not that *one*, he’s banned already.
I’ll tell you something for nothing, yoco… I’m not affraid [sic] of your intellect.
you want me to believe that you people are not afraid IF it is so then why he is banned.Dont say that you are afraid of terrorism because he is a person who strongly condemns terrorism.do you want to know what is real terrorism? terrrorism is what is being done in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Why dont you condemn that OR you think that is right.
Lets agree for a sec. for the sake of argument that one person Usama.B.L. hitted twin towers How many people were killed ? may be hundreds of innocent people had to lost their lives.
BUT
Do you think that it is fair to kill hundreds and thousands of innocent humans in the East for just one persons brutallity.
NOW its time for you to think what is terrorism and who are the terrorists
http://www.zakirnaikexclusion.com/
Salaam All,
Dear Uncle Daud and guys writing with Arabic names. You guys do not know
about Islam and commenting and thinking yourselves as so called
moderate muslims. You guys better leave Islam and then abuse
Islam openly rather than pretending as Muslims, If you guys are honest.
Shame on the so called “moderate muslims”. Islam is not moderate dear
pretenders, Islam is absolutely peace loving. Why you guys are moderate?
Yawn. Here we go. Takfiri peddlars try to shut down criticism of Zakir Naik, who many ulema oppose. What do have to back up your assertion that the ulema are pretending to be Muslims under Arabic names too?
Marwan descends into the surreal in his desperation to defend jihad propagating fascism.
Yoco wrote:
Let’s stop just there – after all Naik believes the Americans and the Joos “hitted” [sic] the Twin Towers. Oddly, you are out of step with your own hero.
Incidentally, the latest apology for Naik’s bigotry is that he supported Ibn Ladin in 1996. According to his British lawyer, this was years before 9/11 (obviously). Again, bizarrely out-of-step with Naik’s own stated views – as I have just pointed out – Naik believes that 9/11 was an “inside job” and nothing to do with Usama or al-Q. Perish the very thought.
first of all i wish to start with the goons that by accident bear Muslim names,well i cannot decide about their level of faith thats up to God.but i can very well say that their knowledge of islam is not just handicapped but totally absent therefore i don’t blame them as they arrogantly continue to swim in their ignorance.
on dr naik i will only tell him not to loose sleep over the ban because to me Britain is nothing but an over crowded tiny island with a very bad weather that had the fortune of being a dying financial center because we are all looking towards the far east now and we all know how they came about that (COLONIALISM). Dr naik is an enigma and no body can change that.Islam is the fastest growing religion on the planet and no body can stop this also.Dr naik may have been banned from the Britain but numerous other countries are begging him to come and guest what these countries are occupied by humans with single head and two eyes just like in Britain.
ibrahim is channeling some sort of bwoy from da hood, I am guessing. I like the “COLONIALISM” in caps best – sort of says it all, really.