From The Mouth Of Mullahs Michael Coren

[cmotherofpirl]

From the mouth of mullahs MICHAEL COREN
Journalists from Channel 4’s Dispatches programme conducted a 10-month undercover assignment in several of Britain’s leading mosques. The resulting segment, Undercover Mosque, was aired on Jan. 15.

What is particularly relevant is that Dispatches has an international reputation for excellence and, important this, for its general left-wing approach to political issues. As such, the producers decided to investigate not those Muslim centres renowned for their extremism but various large, influential and allegedly moderate Islamic holy places.

What it found has provoked waves of shock. Several preachers and imams call for holy war, tell congregations that Muslims have to brainwash people, demand that homosexuals be murdered, insist that girls who refuse to wear the hijab should be beaten, and routinely demand that Christians and Jews be killed.

At one mosque in Birmingham, Abu Usama, one of the most popular speakers, says that Muslims have to “form a state within a state, until we take over.” He says that in this state any Muslim who tried to leave Islam would be killed. “If the Imam wants to crucify him he could crucify him. The person is put up on the wood and he’s left there to bleed to death.”


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It appears to be an accurate and objective exposé of common teaching within those mosques that were until now considered to be standing on the front line against extremism. We would be foolish not to listen to what these Muslims are telling us.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The documentary also shows a preacher joking about harming gay people secretly so as not to break the law. He laughs as he tells Muslim dentists to thrust extra-large needles into the faces of gay patients.

This is all especially embarrassing for the government because one of its main advisors on Islam, a Muslim member of the House of Lords, attends this particular mosque and speaks highly of it.

Another preacher in Birmingham, Dr. Billal Phillips, explains that as Muhammad married Aisha, a nine-year-old girl, all such marriages are condoned. “The prophet Muhammad practically outlined the rules regarding marriage prior to puberty. With this practice, he clarified what is permissible.”

Referring to non-Muslims, another preacher says that, “No one loves the kuffaar [i.e., non-Muslims]. We hate the kuffaar! Allah has not given those people who are kuffaar a way over the believer. They shouldn’t be in authority over us. Muslims shouldn’t be satisfied with anything other than a total Islamic state.”

The book store of the Regents Park Mosque, the largest in London, sells popular videos of the Saudi-trained Sheikh Faiz calling Jews “pigs” who will all be slaughtered. He then makes the sound of a pig and the audience laughs. In fact, throughout the sermons and lessons there is no sign of disagreement or discomfort from anyone in the packed congregations.

The Taliban is praised for killing British soldiers, and followers are repeatedly told to despise Western society. Muslims are condemned if they send their children to kuffaar schools or allow them to play with kuffaars.

The response so far has been that the documentary is mere propaganda. Tragically, it is not. It appears to be an accurate and objective exposé of common teaching within those mosques that were until now considered to be standing on the front line against extremism. We would be foolish not to listen to what these Muslims are telling us.

[url="http://catholiceducation.org/articles/persecution/pch0136.htm"]http://catholiceducation.org/articles/pers...ion/pch0136.htm[/url]

[Lil Red]

yikes

[cathoholic_anonymous]

Hmmm. The problem with that documentary is that it seems to be assuming that an imam is on the same level as a rabbi or a priest - the sort of person who studies for a long time, obtains some kind of theological qualification, and is then assigned to a mosque as leader. In reality, almost any Muslim can be an imam without any effort at all. If I converted to Islam tomorrow, it would be theoretically possible for me to set myself up as an female imam in a women's mosque, preach sermons, and lead prayers. This is because Sunni Islam has no formal clergy system. (Shi'a Islam is different.) If a Muslim is a [i]qadi[/i] (qualified to preside over the Islamic courts) that is when you know that he or she is a scholar. That article makes it sound as if pillars of the British Muslim community are supporting terrorism by dignifying them with titles that could easily be self-conferred or otherwise meaningless.

I also know for a fact that if these mosques are like any other masjid I've ever been in, there won't just be one preacher. Technically, any member of the congregation is allowed to deliver the khutbah (sermon), which renders the claim that a 'preacher' made a homophobic comment meaningless as well. As many as twenty regular mosque-goers might have given a sermon there at some point.

Secondly, Islamic prayer is very solitary prayer, even when it happens in community. It's done in silence and there is little interaction between worshippers. To pray, all a Muslim needs is a place to wash and a clean, quiet area. The only time a sermon is ever given during an Islamic prayer is at midday prayer on a Friday. So a perfectly ordinary Muslim could enter a mosque renowned for fiery extremism, pray Salat-al-Dhuhr on a Saturday afternoon, and not notice a thing out of the ordinary. At Finsbury Park, it wasn't Abu Hamza's vitriolic Friday sermons that got the place a shady reputation. It was what happened inside the mosque after hours, when the doors were closed and Hamza's specially invited guests came round.

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='Cathoholic Anonymous' post='1173882' date='Jan 23 2007, 08:40 AM']
Hmmm. The problem with that documentary is that it seems to be assuming that an imam is on the same level as a rabbi or a priest - the sort of person who studies for a long time, obtains some kind of theological qualification, and is then assigned to a mosque as leader. In reality, almost any Muslim can be an imam without any effort at all.[/quote]I disagree that this assumption is made by the documentary. I don't think westerners have any trouble believing that religious people are not all formally educated.

[quote name='Cathoholic Anonymous' post='1173882' date='Jan 23 2007, 08:40 AM']If a Muslim is a [i]qadi[/i] (qualified to preside over the Islamic courts) that is when you know that he or she is a scholar.[/quote]Just an aside for our Spanish members: the world [i]alcalde[/i] (trans: mayor) is actually derived from the Arabic term [i]al-qadi[/i]. I always liked learning obscure word origins. Anyway...
[quote name='Cathoholic Anonymous' post='1173882' date='Jan 23 2007, 08:40 AM']That article makes it sound as if pillars of the British Muslim community are supporting terrorism by dignifying them with titles that could easily be self-conferred or otherwise meaningless.[/quote]I'd recommend that you watch the video, because I think the reporters are attempting to avoid jumping to conclusions with things like "guilt by association."
[quote name='Cathoholic Anonymous' post='1173882' date='Jan 23 2007, 08:40 AM']I also know for a fact that if these mosques are like any other masjid I've ever been in, there won't just be one preacher. Technically, any member of the congregation is allowed to deliver the khutbah (sermon), which renders the claim that a 'preacher' made a homophobic comment meaningless as well. As many as twenty regular mosque-goers might have given a sermon there at some point.[/quote]One individual who was quoted was Abu Usamah:
[quote name='From the article']But the main preacher at Green Lane is Abu Usamah, an American convert who studied at Medinah University in Saudi Arabia.[/quote]Another was Dr. Bilal Phillips, who sells his own recorded lectures. I wouldn't think they would fall under the category of "regular mosque-goers."

In any event, I don't think word games (e.g. whether someone is technically a "preacher") are helpful.

[quote name='Cathoholic Anonymous' post='1173882' date='Jan 23 2007, 08:40 AM']Secondly, Islamic prayer is very solitary prayer, even when it happens in community. It's done in silence and there is little interaction between worshippers. To pray, all a Muslim needs is a place to wash and a clean, quiet area. The only time a sermon is ever given during an Islamic prayer is at midday prayer on a Friday. So a perfectly ordinary Muslim could enter a mosque renowned for fiery extremism, pray Salat-al-Dhuhr on a Saturday afternoon, and not notice a thing out of the ordinary. At Finsbury Park, it wasn't Abu Hamza's vitriolic Friday sermons that got the place a shady reputation. It was what happened inside the mosque after hours, when the doors were closed and Hamza's specially invited guests came round.[/quote]I believe the TV report focused on Saudi/Wahhabi influence on British Islam. As the story goes, the "fiery extremist" speakers are a product of Saudi Arabian higher education. And thanks to petroleum, related fundamentalist literature and videos are being distributed and used at these mosques for little or no cost to anyone interested. According to the report, Sufi Muslims aren't terribly happy with the Wahhabi influence on their communities.

[Akalyte]

am i the only one who things islam should be wiped off the world map? I cannot stand islam.

[Starets]

I would say that Islam is certainly a diseased spirituality. but I would also agree with Mark Shea that the only cure for a diseased spirituality is a healthy spirituality.

[Urib2007]

Good post, Mother of Pirl.

[cathoholic_anonymous]

[quote]am i the only one who things islam should be wiped off the world map? I cannot stand islam.[/quote]

How many Muslims do you know? And I don't mean the number of Muslims you see on the street on a regular basis, or how many Muslims you've read about in the news. How many Muslims do you know? Have you been to supper at their house? Have you invited them to visit you at your home? Do you talk with them on the phone?

If it weren't for Muslims I would never have found out the importance of prayer, so I would be dead spiritually. If it weren't for Muslims I would never have escaped an eating disorder that I developed in my second year of high school as a result of bullying, so I would quite probably be dead literally. If it weren't be for a lifelong involvement with Islam, the likelihood is that I wouldn't be religious at all. I certainly wouldn't have developed such a strong affinity with the Carmelite order - Carmel and Sufi Islam are extraordinarily similar in their spirituality and approach to prayer. The first time I read the poetry of St John of the Cross, I was bowled over by the similarity to the spiritual writings of the Sufi poet Jalaluddin Rumi, who lived centuries before St John. That was soon after I came to England and it made my homesickness go away. Without Islam, I wouldn't be me.

Can you imagine how you would feel if someone said, "Am I the only one who thinks Catholicism should be wiped off the world map? I cannot stand Catholicism." No doubt you would argue that this is an entirely different case, as Catholicism is the truth. Well, Muslims don't know that. Islam is all they have. It is not a perfect way of knowing God, but it's [i]all they have[/i]. If we take away the thing that's of the most value to them (and religious faith of any kind normally ranks high on a human being's list of most treasured parts of life) without trying to engage with them as people and show them through our love that there is something higher available, then things will only get worse. I'm not talking about extremists here. I'm talking about the people I've met and lived alongside for most of my life so far.

[quote]I'd recommend that you watch the video, because I think the reporters are attempting to avoid jumping to conclusions with things like "guilt by association."[/quote]

I have seen the video, and I did think that the film-makers are encouraging viewers to jump to conclusions. Why did they keep zooming in on niqaabi women during many of the vitriolic speeches? The progression went like this: hate speech, close-up of veiled women, hate speech, close-up of veiled women. How were these close-ups relevant to the content of the speeches? Women who wear niqaab have been getting a bad enough deal from the British media already, and this film seemed to subtly associate violent preaching with a 'different' appearance.

[quote]In any event, I don't think word games (e.g. whether someone is technically a "preacher") are helpful.[/quote]

That's not what I was trying to say. In our (nominally) Christian British culture, the word 'preacher' suggests that a person has some kind of special authority. In Islam it doesn't. The link is missing. This is what bothers me. On hearing that a 'Muslim preacher' has said such-and-such, people are likely to impose what they know about church hierarchy on the masjid, when in reality Sunni mosques function without that kind of central authority - no matter how famous their speakers are. This is one of the major flaws of Islam - the lack of central coherence.

[quote]I believe the TV report focused on Saudi/Wahhabi influence on British Islam. As the story goes, the "fiery extremist" speakers are a product of Saudi Arabian higher education. And thanks to petroleum, related fundamentalist literature and videos are being distributed and used at these mosques for little or no cost to anyone interested. According to the report, Sufi Muslims aren't terribly happy with the Wahhabi influence on their communities.[/quote]

Wahabbi Islam is racist Islam. Whatever its adherents may claim, a lot of its ideals are based on the idea of Arab supremacy. In consquence, much of the conflict between Wahabbi Muslims and Muslims of other schools of thought is racial in nature. One of the most notable things that happened at Finsbury Park mosque when Abu Hamza set up shop there was the conflict that erupted between Arab congregants and Pakistani congregants. Wahabbism exists to impose Arab (specifically Saudi) culture on other people, presenting it as part of some Islamic package deal, and so naturally Sufis (who believe that race is irrelevant) wouldn't be too happy. Nor would any non-Wahabbi Sunni or Shi'ite Muslim - although I noticed that the report gave no coverage of the more significant theological, historical, and cultural differences between different Islamic groups.

Here is an interesting Muslim perspective on the documentary: [url="http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/mt.php/2007/01/15/reflections_on_undercover_mosq#more"]Indigo Jo[/url]. I don't agree with everything he says, but it is interesting to read.