Author Topic: Is third rate Muslim stand-up comic, Dean Obeidallah, trying to make us laugh when he says, “The Boko Haram terrorists are NOT Islamic?”  (Read 159 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rangerrebew

  • America defending Veteran
  • TBR Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48,673
  • “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them
Is third rate Muslim stand-up comic, Dean Obeidallah, trying to make us laugh when he says, “The Boko Haram terrorists are NOT Islamic?”

ScreenHunter_01-Jun.-06-16.411According to Palestinian-American Dean Obeidallah, “The Nigerian terrorist group, Boko Haram, who kidnapped hundreds of schoolgirls in Nigeria has nothing to do with Islam, and it’s grotesquely irresponsible of the media to suggest it does.” Now, that IS funny!

Perhaps not-so-funny boy can glance at a quran, where it says the taking of female slaves is permitted during jihad.


The Daily Beast  Obeidallah (like his fellow Mohammedans at CAIR) demands that the media: Kindly stop referring to the Nigerian terrorist group Boko Haram as “Islamic terrorists,” “Islamists” or anything else involving the word “Islam.”  The despicable acts taken by this militant group—from kidnapping schoolgirls to slaughtering people at churches and mosques—have absolutely nothing to do with Islam. In fact, as one well-known Imam told me, the claim by Boko Haram’s leader that its actions are based on Islamic principles is “blasphemy” of the worst kind. (Only if you consider the quran blasphemous)

Why do our media continually use terms like “Islamist” or “Islamic radical” to describe people or groups without doing the bare minimum investigation into whether there’s actually a connection between their conduct and Islam? (You better hope they never do) Instead, it appears that the media assume if the person is Muslim and claims he is acting in accordance the faith, that’s good enough for them. It shouldn’t be.


Here’s some real “breaking news”: Want to know how much of the violent acts committed by Boko Haram are based on Islamic principles? Nothing, nada, niente, rien, or any word you want to use for having no connection.

And this isn’t just my view. It’s what Muslims around the world having been saying for the past week as they have both denounced Boko Haram’s savagery and stated that Boko Haram’s actions are in no way sanctioned or supported by Islamic principles. (Oh, but they most certainly are. See below)

Clarion Project: In his own words, the leader of Boko Haram’s refutes everything Obeidallah has to say:


For example, he said:

“If we meet infidels, if we meet those that become infidels, according to Allah, there is not any talk except hitting of the neck. I hope you, chosen people of Allah, are hearing. This is an instruction from Allah. It is not a distorted interpretation. It is from Allah himself.”

He also cites Islamic sources when justifying Boko Haram’s kidnapping of the Nigerian girls. Slavery of one’s adversaries, he says, is permissible during a jihad. The captives are the booty of war. Shekau explains,

“There are slaves in Islam, you should know this, Prophet Muhammed took slaves himself during [the] Badr war.”

Shekau isn’t saying that it is permissible to take just anyone as a slave, but only those that belonged to the enemy. So how do these innocent girls qualify as seized enemy property? Because Shekau believes the jihad is not against an army, government or ethnic group but against Christianity, Western influence, democracy and Muslims that Boko Haram sees as impure.


Shekau declared“

“To the people of the world, everybody should know his status, it is either you are with us mujahideen or you are with the Christians.” He continues:

“We know what is happening in this world, it is a jihad war against Christians and Christianity. It is a war against Western education, democracy and constitution… This is what I know in Quran. This is a war against Christians and democracy and their constitution, Allah says we should finish them when we get them.”

Shekau’s view is substantiated by IslamWeb, a popular website that endorses Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood. In a 2002 fatwa (authoritative Islamic ruling), IslamWeb  concludes:

“Islam left only one source for slavery that is enslavement in war and only legal war (i.e. against the non-Muslims). Indeed, the enslavement of prisoners of war was a part of warfare. So, Islam did not free the slaves of its enemies while its own followers are enslaved by those enemies and given the worst possible treatment.”

In another 2002 fatwa, IslamWeb specifies that females from the enemy camp can be taken as booty. It says:

“’The slaves that your right hand possesses’…includes the slave girls and slaves in general those who are under the control of a free Muslim. As a rule, the only channel of producing this segment of society is Jihad in the cause of Allah.”

In fatwa 10382, Islam Q & A states:

“It is permissible for you to take concubines from among those whom you seized as war booty,” regardless of if one has a spouse.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2014, 10:02:19 AM by rangerrebew »
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. Abraham Lincoln

Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo