From the BBC, This Just in: Dog Bites Man

Nick just sent this screen photo of the Beeb’s news report about the killer of Asad Shah. A couple of weeks ago Mr. Shah was murdered outside his shop in Glasgow not long after he wished his Christian neighbors a happy Easter in an online message. His murderer, a fellow Muslim named Tanveer Ahmed, was eventually caught and charged. He had driven all the way from Bradford to Glasgow to do the grisly deed.

The Yorkshire Post referred to Mr. Ahmed as a “Yorkshireman”. Well, ee bah goom!

The murderer has now stated that he wanted to punish the victim for disrespecting Islam — that is, for blasphemy. In this he was acting in strict accordance with Islamic law.

Guidance on these matters may be found at, under the heading “A Muslim is prohibited to congratulate the disbelievers, Christians, Jews or whomever, on their distinctive occasions”:

Muslims must resent disbelievers, dissociate themselves from them and hate their disbelief and disobedience to Allah, as Allah (Exalted be He) states, It was authentically reported that the Prophet (peace be upon him) stated, Anyone who imitates a people becomes one of them. the Shaykh of Islam Ibn Taymiyyah commented on this Hadith saying, “This Hadith at least implies that it is prohibited for a Muslim to imitate the disbelievers though it apparently signifies the disbelief of the imitator. Allah (Exalted be He) states, …and if any amongst you takes them as Auliyâ’, then surely he is one of them.

You (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) will not find any people who believe in Allâh and the Last Day, making friendship with those who oppose Allâh and His Messenger (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) He (Glorified be He) states, O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians as Auliyâ’ (friends, protectors, helpers), they are but Auliyâ’ of each other. And if any amongst you takes them as Auliyâ’, then surely he is one of them. Verily, Allâh guides not those people who are the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong-doers and unjust).

Thus, Muslims are not permitted to express joy or congratulate disbelievers on their festive occasions, whether by word of mouth, posters, newspapers, magazines, cards or the like. The legal authorities must remove these notices.

IslamWeb goes into greater detail on the same topic, citing authoritative scholars of the law:

Ibn Al-Baghdadi said: “It is not permitted to attend the festivals of the Christians and Jews. Ahmad also stated this, and his evidence for that is the verse (which means): “And those who do not witness falsehood…” [Quran 25: 72]. He said: “The Muslims are to be prevented from entering upon them in their synagogues and churches.”

Greeting the non-Muslims on Christmas and other religious holidays of theirs is Haraam, by consensus, as Ibn Al-Qayyim said in Ahkaam Ahl Al-Thimmah: “Congratulating the non-Muslims on the rituals that belong only to them is Haraam by consensus, as is congratulating them on their festivals and feasts by saying: ‘A happy festival to you’ or ‘May you enjoy your festival,’ and so on. If the one who says this has been saved from disbelief, it is still forbidden. It is like congratulating someone for prostrating to the cross, or even worse than that. It is as great a sin as congratulating someone for drinking wine, or murdering someone, or having illicit sexual relations, and so on. Many of those who have no respect for their religion fall into this error; they do not realize the offensiveness of their actions. Whoever congratulates a person for his disobedience or Bid’ah (innovation) or disbelief exposes himself to the Wrath and Anger of Allah.”

Congratulating the non-Muslims on their religious festivals implies that one accepts or approves of their rituals of disbelief, even if one would not accept those things for oneself. But the Muslim should not accept the rituals of disbelief or congratulate anyone else for them, because Allah Almighty does not accept any of that at all, as He Says (what means): “If you disbelieve – indeed, Allah is Free from need of you. And He does not approve for His servants disbelief. And if you are grateful, He approves it for you…” [Quran 39: 7]

And (what means): “. . . This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion. . .” [Quran 5: 3]. So congratulating them is forbidden, whether they are one’s colleagues at work or otherwise.

Ibn Al-Baghdadi was an 11th century jurist of Islamic law of the Shafi’ite school. Ibn Al-Qayyim was a 13th century Hanbali jurist. It’s therefore safe to say that these rulings enjoy a consensus of the scholars. Since the crimes implied are bid’ah (innovation) and kufr (unbelief), the death penalty is indicated. Thus Mr. Ahmed was simply the executioner of a shariah judgment against Mr. Shah, acting as an agent of the worldwide Ummah.

The fact that the victim was an adherent of the Ahmadi sect, a splinter group of Islam considered heretical by the mainstream, undoubtedly added to the zeal of the executioner.

22 thoughts on “From the BBC, This Just in: Dog Bites Man

  1. These interfaith dialog things must be fun to go to…everyone is acting and role playing. Ychhh.

    • True, but we will soon – if not already – be living under a system where decency is illegal.

  2. In Islam being a decent human being( or acting like one ) is considered
    anathema ,warranting the charge of heresy and immediate execution .He who executes the heretic is immediately granted forgiveness of all sins and guaranteed entry to paradise and 72 virgins.

    • It’s interesting that he issued a “highly unusual” statement that Shah was killed because he wasn’t a “proper muslim”. Seems like a very public message to other muslims which will go over the heads of the infidels.

      • Bingo! What you said is so important. Muslims silence the “moderate” Muslims like the Mafia silenced entire neighborhoods through threats of violence and intimidation. When you show supine liberals numbers like the 65% of London Muslims who want Sharia they will argue that there are still 35% who are peaceful (Taqqiya for those 35% but never mind)!

        The tolerance-signaling blinders are just too thick. When neighborhoods, and states and countries let the Kebombs in with impunity, they intimidate the less fanatical and the result are no-go zones full of uncooperative Jihadis. Notice after the Paris attacks the police knew exactly where to go to find the perps?

        We wouldn’t want to racially profile however, I would much rather incur 500+ deaths a year for the gods of tolerance.

        Once you let them build a mosque, they have a symbol of their encroaching dominance.

  3. And yet after the murder of Lee Rigby we had David Cameron in front of the TV cameras saying there was nothing in islam that could be used to justify such a dreadful act.

    This is the same David Cameron who has said openly that he is not an authority on religion, and that he has not even studied religion in general, let alone islam in particular.

    The brass neck of these liars is just incredible.

    • I am guessing that David Cameron (allegedly) inserting his private parts into the mouth of a dead pig would be considered haraam big time. As you say he is not an authority on religion nor off shore banking matters either is it would now more recently appear.

      • He didn’t find it rank hypocrisy to stand up and condemn comedians and singers who had stowed money away (legally, apparently) in schemes to avoid paying the full whack in tax.

        The British public do, however.

        As for his qualifications regarding the religion of islam – Cameron said openly and publicly at his KJV Bible speech, and at a recent Eid reception, that he was not an authority on religion, and he was not a scholar of religion – no matter what argument he made that he thought was supported by those two assertions, he made those assertions.

        And if Cameron hasn’t studied religion in general, and is not an authority on religion in general, then there’s certainly no reason for anyone to believe that anything he says about Islam specifically will be true.

        However, when it comes to the appalling murder of this poor man in Glasgow, who seems to have been a really fine boy, the silence from London is deafening.

        Of course, as you say, Cameron has plenty other worries just now.

        Still, he was quick enough to get himself in front of the cameras after Lee Rigby was murdered. So was Nick Clegg btw. And Boris Johnson. Let’s never forget that.

  4. When the European governments have been ousted and the nation states have been returned to the people, the the banning of the practice of islam must be the first item of business for every state. As for the false prophet, Mohammed – May pork be up him.

    • In my excellent butcher’s today, I was offered a hot “halal” sausage. I said I thought they didn’t “do” halal, and the assistant pointed out that there is no halal pork!

      He also said he’d once worked in a halal slaughterhouse, and never would again.

  5. I’m out of gas. It’s no longer useful to spend precious time searching for reasoning behind retrograde Islam.

    Remnants of civilization will outlaw Islam only after it becomes plainly apparent that the species cannot survive.

  6. We are in for hard times. When a religion, ideology or cult has ideals that grind up against our values with such vehemence there can only be one outcome.
    Ask this question, “where in the Islamic texts does it show humanity to the non Muslim?” you will find the silence deafening. There is no answer because there is no humanity – Islam is insular and bestial, the humanity is driven out and replaced by hatred for the outsider. The whole belief system is built upon conquest and subjugation.
    We have a problem trying to tolerate the intolerant, a solution that cannot be solved with liberal thinking, the more we try the more our ideals are walked over, trampled upon until we submit.

  7. Ah yes, your typical Yorkshireman, eh.

    Likes rugby league, drinking real ale, watching Emmerdale and killing people who disagree with him.

    Why can’t these people start telling the truth about this? How many years is it now since Theo van Gogh was murdered by an Islamic fanatic? How many people have died in similar fashion since? And the best the papers can come up with is that the latest in a long line of similar brutal murders was allegedly committed by a ‘Yorkshireman’????

Comments are closed.