Another UK Muslim (@RazaNadim) Struggles To Condemn Stoning


Photo Taken From Twtitter

I don’t know about you, but I’ve reached the limits of my patience where UK Muslim rent-a-mouths and obfuscating on acts of barbarism are concerned.

It’s not the first time, but this disconcerting phenomenon reared its ugly head again this week when on the BBC, a flustered Asim Qureshi of pro-islamist group CAGE was made to stutter and switch focus like an insomniac husband having their internet browser history read aloud.

What caused such discomfort might you ask? Why, it was host Andrew Neil’s invitation to condemn certain Islamist pastimes including female genital mutilation, stoning adulterers to death, enslaving non-Muslims and bigotry towards homosexuals.

CAGE have made the headlines of late due to their discovered association with ‘Jihadi John’, a young privileged British Muslim with a penchant for removing the heads of journalists and aid workers in Syria. CAGE tout themselves, and have indeed been referred to as a ‘human rights group’. A modicum of attention paying reveals them to be anything but – in fact, they campaign for the release of convicted terrorists – and that’s when they’re not endorsing their deeds.

You can watch Qureshi fail this basic test of human decency below:

After this incident, I tweeted the following:

Despite some bizarre accusations of hatemongering, my intent was not to demonize Muslims – in fact, I would imagine many Muslims would also be interested in hearing these questions answered by individuals claiming to speak on their behalf. One such Muslim who appears to share my impatience for barbarity apologism is Quilliam’s Maajid Nawaz. It’s brought me great pleasure to see him make a routine of exposing these stealthy Islamists on our TV screens. I’ll never grow tired of watching the below compilation:

This brings me to a Twitter exchange I had this morning with Raza Nadim of MPAC. Another soft Islamist organisation whose members have a love of endorsing terrorism and antisemitism. I noticed his ‘offence’ at being asked to condemn stoning and decided it was worth pushing for an answer:



A simple question with a simple and easy answer, surely?



Note the immediate false equivalence of drone strikes as though that somehow negates this ethical curiosity of mine.



I see this type of avoidance a lot.  Rather than say ‘stoning is a terrible thing to do to a human being and I oppose it unconditionally’ we are reminded it’s not actually mandated in the Qur’an. Well, perhaps that’s true – or not.  A great number of abhorrent acts committed by a significant number of Muslims in the name of Islam may not be in the Qur’an, but I’d like to make a few points:

  1. Justification for stoning is actually found in the Qur’an via the following:
    So when Our decree came to pass, We turned them upside down and rained down upon them stones, of what had been decreed, one after another.

    And we rained down on them a shower (of brimstone): Then see what was the end of those who indulged in sin and crime!

    We rained down on them a shower (of brimstone): and evil was the shower on those who were admonished (but heeded not)!

    And We rained down on them a shower (of brimstone): and evil was the shower on those who were admonished (but heeded not)!

  2. It’s not people like me that require a reminder that these practices are ‘unislamic’ – it’s those carrying them out in the name of Islam.
  3. You will also find endorsement of stoning in The Hadith – which is considered the direct teachings of Islam’s Prophet and founder Muhammad1



I’ll let you make up your own mind whether this exchange has a sinister whiff of avoidance or not. In the midst of our exchange, someone asked me to clarify my position on the subject of stoning people to death.



An easy bar to clear, admittedly.



More obfuscation.  We at least have the acknowledgement that it’s a brutal ‘punishment’, but this says nothing about whether or not Nadim agrees that brutal punishments are justified.  We then climb aboard the Islamist merry-go-round;




Raza seems to be of the mind that it’s a governments own business whether they hurl rocks at a woman for adultery – but at least he finally describes stoning people to death as ‘wrong’ – however; whether or not certain Islamic conditions are met depends on one’s understanding of ‘wrong’ – so I seek clarification.






Something about the question appears to have rubbed Nadim up the wrong way….

10twitterThere we have it.  Another self-appointed spokesperson for Islam failing to find the moral clarity required to condemn acts of barbarism.  It serves the interest of Muslims and non-Muslims alike to expose this failure of basic humanity at every opportunity.

You can listen to The Godless Spellchecker Podcast here, and support it by becoming a patron here.

  1. Endorsement of stoning in The Qur’an and the Hadith,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Stoning


What do you think? Leave some comments!