Search This Blog

Wednesday 29 August 2012

DON’T WASTE TIME ON KASAB MERCY PETITION

After Supreme Court Order on the 26/11 jihadi terrorist Kasab Every Indian needs to send his view to

Honourable President of India Shri Pranab Mukherjee Ji

 
DON’T WASTE TIME ON KASAB'S MERCY PETITION!!!

Every Indian must send a postcard to the President of India
and write your name in the Comment Box of this appeal.
 
 
The counter will show the numbers of how many Indians want the jihadi killer Kasab to be hanged very soon.

Write that you expect the President of India to reject this jihadi killer's mercy petition, by Postcard.

Send more than 10 Crore postcards to the Honourable President of India Shri Pranab Mukehrjee Ji
 



  
 
 
Appeal by
 
SAMARTH trust
Post Box No 7312
Sriniwaspuri, New Delhi 10065

Friday 24 August 2012

Congress & UPA Parties Make All Hindus Presumptive Criminals

Comments on Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence Bill (PCTV)
WARNING INDIA IN DANGER IF THIS BILL IS PASSED HINDUS WILL BE TREATED AS CRIMINALS WORLD WIDE
 
By OP Gupta
Former Ambassador to Finland, Estonia, Tunisia & other 4 countries

KEY POINTS
 
1.     A Hindu against whom any Muslim/Christian/minority make any Complaint shall be presumed in law to be guilty by Police & Courts till that Hindu proves his innocence (Sec70, 71 & 73)

2.     An accused Hindu Shall have to be immediately arrested as all offences under this bill are non-bailable & cognizable (Sec 56)

3.     This law can be invoked only by a minority against Hindus.

4.     Accused Hindu shall not be informed who has complained against him (Sec 38) but police has to inform complainant progress of the case.

5.     A minority is not required to give any evidence to support his complaints against Hindus (Sec 70, 71 & 72)

6.     A Hindu refusing to do business with any minority shall be immediately arrested [Sec 3 (f) (i)]. Taking advantage of such anti – Hindu laws a minority can force a Hindu to sell /rent his property and even surrender his daughters to minorities.

7.      A minority cannot be punished for making even false complaints/ statement against Hindus (Sec 40)

 
The PCTV Bill (56 pages) is based on presumption that all Hindus are criminals and communal riots are always committed only by Hindus and never by minorities. This law can be invoked only against Hindus by minorities. Muslims, Christians called “the Group” in the bill (sec 3.e). If they commit violence and hate against Hindus they cannot be booked under this new law as they are exempt from it even though Hindus practice “ahimsa parmodharma” – non violence is the highest religion as preached by Budha, Mahveer and Gandhi.
 
Under the PCTV Bill a Hindu against whom a Muslim including a Bangaladeshi Muslim infiltrator, a jehadi terrorist Muslim or a Christian or any minority makes a complaint he shall be presumed ab initio to be guilty of crimes; that Hindu shall have to be arrested as all crimes under this Bill are cognizable and non-bailable [Clause 56 of may 2011 version];  that Hindu shall have to prove his innocence before a Court;  that the Muslim or Christian making complaint is not required to give any proof or evidence to support charge against that Hindu;  that Hindu shall not be informed as to who has made complaint against him [Section 38]; during the pendency of the case the court can attach property of the accused Hindu even before he is found guilty [Sec 80, 81]. After this bill is passed any donation for religious charity made by a Hindu industrialist will invite great penalty and legal action against him. It is worst than Nazi Germany. 
 
If a minority woman complains of rape against a Hindu, he shall be arrested and he shall have to prove that charge against him is false and that Hindu will not know which woman has made complaint. But if a Hindu woman is raped by a minority male then she has to prove charge of rape against that Muslim etc and her identity shall be told to her rapist. (Ind. Exp. 12.1.12) Arun Jaitly, Mamta Banarjee, Jailalita and Mayawati says that congress wants to establish its dictatorship through this bill. 
 
Taking advantage of this bill a religious minority can force a Hindu to sell his property to him or rent his property to him; can force a Hindu to write off debts a minority owes to him. If a Hindu landlord evicts his Muslim tenant than he can be sent to jail by a false complaint of that tenant. If a Hindu factory owner suspends a Muslim employee for bad work he can be sent to jail by a false complaint of that employee in which no proof required. If a Muslim applies for a job the Hindu industrialist cannot refuse him. A minority can blackmail a Hindu industrialist and collect lacs of rupees from him. This bill will encourage Terrorist elements and pave the ground for Civil War in India. This is Anti-national, Anti-secular, Anti-Harmony, Anti- Democracy, Anti-Constitution, Anti-People and Anti Business. This bill is a violation of human rights of 95 crore Hindu hence we should appeal to the United Nations. Yet Mulayam Singh is supporting this will.
 
This Bill if enacted as a law shall give a legal weapon to every minority to send to jail for 10 years or more any Hindu. (Indian Express 12/1/12) The question arises why there is so much hatred against peace loving innocent Hindus. All this is because there is Muslim unity (Muslim Vote Bank) but No Hindu unity (Hindu Vote Bank). 
 
Congress should pass this bill because this bill will create permanent hatred between majority and minorities, damaging the future of minorities. Hindus always desire the prosperity of Muslims through mutual cooperation resulting in real peace and prosperity of the country hence majority and minority should unite to throw away the conspiracy of this anti national bill. Muslim who has renounced religious hatred and violence is our dear brother. 
 
Many minority institutions including Jemait-e-Ulema Hind are forcing congress for passing this bill. Hence congress will pass this bill saliently to win 2014 election with Muslim votes. Gulam Navi Azad said that govt. is committed to pass this bill. 
 
All India Protest had started under the guidance of eminent persons like Subramanian Swami and many others. Muslims are rising because they get unlimited fund, Hindus are shrinking because they don’t get any funds. Please join us and donate only this can protect your/our children and grand children. For Donation call 9313103060. nr.carried@gmail.com, www.nac.nic.in (Govt. Site). 
 
 

Wednesday 22 August 2012

असम समस्या की जड़


 

चेतावनी − यदि यह विधेयक पारित हुआ तो पूरे संसार में हिन्दुओं के साथ अपराधियों जैसा व्यवहार किया जाएगा

साम्प्रदायिक एवं लक्ष्य की हुई हिंसा विधेयक (पीसीटीवी) पर टिप्पणियां
चेतावनी − यदि यह विधेयक पारित हुआ तो पूरे संसार में हिन्दुओं के साथ अपराधियों जैसा व्यवहार किया जाएगा
 
ओमप्रकाश गुप्ता, पूर्वराजदूत, फिनलैण्ड, एस्टोनिया, ट्यूनीशिया और चार अन्य देशों में भारत के राजदूत
 
पीसीटीवी विधेयक(56 पृष्ठ) इस मान्यता पर आधारित है कि हिन्दू अपराधी हैं और साम्प्रदायिक दंगे केवल हिन्दू ही करते हैं। अल्पसंख्यक समुदाय दंगे बिलकुल नहीं करते। इस प्रस्तावित कानून का इस्तेमाल सिर्फ हिन्दुओं के खिलाफ अल्पसंख्यक समुदाय के लोगों द्वारा किया जा सकता है। इस विधेयक की धारा-3 में समूह” (ग्रुप) का उल्लेख है, इसमें मुसलमान व ईसाई को सम्मिलित किया गया है। यदि समूह” (अल्पसंख्यक मुसलमान एवं ईसाई) हिन्दुओं के खिलाफ नफरत या हिंसा करेंगे, तो इस नए कानून के अन्तर्गत उनके खिलाफ कोई कार्रवाई नहीं की जा सकती, क्योंकि उन्हें इस कानून से पूरी छूट है। ध्यान दें इस लक्षित हिंसा विधेयक का निशाना वो हिंदू समाज है जो विश्व का सबसे सभ्य और शान्तिपूर्ण समाज है और अहिंसा परमो धर्मः को ही अपना जीवन धर्म मानता है, जिसका प्रचार बुद्ध, महावीर और गांधी ने भी किया है।
 
इस कानून के अन्तर्गत यदि हिन्दू के खिलाफ बांग्लादेशी आतंकवादी, घुसपैठिए, जिहादी, पाकिस्तानी या किसी मुसलमान या ईसाई ने किसी भी प्रकार की झूठी शिकायत कर दी, तो उस हिन्दू की तुरंत गिरफ्तारी (धारा 56, मई 2011 संस्करण) की जाएगी। जमानत भी नहीं होगी। उसके खिलाफ आरोप लगाने वाले को कोई सबूत पेश करने की जरूरत नहीं होगी। उस गिरफ्तार हिन्दू को अदालत के सामने अपनी बेगुनाही का सबूत पेश करना होगा। और उस हिन्दू को यह भी नहीं बताया जाएगा कि उसके खिलाफ किसने शिकायत (धारा 38) दर्ज की है। मामले की सुनवाई के दौरान अदालत उस हिन्दू की सम्पत्ति भी जब्त (धारा 80  81) कर सकती है! यह तो औरंगजेब की हुकूमत से भी अधिक अत्याचारी कानून है।
 
यदि अल्पसंख्यक मुसलमान या ईसाई महिला ने किसी हिन्दू के खिलाफ बलात्कार या उत्पीड़न का आरोप लगा दिया तो उस हिन्दू की गिरफ्तारी तुरन्त हो जाएगी। उस हिन्दू को यह तक नहीं बताया जाएगा कि उसने किस महिला के साथ बलात्कार या उत्पीड़न किया है और किसने उसके खिलाफ शिकायत की है। उस हिन्दू को ही यह साबित करना होगा कि किसी अज्ञात महिला से उसने बलात्कार या उत्पीड़न नहीं किया है और यह आरोप झूठा है।
 
इसके विपरीत यदि किसी हिन्दू महिला पर अल्पसंख्यक ने बलात्कार किया तो यह साबित करना उस बलात्कार की शिकार हिन्दू महिला की ही ज़िम्मेदारी होगी कि उस पर सचमुच बलात्कार हुआ है। और समूह” (मुसलमान या ईसाई) के आरोप को उस हिन्दू महिला की पहचान दे दी जाएगी (इंडियन एक्स्प्रेस 12.1.12)
 
इस कानून का फायदा उठाकर अल्पसंख्यक व्यक्ति ने किसी हिन्दू को उसकी सम्पत्ति को मनचाहे दाम पर बेचने या किराये पर लेने के लिए मजबूर कर सकता है।
 
कोई अल्पसंख्यक किसी हिन्दू को उसके कर्ज को माफ करने के लिए विवश कर सकता है। कोई हिन्दू मकान मालिक अल्पसंख्यक मुसलमान या ईसाई किरायेदार से मकान खाली नहीं करा सकता। वह अल्पसंख्यक उस हिन्दू मकान मालिक के खिलाफ शिकायत कर उसे जेल भिजवा सकता है। हिन्दू उद्योगपति किसी अल्पसंख्यक मुसलमान या ईसाई को खराब काम के लिए नौकरी से निकाले तो बिना सबूत की शिकायत पर उस हिन्दू को जेल जाना पड़ेगा। अयोग्य अल्पसंख्यक मुसलमान या ईसाई ने नौकरी के लिए आवेदन दिया तो हिन्दू उसे नौकरी पर रखने से मना नहीं कर सकता।
 
अल्पसंख्यक हिन्दुओं को डरा-धमकार उनसे लाखों रुपये ऐंठ सकते हैं। अगर यह कानून बना, तो कोई भी अल्पसंख्यक किसी भी हिन्दू को मामूली से मामूली इल्जाम के लिए कम से कम 10 साल के लिए जेल भेजने का कानूनी हथियार प्राप्त कर लेगा (इंडियन एक्स्प्रेस 12/1/12)
 
साम्प्रदायिक हिंसा के नाम से प्रस्तावित कानून हिन्दू-विरोधी, उद्योग-व्यवसाय-अर्थव्यवस्था विरोधी, सामाजिक समरसता विरोधी, राष्ट्र-विरोधी, पंथनिर्पेक्षता-विरोधी, लोकतन्त्र-विरोधी और संविधान-विरोधी है। फिर भी मुलायम सिंह जी मुसलमानों को खुश करके उनका वोट लेने के लिए इस बिल का समर्थन करते हैं। यह कानून आतंकवादियों की हिफाजत करेगा और हिन्दुओं को जेल की धमकी दिखाएगा।
 
आश्चर्य की बात है अहिंसा परमोधर्मः मानने वाले, विश्व का कल्याण चाहने वाले, दुनिया के किसी देश पर आक्रमण न करने वाले हिन्दुओं के खिलाफ इन सेक्युलरवादी नेताओं में इतनी नफरत क्यों है? कारण है कि हिन्दुओं में एकता नहीं है, अल्पसंख्यकों में एकता है जो वोट बैंक के रूप में सेक्युलरवादी नेताओं को सत्ता का सुख दिलाती है।
 
भारत को विकसित भारत बनाने मे असफल सेक्युलरवादी राजनेता अपने स्थायी वोट बैंक के लिए इस बिल को पारित कर बहुसंख्यक हिन्दुओं और अल्पसंख्यकों के बीच स्थायी दुश्मनी स्थापित कर देगें। इससे अंततः नुकसान अल्पसंख्यक का ही होगा और उनका भविष्य पूरी तरह चौपट हो जाएगा, क्योंकि सत्ता भोगी सेक्युलरवादी नेता उनका सदैव सत्ता के लिए उनका शोषण करेंगे।
 
हिन्दू कभी किसी का बुरा नहीं चाहते। वे व्यापार और नौकरी देकर अल्पसंख्यकों की आर्थिक उन्नति करना चाहते हैं। हिन्दू सदा अल्पसंख्यकों की सुख-समृद्धि की कामना करते हैं। अतः अल्पसंख्यकों को बहुसंख्यकों के साथ इस देश विरोधी बिल को मिलकर उखाड़ फेंकना चाहिए। जो अल्पसंख्यक मजहबी घृणा और हिंसा को छोड़ चुके हैं, वे हमारे सम्माननीय मित्र हैं।
 
कई अल्पसंख्यक संगठन, जिनमें जमात-ए-उलेमा-ए-हिन्द प्रमुख है, कॉंग्रेस पर इस कानून को पारित के लिए दबाव डाल रहे हैं। हर मोर्चे पर पिट रही कॉंग्रेस 2014 में मुस्लिम वोटों को अपनी झोली में डलवाने के लिए इस खतरनाक हिन्दू-विरोधी विधेयक को पारित करने की कोशिश करेगी। कॉंग्रेस के स्वास्थ्य मंत्री गुलाम नबी आजाद ने कहा है कि उसकी सरकार इस विधेयक को पारित करने के लिए कटिबद्ध है।
 
यह विधेयक विश्व के 95 करोड़ हिन्दुओं के मानवाधिकारों का घोर उल्लंघन है। संयुक्त राष्ट्र संघ (यू.एन.ओ.) में हिन्दुओं के मानवाधिकारों के लिए संघर्ष करना पड़ेगा।
 
श्री अरुण जेटली, सुश्री जयललिता, सुश्री मायावती, श्री नवीन पट्नायक और सुश्री ममता बैनर्जी के अनुसार इस विधेयक के द्वारा कॉंग्रेस देश पर हमेशा अपनी तानाशाही लागू करना चाहती है।
 
मुसलमानों एवं ईसाईयों की जो संस्थाऐं वोट बैंक के लिए सेक्युलरवादी राजनेताओं के लिए सहयोग का कार्य कर रही हैं उनकी संस्थाओं को बहुत बड़ा आर्थिक सहयोग मिलता है। परंतु हिन्दू सर्वत्र मार खा रहे हैं क्योंकि उनकी संस्थाओं को हिन्दू उद्योगपतियों द्वारा आर्थिक सहयोग नहीं मिलता।
 
इस खतरनाक, राष्ट्रविरोधी और हिन्दू-विरोधी विधेयक के खिलाफ डॉ. सुब्रमण्यम स्वामी जैसे प्रतिष्ठित राष्ट्रप्रेमी व्यक्तियों के मार्गदर्शन में अखिल-भारतीय विरोध-अभियान में आप सहयोगी हों जिससे इस अत्याचारी जिहादी कानून के खिलाफ हिन्दुओं का एकजुट संघर्ष ही आपको और आपकी आने वाली पीढ़ियों के भविष्य की रक्षा कर सकेगा। आप इस प्रस्तावित बिल को www.nac.nic.in(सरकार की वेबसाइट) पर भी देखें सकते हैं। सम्पर्क हेतु 09313103060, nr.carried@gmail.com

************
 

Thursday 16 August 2012

क्या यह असम की प्रतिक्रिया है? - मनीष मंजुल (समर्थ – महामंत्री)



देश में पूर्वोत्तर के नागरिकोँ को डर क्यों है? असम की पहली जिहादी प्रतिक्रिया मुंबई में आजाद मैदान पर हुई| इस घटनाक्रम में मुंबई पुलिस की दुर्गति को पूरे देश ने देखा | इस के बाद पूर्वोत्तर के लोग प्रशासन पर कैसे भरोसा करें? पुलिस की कमजोर छवि सत्तापक्ष की दूरदर्शिता की कमी स्पष्ट करता है| पूर्वोत्तर के लोगो में जो डर है, वो दूर कैसे होगा? माँ पिता नहीं चाहते उनका बच्चा किसी जिहादी द्वारा बलि चढ़े | इसके अन्य प्रतिफल क्या होंगे? क्या सत्ता पक्ष, मीडिया और विपक्ष ने इस को सोचा ? पढ़े लिखे नौकरीपेशा लोग भी अफवाहों के जंजाल में फंस रहे हैं| वे अपने घरों से भाग रहे हैं| उनके जीवन पर जिहादी आक्रमण का तनाव उनको अपने घर जाने के लिए मजबूर कर रहा है| पूर्वोत्तर के नागरिक साधारणतया स्थानीय लोगो से ज्यादा संपर्क नहीं रख पाते है | इस कमजोर कड़ी के कारण पलायन ही उपाय दिखता होगा| 

इस तनाव का दुष्परिणाम क्या हो सकता है? इसकी कल्पना भी सरकार को नहीं है| क्या होगा जब बड़ी संख्या में ये डरे हुए लोग पूर्वोत्तर में अपने घरों तक पहुंचेंगे? पलायन के कारण उनका जो नुकसान हो रहा है उसकी टीस कहाँ, कैसे और किस पर निकलेगी?

असम के दंगों को सही समय पर नियन्त्रित नहीं करना भी केंद्र सरकार की दूरदर्शिता की कमी को स्पष्ट करता है| दंगों के पहले चरण के बाद वहां केंद्र सरकार ने राज्य सरकार पर असरदार कार्रवाई के लिए दबाव क्यों नहीं बनाया

असम और मुंबई में जो समानता है, वह विदेशी घुसपैठ है| असम में विदेशी मुसलमान घुसपैठिये सत्ता हासिल करने का साधन बन चुके है| असम में विदेशी घुसपैठियों को स्थानीय लोगों ने अस्वीकार किया है| मुंबई में इन्ही विदेशी घुसपैठियों के समर्थन में भारतीय मुसलामानों ने पाकिस्तानी झंडा लेकर मजहब और मजहबी रिश्तों को देश की मिट्टी से बड़ा माना | यह इतनी भयावह मानसिकता है, जिसके दुष्परिणाम की कल्पना भी नहीं की जा सकती |

यदि ये मानसिकता भारत में जड़ जमाएगी तो देश में सद्भाव और समरसता की जड़ें हिल जाएँगी | यह मानसिकता भारत को किस दिशा में ले जायेगी?  क्या हम इसकी कल्पना कर सकते है?

Wednesday 15 August 2012

Azad Maidan (CST-Mumbai-Riots) 11th Aug 2012

नोर्थ ईस्ट प्रान्तों के भारतीयों पर मुंबई के आजाद मैदान जैसे जिहादी उपद्रवियों द्वारा असम दंगों की प्रतिक्रया में आक्रमण


HOW MUSLIMS DEFEND THE STUPIDITY OF ISLAM?

HOW MUSLIMS DEFEND THE STUPIDITY OF ISLAM?

Monday, 13 August 2012 15:30 Sujit Das

A incisive discussion on Muslims' "language" and "out of context" arguments to shut up critics of Islam...

Presently the debate on Islam is in full swing on various social networking as well as in many ex-Muslim and anti-Islam websites. Yet, the truth is not embraced easily. Old beliefs die hard. Though many sympathizers of Islam, e.g., Karen Armstrong, Edward Said and John Esposito, try to portray a deceptive rosy picture of Islam, the true Muslims show the real face of Islam with their constant readiness to harass, intimidate and assassinate anyone who may slight their religion. For this reason, Theo Van Gogh was shot and stabbed to death in the Netherlands and his associate Ayaan Hirsi Ali had to live with bodyguards and armored cars (Ali, 2007, p. xii), Taslima Nasrin has been living in exile since 1994, Faraj Foda was shot dead in front of his office in Cairo, Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd fled out of Egypt to escape the death penalty, and Sayyid Mahmoud al-Qimni was forced to recant all his writings (Ahmed, 2006, p. ix). Unfortunately, before the outside world would get a chance to read their works, these writers were silenced through murder, terror, and death-threats, and their writings were banned in the Muslim world. But who can stop the truth from spreading?

Today who can deny the fact that Islam is different from all other religions, because of the threat of violence to its critics? All other religions can be criticized and even ridiculed without fear of violence. Only with Islam is there a credible threat of violence to its critics. Muslims can criticize Christianity and Hinduism without any fear of violence, but Christians and Hindus cannot criticize Islam without an ever-present fear of Islamic violence. It needs far more bravery to be on that side. A simple, calm, rational debate between all religions is not possible, because the fear of Islamic violence is always in the background. If Islam is, as Muslims claim, a mature, modern, tolerant religion, then why there is a need to the threat of violence? Muslims don’t understand the self-contradiction.

Since Muslims cannot argue their religion with reason (Islam cannot survive if argued with reason), they resort to sudden abnormal rage. If it does not help, they opt for habitual lying and flawed arguments. We often hear two such arguments from them – the “language” argument and the “out of context” argument (Warraq, 2003, pp. 400-4). In this article, we will have a closer look at these two arguments.



The language argument
When the Qur’anic contradictions, or absurdities, or the violent verses are pointed out, Muslims will ask aggressively, “Do you know Arabic?” Then they tell triumphantly, “You have to read it in original Arabic to understand it fully”, or “These are not there in original Arabic Qur’an”, or, “The beauty of the Qur’an is lost in the translation”, or “There are many fake translations of the Qur’an to malign Islam” etc. With this, Western critics generally become silent. Now the question is: How many Muslims have read the Qur’an in original Arabic? Since the majority of Muslims are not Arabs, they have to rely on translations. In fact, most Muslims who raise the language arguments are non-Arabs and don’t understand Arabic.

Secondly, a large section of the Qur’an is just meaningless blabbering of an illiterate seventh-century mental patient whom Muslims revere as their Prophet. In this respect, Puin, the great scholar of Islam (cited Warraq, 2002, pp. 112, 121) commented, My idea is that the Qur’an is a kind of cocktail of texts that were not all understood even at the time of Muhammad. Many of them may even be a hundred years older than Islam itself. The Qur’an claims for itself that it is ‘mubeen’, or clear. But [contrary to popular belief] if you look at it, you will notice that every fifth sentence or so simply does not make sense … the fact is that a fifth of the Qur’anic text is just incomprehensible. If the Qur’an is not comprehensible, if it cannot even be understood in Arabic, then it’s not translatable into any language. That is why Muslims are afraid. Since the Qur’an claims repeatedly to be clear but is not — there is an obvious and serious contradiction. Something else must be going on”.

The Qur’an is indeed a confusing text, which confuses everyone – whether one knows Arabic or not. In fact, the Qur’an was not written fully in the purest Arabic. There are many foreign words, which got included in this supposed to be “God’s unaltered word” (Warraq, 1995, p. 108). The very word “Qur’an” itself is of foreign origin. Contrary to popular Muslim belief, the meaning of the Qur’an is not recitation. It is actually derived from an Aramaic word, “Qariyun”, meaning a lectionary of scripture portions appointed to be recited at divine service. Qur’an contains most of the Biblical stories in a shorter form, and as Puin commented (cited Das, 2012, p. 158), is “a summary of the Bible to be read in service”.

Moreover, freethinkers and critics do not need to know Arabic. All they need is a critical sense, clarity of thought, unbiased attitude and skepticism. The language of the Qur’an is a form of classical Arabic, which is totally different from the spoken Arabic of today. So, even Arabs have to rely on translations to understand their holy text. Moreover, when Muslims criticize the Bible and other sacred texts of Christianity, how many of them know a word of Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek? When they criticize the holy scriptures of Hinduism, how many of them know Sanskrit? Muslims do not understand that their flawed logic to defend Islam’s foolishness goes against them. Also, Muslims around the world preach Islam to make converts in languages other than Arabic. If the Qur’an can only be understood in Arabic, why do they do this?

Neither the “actual meaning” of the Qur’an nor its “beauty” is lost in the translation. There are translations of the Arabic Qur’an by Muslims themselves, so Muslims cannot claim that there has been deliberate tampering of the text by infidel translators. Arabic is a Semitic language related to Hebrew and Aramaic, and is no easier but also no more difficult to translate than any other language. Of course, there are all sorts of difficulties with the language and grammar of the Qur’an, but these difficulties have been recognized by Muslim scholars themselves. As example, as-Suyuti, possibly the greatest Arabist and Qur’an commentator ever, wrote about verse 11.107 that “I cannot make heads or tails out of this blessed verse.” (cited Warraq, 2011, p. 224) The Qur’an is indeed a rather opaque text, but it is opaque to everyone. Even Muslim scholars do not understand a fifth of it (Warraq, 2003, p. 400). The Arab literary scholar Nicholson noted (1969, p. 161) that the Qur’an is, “obscure, tiresome, uninteresting, a farrago of long-winded narratives and prosaic exhortations”. And regarding “beauty” of the Qur’an, it is better we say nothing; otherwise it will put Muslims more in shame. A large portion of the Qur’an is full of Jihadi verses and hate speeches against the infidels. As example, here I quote the most “beautiful and peaceful” verse of the Qur’an, known as the verse of sword.

Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.” (Q: 9.5)

This is just one example of miraculous beauty of this holy book. Let us read the Surah 111 (Al-Massad: Palm fiber, The Flame).

The power of Abu Lahab will perish, and he will perish. His wealth and gains will not exempt him. He will be plunged in flaming Fire, and his wife, the wood-carrier will have upon her neck a halter of palm-fiber.

The complete Surah 111 is a curse. What beauty can we find in a hate speech? The Qur’an is full of vulgar words and obscene language directed toward infidels. For example: infidels are

1) wrong-doers (Q 2.59; 2.95; 2.145; 2.150; 2.165; 2.193; 2.229; 2.246; 2.254; 2.258; 2.270; 3.57; 3.86; 3.94; 3.128; 3.140; 3.151; 4.74; 5.29; 5.45; 5.107; 6.21; 6.45; 6.58; 6.135; 7.41; 7.47; 7.148; 8.54; 9.23; 11.31, etc);

2) hypocrites (Q 4.61; 8.49; 9.64; 9.73; 29.11; 33.1; 48.6; 57.13; 59.11; 63.1; 66.9, etc.);

3) Liars (Q: 6.28; 7.66; 9.77; 11.93; 39.3; 40.24, etc); and

4) Evildoers (Q: 2.12; 2.26; 2.99; 3.63; 5.47; 5.108; 7.102; 9.24; 10.17; 11.18; 14.22; 17.47; 18.53; 19.86; 24.4; 29.4; 34.42; 37.22; 39.24, etc) (Das, 2012, p. 142).

All these hate speeches that go on verse after verse indicate the cultural heritage of illiterate Muhammad brought up in a desert. People, who are evil, attack others instead of facing their own failures. A curse is uttered by a person, who desires to harm another, but finds him or herself powerless to do so, and appeals to a supernatural power to inflict such harm oh his/her supposed opponent.

Secondly, there is another very strong and serious problem in the Qur’an. It affirms the scriptures of the Jews and Christians as authentic and true revelation from God. Allah confirms,

Verily this is a Revelation from the Lord of the Worlds: With it came down the spirit of Faith and Truth Upon thy heart, that thou mayst be (one) of the warners, in the perspicuous Arabic tongue”. (Q: 26.192-5)

And lo! it is in the Scriptures of the men of earlier (Prophets)”. (Q: 26.196)

The “earlier writings” are the Torah and the Injil for example, written in Hebrew and Greek. For Jews, Arabic was a language of poets and drunkards. How can, then, the Arabic Qur’an be contained in books of other languages? Now, we have the choice between two different lies in Allah’s revelations. Either because of verse 26.196, the words “in clear Arabic speech” is contained in the earlier revelations. This is a lie, because they are not in Arabic. Therefore, it cannot be in the earlier revelation. But then verse 26.196 becomes a lie in the Qur’an. In no way, can we save the situation. There are more such verses, e.g., the verse 16.103 also claims “this is Arabic pure and clear”, which refers to the Qur’an without doubt.

Moreover, it raises another serious question: In what language is the one and only true original of the document? Was it written in Arabic, or Latin, or in some language unknown to us? The first earthly edition of the Qur’an was published in Arabic, and subsequently it has been translated into other languages. Also, some scholars believe that initially the Qur’an was written in a popular dialect prevailed in the Hijaz (a coastal region of the western Arabian Peninsula bordering on the Red Sea), but later the book was re-written in Arabic literary language that now appears to us (Warraq, 2011, p. 83). It means the original language of the Qur’an is not pure Arabic. But then what is the original language of this supposed-to-be-sacred scripture? Nobody on earth, not even the most devout Muslim, knows the answer to this question.

Yet, there is another problem. Skeptics, who doubt that any earthly edition of the Qur’an is a transcript of a supernatural prototype, point out that earthly editions of the Qur’an contain many contradictions, inconsistencies, fallacies, errors, and absurdities. If the earthly editions are not free from error how can we be sure that the heavenly version (Q: 43.3 – “the mother of the book”; Q: 55.77 – “a concealed book”; Q: 85.22 – “a well guarded tablet”) is entirely error free?

Therefore, we can see that Muslims’ “language” argument does not stand on firm grounds. If Muslims claim that there are many “fake” translations in circulation (Jewish conspiracy?) to defame Islam, why there is no fatwa (religious verdict) to remove the fake copies from circulation? Why there is not an outrage similar to Muhammad-cartoon incident, or Salman Rushdie’s 1988 novel The Satanic Verses, or, Pope’s criticism of Muhammad on September 12, 2006? The simple fact is that there is no so-called “fake” translation of the Arabic Qur’an. This “beautiful” book is a violent and hateful text, the mother manual of today’s Islamic terrorism.

So while criticizing Islam, freethinkers should not think – who am I to criticize Islam, when I don’t know Arabic? The language argument is a Muslim tactic to defend the foolishness of Islam. For a first-rated independent thinker, who embarks on studying and searching for the discovery of truth and reality with honesty and sincerity, language is not a barrier. If not, how these freethinkers are happy to criticize Christianity or Hinduism? How many Western freethinkers and atheists know Hebrew? How many even know what the language of the Old Testament was? How many of them know the ancient Sanskrit to criticize the Hindu sacred texts? Of course, Muslims are also free in their criticism of the Bible and Christianity, and Hinduism and Bhagvada-Gita without knowing a word of Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek or Sanskrit.

The out-of-context argument
Next, let us discuss the “out of context” argument. When Jihadi verses are pointed out, Muslims say, “You have quoted out of context”. This “out of context” argument, to borrow words from Warraq, is the “old standby of crooked, lying politicians” (Warraq, 2003, p. 400). This could mean two things: (a) the historical context to which the various verses refer; and (b) the textual context, the actual place in a particular chapter that the verse quoted comes from.

The Historical Context is out of question. Qur’an is supposed to be the eternal word of God, true and valid for all places and time. If Allah is eternal, then Allah can neither have a past nor a history. Therefore, Muslims actually blaspheme against their God, when they talk about historical context. Secondly, as Spencer observed (2003, p. 127), reading the Qur’an is often like walking in on a conversation between two people with whom one is only slightly acquainted. Frequently, they make reference to people and events without bothering to explain what is going on. Even the famous Muslim scholar and one of the most influential thinkers, Sayyid Qutb, admits that most of the Surahs were not revealed as wholes, but rather bit by bit at diverse occasions, of which there is no historical record agreed upon by scholars. Hence, the only option available to us is that of assumption and preponderaton in this matter (cited Boullata, 2002, p. 363). In other words, the context is often not supplied. Therefore, if the context is not given in the Qur’an, how a verse can be quoted out of context?

The remaining is the textual context. No doubt, there are some peaceful verses in the Qur’an, which were revealed early in Muhammad Prophetic mission in Mecca. Muslims want to prove that Islam is a peaceful religion by quoting those verses. But all the peaceful verses were abrogated by the violent verses of the ninth Surah, because the ninth Surah was revealed toward the end of Muhammad’s life. In fact, most Muslim authorities agree that the ninth Surah was the very last section of the Qur’an revealed to him. Many Muslim theologians assert that the verse of sword (Q: 9.5) abrogates as many as 124 more peaceful and tolerant verses of the Qur’an (Spencer, 2007, p. 78; McAuliffe, 2006, p. 218). The ninth Surah is the only one of the Qur’an’s 114 chapters that does not begin with “Bismillah ar-Rahman ar-Rahim” – “In the name of Allah, the compassionate, the merciful.” It is because, Muhammad not only did not recite the Bismillah himself, but commanded that it not be recited at the beginning of this Surah. The Tafsir al-Jalalayn explains Muhammad’s command by saying that the Bismillah is security, and ninth Surah was sent down when security was removed by the sword. Ali ibn Abi Talib agrees, saying that the Bismillah “conveys security while this Surah was sent down with the sword. That is why it does not begin with security” (Oliver, 2006, p. 537; Spencer, 2009, p. 200). Ibn Kathir declares that the verse of sword (Q: 9.5) has “abrogated every agreement of peace between the Prophet and any idolater, every treaty and every term … no idolater had any more treaty or promise of safety ever since the Surah Bara’ah (ninth Surah) was revealed” (Spencer, 2003, p. 134). Ibn Juzayy, another commentator, agrees that the verse of the sword’s purpose is (Spencer, 2005, p. 25), “abrogating every peaceful treaty of the Qur’an”.

Therefore, the tolerant verses are practically meaningless. The problem began when Uthman collected the verses of the Qur’an and arranged them in a way that the abrogated verses were mixed up with the abrogating verses (Ahmed, 2006, p. 77). This arrangement led to the appearance of discrepancies and contradiction in the Uthmanic Qur’an, which is used until our present day. The second proof is that the Sharia law does not take into account the peaceful verses because these are abrogated. Muslims try to fool the non-Muslims with their twisted logic and pathological lying. They repeat the same lies again and again thinking that it will become true if often repeated. “Islam is a peaceful religion” is a lie which is as old as the birth of Islam. Why don’t we find the Taliban terrorists singing the peaceful verses from the Qur’an while beheading the captives? If the verse “There is no compulsion in religion.” (Q: 2.256) is still valid why Muslims had destroyed the world-famous Bamiyan Buddhas in Afghanistan?

In November 2002, Osama bin Laden quoted eight jihadi verses from the Qur’an in a “Letter to the American People”, and in his 1996 declaration of jihad against the USA, he quoted sixteen jihadi verses (Spencer, 2003, p. 125). Long history of lying has caused Muslims to believe their own lies.

Secondly, reinterpretation of the Qur’anic verses is officially allowed. Sheikh Youssef Alqardawi, the most famous Muslim scholar in the Arab world, appeared on Al Jazeera’s weekly program “Sharia and Life”, to discuss issues related to Islam and answer some of the questions put to him, through phone calls. On February 22 2009, he rejected the evolution theory, because the Qur’an says otherwise; but he reassured his audience that Muslims don’t need to worry about the evolution theory as long as it remains a theory. Only if it becomes a recognized scientific fact, the Muslim scholars would reinterpret the relevant verses in the Qur’an to bring them in line with proven scientific facts (Salih, 2009). Muslims claim that Qur’an is divine, but shamelessly reinterpret the Qur’an by twisting the language and changing the meanings of the words or even introducing completely new meanings. This is how the Muslims lie to save their holy book from divine downfall. Their logic is simple, “The Qur’an is correct even when it is wrong”.

From this discussion, it is very clear that while dealing with Muslims, what they say is not the issue. The real issue is: what they actually mean in their hearts. They lie when it is in their interest to do so, and Allah will not hold them accountable for lying when it is beneficial to the cause of Islam. They lie by swearing to Allah, or by taking an oath by the Prophet, the Ka’ba and the Qur’an – all with a very sincere and pious look and innocent face without any guilt or fear of accountability or retribution. And one lie leads to another to cover up the first one. A lie in the defense of Islam is approved, even applauded, in the Qur’an. Allah and Muhammad were two of the greatest liars humanity had ever seen. It is quite fascinating that both of them could just tell a lie and make the Muslims believe it’s true. Muslims have picked up the art of lying from the Qur’an. If we don’t understand Muslims’ Qur’anic strategy of lying to propagate the cult of Islam, we just invite more death and destruction on us in the future.

References

  • Ahmed, A. A (2006); The Hidden Life of the Prophet Muhammad. Author House. Indiana.
  • Ali, Ayaan Hirsi (2007); Infidel. Free Press. NY.
  • Boullata, Issa, J. (2002); Literary Structures of Religious Meaning in the Qur’an. Curzon Press. Richmond, Surrey.
  • Das, Sujit (2012); Islam Dismantled: The Mental Illness of Prophet Muhammad. Felibri. US.
  • McAuliffe, Jane Dammen (2006); The Cambridge Companion to the Qur’an. Cambridge University Press. UK.
  • Nicolson, Reynold (1969); A Literary History of the Arabs. Cambridge University Press. UK.
  • Oliver, Leaman (2006); The Qur’an: an encyclopedia. Routledge. Abingdon.
  • Spencer, Robert (2003); Onward Muslim Soldiers: How Jihad still threatens America and the West. Regnery Publishing. Washington DC.
  • Spencer, Robert (2005); The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades). Regnery Publishing. Washington DC.
  • Spencer, Robert (2007); Religion of Peace? Why Christianity is and Islam isn’t. Regnery Publishing. Washington DC.
  • Spencer, Robert (2009); The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran. Regnery Publishing Washington DC.
  • Warraq, Ibn (1995); Why I am not a Muslim. Prometheus books. NY.
  • Warraq, Ibn (2002); What the Koran Really Says – Language, Text and Commentary. Prometheus books. NY.
  • Warraq, Ibn (2003); Leaving Islam, Apostates Speak Out. Prometheus Books. NY.
  • Warraq, Ibn (2011); Which Koran: Variants, Manuscripts, Linguistics. Prometheus books. NY
  • Salih, Mumin (2009); It is Official: Muslims Reinterpret the Quran! Islam-Watch. (http://www.islam-watch.org/MuminSalih/Muslims-Reinterpret- Quran.htm, last accessed November 27, 2011)