News

Fools and their fatwas: It’s a criminal offence to criticise mad Muslim clerics says mad Muslim cleric

Nasreen

EARLIER this month the Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen used Twitter to attack a Muslim cleric in Bareilly, India, over some dumb fatwa  he’d issued.

Hasan Raza Khan took serious offence over Nasreen’s tweet in which she said:

In India, criminals who issue fatwas against women don’t get punished.

Hasan Raza Khan was so offended that he stormed off to the local plods, demanding Nasreen’s arrest. His complaint said qualified Islamic scholars issue fatwas in the light of the teachings of the Koran and and rules concocted by “noted religious leaders” of the “prophet” Mohammed’s era. By describing these muftis as criminals Nasreen had

Hurt the religious sentiments of Muslims.

In 2007, another murderous lame-brained cleric, Tauqeer Raza Khan put a 500,000 rupee bounty on her because he was offended by a book by Nasreen in which she referred to Islam. He declared:

Taslima has put Muslims to shame in her writing. She should be killed and beheaded.

Tauqeer

Tauqeer Raza Khan

We don’t know what the outcome was of No 1 Khan’s crybaby whinge, but we do know that foolish fatwas still keep coming from clerics in that neck of the woods.

Indeed another Bareilly-based, bearded buffoon – Mohammad Afzaal Rizwi, the mufti of Darululoom Ifta at Dargah Aala Hazrat  – has just issued a fatwa against homosexuality (sigh) and live-in relationships, saying that severe punishments were needed for such “anti-Islamic” behaviour:

A person may be burnt alive, pushed from a high wall or be beaten publically with stones if he indulges into either of the two behaviours.

ask_the_mullah

Many clerics have backed the fatwa. Maulana Tasleem Raza Khan of Ahle Sunnat Movement said the two relationships do not have legal validity under Islam. He said no religion would allow this and advised Muslims to boycott any law that promotes such behaviour.

Shia cleric Maulana Yadoob Abbas said both live-in relationships and homosexuality were against nature.

And Maulana Khalid Rasheed Firangi Mahli of Eidgah Lucknow termed it “against Indian tradition”.

Meanwhile, the Indian Supreme Court’s muddle-headed decision to recriminalise homosexuality has proved such an embarrassment to India’s government that it has ordered the court to review its order, saying it believed it:

Violated the principle of equality.

The order came after the celebrated Indian novelist Vikram Seth, who is writing a sequel to his epic bestseller A Suitable Boy, appeared on the latest cover of India Today unshaved, dishevelled, ooking distinctly angry and holding a chalkboard saying “Not A Criminal”. He did so to promote his moving essay in the magazine on gay rights.

Vikram Seth

Vikram Seth

Hat tip: Great Satan (gay fatwa link)

18 Responses to “Fools and their fatwas: It’s a criminal offence to criticise mad Muslim clerics says mad Muslim cleric”

  1. Caute says:

    What a fantastic idea. If anyone criticises me then I will just have them killed by a mob.

  2. charlie says:

    So much for Islamic peace and tolerance. A case of do things my way or you must die. Shameful cowards.

  3. L.Long says:

    Well if the islame nutjob thinks criticism is worth a fartwa then he best not read any of these blogs cuz he will run our of ink giving them out to over 16% of the US.

  4. Robster says:

    Those muslims have a really hopeless god, he does nothing. Surely if he/she/it is so pissed off at the author, he/she/it could whip up a lightening bolt, local earthquake or perhaps a tsunami to teach that threatening woman a never to be forgotten lesson, but no, nothing. Not even a supernatural burp or divine fart. Time to move big Al over and consider another deity, there’s plenty to choose from. Problem is though, they’re all about as good as each other.

  5. Matt+Westwood says:

    If it’s perfectly okay for Muslims to demand the death of others for criticising them, why is it not similarly okay for non-muslims to demand the death of muslims?

    Oh yes, I remember now, it’s because we live in a civilised democracy where such sentiments are discouraged.

  6. Broga says:

    It is about power being pursued by the ignorant, hopeless and useless who could not achieve the most minimal status in no other way than via their religion. Loathsome buffoons. They should be locked up as a nuisance to sensible people.

    I see Her Maj, at the behest of a government Minister, has graciously granted a pardon to Alan Turing, a mathematical genius, who is reliably thought to have been the reason for WW2 ending ,two years before it might have done and, and as a homosexual man, was chemically castrated.

    Bit late in the day, I’m afraid. It must be rare, throughout history, that someone who contributed so much, and saved so many people from death and injury, was rewarded by such brutality. Turing was a giant who was preyed upon by lice of the human variety.

  7. Sharad says:

    Some serious doublethink going on here… if the cleric can pursue a case of “hurting religious sentiments” against Tasleema, surely she should be allowed to pursue a case of criminal intimidation against the issuers of the fatwas? Once again, religion trumps common sense in the “largest democracry in the world.”

  8. barriejohn says:

    This article was highlighted by the NSS. “The vision of secularism that the Catholic Herald (almost) shares with the NSS”:

    http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2013/12/23/anti-christian-violence-in-the-middle-east-the-answer-is-more-secularism-not-multiculturalism/

  9. Brummie says:

    @ Broga
    It would be good to see Alan Turing portrayed on British banknotes. True recognition for his achievements.

  10. sailor1031 says:

    When one sees such examples of islamist thinking about law and society it is depressing to realize how many centuries behind the present these barbarians actually are. There is no common ground and we shouldn’t bother trying to find any.

  11. Broga says:

    @Brummie: Great idea.

  12. David Anderson says:

    Ah, oh so secular India. Can any Indian explain to me why, in your secular country, a person who calls for the murder of another person and offers a reward for doing so is not in prison. Nehru would be so proud of you.

    It seems to me that the two lumps of shit that are your neighbours are infecting your minds.

    @Brummie: Thirded.

  13. Albert Yome says:

    This toxic ideology is more than a religion, it’s a pathology used by sick, inadequate men, many of whom harbour closeted sexual attractions to young men and boys and who have a deep hatred of women. They’ can’t leave the gays be, as it reminds them of their guilty secret and their deep misogyny and gynophobia leads them to lash out, sometimes literally against the female gender.

  14. Trevor Blake says:

    In the USA today there is a tempest in a teapot about a man on the television show ‘Duck Dynasty’ who said homosexuality was unappealing and sinful, but he left it to individuals to make their choices in life. How much easier it is to protest this man who has harmed no one and will harm no one instead of Muslim murder of minorities. There is religious oppression of homosexuals in the world, and in comparing mean words to being set on fire or stoned it is not morally vague where atheist / secular / legal rights work should go. Let’s drag the Muslim world into the 19th Century, give them a breather, then on to the 21st.

  15. Broga says:

    @Trevor Blake: What we really need is the media time handed to the religious to be matched by the time given to those who hold secular views. And similar time and people in the House of Lords to that of the bishops. And why not? Common sense and reason given an even playing field to fantasy and superstition.

  16. 1859 says:

    As an experiment I think one or many of these fatwa mullahs should be given a heap of time on TV or radio, because, let’s face it, will they really make converts? What is much more likely to happen is that their medieval, abhorrent views will be seen for what they are and the public’s backlash may well be worth it. Somehow denying these religious freaks air-time tends to make them even more provocative and apoplectic. Whereas if they receive a constant barrage of scorn, derision and open-minded common sense from the public…perhaps (?) there’s a slim chance they will re-think their ways?

  17. 1859 says:

    re last post: Sorry was in a rush. The sort of ‘air-time’ I was thinking about is a platform that would allow the immam’s views and opinions to be challenged, analysed and criticised by a secular, or even a non-secular audience. The more the infantile fictions and cruel absurdities of islam, or any religion are exposed, I feel the more people will turn away and make rational choices. Though, I will be the first to admit, that I may be placing more hope in humanity’s rational capacities than is warranted. Hey ho!