“Islam is clearly not a religion of peace. It is a framework for establishing power and conquest” – Chapter 3
Dare to Speak
Islam versus Free Democracy and Free Enterprise By Al Bailey
Introduction
Much has been written about Islam, its ethics, and its relationships with other religions. Despite this large volume of work, there appears to be something missing, something even more basic and important to people of all faiths. What is missing is a study of Islam with regard to governance, particularly regarding its relationship to what we call democracy. The goal of this book is to fill the gap by providing this investigation and presenting its findings.
Why choose this subject? Because, throughout the world, we receive starkly conflicting information about Islam. Apologists claim that Islam is a religion of peace. They also claim that our democratic traditions of religious tolerance require us to respect the freedom of Muslims to practice Islam. At the same time, we see Muslims practicing violent religious intolerance around the world. This intolerance is often against their non-Islamic neighbors, who range from Orthodox Russians to Sudanese Christians, Hindu Indians, Catholic Filipinos, and Buddhist Thais. Additionally, Muslims practice religious intolerance against each other. We hear of Sunni Muslims persecuting Shiite Muslims, Shiite Muslims persecuting Sunni Muslims, and Wahhabis persecuting everyone else.
Clearly, something is wrong with this picture. Yet many people fail to associate the violence committed by Muslims with Islam itself. They steadfastly seek alternative explanations, such as colonialism, tribal tensions, racism, and poverty. They refuse to even consider the idea that Islam may be inherently aggressive and intolerant toward other religions.
This self-deception cannot continue for long. Islam’s presence and influence is growing throughout the world, and it demands our attention. For example, Nigeria’s northern states announced their conversion to Islamic Law in 2002 by sentencing several women to death by stoning for adultery. In 2006, the entire nation of Denmark was terrorized by Muslims around the world because a mid-sized, independent Danish newspaper published some political cartoons of Muhammad.
An ever-growing cascade of violence tells us that we are approaching a time when we will have no choice but to confront two disturbing possibilities:
• Islam is fundamentally incompatible with democracy as we know it, because it opposes the individual freedoms and protections that citizens of democracies cherish.
• Muslims are in the process of using our own democratic institutions to subvert democracy and to replace democratically determined law with Islamic Law.
Before you dismiss these words as bigotry, please allow me to explain:
In the United States, we have embraced principles of tolerance and freedom that may be described as “live and let live.” Applied to religion, “live and let live” means that no one has the right to force their beliefs on others; nor may they prevent others from changing their beliefs. While Americans may not always live up to these principles, we aspire to them, and use our freedoms to correct ourselves as we progress.
5
Tolerance and freedom are essential parts of what we call democracy, which political theorists usually call Liberal Democracy or Western Democracy.
In Dare to Speak, this form of democracy is called Free Democracy. Religious tolerance is an essential principle we live by in the United States and throughout the Westernized world. This principle has evolved from centuries of futile religious battles that caused us to violate the very beliefs we claimed to fight for. It was codified in complete form by the Constitution of the United States, which has been an example and a beacon of hope for nations around the world. While these nations have created constitutions of their own, to serve their particular circumstances, the U.S. Constitution has remained a guiding reference for progressive thinkers everywhere. Why? Because it exemplifies a framework for governance that grants unprecedented powers and freedoms to its citizens.
In contrast, there is a part of the world where Free Democracy has not flourished, and its freedoms are not valued. Free Democracy did not evolve there, and we are discovering that it does not grow there, despite a variety of working examples in other parts of the world. This infertile soil is the House of Islam.
Why has the form of democracy we cherish failed to take root and grow in the Islamic world? Because Islam ties religion and politics together in a Gordian knot. Islam has its own body of laws, known as Shari’ah,1 and these laws sharply oppose Free Democracy. Islam and Free Democracy are as opposed to each other as Communism and Free Democracy, or Fascism and Free Democracy.
Many people refuse to consider the possibility that Islam and Free Democracy are irreconcilably opposed to each other. After all, the benefits of Free Democracy are obvious, and many Islamic nations have worked diligently to adopt it. Unfortunately, the fruits of these efforts confirm that Islam and Free Democracy do not mix. Islamic nations like Turkey, Egypt, and Algeria have histories of secular governments, but those governments have uneasy relationships with their citizens. These nations have often found themselves resorting to warlike tactics against Islamic fundamentalists to preserve themselves. In Iran, Islam’s mullahs won such a war, and they now use their authority to thwart the superficially democratic institutions they control.
What makes Islam different from other religions? Why is it hostile to Free Democracy? To put it plainly, it does not believe in “live and let live.” Devout Muslims do not feel obligated to convince others to convert to Islam through reason. Instead, the Koran encourages them to use persecution. According to the Koran,2 people of other faiths are allowed to continue in their practices only if they acknowledge that Islam is a superior religion and pay extortion money to an Islamic government in the form of special taxes.3 This exception, which is extolled by Muslims as an example of tolerance, is actually designed to grind down other religions to nothing over time. To people who are weak, or young in their faiths, this persecution raises a…
1 Also referred to as Sharia or Shariah.
2 The Koran, which is also spelled “Qu’ran” or “Quran,” is a compilation of the recitations of Muhammad, believed by Muslims to be literal words of Allah.
3 Jizyah, which is a per capita tax imposed on adult male non-Muslims living under Muslim rule.
6
…question: “Why pay extra taxes and accept an inferior position in society when all I have to do is convert to Islam?”
In a sense, these mercenary conversions are a saving grace. There are many Muslims in the world who are Muslim in name only. They know that if they left Islam, their Apostasy4 would be considered a capital crime. They are prisoners of their faith instead of believers. Therefore, the apparent strength of Islam can be deceptive, and many nominal Muslims are far more benevolent than Islam calls them to be.
Many of us Westerners grew up ignorant of Islam. Therefore, with few experiences to contradict our democracy-inspired beliefs, which seek to accommodate different religions, we have absorbed the notion that the world’s religions as merely different paths to the same goal. For people who still believe this, the words of this book will come as a shock, because they reveal that Islam violates this assumption. Dare to Speak will show that Islam is overtly hostile toward other religions. More importantly, it will show that Islam is overtly hostile to non-Islamic governments.
This book will also uncover the subterranean war that Muslims are currently waging against the world’s Free Democracies. It will lay out the issues, provide references to back them up, and begin to discuss the actions that Westerners can take to preserve Free Democracy for future generations.
This book quotes extensively from the Koran (a compilation of recitations that Muhammad claimed were Allah’s) and the Hadith (compilations of Muhammad’s other words and deeds), as well as recent news articles and modern religious books written by Muslims. It does so to demonstrate two key points:
1. The portions of Islamic holy scripture that carry disturbing messages are not merely stray quotes in otherwise benign books. They are essential components of Islam, and the Koran and the Hadith emphasize them repeatedly. Faithful Muslims take these messages seriously and act on them.
2. The actions of Islamic terrorists around the world are not merely the products of a few deviant minds or some splinter group; they come from the violent messages of one “eternal” source: Islamic holy scripture .
Dare to Speak will demonstrate that, as long as Islam is treated as a respectable religion, and not as a hostile political ideology bent on global domination, Islam will continue to expand and sow its seeds of terror throughout the world. If we allow this to happen, the nations that currently embrace Free Democracy may one day find themselves destitute and chaotic, with their democratic laws replaced by Islamic ones.
As you read this book, you will find many references embedded directly into the text rather than exiled to appendices or footnotes. This structure gives you direct access to the sources of Dare to Speak’s assertions, to help you view them easily and form your own conclusions.
4 The abandonment of one’s religion. While most religions frown upon Apostasy, Islam views it, in specific legal terms, as the greatest of all crimes that a Muslim can commit. It is a crime punishable by death.
7
If, after reading this book, you doubt its assertions, please do your own independent research. With vast resources and newspaper archives available on the Web and in libraries, your job will be easy and inexpensive. As a starting point, I highly recommend the University of Southern California’s “Compendium of Muslim Texts,” which provides on-line access to three translations of the Koran, plus a comprehensive compilation of hadiths, along with keyword search functions for all texts. You can find this site at www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/reference.html.
Please do not dismiss or pre-judge the points of this book if they disagree with what you want to believe. You have a duty to yourself and your family to understand the issues we face, so that you can respond to them appropriately. Your actions may impact your children far more than yourself.
Before moving on to the first chapter, I would like to tell you why I call this book Dare to Speak. According to Islamic Law, these writings could easily be interpreted as insulting to Islam, and to Muhammad himself. The punishment for such insults, according to Shari’ah, is severe and may include death. Therefore, by writing to you, I am truly putting my life on the line. But this is why I feel I must speak. If I was silenced by fear, it would already be too late; Islam would be in control of my life, and yours.
8 Chapter 1: The new Cold War
Back in the exciting days of the late ‘80s, when it became apparent that Communism had failed, and that Free Democracy held the keys to the future, Francis Fukuyama wrote a hopeful article called The End of History? which was later expanded into a book.5 As he saw it, history records the evolution of society. Through it, we have learned how primitive tribes progressed through various forms of government and economy in a series of experiments that ultimately led to a perfected structure that Fukuyama felt could no longer be improved. He believed that, while actual governments and laws may still evolve, the basic structures of modern democracy, including Free Enterprise and the fair treatment of minorities, were firmly established and needed no additions. He, and many others, believed that the battle between Communism and Free Democracy was the last great conflict of humankind. The popular image of Afghani Muslims at the time was that of courageous freedom fighters, who helped the West finally break the back of the Soviet Union. With the Cold War over, we could all look forward to pounding our swords into plowshares and cashing in on the “peace dividend.”
Only one minor problem remained: the Middle East. But Yasser Arafat, Yitzhak Rabin, and Shimon Peres 6 were having productive talks in Oslo, 7 and, in 1994, their break-through agreements won them the Nobel Peace Prize. The 1979 revolution in Iran was seen by the general public as an isolated case in an isolated country. The bombing of the Marine Barracks in Lebanon in 1984, which killed 240 Americans, was portrayed as political rather than religious, and rooted in Europe’s occupation of Ottoman territories after World War I. Somalia’s bloody rejection of U.S. aid in 1993 was blamed on inept interference in a chaotic country that the U.S. did not understand. But all those issues were mere side-shows. The main event was Peace in the Middle East. A giddy world prepared for the revelry and looked forward to giving history its final curtain call.
Unfortunately, it did not work out that way. Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated by a Jewish extremist for negotiating away too many Jewish demands. Later, the few remaining negotiating points became stumbling blocks that broke the whole deal. On September 28, 2000, Yasser Arafat declared the Intifada, 8 and Israeli-Palestinian relations fell apart.
An amazing detail in this deadly deterioration is that the area of land that broke the deal is less than 50 square miles, and most of it is barren wasteland.9 Equally amazing is the fact that no one seems willing to point out that it is absurd to rage eternally over such small stakes. Why do we ignore the apparent silliness of these people, who sacrifice thousands of lives over a small expanse of arid dirt? It might be because it is too embarrassing – we would rather think….
5 The End of History and the Last Man, by Francis Fukuyama, 1992, publisher: Penguin Books
6 At the time, Yasser Arafat was Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Yitzhak Rabin was Prime Minister of Israel, and Shimon Peres was Israel’s Minister of Foreign Affairs.
7 Capital of Norway. 8 Arabic term for “uprising.” The Intifada referred to here is more formally known as the Al Aqsa Intifada, or the Second Intifada. It refers to the uprising of Palestinians against Israel, beginning in September 2000, which began as hopes for a resolution on issues unsolved by the 1993 Oslo Accords deteriorated.
9 Apartheid Wall, by Nigel Perry, The Electronic Intifada, 2000-2002 Palestine Independent Media Center.
9
….that the world is being rocked to its foundations by something important. To Americans, living in a country formed by the Louisiana Purchase, the Alaska Purchase, and the Gadsden Purchase, the situation is unfathomable. If the parties involved really wanted to solve their problems, they could readily do so through some kind of purchase or land swap. There is obviously something more ominous afoot, and it has little to do with land.
Other events soon revealed that history was not going to end any time soon. They included the bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa in 1998 and the U.S.S. Cole in 2000. The United States responded but was ineffective. The country was so caught up with Bill Clinton’s trysts with Monica Lewinski that people barely noticed. Osama bin Laden was a shadowy, unknown figure who had rarely surfaced in the news before these attacks. Some cynics even viewed him as a convenient distraction from Bill Clinton’s impeachment process. After bin Laden openly declared war on the United States, the U.S. assailed him with a military fly-swatter – an ineffective cruise missile attack – and then returned to its scandals.
On September 11, 2001, everything changed. With the Twin Towers collapsing in a cloud of dust, a gash in the Pentagon billowing smoke, and Flight 93 smashing into a Pennsylvania field on its way to Washington, presumably to the White House, the United States woke up and declared its War on Terror and Osama bin Laden.
But how could Osama bin Laden, an outlaw in a remote part of the world, with only a few thousand terrorists at his disposal, strike such a devastating blow? And, how could he elude capture even to this day?
The answer is that bin Laden is not an outlaw: his actions were condoned by his Afghan host, the Taliban. And, despite his apparent outlaw reputation among most Islamic governments, he was considered by many citizens of those governments to be a combination of Robin Hood and spiritual leader. These people saw him, and still see him, as a hero for declaring Jihad10against the Infidel West, and they cheer his tirades against the United States.
The alarming truth is that the only thing that can keep Osama bin Laden at large while a $25 million dollar reward hangs over his head is the intense loyalty of a vast multitude of Muslims.
10 1. A Muslim holy war or spiritual struggle against infidels. 2. A crusade or struggle. – The American Heritage Dictionary, Fourth Edition, ed. Joseph P. Pickett, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2000.
Link @YouTube Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy discusses the start of the COALITION TO STOP SHARIAH (www.USAStopShariah.org) at the National Press Club in Washington, DC.
This second video continues where the above video left off.
Link @YouTube Best-selling author Robert Spencer of JihadWatch.org discusses the start of the COALITION TO STOP SHARIAH at the National Press Club in Washington, DC.
We are Americans opposed to the stealth jihad being waged in this country by those who promote Shariah – authoritative Islams theo-political-religious program for establishing a global theocracy. As such, Shariah and its espousal of violent and stealthy jihad constitute sedition. We are determined to resist efforts now underway to create parallel Muslim societies and otherwise to insinuate Shariah into this country via its mosques, prisons, campuses, media, government and financial institutions.
Of particular concern is the progress being made to establish Shariah-Compliant Finance (SCF) within Western, and most recently, U.S. banks and other institutions that trade securities. Islamic finances leading Shariah authorities have made plain that they consider SCF to be jihad with money, financial jihad and a means of promoting their objective of destroying the Wests economic system and replacing it with an Islamic one.
Incredibly, in recent days, the U.S. Treasury Department has begun embracing Shariah-Compliant Finance. Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Robert Kimmitt has professed an interest in studying the salient features of Islamic banking to ascertain how far it could be useful in fighting the ongoing world economic crisis. According to a press report out of Saudi Arabia, he has declared that experts in the Treasury Department are currently learning the important features of Islamic banking.
…….The Coalition to Stop Shariah calls on the Treasury Department to cancel this indoctrination session, to cease its efforts to promote Shariah-Compliant Finance and to recognize Shariah for what it is – sedition – and treat it accordingly by banning its use in U.S. financial institutions and products.
ANN ARBOR, MI – A federal lawsuit was filed this morning against U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr. and the Federal Reserve Board to stop all bailout funds from going to American International Group, Inc. (“AIG”). According to the lawsuit, the U.S. government, through its ownership of AIG, is not only violating the Constitution, but also promoting and financing the destruction of America using American tax dollars.
The basis of the lawsuit is that AIG intentionally promotes Shariah-compliant businesses and insurance products, which by necessity must comply with the 1200 year old body of Islamic cannon law based on the Quran, which demands the conversion, subjugation, or destruction of the infidel West, including the United States. To help achieve these objectives and with the aid of federal tax dollars, AIG employs a three-person Shariah Advisory Board, with members from Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Pakistan. According to AIG, the role of its Shariah authority “is to review [its] operations, supervise its development of Islamic products, and determine Shariah compliance of these products and [its] investments.”
Of particular significance is the Pakistani Board member, Dr. Muhammed Imran Ashraf Usmani. Dr. Usmani is the son and devoted disciple of Sheik Mufti Taqi Usmani, the leading authority on Shariah financing who, in 1999, authored a book dedicating an entire chapter on why a Western Muslim must engage in violent jihad against his own country – even if Muslims are given equality and freedom to practice their religion and to proselytize.
The lawsuit was filed in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of Kevin J. Murray, a former Marine infantryman who served two tours of duty in Iraq. Murray is represented by the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and David Yerushalmi, an associated attorney who specializes in litigation and is an expert on Shariah law and Shariah compliant financing. Mr. Yerushalmi also serves as general counsel to the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C.
According to the lawsuit, use of taxpayer funds to acquire ownership of a business that intentionally promotes, endorses, supports, and funds Shariah-based Islamic religious practices violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, “This lawsuit not only raises significant constitutional issues, it also shines a light on serious national security issues that our own government has created by direct financial support and ownership of a business that supports anti-American, radical Islamic activities. Make no mistake, there is an internal cultural jihad underway against our great nation, and I fear that many of our political leaders are unwittingly complicit in it.”
On September 11, 2001, Islamic terrorists, guided by principles of Shariah-mandated jihad against “infidels,” attacked and killed thousands of innocent American civilians. Shortly thereafter, the U.S. went on the offensive by engaging Islamic terrorists overseas in Iraq and in Afghanistan. As in the past when our Nation faced great crisis, American servicemen were called to action, and Kevin Murray answered the call. From March to October 2003, Murray – a U.S. Marine – was deployed overseas in support of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Yet today, Murray’s federal tax dollars are being used to advance the very cause of global jihad he and his fellow servicemen were placed in harm’s way to overcome. Shariah explicitly demands the murder of infidels like Kevin Murray and the destruction of the United States, which Murray took an oath to defend. Shariah is the same law that is used to justify beheadings, stonings, and amputation for petty crimes in places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Sudan, which Americans deplore.
Nevertheless, AIG acknowledges and boasts its promotion of Shariah law and Shariah-based business practices. AIG itself describes “Sharia” as “Islamic law based on the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet [Mohammed].”
In further support of the federal government’s endorsement of Shariah, the U.S. Treasury department co-sponsored a seminar in November of this year entitled “Islamic Financing 101” to promote Shariah financing among American institutions. The Seminar was jointly sponsored by Harvard University, one of the many American universities and colleges receiving millions of dollars from oil-producing countries to influence their Middle East programs, which are often staffed with professors who are anti-American, anti-Israeli, and pro-Islamic.
“It is clear,” said Thompson, “oil money is purchasing the sovereignty of the United States and whatever loyalty to America these greedy financial institutions, corporations, and universities have left. It’s up to the American people to take back their country from those who so easily betray its interests.”
The federal lawsuit challenges that portion of the “Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008” that appropriated $40 billion in taxpayer money to fund and financially support the United States government’s majority ownership interest in AIG, which engages in Shariah-based Islamic religious activities that are anti-Christian, anti-Jewish, and anti-American.
According to the lawsuit, through the use of taxpayer funds, the U.S. government acquired a majority (79.9%) ownership interest in AIG, and as part of the bailout, Congress appropriated and expended an additional $40 billion of taxpayer money to fund and financially support AIG and its financial activities. AIG, which is now a government owned company, engages in Shariah-compliant financing, which subjects certain financial activities, including investments, to the dictates of Islamic law and the Islamic religion. This specifically includes any profits or interest obtained through such financial activities.
An important element of Shariah-compliant financing is a form of obligatory charitable contribution called zakat, which is a religious tax for assisting those that “struggle [jihad] for Allah.” The amount of this tax is between 2.5% and 20%, depending upon the source of the wealth. The zakat religious tax is used to financially support Islamic “charities,” some of which have ties to terrorist organizations that are hostile to the United States and all other “infidels,” which includes Christians and Jews.
The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, recently convicted for providing material support to Islamic terrorist organizations, is an example of an Islamic “charity” that qualifies for receipt of the zakat. Thus, as a direct consequence of the taxpayer funds appropriated and expended to purchase and financially support AIG, the U.S. government is now the owner of a corporation engaged in the business of collecting religious taxes to fund interests adverse to the United States, Christians, Jews, and all other “infidels” under Islamic law
Continued Thompson, “This lawsuit is as much about protecting constitutional principles as it is about protecting our national security and preventing another 9/11 – whether it be overt through flying planes into buildings or covert through appropriating taxpayer money to fund an Islamic cultural jihad.”…
Now that you are all caught up, here is the latest news. Obama appointee Geithner has no respect for the US Constitution. Shocker! Timmy Geithner and the Fed tried to get the case dismissed before it even went to trial.
Regardless of jihad, there is no dispute that, as U.S. District Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff wrote on May 26, “AIG is the market leader in Sharia-compliant financing, which features financial products that comply with the dictates of Islamic law.” It’s undisputed that the government, as a result of last fall’s bailout, now owns 77.9 percent of the “aggregate voting power of the common stock” of AIG. Furthermore, Judge Zatkoff wrote, “after the government acquired a majority interest in AIG … the government co-sponsored a forum entitled ‘Islamic Finance 101.’ ”
Why is all this important? Because in the case of Kevin J. Murray v. Timothy F. Geithner and Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Mr. Murray argues that if the government owns AIG and AIG extensively practices Shariah-compliant finance, then the government effectively is supporting Islam. That would be unconstitutional.
Mr. Geithner and the Fed filed a motion for the judge to dismiss the case immediately before coming anywhere near a full trial. In a devastating 16-page decision, Judge Zatkoff slapped down Mr. Geithner and company, allowing the case to go forward. The judge acknowledged that the government bought AIG only to stave off an apparent crisis.
The money quote:
He then wrote: “Times of crisis, however, do not justify departure from the Constitution.”
Smack down!My faith in our justice system has been restored. Send U.S. District Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff to the US Supreme Court. He is badly needed.
I found this interesting because of the four religions in this top 20 list, only Islam’s outrage has resulted in death.
Here’s the tally,
Christianity, blasphemed 13 times, zero deaths.
Buddhism, blasphemed once, zero deaths.
Sikhs, blasphemed once, zero deaths.
Islam, blasphemed5 times, 140 deaths.
The Danish cartoons were pretty tame compared to the Piss Christ, and some of the other obscene material listed below, but the religion of peace has a nasty habit of contradicting itself.
Rated by
Vulgarity –the piece shocked through its conflation of the sacred and the profane Criminality –the piece contravened laws in a given country Religious impact –the work caused outrage from religious leaders Political impact –speeches were made by governments, laws were created or changed. Deaths – outrage at the work led to the death of one or more people
20.Jesus Christ Superstar
Crowds gathered in protest outside the Broadway theatre where this musical about Jesus and Judas was first staged. Some Christians took offence at the portrayal of Jesus as a man rather than as God and the sympathetic rendering of Judas Iscariot. The omission of the Resurrection was also a point of controversy. Some Jewish groups counted the performance as anti-Semitic in its depiction of Jewish crowds calling for Jesus’ death. Vulgarity: 0 Criminality: 0 Religious impact: 4 Political Impact: 0 Deaths: 0
19. Popetown
An animation of the life of fictional character Father Nicholas, who lives in Popetown (Vatican City) and works as the cartoon Pope’s handler, protecting the public from the truth that the animated pontiff is actually very stupid. The series, produced by the BBC was removed from scheduling before being aired on British television because of fears it would offend Roman Catholics. In Germany a full-scale campaign against the series continues. Vulgarity: 3 Criminality: 0 Religious impact: 3 Political Impact: 0 Deaths: 0
18. Chocolate Christ
Cosimo Cavallaro’s My Sweet Lord, a rendering of the crucifixion in chocolate was pulled from a New York art gallery during Holy Week this year under pressure from the Catholic League.
The 200lb sculpture, which exposed the genitals of the dying Christian saviour, incensed the Catholic League who bombarded the Lab gallery in Manhattan with protest emails. Vulgarity: 5 Criminality: 0 Religious impact: 4 Political Impact:0 Deaths: 0
17. Ecce Homo
Photographs showing Jesus eating with homosexuals and transsexuals in an exhibition in Sweden, raised eyebrows in Europe between 1998 and 2000. The vivid images caused Pope John Paul II to cancel a meeting with the Swedish Lutheran Archbishop Karl Gustav Hammar who supported their exhibition. Vulgarity: 3 Criminality: 0 Religious impact: 7 Political impact: 0 Deaths: 0
16. Strelnikoff Mary of Help of Brezje
An album cover showing Mary of Help cradling a rat above the title “Bitchcraft” was the Slovenian band’s statement on the Catholic teaching on abortion. There was subsequent outcry – almost 4000 public protests were made to the State Attorney’s Office in Ljubljana and over 1000 requests for indictment. It was refused by the High Court who said the album was “tasteless” but did not cross the line of what is permitted. Vulgarity: 3 Criminality: 0 Religious impact: 4 Political Impact: 3 Deaths: 0
15. Jerry Springer the Opera
Based on the daytime TV phenomenon but with a sacrilegious twist, the British opera featured a character Jesus who dressed as a baby and regularly soiled his nappy. Protests when the opera was screened on British television saw Christians burning their TV licences outside BBC Television Centre, but other demonstrations were relatively sparse and tame. Vulgarity: 7 Criminality: 0 Religious impact: 4 Political Impact: 0 Deaths: 0
14. The Life of Brian
Arguably, Monty Python’s finest hour the Life of Brian is a comic biopic of Brian Cohen, born at the same time as Jesus and mistaken for the Messiah. A satire on excessive religiosity the film was banned in many towns in the UK for its alleged blasphemous content. Particular offence was taken at the crucifixion scene where those being executed burst into song with the theme tune “Always look on the bright side of life”. In New York Nuns and Rabbis picketed screenings of the film, which was completely banned in some states. In Ireland Life of Brian wasn’t shown for eight years after it was made and not for 11 years in Italy. Just this year, a screening of the film in a church in Newcastle Upon Tyne caused uproar from conservative Christian group Christian Voice. Vulgarity: 4 Criminality: 0 Religious impact: 5 Political Impact: 2 Deaths: 0
13. Rude Buddha
A sculpture of Buddha with a banana and two eggs strategically placed was happily on display at the Royal Academy of Arts this summer, but when it was moved to the sculptors’ home city of Norfolk it raised hackles amongst the local police force’s hate crime unit. DC Dan Cocks ordered it to be removed from the gallery. The artist said he aimed to show that in a global village everyone can take offence at something. Vulgarity: 5 Criminality: 5 Religious impact: 2 Political Impact: 0 Deaths:0
12. Gilbert & George Sonofagod exhibition
The ‘two poofs’, as Gilbert refers to himself and George, have been bedfellows with controversy throughout their career, but they tested the boundaries of religious tolerance with their Sonofagod – was Jesus heterosexual? Exhibition at the White Cube. They raged against the Catholic Church and one of their images included the text “God loves fxxxing”. Tory MP Anne Widdecombe denounced it as “blasphemous”. Vulgarity: 7 Criminality: 0 Religious impact: 2 Political Impact: 3 Deaths: 0
11. Cartoon of Jack Hobbs
Back in 1925, The Star newspaper printed a cartoon showing the Captain of the English Cricket team, Jack Hobbs, being revered by a “gallery of the most important historical celebrities”, Mohammed was among them. Muslims in India were enraged at the image and the Indian government passed resolutions of protest. Vulgarity: 4 Criminality: 0 Religious impact: 5 Political Impact: 5 Deaths: 0
10. The Profit
A film about a con man who starts a religion in order to become rich. It is banned in the US because of a lawsuit taken out against it by The Church of Scientology – despite the filmmaker’s claims it is not based on the founder of Scientology L. Ron Hubbard. Scientologists said the film was made to influence the jury in the case of Lisa McPherson who died while in the care of the Church of Scientology in Florida. Vulgarity: 0 Criminality: 3 Religious impact: 6 Political Impact: 6 Deaths: 0
9. Behzti (Dishonour)
Set in a Sikh temple, the play includes scenes of rape, murder and physical violence, which many Sikhs counted as supremely offensive. On its opening night at the Birmingham Rep a riot broke out and the performance cancelled. The protest took place as the Government was outlining legislation to outlaw incitement to religious hatred Vulgarity: 7 Criminality: 0 Religious impact: 7 Political Impact: 2 Deaths: 0
8. Quran on toilet paper
Manfred van H. was sentenced to one year in prison on probation in Germany for posting toilet paper stamped with verses from the Quran to mosques and the media. He was charged for defaming religious convictions in a manner that would disturb public peace. Vulgarity: 8 Criminality: 6 Religious impact: 5 Political Impact: 0 Deaths: 0
7. Chris Ofili’s Virgin Mary
The man who brought elephant dung to the art world created a Virgin Mary, surrounded by pictures of female genitals from pornographic magazines. It was removed from the Brooklyn Museum of Art’s ‘Sensation’ exhibition in 1999 after Rudy Giuliani, then Mayor, threatened to withdraw the $7m City Hall grant from the museum. Vulgarity: 6 Criminality: 0 Religious impact: 5 Political Impact: 8 Deaths: 0
6. Penis on a cross by Danuta Nieznalska
The title of the piece says it all really. It contravened Polish blasphemy laws and the artist was fined, and banned from foreign travel for six months. She was sentenced to six months “restricted liberty” the Polish equivalent of community service. Vulgarity: 8 Criminality: 9 Religious impact: 3 Political Impact: 0 Deaths: 0
5. Sony’s Cathedral shoot-out game
Games giant Sony chose to set their alien shoot-out game in Manchester Cathedral’s nave without permission from the Dean. The cathedral works to reduce violence in the city plagued by gun-crime, and threatened to sue Sony for breach of copyright of the interior of their building. The Prime Minister at the time, Tony Blair, told Parliament that large corporations like Sony should have more sensitivity and social responsibility in such cases. The controversy was resurrected when the game was nominated for a Bafta award and the Church called for the honour to be withdrawn. Vulgarity: 5 Criminality: 5 Religious impact: 6 Political Impact: 5 Deaths: 0
4. Submission directed by Theo van Gogh
A 10-minute film about violence against women in Islamic countries, Submission depicted four Muslim women telling Allah the offences against them, while partially covered. Quranic texts, inciting women to submit, were projected on their bodies. The creator, Theo van Gogh and writer Hirsi Ali received death threats in Holland as a result of the film. In 2004 van Gogh was shot dead by a man who was caught fleeing the scene. Aftermath protests saw 174 incidents of violence against mosques, churches, and Islamic schools following the murder.
Holland’s Minister for Justice called for the country’s blasphemy laws to be implemented more stringently with counter calls for them to be abolished all together. An Independent Dutch MP called for a five-year ban on all non-Western immigration following the murder.
Vulgarity: 6 Criminality: 2 Religious impact: 8 Political Impact: 5 Deaths: 1
3. Piss Christ
Christ hanging on the Cross and suspended in a jar of the artist’s urine won the Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art’s award in 1989 – a prize part-sponsored by the National Endowment for the Arts, a US government agency. Debate about the photo went as far as the US Senate. Vulgarity: 8 Criminality: 0 Religious impact: 4 Political Impact:10 Deaths: 0
2. Satanic Verses and Salman Rushdie’s Knighthood
Rushdie’s book which was a political satire on Islam led Ayatollah AliKhamenei Khomeini in Iran to issue a fatwa (a religious ruling) sanctioning Muslims to kill the author for blasphemy. More than 10,000 marched on the British High Commission in India. Three people were shot and two died following the fatwa and 37 were killed in a riot in Turkey. Rushdie was forced into hiding for 10 years and has round the clock protection to this day, but he refused to apologise or recall the book. Robin Cook, then Foreign Secretary brokered a deal with the Iranians ensuring they would do nothing to carry out the fatwa, even though it still stood.
When he was awarded a knighthood this year, the coals of the controversy were stoked and protest ignited once again with effigies of the author and The Queen burned on the streets in Pakistan. Al Qaeda threatened terror attacks against the UK in response to the honour. The book remains banned in Muslim countries. Vulgarity: 6 Criminality: 9 Religious impact: 10 Political Impact: 10 Deaths: 39
1.Jyllands-Posten Mohammed Cartoons
Protests against the cartoons of Mohammed – one with a bomb in place of a turban – printed in the Danish Newspaper Jyllands-Posten, led to arrests, convictions, and caused over 100 deaths.
The newspaper claims it was contributing to the debate on self-censorship but Muslims across the world took offence at the depiction of their prophet, any image of whom is regarded as blasphemous.
Vulgarity: 4 Criminality: 7 Religious impact: 10 Political Impact: 10 Deaths: 100
Conservative girl next door. I am a pissed off red head.
Fear my wrath, or come along for the ride. Choose your side.
Free will, truth and the freedom of speech are my weapons of choice.
"...But if a believer demands that I, as a nonbeliever, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect, but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy."
- Flemming Rose
"lan astaslem"
I will not submit.
I will not surrender.
A Refresher Course...For Those In Denial
"Above all, the devil cannot stand to be mocked" - C.S.Lewis
Introduction
17. 
16. 
15. 
14. 
12. 
9. 
8. 
7. 
6. 
5. 
4. 
2. 
When he was awarded a knighthood this year, the coals of the controversy were stoked and protest ignited once again with effigies of the author and The Queen burned on the streets in Pakistan. Al Qaeda threatened terror attacks against the UK in response to the honour. The book remains banned in Muslim countries.
1. 
Entries (RSS)