Saudi Grand Mufti: Attacks Un-Islamic

[FKA Reader]

RIYADH, Sept 15 (Reuters)- Saudi Arabia's Grand Mufti, the highest religious authority in the birthplace of Islam, on Saturday denounced attacks on diplomats and embassies as un-Islamic after deadly protests against a U.S.-made film mocking Islam's founder.

Sheikh Abdulaziz bin Abdullah Al al-Sheikh also called on governments and international bodies to criminalise insults against prophets and excoriated the film that has prompted a wave of fury across the Middle East.

"It is forbidden to punish the innocent for the wicked crimes of the guilty, or to attack those who have been granted protection of their lives and property, or to expose public buildings to fire or destruction," he said in a speech carried by state news agency SPA.

Describing the release of the crudely made short film as "miserable" and "criminal", he added that attacks on the innocent and diplomats "are also a distortion of the Islamic religion and are not accepted by God".
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/15/saud...

[QWA]

FKA Reader wrote:

Sheikh Abdulaziz bin Abdullah Al al-Sheikh also called on governments and international bodies to criminalise insults against prophets and excoriated the film that has prompted a wave of fury across the Middle East.

How dense are you, did you even read that part of the statement, they want Sharia Law oppressing all of us.

[FKA Reader]

QWA wrote:

<quoted text>
How dense are you, did you even read that part of the statement, they want Sharia Law oppressing all of us.

Clearly that is something (making laws against insulting the prophet) that is not going to happen here (the US).

It would violate our Constitution.

And yet, many here would cheerfully violate that Constitution by banning the building of mosques and the like.

I am interested in your response to the part where he points out that the particular actions of late (destroying buildings, attacking innocents) are particularly condemned by Islam.

[QWA]

FKA Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
Clearly that is something (making laws against insulting the prophet) that is not going to happen here (the US).
It would violate our Constitution.
And yet, many here would cheerfully violate that Constitution by banning the building of mosques and the like.
I am interested in your response to the part where he points out that the particular actions of late (destroying buildings, attacking innocents) are particularly condemned by Islam.

Obama appoints a fifth justice means that "hate speech" restrictions become OK, or just a Muslim shakedown campaign that gets anyone fired who criticizes Islam a la Jesse Jackson.

[FKA Reader]

QWA wrote:

<quoted text>
Obama appoints a fifth justice means that "hate speech" restrictions become OK, or just a Muslim shakedown campaign that gets anyone fired who criticizes Islam a la Jesse Jackson.

That would be assuming quite a bit.

But, you dodged my question.

[Jimmy]

FKA Reader wrote:

RIYADH, Sept 15 (Reuters)- Saudi Arabia's Grand Mufti, the highest religious authority in the birthplace of Islam, on Saturday denounced attacks on diplomats and embassies as un-Islamic after deadly protests against a U.S.-made film mocking Islam's founder.
Sheikh Abdulaziz bin Abdullah Al al-Sheikh also called on governments and international bodies to criminalise insults against prophets and excoriated the film that has prompted a wave of fury across the Middle East.
"It is forbidden to punish the innocent for the wicked crimes of the guilty, or to attack those who have been granted protection of their lives and property, or to expose public buildings to fire or destruction," he said in a speech carried by state news agency SPA.
Describing the release of the crudely made short film as "miserable" and "criminal", he added that attacks on the innocent and diplomats "are also a distortion of the Islamic religion and are not accepted by God".
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/15/saud...

The Quran tells Muslims to lie "taygigya" to infidels. You can't trust what they say.

[6was9]

FKA Reader wrote:

RIYADH, Sept 15 (Reuters)- Saudi Arabia's Grand Mufti, the highest religious authority in the birthplace of Islam, on Saturday denounced attacks on diplomats and embassies as un-Islamic after deadly protests against a U.S.-made film mocking Islam's founder.
Sheikh Abdulaziz bin Abdullah Al al-Sheikh also called on governments and international bodies to criminalise insults against prophets and excoriated the film that has prompted a wave of fury across the Middle East.
"It is forbidden to punish the innocent for the wicked crimes of the guilty, or to attack those who have been granted protection of their lives and property, or to expose public buildings to fire or destruction," he said in a speech carried by state news agency SPA.
Describing the release of the crudely made short film as "miserable" and "criminal", he added that attacks on the innocent and diplomats "are also a distortion of the Islamic religion and are not accepted by God".
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/15/saud...

One cleric says "It is forbidden to punish the innocent for the wicked crimes of the guilty,"

Big deal......No doubt he would willingly punish those he feels to be the guilty of insulting the prophet......I doubt the punishment would be less than death....

here is another saudi cleric.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

[Spookisbacksoblo wmetrolls]

6was9 wrote:

<quoted text>
One cleric says "It is forbidden to punish the innocent for the wicked crimes of the guilty,"
Big deal......No doubt he would willingly punish those he feels to be the guilty of insulting the prophet......I doubt the punishment would be less than death....
here is another saudi cleric.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Never trust a cleric

[imagine2011]

FKA Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
Clearly that is something (making laws against insulting the prophet) that is not going to happen here (the US).
It would violate our Constitution.
And yet, many here would cheerfully violate that Constitution by banning the building of mosques and the like.
I am interested in your response to the part where he points out that the particular actions of late (destroying buildings, attacking innocents) are particularly condemned by Islam.

They can either ban them or burn them one. Islam does not belong here, at all. They do not mix with freedom or Christianity and do not have any intention of trying to fit in. They're intentions are to destroy our freedoms.

[imagine2011]

Jimmy wrote:

<quoted text>
The Quran tells Muslims to lie "taygigya" to infidels. You can't trust what they say.

Thank you, but I guarantee you she ignored your answer. She doesn't believe that a hate filled political system can be cloaked in a false religious name, for the purpose of global domination, using the sympathy of victimhood as a border pass.

[FKA Reader]

6was9 wrote:

<quoted text>
One cleric says "It is forbidden to punish the innocent for the wicked crimes of the guilty,"
Big deal......No doubt he would willingly punish those he feels to be the guilty of insulting the prophet......I doubt the punishment would be less than death....
here is another saudi cleric.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

This was not a response to the recent events. It dates from 2009. The source was Jihadwatch, with translation provided by Memri.

Regarding MEMRI, from wiki, which notes (as is generally the case for wiki with any articles related to Islam) that the articl has issues:

The organization's translations are regularly quoted by major international newspapers, and its work has generated strong criticism and praise. Critics have accused MEMRI of producing inaccurate, unreliable translations with undue emphasis and selectivity in translating and disseminating the most extreme views from Arabic and Persian media, which portray the Arab and Muslim world in a negative light, while ignoring moderate views that are often found in the same media outlets. Other critics charge that while MEMRI does sometimes translate pro-US or pro-democracy voices in the regional media, it systematically leaves out intelligent criticism of Western-style democracy, US and Israeli policy and secularism.[4][29][30][31]

MEMRI's work has been attacked on three grounds: that their work is biased; that they choose articles to translate selectively so as to give an unrepresentative view of the media they are reporting on; and that some of their translations are inaccurate.[

[FKA Reader]

Jimmy wrote:

<quoted text>
The Quran tells Muslims to lie "taygigya" to infidels. You can't trust what they say.

This is the difficulty discussing Islam with righties.

They always want to know why moderate Muslims do not denounce extremism and terrorist actions. Yet, when they are confronted with exactly that, they fall back on the old, "Muslims are all liars" excuse.

You have defined for yourself a circular argument.

You believe then, as an article of faith, that all Muslims are barbaric, terrorist and bent on destruction. Any evidence to the contrary is dismissed as deliberate deception.

[6was9]

FKA Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
This was not a response to the recent events. It dates from 2009. The source was Jihadwatch, with translation provided by Memri.
Regarding MEMRI, from wiki, which notes (as is generally the case for wiki with any articles related to Islam) that the articl has issues:
The organization's translations are regularly quoted by major international newspapers, and its work has generated strong criticism and praise. Critics have accused MEMRI of producing inaccurate, unreliable translations with undue emphasis and selectivity in translating and disseminating the most extreme views from Arabic and Persian media, which portray the Arab and Muslim world in a negative light, while ignoring moderate views that are often found in the same media outlets. Other critics charge that while MEMRI does sometimes translate pro-US or pro-democracy voices in the regional media, it systematically leaves out intelligent criticism of Western-style democracy, US and Israeli policy and secularism.[4][29][30][31]
MEMRI's work has been attacked on three grounds: that their work is biased; that they choose articles to translate selectively so as to give an unrepresentative view of the media they are reporting on; and that some of their translations are inaccurate.[

I fail to see the relevance of the timeline unless you can prove that the cleric featured has changed his views...

Here is a recent comment re your friendly neighborhood cited mufti....
apparently he is not to thrilled about new or existing Christian churches......
http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/...

He said,
In recent comments to Kuwaiti parliamentarians, Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah al-Sheikh said it was not only forbidden to build new churches on the Arab Peninsula but that all existing ones in the region should also be razed to the ground "as there are too many," the Austrian Catholic news agency Kathpress reported.

Here is a video by saudi Sheikh Nasser Al Omar demanding the death of a columnist who insulted mohammed.... Feb of this year.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

need more???????

[tip]

6was9 wrote:

<quoted text>
I fail to see the relevance of the timeline unless you can prove that the cleric featured has changed his views...
Here is a recent comment re your friendly neighborhood cited mufti....
apparently he is not to thrilled about new or existing Christian churches......
http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/...
He said,
In recent comments to Kuwaiti parliamentarians, Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah al-Sheikh said it was not only forbidden to build new churches on the Arab Peninsula but that all existing ones in the region should also be razed to the ground "as there are too many," the Austrian Catholic news agency Kathpress reported.
Here is a video by saudi Sheikh Nasser Al Omar demanding the death of a columnist who insulted mohammed.... Feb of this year.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
need more???????

An innumerable amount of examples would not persuade the Apologist to renounce her pro-Muslim views.

[imagine2011]

FKA Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
This is the difficulty discussing Islam with righties.
They always want to know why moderate Muslims do not denounce extremism and terrorist actions. Yet, when they are confronted with exactly that, they fall back on the old, "Muslims are all liars" excuse.
You have defined for yourself a circular argument.
You believe then, as an article of faith, that all Muslims are barbaric, terrorist and bent on destruction. Any evidence to the contrary is dismissed as deliberate deception.

The way to prove to us that they 'disapprove' of Islam killing Americans, is if they locked and loaded a large army of 'moderate muslims' against the 'extremist islamist' you keep referring to. I have seen zero effort of the 'moderate muslims' to do anything at all but give us a few scripted lies.

[FKA Reader]

6was9 wrote:

<quoted text>
I fail to see the relevance of the timeline unless you can prove that the cleric featured has changed his views...
Here is a recent comment re your friendly neighborhood cited mufti....
apparently he is not to thrilled about new or existing Christian churches......
http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/...
He said,
In recent comments to Kuwaiti parliamentarians, Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah al-Sheikh said it was not only forbidden to build new churches on the Arab Peninsula but that all existing ones in the region should also be razed to the ground "as there are too many," the Austrian Catholic news agency Kathpress reported.
Here is a video by saudi Sheikh Nasser Al Omar demanding the death of a columnist who insulted mohammed.... Feb of this year.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
need more???????

Your standard is that one stands for the whole. But only the ones that you personally select, correct?

[6was9]

FKA Reader wrote:

RIYADH, Sept 15 (Reuters)- Saudi Arabia's Grand Mufti, the highest religious authority in the birthplace of Islam, on Saturday denounced attacks on diplomats and embassies as un-Islamic after deadly protests against a U.S.-made film mocking Islam's founder.
Sheikh Abdulaziz bin Abdullah Al al-Sheikh also called on governments and international bodies to criminalise insults against prophets and excoriated the film that has prompted a wave of fury across the Middle East.
"It is forbidden to punish the innocent for the wicked crimes of the guilty, or to attack those who have been granted protection of their lives and property, or to expose public buildings to fire or destruction," he said in a speech carried by state news agency SPA.
Describing the release of the crudely made short film as "miserable" and "criminal", he added that attacks on the innocent and diplomats "are also a distortion of the Islamic religion and are not accepted by God".
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/15/saud...

I will just respond to the title post......

Your boy that you are attempting to hold up as an example of islamic tolerance said the following recently......

http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/ ...

In recent comments to Kuwaiti parliamentarians, Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah al-Sheikh said it was not only forbidden to build new churches on the Arab Peninsula but that all existing ones in the region should also be razed to the ground "as there are too many," the Austrian Catholic news agency Kathpress reported

Religion of tolerance my back side......

apparently he is not to thrilled about new or existing Christian churches......

[tip]

FKA Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
Your standard is that one stands for the whole. But only the ones that you personally select, correct?

Those that make up the majority.

Reminder: 19,603 deadly Muslim terror attacks since 09/11/01

When you find 19,603 official condemnations, let us know.