While Tommy was in Bury, he ended up having a civilised debate with a very gracious and polite Muslim woman from the area about the Quran and the interpretations of her holy book.
As the discussion began she started by saying “The first thing we are taught, from the mosques as well, is that everyone has different interpretations of the Quran and that any translation into any language will never be literal.”
The young Muslim woman also states that there are many different types of Muslim in the world; we agree, there are said to be at least 73 different Islamic sects in the world today. We know that Muslims are not a single monolith; Muslims come from various cultures, traditions and schools of thought, never once have we said that all Muslims think the same. The one constant in a Muslims life is, of course, the Quran.
So Tommy’s discussion with the young Muslim lady starts with a huge “get out clause” from the off, this will allow anyone who defends Islamic scripture sufficient “wiggle room” to avoid some disturbing truths. Which also begs the question, if an all-knowing omnipotent being such as Allah delivers a message, why is that message not clear or concise enough for it to be to adequately understood and followed? It just seems unfathomable that an all-knowing deity provided a message that won’t be correctly interpreted by his followers; it just seems inexplicable to us. Pretty counter-productive in fact.
That said, we want and should be fair to the young lady in this video, we do not wish her any harm, we do not have any ill feelings towards her, Tommy wanted to give her a fair shake and allow her to put her opinions across, Tommy did precisely that.
We understand and appreciate that any individual has the right to their own interpretations of any religious texts, however that does not change what is written in the texts and neither does it negate any “respected influential Muslim scholars” take on the text either.
We will not agree with some of her hypothesis in terms of Quranic interpretations, nor will we accept or like some of the things she has said. However, we do appreciate how she conducted herself, and how she took on board Tommys points during the discourse.
It makes a pleasant change to be able to discuss a topic within the realm of free expression and free speech on the battleground of ideas. No ideology should be spared from critique, Islam, however, does deserve special attention given the fact that its adherents carry out most terrorist attacks in the modern world today, and they do so in the name of their prophet, their god and their religion, citing specific religious texts when doing so.
Christianity has had to endure endless critique, as has Judaism. The thing is that Islam, being the youngest of the monotheistic faiths, has not had to take too much criticism; in fact, it is protected from criticism. Any critique of Islam requires an reactionary indictment here in the West. The strategy employed by thin-skinned Islamic advocates requires an immediate castigation of the person who made the criticism a being a racist Islamophobe; the irony with that strategy is that Islam is not a race, it’s a purposefully disingenuous conflation to hide behind semantics, but it works well for them, so why fix something that isn’t broke?
In a country where Islamic law rules, expect death and destruction for blasphemy, it’s a strategy that works well in Islamic countries.
A thorough critique of the Islamic ideology is much needed, and hopefully; as a result, the Islamic world can move on from puberty and become a mature adult. Attaining maturity will only happen when the Islamic world goes through a much-needed reformation and an age of enlightenment; that way it can join the 21st century and become a more civilised, less backward, more tolerant, and a less “bomby” and violent place.
This young Muslim lady was fine with Tommy exchanging ideas, giving his opinion based on facts and what Muslims themselves have said and done. At no time did this young woman become offended or insulted to the point where she had to act out a violent temper-tantrum which unfortunately tends to be the norm when dealing with less mature individuals.
Tommy broached the subject of Muslim men being allowed to beat women in the Quran.
Muhammad himself struck his child-wife Ayisha in the chest; you can find that here.
However when Tommy starts this discourse he noticed something a little concerning, the young Muslim woman had in her possession a book authored by Ibn Kathir. It would almost certainly have been a Tafsir, a Quranic exegesis that gives explanation and context to the verses contained in it by referring to accepted/authoritative (shahi) hadith (the accepted deeds, sayings and behaviours of the prophet Muhammad as reported by his close companions and followers). The book in her possession was a clear point of reference to debate the points raised by Tommy.
To break down Surah 5 verse 33 in the Quran we will only use Islamic sources, we will need to refer to Ibn Kathir (the young Muslim woman’s reference book), look at various “interpretations” of the Quran from Arabic to English, and then examine the meaning of Arabic words themselves, that way we cant get lost in apologetics and obfuscation.
The Arabic translation that Tommy was referring to as “mischief”, is also used by Quranic translators as “corruption”. The Arabic word ascribed to mischief/corruption is Fasad – which in Arabic is – فساد
The word “Fasad” (or a variant of it) relates explicitly to corruption/mischief in Sura 5 verse 33 which you can see here.
Now that we have established the use of the Arabic word for corruption/mischief (Fasad) as used by many Muslim scholars when they have translated the Arabic Quran into English, we can now see how Ibn Kathir came to the conclusions he did about mischief and the requisite punishments that are justifiable against those who commit such a crime.
So when Tommy talks about the issues of “scholarly works” that come from the likes of Ibn Kathir, works that clearly state a mere “disbelief” in Allah or Muhammad constitutes a “mischief.” Thus those who disbelieve are subject to the punishment of the cutting of hands and feet from opposite sides (amputation), expulsion from their indigenous homeland (cast out) or death by way of crucifixion, he’s absolutely bang on the money!
Now there’s not so much wiggle room after all, once people can see through the fog of disingenuous obfuscation its pretty clear why Islamic literalists murder in the name of their religion.
For the record, we are not suggesting that this lovely young Muslim woman was in any way deliberately obfuscating; however, she absolutely needs to read up on what the Quran ordains and what her scholarly reference books and/or mosque promote.
Islam is a backward and murderous ideology, that’s not us hating, that’s the hatred contained within Islamic texts, and that’s what is propagated by Muslim scholars today in mosques all over the UK. If any Mosque or Immam would reject such an assertion, then surely they would not be supplying a tafsir from Ibn Kathir?
We recognise that everyone has the right to their opinion; however, people are not entitled to their own facts.
Vote for Tommy Robinson, vote for truth!
CAN YOU HELP US REPORT MORE INDEPENDENT NEWS?