Sunday, 30 June 2013

Oh James...

James White claims he knew Arabic on FaceBook:
James White appealing to some dodgy guy on the internet when rebuked:

Bassim Gorial called to apologise

Debate: Was Muhammad a True Prophet? Osama Abdallah v Sam Shamoun (Review) by Yahya Snow

I feel compelled to write on the debate between Osama Abdallah and Sam Shamoun on the topic of whether Prophet Muhammad (p) was a Prophet.

Constructive criticism of Osama Abdallah

Before the debate review, some constructive criticism for Osama Abdallah in order to help Osama Abdallah in the future.

Sam Shamoun is a dishonest and obnoxious man who is considered unworthy of debate – the man is a true disaster in Christian apologetics. By debating such a person one ends up appearing to be ‘legitimizing’ and allowing his insults, deceptions and general craziness to be swept under the rug. Mainstream Muslim speakers do not consider Shamoun with any regard. The man has some serious issues of dishonesty hatred towards Muslims and immorality as highlighted in the Sam Shamoun section here:

I cannot agree with Osama’s decision to share a platform with Shamoun. Why feed the trolls? Why help resuscitate his dead apologetics career? Why allow his unchecked insults and blasphemies go unpunished? This is a man who trolls comment sections and abuses Muslims in his attempts to arrange a debates.

Osama, from my understanding had FOUR DEBATES against FOUR different opponents in TWO days

This is a ridiculous amount of responsibility to take on. I actually criticise Osama for taking on such a work load. Why he did so I am not sure. It certainly is not wise and nor beneficial to oneself or the audience. How does he expect to do each topic justice with his attention diverted 4 ways? This is not a game – it’s serious business.

You can’t offer the same clarity, quality information and quality argumentation in each debate as you would if you focussed on one debate like each one of his opponents (Sam Shamoun, Anthony Rogers, Dr Edward Dalcour and Louis Lionheart).

Osama was had – either he was duped or he made a humongous error in judgement and his opponents rubbed their hands with glee. The ‘Center for Religious Debate’ must have been licking their chops with anticipation of the lone ‘sheep’ that was going to be hunted by for of their ‘wolves’ The interesting thing here is, as you will see in the review below, his opponent could not make any real inroads due to an absence of genuine and consistent argumentation.

Osama’s performance in many ways reflected this four-fold dilution despite making numerous good points he lacked flow, organisation of thoughts, coherence (at times), research, planning, structure and decorum (at times). This is not doing the Muslim community justice at all.

The organisation of the debate was shoddy. It seemed as though they were forming the debate format whilst debating. Osama close to the end just became less professional and less controlled – it actually became a farce. I guess the stress of having to do 4 debates in 4 days with 4 different opponents was getting to him. I also think Osama’s lack of preparation added to his frustrations which led to his inability to maintain an acceptable level of restraint.

Muslim argumentation is so much stronger than Christian argumentation and much of the leg work has actually been done for you by the likes of Dr Shabir Ally. For a Muslim debater it’s essentially just a matter of turning up ORGANISED and PREPARED. Have an opening statement penned. For me there is no excuse for a Muslim debater not to be fluent in his OS. No excuse at all. Pen it and practice it. Then turn up and deliver it.

Debate Review: Osama Abdallah v Sam Shamoun on ‘Was Muhammad a True Prophet?’

Osama used the Bible to convince his audience of the Prophethood of Muhammad. This is fair enough and makes sense as I believe his immediate audience was primarily consisting of Christians. However Osama spent too long on this line of argumentation, in fact most if not all his presentation was based on this line of argumentation which for me was an unwise move on the part of Osama.

It’s easy to argue for the Prophethood of Muhammad (p) as here is a man (p) who called people back to Abrahamic monotheism, performed miracles, confirmed the previous Prophets (p) including Jesus and significantly he came with a Book (the Quran) from God which contains historical, numerical and scientific miracles.

Scientific facts in the Quran (by Abdur-Raheem Green):

Historical Facts in the Quran:

Mathematical miracles in the Quran (Dr Shabir Ally):

Those around the Prophet are actually powerful witnesses as here we have thousands of people who met him (many of whom knew him well) were so convinced of the Prophethood of Muhammad (p) which was revealed to the Prophet that they were willing to die for such beliefs. This is a powerful witness for those who want to reflect.

The fruits of what was revealed to Prophet Muhammad have actually defended Mary (may Allah bless her further) against false allegations and have the lowest amount of sex outside of marriage (fornication and adultery) –  a recent study has shown that Muslims have the least sex outside of marriage out of all the world’s major religions:


Aside from producing a group of people who are better behaved sexually than any other group we can also see Muslims are famous for not drinking alcohol. Medical professionals would applaud this as alcohol is a risk factor for cancer amongst other ailments of the health - sincere Christians would also appreciate this in the light of the following verses in their Bible:
“Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging; and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise.” [Book of Proverbs 20:1]
“And be not drunk with wine”. [Book of Ephesians 5:18]

Islam brings back the teachings of covering your head (a teaching which is forgotten by many Christian women), keeping a beard for the man and worshipping God alone through prostrations (the manner in which Jesus worshipped God).

Osama would have made better use of his time if he truncated the arguments from the Bible and added a standard presentation to his Biblical arguments – similar to the accumulative type which Dr Shabir Ally or an iERA speaker would present.

Sam Shamoun throws the Bible behind his back

Sam Shamoun had no genuine or consistent argumentation. Shamoun focuses on 2 or three small incidents in the life of Prophet Muhammad (p) and presented his own narrative to argue against the character of Prophet Muhammad (p). In the process he threw the Bible behind his back. His desperation to argue against the Prophethood led him to such an inconsistent and disingenuous level of argumentation.

If he can accept Moses (who according to Exodus 32 passed on the command from God to kill roughly 3000 men plus according to Numbers 31 it shows Moses giving the instruction to kill boys and women) , David (who according to the 2 Samuel 11 committed adultery), Lot (who according to the Genesis was involved in incest unknowingly) and Solomon (who according to the1 Kings 11 had 700 wives and 300 concubines – the same reference also says he was led astray by his wives) as Prophets then he would be hypocritical to argue against Prophet Muhammad in such a way.

Shamoun presented the same tired and already-refuted argument of ‘special privileges’ for Prophet Muhammad (p). Shamoun tries to make out that the Prophet Muhammad was using the religion as a self-serving vehicle. This again is another argument which lacks thought. Theres an account where Umar ibn AlKhattab was weeping upon seeing the austere way Prophet Muhammad lived. He did not live in luxury. Surely if you were a man who was misusing a religion to gain special privileges you would not live in such austerity. Here is an article by Bassam Zawadi to aid people’s understanding further:

The pagans, upon seeing the followers of Prophet Muhammad (p) increasing, they offered him wealth and power to the extent of him becoming the richest amongst them and a king – Prophet Muhammad declined and stood fast to Islam. So Shamoun’s self-serving argumentation is just  illogical, old, boring and oft refuted.

The problem with Sam Shamoun is his hatred and pride leave his ability to think logically clouded hence arguments of this calibre. In fact Shamoun or anybody else for that matter does not need copious research to realise the invalidity of the ‘self-serving’ argument as numerous people who were staunch believers and contemporaries of Prophet Muhammad – people who knew him well –risked their lives and some actually lost their lives for the religion revealed to the Prophet. People don’t risk or lose their lives if they believe the founder is solely in it for himself. Here is a short article by Sami Zaatari to aid people’s understanding further:

Shamoun throws his Bible aside in order to argue against what he deems 'irrational teachings from ahadith'
Shamoun then proceeded with an inconsistent (hypocritical) line of argumentation which he deemed to be ‘irrational teachings’ of Prophet Muhammad (p). An example here is Shamoun’s criticism of Adam’s height being 60 cubits.

On what basis can Shamoun as a supposed Bible-believing Christian criticise this? Shamoun actually believes in giants as the Bible mentions them (Genesis 6). So what is Shamoun’s problem? Clearly a desire to grab any absurdly inconsistent (hypocritical) argument and throw it out there!

It highlights the lack of argumentation he has. In fact Osama Abdallah actually presented science to show that the inhabitants of earth were bigger in the early history of the earth – hence the size of dinoaurs. However, I don’t think Osama needed to even go to such an extent with Shamoun’s argumentation as Shamoun believes angels had intercourse with humans (women) and the offspring were giants. Thus his Bible is indicating heavenly bodies are actually bigger!

Another example here is his criticism of the Muslim belief that Satan urinates. Shamoun believes this is irrational as he believes Satan is a spiritual being so does not urinate. Erm says who? Has Shamoun met Satan and followed him around to check if he urinates or has bowel movements? Why is Shamoun trying to make Satan out to be cleaner than human beings?

The elephantine portion of inconsistency (hypocrisy) of his argument is highlighted as angels (genuine spiritual beings) are believed (by Paul and other Trinitarian Christians such as Shamoun) to have sex and lust:

So why is Sam Shamoun objecting to Satan urinating whilst Paul was believing that angels have sex with humans and lust after Christian women who don’t cover their heads?

Looks like Shamoun is defending Satan and attacking angels all in order to present a case against the Prophethood of Muhammad (p). Bizarre!

Shamoun wastes time by making much hoohaa over ‘satan in your nose’. It seems as though Shamoun just plucked this argument from some tacky anti-Muslim flyer and just ran with it in the debate.

Again, Shamoun throws his Bible behind his back just to leach on to any argument against Islam:

He must have read his own Bible which has dozens of statements about Satan entering the bodies and bellies of people. The Gospel of John says that after Judas ate food from Jesus’ own hand, “Satan entered into him.” (John 13:27) So if after eating food from Jesus’ hand one could not be safe from Satan, what is surprising if an ordinary person has Satan near his nose during the night? [Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi]

Did Shamoun even stop to bother to check if his anti-Muslim flyer style argument had already been discussed by scholars? Shamoun, would do well to read the following by Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi:

Muslim scholars explain that the nose is one of the ways to one’s mind and thoughts. Satan tries to put his ideas and suggestions into the mind of a person during his sleep as well. The best cure is that after waking up one should clean one’s nose, make ablution for Prayers and seek God’s protection. Some other scholars say that Satan is a symbol of everything bad and evil. Through this symbolism the Prophet was warning the people to be conscious about the cleanliness of their bodies. In the hot and dry climate, the nose does become stuffy during the night. One feels like the devil was in the nose. This was the Prophetic way to tell the people to keep themselves clean and make ablution as soon as they get up.

All Semitic languages, and especially Arabic, are full of metaphors and hyperboles. Jesus (peace and blessings be upon him) used to speak in parables; similarly, Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) used to instruct his people sometimes in a metaphorical and symbolic language. It is reported that Jesus (peace and blessings be upon him) supposedly said, “Do not give dogs what is holy; and do not throw your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under foot and turn to attack you.” (Matthew 7:6) These words fit very well on those who do not try to understand the Prophetic pearls and holy language. The author of this flyer should pay attention to these words of Jesus."

I would also ask Shamoun to look at this video as this Christian is being ridiculed by for believing in talking animals (snake and donkey) as he believes in the Bible. Shamoun tossed the Bible behind his back  and resembled the man mocking the poor Christian in the video whilst presenting  his argument against food praising God. Why is Shamoun arguing like an atheist? Simple, he feels he has to throw his Bible behind his back in order to argue against Islam. God can make whatever He wills talk – serious Christians and Muslims know this. Here is the video:

In sum Shamoun’s argumentations against selected ahadith were actually hypocritical as he once again threw the Bible behind his back just to scrape some silly arguments from the bottom of the barrel to use in some internet debate against the Prophethood of Muhammad (p). What a sad man.

Shamoun bangs on about slave girls – he even claims rape took place. Erm the Islamic sources are vast, there’s no record of rape and Islam does not allow rape of slave girls or anybody else. Here is an article by Bassam Zawadi to aid people’s understanding further on slave girls and the rape allegation:

Shamoun also makes a big deal out of Mut’ah. He forgets Islam did not come down all at once. It was revealed over a period of 23 years so the prohibition is not necessarily immediate – this is the same for alcohol there was no prohibition of alcohol initially. Article on Muta being forbidden in Islam by Sami Zaatari:

Shamoun throws honesty and commonsense out of the window

We’ve seen Shamoun is so entrenched in his hatred of Islam that he throws consistency and his Bible behind his back but here he just lost all control and decided to throw honesty and common sense out of the window.

Shamoun just literally started to make stuff up. He claimed Aisha was prepubescent when her marriage was consummated. What a liar. Even this ignoramus would know that scholarly consensus is that Aisha had attained puberty. The marriage between Prophet Muhammad and Aisha was similar to the practice which Jews practiced (even at the time of Jesus). See here for the scholarship of Jesus scholar, Geza Vermes, on this subject (it beats listening to Shamoun's lies):
Shamoun lied further by claiming the Quran allows sex with prepubescent girls. Another blatant lie which goes against scholarly consensus and common sense - who are you going to believe scholarly consensus or an anti-Muslim bloke on the internet who is making crazy claims?

Which lie is Shamoun going to regurgitate next? The ‘thighing’ lie? See here:


Osama Abdallah was unprepared, lacked composure and wrongly chose to go almost exclusively with arguments of Biblical prophecies of Prophet Muhammad (p). He did not even present half of the standard material that non-Muslims should be made aware of when discussing the Prophethood of Muhammad (p). 40 minutes for an OP should be used better. When you are arguing for the affirmative then the OP becomes even more important as you need to present more material than your opponent. Osama should have made better use of his 40 mins.

Sam Shamoun was dishonest, disingenuous and inconsistent to the extent of throwing his own Bible behind his back. The baulk of Shamoun’s presentation was inconsistent as he simply threw the Bible behind his back to make way for emotional arguments against the Prophethood of Muhammad (p). This speaks volumes of Shamoun’s demeanour – he is motivated out of pride and a misguided hatred for Islam rather than from a stance of BIBLICAL evangelism.

Again, I point Shamoun to his own Bible and ask him how he can accept the Prophethood of Moses, David, Solomon and Lot (in the light of respective Biblical stories highlighted earlier in this review) yet reject the clear Prophethood of Muhammad and present hypocritical arguments against him? Is it due to hatred and pride?

His inconsistent (hypocritical) and illogical arguments are one thing but his outright lying is another. Please can we send Shamoun back to the debate-blacklist. The man is an embarrassment to Christian apologetics.

Now you see why educated Christians would not value Shamoun’s argumentation.

Education and consistency is a good thing, Mr Shamoun. Try it some day.

Do I recommend this debate? No. It has little benefit. There’s plenty of other presentations out there that are of greater benefit to the truth-seeker and the researcher.

Doubtless, this debate will be viewed by cheerleaders who just want a bit of entertainment. Debates on such topics are not games. This is serious stuff.

If you want to learn about Muslim arguments for the Prophethood of Muhammad here is a presentation from Dr Shabir Ally:


Comment on the Hadith about Satan staying in the nose at night

Does Satan Stay in your Nose Overnight?
The question was forwarded to, Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi, former President of the Islamic Society of North America and Director of the Islamic Society of Orange County, Garden Grove, California. He states the following:

"The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is reported to have said, “When any of you wakes up from his sleep and makes ablution, let him clean his nose three times, because Satan stays at night at the upper part of his nose.” (Al-Bukhari)

We have forwarded your question to, Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi, former President of the Islamic Society of North America and Director of the Islamic Society of Orange County, Garden Grove, California. He states the following:

"The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is reported to have said, “When any of you wakes up from his sleep and makes ablution, let him clean his nose three times, because Satan stays at night at the upper part of his nose.” (Al-Bukhari)

The author of this flyer ridicules this hadith. He considers this one of the “foolish and false statements” of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).

He must have read his own Bible which has dozens of statements about Satan entering the bodies and bellies of people. The Gospel of John says that after Judas ate food from Jesus’ own hand, “Satan entered into him.” (John 13:27) So if after eating food from Jesus’ hand one could not be safe from Satan, what is surprising if an ordinary person has Satan near his nose during the night?

Muslim scholars explain that the nose is one of the ways to one’s mind and thoughts. Satan tries to put his ideas and suggestions into the mind of a person during his sleep as well. The best cure is that after waking up one should clean one’s nose, make ablution for Prayers and seek God’s protection. Some other scholars say that Satan is a symbol of everything bad and evil. Through this symbolism the Prophet was warning the people to be conscious about the cleanliness of their bodies. In the hot and dry climate, the nose does become stuffy during the night. One feels like the devil was in the nose. This was the Prophetic way to tell the people to keep themselves clean and make ablution as soon as they get up.

All Semitic languages, and especially Arabic, are full of metaphors and hyperboles. Jesus (peace and blessings be upon him) used to speak in parables; similarly, Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) used to instruct his people sometimes in a metaphorical and symbolic language. It is reported that Jesus (peace and blessings be upon him) supposedly said, “Do not give dogs what is holy; and do not throw your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under foot and turn to attack you.” (Matthew 7:6) These words fit very well on those who do not try to understand the Prophetic pearls and holy language. The author of this flyer should pay attention to these words of Jesus."


Clarification: Sperm Production and the Quran

Some Christians claim that the Quran has a scientific error in it regarding sperm production
 This is incorrect

The critic focuses on the verses 86:6-7, especially verse 7 as this is where their contention is directed. The critic claims the Quran (86:7) is telling us that semen is produced between the backbone (sulb) and the ribs (tara’ib). The Arabic words mentioned by the Quran are sulb and tara’ib. Tara’ib is thought to mean ribs, though there is some dispute. However, the chief point of interest is the word sulb. Sulb  can be translated as ‘loins’ or ‘backbone’ or ‘lower back’.

The critic favours the translations which use the word ‘backbone’ as they use it to attack the Quran by claiming the Quran teaches that semen is produced between the backbone (sulb) and the ribs (tara’ib).

However, the critic is very selective in deciding which translation to use as he/she avoids the numerous translations which translate ‘sulb’ as ‘loins’. They avoid these translations as they scupper their critical claims straight away as loins. Here, the word loins refers to:

a. The region of the hips, groin, and lower abdomen.
b. The reproductive organs. [1]

So the critic refrains from using this translation for the word sulb as it is clearly scientifically accurate, ie the semen is produced in the are between the loins and ribs. So, if we translate the Quran (86:7) this way there is no contention.

The misleading methodology of the critic is to avoid mention of the numerous translations which translate the word sulb as loins.Not only do they avoid mentioning the numerous translations using the word ‘loins’ they highlight translations which use the word ‘backbone’.

This is rather deceptive, especially considering a number of non-Muslim translators, including a Christian translator, translates it as ‘loins’ ( A.J Arberry, George Sale, J.M Rodwell and Henry E Palmer) as well as a number of Muslim translators who also use the word loins (Hamid S Aziz, Muhammad M Ghali, Muhammad M Pickthall and Mohammad Asad) [4]. It is unscholarly as well as misleading on the part of the critic not to mention this important fact.

However, the critic does use Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s translation which translates it as ‘backbone’, therefore rendering a meaning of between the backbone and ribs. So the critic understands the Quran as teaching us that semen is produced between the backbone and ribs. In the way of intellectual honesty I do not want the reader to believe that only Abdullah Yusuf Ali translates this verse by using the word ‘backbone’, Shakir and Khan/Hilali also do this. The question still remains; which word should be used in the translation?

 Well, the critic does not tell you that Dr Edward William Lane’s Lexicon indicates the word sulb’ to mean ‘loins’ and even refers to the verse in question (86:7) as referring to the ‘loins’. So it does seem that the more accurate translation of this would be “between the loins and the ribs” as opposed to “between the backbone and the ribs” [4]. Hence the critic uses the weaker translation.

However, even if we assume the critic to be correct and take the translation; “between the backbone and the ribs” we still see no scientific error. The critic assumes that the ejaculate (semen) emanates from the testes, this is incorrect.  Sperm is produced in the testes and is then transfered to the seminal vesicles awaiting ejaculation, this accounts for 5 % of the ejaculate, the rest of the ejaculate comes from the seminal vesicles (46-80%),with the prostate gland and the bulbourethral and urethral glands producing the rest of the ejaculate [2]. At the time of ejaculation, all this (semen, which contains the sperm) is released

From the seminal vesicles which are in fact between the backbone (coccyx, lower back) and the ribs! So if we run with the translation of the critics we see something that people would describe as a scientific miracle and not a scientific error.

Osama Abdallah says the same thing but goes into a little more detail (bracketing is mine):
 “If one was to insist upon the literal meaning (the translation favoured by the critics), one would still find that the Quran is 100% correct literally, too.  The seminal vesicles are anterior to the sacrum and coccyx (lower back, loin) and the ribs are anterior to the seminal vesicles. If one was to draw a line from the tip of the coccyx, to the upper portion of the seminal vesicle _ either one of the two_ and extend the line forward it will catch the ribcage.The seminal vesicles from which the semen spurts out during coitus, lies between the ribs and the coccyx (backbone)!” [3]

The irony is that the critics accuse the Quran of making a scientific error yet the error is on their part as they only believe it to be an error as they wrongly believe semen emanates from the testes, while in fact in emanates from the seminal vesicles which are in between the backbone and the ribs! So now we all know the critics are being unfair, unscholarly and misleading when they claim the Quran (86:6-7) tells us that semen is produced in the kidneys etc.

May Allah guide us all to further Truth. Ameen.

 Further reading:

This short article lent very heavily on Fotfoundation’s video presentation on this subject. This two part video presentation (in my view) is the best explanation of this subject and most in depth (all praise is due to Allah) so if the reader wishes to study further then please view:

Part 1 by Fotfoundation
Part 2 by Fotfoundation

Other further readings:

      4. Part 1 by Fotfoundation:
          Part 2 by Fotfoundation


Sleaze on ABN: Dr Bassim Gorial Called to Public Apology and Repentance (James White called to clean up the ministries)

Bassim and Haifa Gorial are asked to publicly apologise and also (privately or publicly) repent concerning the sleaze and adult nature of one of their programs featuring C.L Edwards, Sam  Shamoun and David Wood.

The program was deeply offensive and  inappropriate especially considering women and children have access to view such a program. It's not one expects from a supposedly Christian TV show. It was not suitable for family viewing and the lewd and immature comments/manners of the presenters were reprehensible.

Would Dr Bassim Gorial be happy if one of his daughters or his wife made such lewd and sleazy comments? Would he allow his youngest daughter to view the material or even hang out with David Wood, Sam Shamoun or C.L Edwards?

No religious person would accept such behaviour. Then why is such a program still available for viewing? Why are those 'presenters' of the program not rebuked and asked to publicly apologise?

In this video you will find statements of an adult and sleazy nature from 3 ABN presenters

If video does not play, please see:

C.L. Edwards asked to apologize C.L is your sleaziness a product of the anti-Muslim Christian company/colleagues you have chosen to keep? I bet you were never speaking like that in front of Muslims when you were hanging with Muslims.

C.L Edwards, I invite you to repent and become a Muslim. Please realise I am condemning your actions, mannerisms and the company you keep - not you as a soul. Feel free to email me:

Christian women should cover their heads - Paul

Muslims have least sex outside of marriage Email:

Saturday, 29 June 2013

CL Edwards Calling Muslims: Public Repentance Sought (Call Dr White)

I am officially asking for C.L. Edwards to publicly repent for his sleazy behaviour on Bassim Gorial's Christian Satellite TV channel. C.L. Edwards is asked to apologise to Muslims, apologise to Bassim and Haifa Gorial as well as to the Christian viewers who he made feel uncomfortable with his sleazy remarks.

It's bizarre that this man is calling Muslims to Christianity yet is unable to refrain from making sleazy remarks whilst on camera.

C.L is your sleaziness a product of the anti-Muslim Christian company/colleagues you have chosen to keep? I bet you were never speaking like that in front of Muslims when you were hanging with Muslims.

C.L Edwards, I invite you to repent and become a Muslim. Please realise I am condemning your actions, mannerisms and the company you keep - not you as a soul.
 Feel free to email

C.L if you are unsure about which lewd comments this post refers to, please see:

Christian women should cover their heads - Paul

Muslims have least sex outside of marriage

Muslims Condemn Sexual Grooming of Girls in the UK

Sexual Grooming of Children - Alyas Karmani

In the last couple of years Muslims in the UK have been blamed by the media for "sexual grooming of children" Although the majority of people convicted of this crime were non-Muslims. Muslims are the only ones being mentioned in the news as ("MUSLIM" Men Sexual Grooming Girls). Today the Muslims all across the UK came together and jointly condemned child sex grooming and what Islam has to say about this. Powerful message sent out by brother Alyas Karmani to the media the world and all those involved in this crime against these children.

Below is a article taken from the BBC News website.

The sexual grooming of children is expected to be condemned by Muslim leaders across the UK later in a sermon to be read to thousands of worshippers.

Imams at about 500 mosques are expected to read the sermon to congregations during Friday prayers, said organisers Together Against Grooming (TAG).

The sermon will highlight how the Koran emphasises that Muslims must protect children and the vulnerable, said TAG.

The policing minister Damian Green said it was a "very important" move.

"It reminds people that the vast majority, the overwhelming majority, of British Muslims, condemn child sexual abuse as strongly as any other group in modern Britain," he said.

Muslim religious leaders to condemn child sex grooming

Read on:

Christian Head Coverings Stops Sexual Sin - According to Paul

Dress code for Christian females
Muslim women and Christian women united by the HIJAB!!

We know Paul was an advocate of the Hijab (head covering) to the extent of essentially forcing Christian women to wear the Hijab by offering the ultimatum of chopping off their locks (hair) or wearing the Hijab, but we are not sure why Paul was so in favour of the Hijab.

The Jesus scholar,Geza Vermes, offers some insight concerning our difficulty and his theorizing is interesting to say the least:

The idea of potential sexual rapport between angels and women continued to float in the air even as late as in the New Testament times. Indeed, when St Paul forbade the female members of the church of Corinth to attend Christian assemblies with the head uncovered, he justified this prohibition by his belief that the sight of their hair might lead astray some passing-by sons of heaven: 'That is why a woman ought to have a veil on her head, because of the angels', Paul insisted (1 Cor 11:10). [1]

Christian men tempted by Christian women without hijab?

If Vermes' view concerning Pauls' reasoning is correct one wonders as to the extent early Christians thought hijab-less women as a temptation to sin. After all, if they thought angels could not resist unveiled Christian women then what about the lay Christians? So why in the world are they freely mixing with uncovered Christian women at churches every Sunday? Not only that, what about day to day activities. I cannot ever recall seeing a lay Christian woman in hijab yet I have lived in the Christian West all my life!

Christians need to stop presenting Christianity as secualrism with a belief in a trinity and blood sacrifice. It's not.

Paul ignored by Christian women...

Paul's precautions against sexual sin (the hijab) have largely been ignored by most Christian women.

We would very much encourage Christian women to ignore Paul on his mistakes but act upon the teachings which have a ring of truth and sense to them. The hijab is something Mary wore and something which all women should strive for.

Of course, we as Muslims are not going to accept the idea that angels are tempted to sexual sin. Muslims believe angels do not disobey God.

Christian men...

Why are Christian men so lax in encouraging the Hijab? For some reason, Christians follow Paul theologically to the letter yet ignore him practically as in this case. I'd like to see Christians ignore Paul theologically and adopt Paul's teaching of hijab...

You don't have to believe Paul's alleged reasoning for the hijab, just start handing out hijabs to women who claim to love Jesus (p).

PS You can get all your hijabs from an Islamic centre near you, please pick some literature up on the way out. Thanks. May God bless you.

Invitation to Islam

Do you want a relationship with God? The God who created Jesus and whom was worshipped by Jesus? If yes, please come to Islam today.

[1] The Nativity, Geza Vermes, Penguin Books, 2006, p53


Become a Muslim if you love Jesus (p)

Sexism: Reason to change the Bible

Discover Islam

New Testament Discussed

Thursday, 27 June 2013

Islamophobes (Mis)Using Rape Victims to Attack Muslims

At least one bigot on the internet is using the following story to demonize Muslims. This bigot is actually collecting cash as he disguises his anti-Muslim propaganda as a Christian ministry.

Do these Christian bigots actually stop to think about the victim/s? It's almost as though these people rub their hands with glee whenever they come across a rapist who happens to be Muslims. Most rapists are non-Muslim. For some reason these bigots never highlight the non-Muslim rapists. Desperate evangelism?

Answering Muslims: Here's the story a bigot on the net was misusing:

United Kingdom—Members of a sadistic paedophile ring convicted of grooming vulnerable underage girls for sexual exploitation threatened to decapitate the baby of one of their young victims, a court heard today.

The Old Bailey in central London was also told that one of the Oxford-based sex ring’s victims has considered suicide while another suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of the abuse.

Statements from some of the victims' parents were read out in court ahead of the sentencing of the gang, in which they described how the seven defendants had ruined their daughters' lives.

The court heard the extent of the girls' psychological damage, with one admitting she is prone to depression and self-harming, while another suffers nightmares, panic attacks and flashbacks.

A statement from the mother of that girl said her daughter developed
chronic insomnia and also suffered a minor stroke, believed to have been brought on by the stress of what happened.

She said the family had to leave their home, leading to her daughter receiving a call in which she was threatened with having her face cut off, and relatives having their throat slit and being decapitated.

Muslims have least sex outside of marriage

Age of consent for Christians and Jews Is Puberty?

Prof. Geza Vermes
Earnest inquiry as to the age of Mary at the time of her betrothal (and marriage) to Joseph as well as the virginal conception (and birth) of Jesus (p) is clouded by the revisionist claims of Christian evangelists who are intent on representing a 21st century understanding of such customs. This is another reason why consulting scholarship in any enquiry is of paramount importance. Here we have the Jesus scholar, Professor Geza Vermes, breaking the barriers of evangelical revisionism with proper contextualisation of suchlike.

Christians and Jews: Arranged Marriages

Arranged marriages were the norm within Jewish societies prior to and contemporaneous to Jesus’ time. Thus, scholars like Geza Vermes are led to believe Mary’s betrothal to Joseph would have been arranged by a male relative at a young age.

To begin with betrothal, in Matthew (as in Luke) Joseph and Mary are said to be engaged. To appreciate properly the meaning of betrothal, it is to be remembered that in the Jewish society of the age of Jesus, arranged marriage was the established custom. The betrothal of a young girl was the prerogative of her father. If the father was no longer alive, his place was taken by the girl’s brother or some other male relative. The head of the family negotiated the financial settlement with the groom and his parents. The girl had no say whatever in the matter.

Betrothal of minors was a Jewish norm

Contrary to some of the apologetic material emanating from various Christian ministries, standard Jewish practice at the time was the betrothal of minors – females attained maturity at the age of twelve.
Quite apart from the subordinate status of women in Jewish Law, in the rabbinic era and no doubt earlier too, the bride-to-be was by definition a minor, a person not yet of age. It should be noted that in the Mishnaic-Talmudic legislation girls attained majority when they started to menstruate, or on the day after their twelfth birthday, whichever came first. In the rabbinic perspective, majority and attainment of puberty were coterminous. By the age of twelve years and six months a young woman became, in the terminology of the rabbis ‘mature’ (bogeret), and was expected already to be married. In any case, by then her father no longer had the right unilaterally to betroth her.

Vermes: Mary was no more than twelve (12) or a little younger

Again, cutting through some of the evangelical revisionism, according to Geza Vermes, Mary would have been twelve years of age (or a little less) at the time of her betrothal/marriage to Joseph and at the time of her giving birth to Jesus (p)

Once the preliminary requirements laid down in the agreement of betrothal were satisfied, nuptials followed: they were presumed to take place within twelve months from the date of agreement. Then the bridegroom led his bride to his own home amid solemn festivities attended by family, friends and neighbours. The Gospels contain various parables about Jewish weddings (see for example Mt 25:1-13). It would follow from these rules, which appear standard and long standing, and not some kind of innovation by the redactors of the Mishnah, that at the time of the incidents described in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, Mary was no more than twelve years old or conceivably a little less, and by the standards of her society and age, mature enough for marriage

Jesus’ views + Christian fundamentalist hypocrisy and folly

Christian evangelists should note there is no recorded condemnation of such practices from Jesus thus suggesting Jesus gave (at the very least) tacit approval of such marital customs.

Some of the riff-raff amongst Christian evangelists readily de-contextualise the marriages of Muhammad (p) to Aisha (ra) in order to direct an intellectually dishonest character-assassination attempt of Prophet Muhammad (p) yet fail to recognise this marriage was in similar vein to the Jewish customs at the time of Jesus. These evangelists fail to attack the Jews for such practices whilst attacking Muslims and Mormons (Joseph Smith) for the same custom.

Further still, the riff-raff amongst Western Christian evangelists fail to attack their fellow ‘Bible-believing’ forefathers as they were following similar marital customs:

Age is an additional requirement. Every jurisdiction mandates that a man and a woman must be old enough to wed. In the 1800s, the legal age was as low as 12 years old for females. Modern statutes ordinarily provide that females may marry at age 16 and males at age 18. Sometimes a lower age is permitted with the written consent of the parents. A number of states allow for marriage below the minimum age if the female is pregnant and a judge grants permission [Marriage: Legal Dictionary -]

Quotes taken from Jesus, Geza Vermes, Penguin Books, 2010, p. 64-65

May Allah send more Blessings upong Mary, Jesus and Muhammad. Ameen.


Osama Abdullah Debated Sam Shamoun on Prophet Muhammad (p)

Before you watch anything from Sam Shamoun make sure you view all the Sam Shamoun section here:


Muslim Rapes in Norway and Sweden? Stop with the Propaganda Against Muslims!

On the internet, there's a lot of anti-Muslim sentiment based on 'Muslim rape figures' in Sweden and Norway. However, I'd imagine most people who propagate such material have not really thought about the claims they are presenting.

In Greece and Switzerland where the percentage of Muslims is higher than the two Scandanavian countries mentioned there's less rape. This article actually analyses the claims and explains away the hysteria.

If you are somebody who is getting anti-Muslim traction by propagating the 'Muslim rape figures' in Norway and Sweden please read the article below. The same applies to anybody supporting any anti-Muslim websites/blogs which are using such claims to further their hateful agendas against Muslims and Islam.

The following article is taken from:

Atheists or racists have claimed that the rape and crime in Sweden is caused primarily by Muslims and because of the Muslim population in Sweden. Initially I thought this could have been the case, but upon investigating this claim I found it to be false.

So Muslims (and basically any non-white immigrant) are blamed for all the problems and crime in Sweden.

In Sweden, a liberal atheist country, throwing rocks at Somalians and beating Jews is just normal and common, and normally accepted by liberal atheist Swedes. I think Sweden’s new slogan should be “Come come beat a Jew, this is Sweden”. Beating Jews is like a national pastime in Sweden. If someone beats up a Jew in Sweden all the Swedes are just thinking “What’s the big deal? It’s just a Jew”. Don’t try wearing a kippah or yamaka or whatever in Sweden. Everyone in Sweden either is a Nazi, personally knows a Nazi, or knows someone who knows a Nazi because Nazism is popular in Sweden.

In order to find out if Muslims are actually responsible for the crime and rape in Sweden I looked at the Muslim population by country according to the October 2009 Pew Report and then I looked at rape statistics by country according to the U.N. statistics.

I only looked at European countries or countries made up of mostly Europeans knowing that atheists or racists would dismiss low rape rates in Muslim countries as being caused by a lack of reporting rapes.

New UPDATE (06/06/2013):Sweden’s latest murder statistics have come out for the year of 2012, and this is really bad news for atheists/racists.

Remember the murder statistic is a very objective crime statistic since it doesn’t rely much upon the rate of reporting, a country’s laws, and is difficult to falsely report. So the homicide rate and count is very objective when compared to many other crime statistics.

Since atheists as a whole are universally stupid people, they would never ever read the official crime statistics published or encourage anyone to do so and instead just use speculation, rumors, or other such nonsense as sources, lol.

Here’s the official crime statistic:–statistik/mord-och-drap.html
The murder count in Sweden in 2012 was 68, which comes to a murder rate of 0.71 per 100,000 for 2012, which is lower than all 50 US states, almost every country on the entire planet, and one of the very lowest murder rates in Sweden history!

So Sweden has now achieved an unthinkable astronomically low murder rate of 0.71!
What a disappointment for the Nazis/atheists, Sweden’s murder rate in 2012 (with more Muslim immigration) is even lower than it was in 2011, one of the very very very lowest murder rates in all of Sweden history.

It’s really almost unthinkable that any country could have a murder rate this low.

To put things into perspective, let’s look at number of murders in US states with population sizes closest to Sweden’s 9.6 million population (Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina) since the murder rate is in proportion to the population size:
- Georgia had more than 550 murders in 2011
- Michigan had more than 600 murders in 2011
- North Carolina had more than 500 murders in 2011

So this means that the US state with the lowest murder count and population size closest to Sweden (North Carolina) had nearly 100 more murders in 1 year than Sweden did in 5 years.
Sweden’s murder count in 5 years (2008-2012) would be 414, where as North Carolina’s murder count is above 500 in just 1 year.

The murder count in Sweden in 2012 was 68. You’ll have to go all the way back to maybe the 1960s or 1970s to find Sweden murder rates this low, lol.

I thought there was more crime in Sweden like the fools (atheists) said? If crime is up and there’s much more violence, wouldn’t the murder count and murder rate go up dramatically and be higher than at least a few US states? So where’s all the ‘crime’ that the fools (atheists) are referring to?
Not only is the murder rate lower, the murder count is lower than ever as well.

Apparently there’s more ‘crime’ and violence in Sweden, but Sweden is safer than all 50 US states, LOL (the US state with the lowest murder rate in 2011 had a murder rate of 1.2 per 100,000).
Well I guess I can’t blame atheists for being misled, they are gullible people who never read official crime statistics published, just garbage on blog sites.

I’m still waiting for the fools (atheists) to justify their lies about there being so much more crime in Sweden now with more Muslim immigration, I guess they can’t. All they have are lies arising from their low-life atheist mouth.

What will the fools (atheists) come up with next since the official crime statistics published debunks their lies?

When you see an atheist know that this person is a low-life, a disgusting person, a liar, a racist, a subhuman being, don’t trust them, they have already misled the world with their lies.
Atheists take pleasure and rejoice in telling lies, it’s something fun and enjoyable for them.
No one really knows how it’s possible for any group of people to tell this many lies.
So the very worst thing that can happen to the Nazi White Nationalist movement in Sweden is a 0% Muslim population and lots of non-white non-Muslim immigrants, this would ruin everything for them wouldn’t it?

They should deport/ban Muslim immigrants and prevent all that ‘crime’ in Sweden (that doesn’t show up in their murder rates, lol), then bring in lots of non-white non-Muslim immigrants, if this time with non-Muslim immigrants there really is more actual crime, what will Nazi Swedes do (their dream easy target is gone)?

There’s more crime, but the murder rate in 2012 (latest data) is one of the lowest in Sweden history, lower than all 50 US States (meaning there’s not even 1 US state that has a lower murder rate), and lower than almost every single country in all of the entire world, lol.
All that the liars/atheists can do is discourage people from reading the official crime statistics published and avoid mentioning the murder rate at all cost, lol.

What a joke, atheists are the clowns of the world, the biggest joke that exists.
Don’t trust an atheist, they are always full of lies.

UPDATE: After much discussion I’ve determined the actual cause of the reported rape rate in Sweden being high.

Here’s my hypothesis as to why Sweden’s reported rape rate is so high:

- Sweden’s new modified rape laws in 2005 made it so that the way rapes are counted is intentionally inflated
- The rate of reporting rapes in Sweden is very high
- Many reported rapes in Sweden are false reports caused by the extreme racism there

The evidence to support this hypothesis:

- An excerpt from this BBC News article demonstrates how laughable Sweden’s new rape laws are:
“In Sweden there has been this ambition explicitly to record every case of sexual violence separately, to make it visible in the statistics,” she says.
“So, for instance, when a woman comes to the police and she says my husband or my fiance raped me almost every day during the last year, the police have to record each of these events, which might be more than 300 events. In many other countries it would just be one record – one victim, one type of crime, one record.” -

So this means that 1 report from 1 woman in Sweden could count as 300 or more “rapes” in their rape statistics, depending on how many times the victim claims they were “raped”.

In 2009 according to the Sweden Democrats there were only 253 rape cases (the number of rape cases would tell us the number of rapes if Sweden would’ve had regular rape counting laws), meaning that Sweden’s reported rape rate would only be around 2.7 per 100,000 if they had normal rape counting laws (which is more than 94% lower than the current rate that appears in their rape statistics).

- All of the objective crime statistics in Sweden that are difficult to falsely report like the murder rate and car thefts have decreased or remained constant

- Sweden’s murder rate in 2011 with more Muslim immigration has decreased to 0.86, it’s the lowest murder rate in decades for Sweden and one of the lowest in all of Sweden history, so Sweden’s murder rate is lower than all 50 US states in 2011 and almost every country in the entire world.  The murder rate in Sweden was much higher in the 1990s when there was much less Muslim immigration. From the murder rate we know that the type of “rapes” and “crime” in Sweden must not be lethal (Source:–statistik/mord-och-drap.html)

-  The reported number of homicides for Sweden in 2009 was 232, but the actual number was 92! So this means the actual homicide rate was more than 60% lower than the reported homicide rate. Over 100 of the reported homicides in Sweden in 2009 weren’t even about homicides, lol, can you believe that Swedes would stoop this low as to attempting to falsely report murders? (Source:

If people are willing to falsely report murders obviously they would be willing to falsely report a rape.

For a car theft how are you going to falsely report it? Are you going to make a up a non-existent license plate or hide your car? It’s difficult to falsely report a car theft.

For a homicide how are you going to falsely report it? Claim someone got killed even if they’re alive? It’s difficult to falsely report a homicide. Although you can falsely convict someone of murder.
But for a rape how are you going to falsely report it? Well it’s easy, even if there’s no DNA evidence or injuries in the case you can still win. Anyone can just make up a story about how they were raped, it’s arguably the very very easiest crime to falsely report.

- The main sign of a false rape report is no injuries and no DNA evidence. No injuries tells us that very little to no force was used and no DNA evidence tells us that there was no actual intercourse. So in cases like these you would just have to rely upon who you believe, the accused or the accuser. If there was more violence in Sweden we would expect the murder rate to increase, not decrease, so the murder rate is a real big blow to the Nazi movement in Sweden.

- Falsely reporting a rape is extremely easy, falsely reporting a homicide is extremely difficult, and the reported rape rate is the only crime statistic that’s radically changed in Sweden

- We know from history that in extremely racist societies falsely reporting rapes was common, here’s an example of one in Sweden:

“The [Swedish] woman later recanted her story about the alleged rape when she learned that a surveillance camera mounted in the taxi had recorded the couple leaving the vehicle without paying” –

- The murder rate isn’t calculated by the number of reports like how the reported rape rate is, it’s calculated by objective deaths, so the murder rate is a very objective statistic that’s difficult to distort and skew

- There were over 5,940 reported rapes in Sweden in 2009, but the Sweden Democrats talked about 114 out of 253 cases, 253 cases is more than 95% lower than the total number of reported rapes in Sweden, I’m guessing the number of cases is much lower because the “reported number” counts each alleged event (Source:

- According to Swedish journalist Ingrid Carlqvist “Most [Sweden] rape complaints are false. I base my conclusions on the hundreds of preliminary investigations and verdicts I’ve reviewed in my 30 years as a journalist” (Source:,00.shtml)

- Since the reported rape rate relies upon a country’s rape laws, the rate of reporting rapes, and since it’s extremely easy to falsely report a rape the reported rape rate is the very least objective of all crime statistics and gives us no objective data as to what’s occurring


- The murder rate is really embarrassing so the Nazis/Swedes avoid mentioning it all costs

- Not being able to falsely report a murder like a rape must really pain the Nazi movement in Sweden

- Swedes are disgusting extremely racist people

- There’s no way Swedes and other racists are going to encourage people to look at the official statistics and reports published, they’re only going to encourage people to look at  propaganda Nazi articles and YouTube videos

- The basic argument of the Nazis/Swedes and anyone who supports them is that “crime is up in Sweden except in every objective crime statistic that’s difficult to falsely report and distort”

- All that’s changed in Sweden is Sweden’s rape laws and the rate of reporting rape, this is why the murder rate has remained constant (actually lower now) in Sweden

If Swedes really believe that Muslim immigration is their problem (with a murder rate lower than all US states) then here’s what I suggest they do:

- Deport/ban all Muslim immigrants

- After all the Muslims are gone, bring in lots of non-white non-Muslim immigrants

- If there’s more actual crime in Sweden (you know in objective crime statistics) with non-white non-Muslim immigrants, without a target as easy as the Muslims what will Nazi Swedes do?

I would encourage Sweden to deport all existing Muslim immigrants and ban all Muslim immigration, if this does not occur then I would suggest that any Muslim immigrant living in Sweden just voluntarily leave Sweden. I would also suggest that non-white non-Muslims go live in Sweden.
It would be a great experiment to see what would happen in Sweden with a 0% Muslim population and lots of non-white non-Muslim immigrants. My guess is that then it wouldn’t matter if the murder rate was 10 times or 20 times higher in Sweden, it wouldn’t be international news or anything because non-Muslim immigrants are much harder targets.

Some other things to note:

- The worst rapist in Sweden was a White Swede, Thomas Quick, who allegedly rape and murdered 30 men

- New Zealand doesn’t have Sweden’s unique rape laws, so NZ’s reported rape rate is probably more real than Sweden’s, in NZ they have rape-murders like Jason Frandi, a White New Zealander who raped and murdered a tourist

- The European countries with the highest murder rates, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia have the least non-white immigration, lowest percentage of Muslims in Europe, and purest European stock. I’ve asked the people who complain about the supposed “Problem of Islam” in Europe as to why they don’t make websites or YouTube videos to help out Lithuanians, Latvians, and Estonians, but none of them have ever answered the question.

- Anyone who speaks to a Swede realizes how dumb and gullible they are, they don’t even know anything about their own country’s crime statistics

- Multiple studies and experiments have shown that White males are reported less often for all crime in general

- Since White males are reported less often for rape, if White males were reported as often as others at least 80% of the reported rapists in Sweden should be White males, this would be more consistent with the murder rate in Sweden

- If you report a White male for rape and there’s no injuries, you don’t have video camera evidence, 20 witnesses, or anything like that, and it’s not a child rape or drug rape then the jury will most likely just say “it’s no big deal, charges dropped”, you’ll just have to wait for the White male to go on to kill or seriously injure someone to get a conviction

- Society should really move towards opposing all rape in general regardless of who’s doing it
What a shame it is for the Nazi movement in Sweden that you can’t falsely report a murder like a rape

ANOTHER UPDATE: Since I’ve already completely embarrassed Nazi Swedes I guess I’ll embarrass some Nazi Norwegians.

The media in Norway and Sweden is controlled in a similar way that the media is controlled in many Islamic countries, so I suppose it’s not entirely their fault that they are so clueless about everything.
I’m sure you’ve probably heard the supposed claim that “ALL Assault rapes in 2010 in Norway come from Muslims or non-Western immigrants” or something like this on lots of articles and YouTube videos on the Internet.

It all sounds convincing up until you read the official Oslo police report published by the Norwegian police department:

Assault rape only comprises 6 cases, however, and the same perpetrator was responsible for two of these (there were 5 unique suspects/persons seen in 6 reports).In 4 of the six reports (3 unique men) the perpetrator was from the Middle-East, in one assault rape the man was from Africa, and in another, from Asia. Claims that all assault rapes are committed by foreigners are thus supported by these figures, although the basis for the claims is small and the selection is special

So all the articles and videos that use the term “ALL” are referring to 6 out of 6 cases.
A sum total of 6 assault rape cases in a population of 4.6 million comes to rate of 0.13 which matches into Norway’s extremely low murder rate of 0.6 (per 100,000).

But this isn’t the whole story, read on:

“If you extend the material to cover the 16 assault rape cases in which the person is unidentified, but where a description has been provided by the victim,another picture emerges: 8 of the perpetrators were of African/dark-skinned appearance, 5 were western/fair-haired/Nordic and 4 looked Asian.”

So counting assault rapes where the perpetrator was unidentified as well, it comes to a sum total of 22 cases (3 Middle-Easterners, 5 Asians, 9 Africans, and 5 Nordics).
Source: Document:

So the articles and videos claiming that “all assault rapes in Norway in 2010 come from non-Western immigrants” should be renamed to:

“In a sum total of 6 assault rape cases where the Norwegian police identified the perpetrator, all of them were non-Western, in the 16 assault rape cases where the perpetrator was unidentified by the Norwegian police 100% of them were non-Middle Eastern and 5 of them were Nordic. Norway’s murder rate has decreased and is lower than even Sweden’s in 2010, but that’s not worth mentioning since you can’t falsely report a murder like a rape.”

The main strategies the misleading videos and articles use are:

- Not mention the number of cases they’re referring to (6 out of 6 cases)
- Not mention the other cases where the Norwegian police conveniently did not identify the perpetrator (all 16 of them happened to be non-Middle-Easterners, lol)
- Not mention the murder rate in Norway in 2010 (0.6)
A sum total of 6 assault rape cases in a population of nearly 5 million is extremely low beyond imagination. We can point out lots of cities with populations of 100,000 or less with more than 6 assault rapes.

Norway’s murder rate in 2010 is 0.6, lower than all 50 US states and every single country in the entire world except for around 5-7 countries. There’s no way the Nazi atheists are going to encourage people to read the official statistics and reports, and the Nazi atheists will definitely avoid mentioning the murder rate at all cost.

A delusional atheist even told me that the official statistics were wrong, only what he saw on YouTube videos and blog sites was true. How can anyone be this gullible?

It would just be better for society if all European countries had banned and deported JUST Muslim immigrants. Muslims are just making things easier for the Nazis by being an easy target. All Muslims JUST GO HOME, leave Europe now! Non-white non-Muslims go live in Europe.

The best way for Swedes, Norwegians, Danes, and other atheist/racist countries to learn their lesson about telling lies would be if they just banned and deported all Muslim immigrants from Europe and then brought in lots of non-white non-Muslim immigrants. They shouldn’t even allow Muslims to visit these countries. A 0% Muslim population and lots of non-Muslim immigrants would severely damage the Nazi/atheist movement, their easy dream target would be gone.

So I support the people who want to ban/deport Muslims from any and every country. The Muslims are just distracting people away from what’s really going on.

Since Sweden, Denmark, and Norway have relatively low population sizes this means if their murder count goes up slightly the murder rate would really go up (yet they still all remain lower than all 50 US states).

So what would European countries do if they had a 0% Muslim population and lots of non-Muslim immigrants with a murder rate that’s 10 or 20 times higher than their current murder rates?
On another note the one who actually killed 77 people in Norway was the White non-Muslim Norwegian Breivik. The liberal atheist media was severely disappointed when they found out that the “terrorist” was not an Islamic terrorist but instead a White non-Muslim. As soon as they found out that it was a White non-Muslim it turned into a non-event after like 2 days and no one cared. Muslim terrorist attacks that kill far less than 77 people remain international news for years and years.

There are lots of web sites and things like that dedicated to ending the supposed “Muslim crime epidemic” in Europe (just non-violent rapes with no injuries). Are these people just trying to end Muslim crime and terrorism alone? What about non-Muslim killings and crime?

The countries in Europe with the highest murder rates (Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania) have the least non-white immigration, lowest percentage of Muslims, and purest European stock. I’ve repeatedly asked the same people who are attempting to end JUST Muslim crime alone (non-violent rapes with no injuries obviously the result of modified rape laws , the rate of reporting rapes going up, and false reports) why they don’t try to end all the crime in those countries, but still no one answered the question.

Wouldn’t it be great if Latvia, Lithuania,  and Estonia had murder rates as low as Norway’s and Sweden’s?

Just look at how primitive Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia are. These countries have accomplished almost nothing. The only good thing I can say about one of these countries (Lithuania) is Phoebus Levene.

Why can’t things be a big deal regardless of if a Muslim or non-Muslim did it? If all the people who did killings all around the world were Muslim we could get the entire world to oppose what they do.
I had a friend from Estonia, his parents were murdered when he was 5 years old, is it not a big deal because non-Muslims did it? I had another friend who’s Father was murdered and killed, is it not a big deal because non-Muslims did it?

Look at all the opposition towards the supposed Muslim crime in Europe (just the reported rape rate increasing after countries modified rape laws and the murder rate decreasing or remaining extremely low). Just imagine what the world would be like if only Muslims did crime, we could get the entire world to oppose what they were doing.

What a shame.
Sweden Muslim population: 2% (149,000 total)
Sweden 2008 rape per capita rate per 100,000: 46.6 (4,269 total rapes)
New Zealand Muslim population: 0.9% (37,000 total)
New Zealand 2008 rape per capita rate per 100,000: 31.3 (1,314 total rapes)
Greece Muslim population: 3% (310,000 total)
Greece 2008 rape per capita rate per 100,000: 2.0 (214 total rapes)
Switzerland Muslim population: 4.3% (323,000 total)
Switzerland 2008 rape per capita rate per 100,000: 8.6 (648 total rapes)

The much more religious countries like Greece and Switzerland some how have less rape per capita rates and rape total counts despite having much higher Muslim populations than the more atheistic countries like Sweden and New Zealand. New Zealanders, similar to Swedes are very racist and also blame all their problems on immigrants.

In New Zealand, a celebrated atheist country, throwing hamburger meat at Asians is normal and common. Basically 100% of male Asians who have lived in New Zealand have experienced racism at least once. The rape in New Zealand cannot be blamed on Arabs or Muslims so atheist New Zealanders will probably blame the rape on the hated immigrant group there, Asians.

New Zealand and Sweden (and nearly every other country with a high atheist population) have very high levels of female promiscuity. In New Zealand it’s just common to run into women who have slept with more than 50 guys. The average female in New Zealand has slept with 20 guys.

Perhaps high levels of promiscuity or a high atheist population is what actually causes high rape rates and not Muslims. If Muslims are responsible for high rape rates, then how can countries with much higher Muslim populations than Sweden or New Zealand have much lower rape rates and counts?
In conclusion atheists have a tendency to rape. These people called “atheists” are the worst people you’ll ever meet, the most racist form of life. People have to realize what happens to a country when uncivilized atheists take over a country. Everywhere atheists go they cause rape and racism, then try to blame it all on the immigrant group.