News

New blasphemy case accents Islam’s passion for slaughter

New blasphemy case accents Islam’s passion for slaughter

Two Christians and a Muslim have been sentenced to death for blasphemy in Pakistan.

Anjam Naz and Javed Naz, both Christians, and Jafar Ali, a Muslim, were found guilty of  insulting the ‘prophet’ Mohammed by the Anti-Terrorism Court in Gujranwala, Punjab province, and were also sentenced to 35 years in prison.

According to this report, the three were found to have insulted the “prophet” in an audio recording.

Said Mohammad Tanveer a senior police official:

When police arrested Javed and Jafar on May 15, they recovered an audio recording of Anjam committing blasphemy.

We also recovered the recorded audio from Jafar’s possession and found that he and Javed were blackmailing Anjam by threatening to release the audio to the public if he did not pay them.

Tanveer. added:

They will now be permitted to appeal the verdict before a higher court.

Sentences such as these, one would imagine, would horrify normal, non-extremists Muslims. But they don’t.

Click on pic for video and report

Click on pic for video and report

At a recent Islamic conference, a hall full of Muslims who identified themselves as normal and non-radical overwhelmingly agreed with the unnamed speaker above that death sentences and stoning are the best possible punishments for what are perceived as breaches of laws laid down by “Allah and his messenger”.

Incidentally, the BBC this week posed this question:

Do you believe the world would be more peaceful without religion?

At the time of posting, this was the result of its poll:

BBC-poll

Hat tip: BarrieJohn (Pakistan report)

25 responses to “New blasphemy case accents Islam’s passion for slaughter”

  1. CoastalMaineBird says:

    Do you believe the world would be more peaceful without YOUR religion?

    ( ) Yes
    ( ) No

    Do you believe the world would be more peaceful without ALL OTHER religions except yours?

    ( ) Yes
    ( ) No

  2. CoastalMaineBird says:

    I like that 87%-13%. But I don’t know how many votes that is. It could be 7-1.

    It didn’t change when I voted.

  3. Broga says:

    How would these religion produced criminals feel about the suggestion of beheading all those who believe in Islam? Just as sensible or nonsensical.

  4. L.Long says:

    There may be a lot of USA/UK/Europe muslins who say the ‘normal’ muslins should not be violent by the rules of the book o’BS, also know that if they tried anything they would be thrown in jail or worse!!! So their saying ‘don’t be violent’ does not mean much! And from this posting their are a lot of the muslins that say it is OK to kill, but we wont!
    When you look at one cult of anything that says XXX and another cult that says YYY, and they are exact opposites, and their books o’BS all say HATE!!! Then you know why I don’t trust any group of them bigger then 1!!

  5. remigius says:

    CoastalMaineBird,

    If the tally stood at 87%-13%, and didn’t change when you voted, then more than 8 people participated.

  6. pinecone says:

    Yesterday I posted on this site a reference to a BBC article about a bunch of unctuous muslims in the uk who are going around saying that there are ignorant people who don’t understand islam.
    Well I understand islam perfectly well because every day the news outlets are riddled with as many examples of atrocities committed by muslims as there were bullet riddled bodies at Istanbul Airport yesterday.

    Make no mistake, the footsoldiers of islam are encamped in a town near you right now, and reinforcements are arriving daily. Just wait until they outbreed the non muslim population and then the true purpose of islam will be unleashed. Those pleading victimhood and seeking protection now will impose their will by violence on a scale we currently associate with iraq, syria, afghanistan and all the other failed states infected by this pernicious, dangerous and evil death cult.

  7. H3r3tic says:

    If you think that blasphemy laws are somehow related to other, more religious countries, you need to consider the kind of things that MPs like Keith Vaz came out with not so long ago. If he can build a consensus with the Christian MPs we should all be concerned.http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2015/11/labour-mp-keith-vaz-would-have-no-problem-with-reintroduction-uk-blasphemy-laws

  8. pinecone says:

    Vaz is one of the millions of muslim termites in western countries nibbling away at the edfices of civilisation and law and order in a determined effort to inflict and enforce islam where it is not wanted. If I said its time to call in rentokill I would be severely admonished. But is my sentiment really as bad as the actions of murderous butchers who do actually behead and hack to death those who ‘insult’ the prophet? And by the way any truthful observation about the prophet will be considered to be an insult by the hoardes of stupefied followers who will, shriek and scream and threaten and wilfully whip themselves into a petulant fury of confected outrage. Islam – by any measure beggars those it infects. How many muslims have won a nobel prize for example.

  9. remigius says:

    pinecone,

    Referring to muslims as termites is not helpful.

    The very act of dehumanising a people can lead to the justification of atrocities directed towards them. They are humans – misguided humans, but human nonetheless.

    Oh, and 12 muslims have won Nobel prizes out of a total of over 800 awarded.

  10. CoastalMaineBird says:

    remigius,

    “If the tally stood at 87%-13%, and didn’t change when you voted, then more than 8 people participated.”

    Or, they didn’t allow my vote because it was from outside Britain.

    Or they quit counting because they didn’t like the result.

    It hasn’t changed in 3 hours.

    I realize that such polls are highly unscientific, but if it was anywhere near true in the general population, religion would die.

  11. remigius says:

    CoastalMaineBird,

    Yes, any one of those scenarios is theoretically possible, but Occam’s razor would suggest that more than 8 people participated.

  12. Matthew Carr says:

    It appears that it is a matter of faith that being beheaded changes one’s mind. Perhaps that is not the true belief but I would think that making it appear to be so would indicate your opinion is worthless.

  13. H3r3tic says:

    @pinecone – “is my sentiment really as bad as the actions of murderous butchers who do actually behead and hack to death those who ‘insult’ the prophet?” To my way of thinking the answer is clearly yes, because you suggest killing people who disagree with your point of view. This is poor way of proving your point. Much as I abhor the perversions of fundamentalist Islamists, in the same way that I consider creationists to be a couple of aces short of a full deck, to suggest “its time to call in rentokill” is, to my mind, a gross over-reaction. Perhaps you will be able to point to my foolishness when Sharia law is implemented in the UK, or perhaps the prevailing UK attitudes of tolerance, humanism and general apathy towards religion as a whole will prevail.

  14. DMedd says:

    Sentences of death and 35 years in prison seem to be mutually exclusive,or does religious (il)logic say that Allah (peebum) makes this possible? After 35 years in a Pakistani prison,they’d likely be dead anyway, and if after execution,is imprisonment supposed to equate to sending them to hell?

  15. Trevor Blake says:

    Pakistan – the nation where Osama Bin Laden hid, and which some say hid him.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_support_system_in_Pakistan_for_Osama_bin_Laden

    What must a nation do to be shunned by other nations? Boycotts are credited with being a major part of ending apartheid in South Africa. Perhaps this peaceful means could be used to isolate and pressure Muslim nations.

  16. Paul says:

    I find it so sad that people want to kill anyone for saying – the “prophet” you cannot prove existed, nor the things he said were said, and may have lived and said those things some 1500 years ago. 1500 years ago. It’s insanity to keep holding onto this system.
    It’s so incredibly dangerous for secularism that the power of belief overwhelms so many people who would otherwise be probably decent people if only they didn’t have this insane belief.

  17. Angela_K says:

    Here we have the central problem of all religions, they know they cannot defend their religion because they have no case to answer; they are incapable of debate nor want debate less it makes them doubt their beliefs, so shout down any opponents or in Islam’s case: murder.

  18. pinecone says:

    To those who reacted badly to my point. I wrote IF. I chose my words carefully … “If I said its time to call in rentokill..”…With islamists there is no IF … they really actually do commit atrocities whereas I just speculated what would happen if I made an inflamatory comment. So I think my point is made. Please read carefully before you react.

    On and there is such a thing as freedom of speech. I used the term termites. Just an analogy … I think its a good one too. But islamists actually use violence … brutal deadly violence … civilised people use words. And termite is a perfectly good word to use in order to make the point about the deliberate erosion of the ideals of the civilised west by islamists. Oh yes and I robbed the analogy from Christopher Hitchens … who I think got most things right.

  19. remigius says:

    pinecone,

    I am well aware of Christopher Hitchens ‘termite’ speech. However he wasn’t calling muslims termites (as you did).

    He was referring to the intellectual and moral dishonesty of those western liberals/leftists who blame all of the worlds ills on western foreign policy rather than directing it at theocratic ideologies.

  20. barriejohn says:

    Remigius: I don’t really agree with THAT statement of Hitchens either (nor his support for the Iraq war), because it’s not an either/or situation. Theocratic ideologies are abhorrent, but have far more influence in the Middle East because of the history of western interference there. After all, the Iranians were really grateful to us for imposing the Shah of Iran on them!

  21. pinecone says:

    Yes I know what CH was saying. But be careful because you are implying its ok to call one group termites but not another group. Where is the consistency in that. You sound like one of the termites to which CH was referring.
    Remember, I, as do you, have the right to say as I feel.
    Civilised people say what they think … others commit atrocities without thinking.

  22. pinecone says:

    Islam – this is what we get when we let the shitehawks of islam have one inch of rope.
    http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-boston-qaeda-idUKKCN0ZH4TD
    Be in no doubt that islam wants a fight to the death. They will not rest until they have caused as much damage and hate as possible. The answer is obvious.

  23. remigius says:

    pinecone,

    How the hell have I implied “its ok to call one group termites but not another group”. If anything I implied the exact opposite. I offered my opinion that it is wrong to dehumanise – that would apply to all humans. Show me where I say it is OK to dehumanise one group but not another.

    “Where is the consistency in that. You sound like one of the termites to which CH was referring.” You said muslims were termites – and when challenged you suggested you had “robbed the analogy from Christopher Hitchens”.

    You hadn’t – cos he had never said muslims were termites, he was referring to liberal political correctness. And how does anything I have said in this thread suggest I am a liberal lefty? You could not be more wrong.

    “Civilised people say what they think…” Yes, we have heard what you think as well. You think muslims are termites. You hold the sentiment that “its time to call in rentokill”, but recognise that expressing the sentiment you hold would lead to rebuke.

    You state “Vaz is one of the millions of muslim termites…” and then go on to mention Rentokill. Keith Vaz is a Labour MP. You may not be aware that another Labour MP was recently murdered by a constituent who holds views not too dissimilar to yours. When I read what you had written I couldn’t decide whether you were just ignorant, or being deliberately inflammatory.

    However, in your reply to H3r3tic et al (above) – who also took issue with your expressed sentiment – you stated that you chose those words carefully. So I can only conclude you meant it.

    You have put forward views that are both offensive and threatening, and when challenged you resort to deceit.

    Even your initial presumption is wrong – Keith Vaz is not a muslim. He is a Roman Catholic.

  24. Cali Ron says:

    pinecone : When your rhetoric sounds the same as those whom you are attacking it becomes difficult to tell the two apart. Using an “if I ” in front is as dishonest as when someone says “I’m not a racist, but ” and then proceeds to make a racist statement. My impression from your comment was that you would condone killing Muslims for being Muslim and you wanted us to know that. Say what you really mean and own it or be prepared to be called on your intellectual dishonesty.

  25. John says:

    I believe Keith Vaz is a consumer of the Church of Rome.
    This means that if he says he supports the introduction of sharia law in Britain he is saying it largely for the political purpose of getting himself re-elected in a parliamentary constituency with a large Muslim population.
    This makes him a “useful idiot” for Islamic extremism and a light-green fellow-traveller of Salafism.
    Of course, nothing of what he says is at all genuine.
    That is just the way he is.