The Most Honest Muslim in Canada

A few days ago a book sold at a Muslim bookstore in Toronto stirred controversy. In a marriage guide titled “A Gift for the Muslim Couple” by Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi, somebody found a “sound” advice for husbands on how to beat their wives to maintain the family harmony.

The story was picked by TV stations and newspapers (every one with its own interpretation) and it showed the ugly face of the Muslim “marriage counselling” methods. Only the so-called “moderate” Muslims like Tarek Fatah condemned the book, the rest kept their silence as usual.

However, thanks to the blogger Blazingcatfur, who published the complete text, I found an article on the issue, written by Sheharyar Shaikh. In the end he is described as “the former President of North American Muslim Foundation. He is specializing in contemporary Islamic thought and modernity.” The description implies that we are dealing with a modern and sensible scholar (which turned out to be not that correct).

What I found refreshing about his opinion is that it was very honest. Shaikh openly expresses the point of view that most other Muslims are trying to conceal. He basically agrees with the premises of the Thanvi’s book and explains to the ignorant kafirs why they don’t understand anything.

He wastes no time in attacking Tarek Fatah, who in the Muslim world appears to be some kind of a pathetic apostate:

“Tarek Fatah of course wants the bookstore owner charged under the law. This is not unexpected of Fatah who has made a lifelong career out of stabbing his own community. Strangely he becomes bitterly resentful (as he did on March 1, 2012, at University of Toronto when he isn’t awarded the honor he feels he deserves from his “racist” circus masters in return for vilifying Muslims. What does he think? Fatah, you are nothing more than a cheap condom for the Michael Corens, Jonathan Kays, Ezra Levants and others out there to screw over this community and then flushing it down the toilet. If they begrudgingly bear you on the same panel as themselves, its not for your rugged good looks, but the damage they can inflict on the Muslims using your small brain and a big mouth.”

What a mastery of the English language! I am obviously not a good match of Shaikh’s filthy Muslim mind, because I can’t quite imagine how Tarek is used as a condom by Michael Coren. Do they teach that dirty imagery in the Muslim schools?

Other than misrepresenting the “fixer” incident that caused Tarek’s outburst last March, I admire Shaikh’s honesty in expressing the opinion of the Muslim community about Islam’s reformers. Fatah has spent decades trying to change Islam and make it more acceptable in the eyes of the Westerners. All that he has achieved so far is that the latter find him to be an interesting and courageous speaker, but his influence in his own Muslim community is practically non-existent.

All that he got from them was hatred and the accusations that he is some kind of a Muslim Uncle Tom, who is backstabbing his own community to earn a few crumbs from his Christian masters. I really respect Tarek’s work, but it looks like the barbaric Islam is an impenetrable castle that nobody can change.

Shaikh’s rage doesn’t stop at bashing Tarek. He is furious that nobody of the Muslim leaders defended the wife-beating manual:

“I do however blame the self-appointed Muslim community leadership, which began either mindlessly condemning Thanvi’s book in unison or has remained pathetically silent about the issue. Where is the Imam Council? Where is Ali Hindy? Where are the champions of faith who are foremost in their dawah efforts? Their silence is deafening.”

Yes, where are those nice people, whose job is to force Islam on us? How could they miss such a golden opportunity to show why wife discipline is such a marvelous part of their cult?

Since they are still quiet, Shaikh takes upon himself the task to put the things in order. Please read carefully the following quote, it is the most important one in the article:

“To make things clear on our end: Islam, like all pre-modern religions, does not, I repeat, does not stand for equality of spouses in a conjugal relationship. Man has a role in the family as a protector, provider and a moral leader, which is distinctly different from the one God awards to the woman. This is the truth. To the Muslim leadership that denies it, I say, shame on you for telling people lies! You know well that men have a responsibility to be the captain of the ship, to be the moral guardians first and foremost who will be held responsible before God for the moral direction of the family institution in society – which today is in shambles. Although Islam is certainly not “oppressive” to women, it does require wives first and foremost with guarding the household in their husbands’ absence. Chauvinistic? Unfair? Exploitative? Perhaps. But this is what we are commanded, and if we turn back we hurt none but ourselves.”

Here he gets extra points for honesty. Most of the other imams and “scholars” go out of their way to hide the real nature of Islam, picturing it as some hip religion, which is good for everybody, while Shaikh is very straightforward: “Yes, in Islam women are second class creatures, yes, we beat them, and that’s the way it is – deal with it!”

This should be read by every lefty feminist dimwit, who thinks that Muslims are a misunderstood minority and the burqa is an expression of the independent minds of the Muslim women. Shaikh plainly states that brutality and oppression are vital parts of Islam and you shouldn’t mess up with them.

Then, just like every other cult follower, he tries to justify his delusions by convincing us that they are much better than the real world. He is not shy in his attempts to blackmail the decadent West:

“If invoking this 19th century book is allowed to thrash Canadian Muslims today, then critics should be allowed to cite works from that same era to make the case for Western males’ contempt for women as well. And if the mere presence of this book in the 21st century counted a crime, what then should we say to the world that sees the Western woman objectified, sexualized, and humiliated in bondage and sadomasochistic videos, criminally accessible to 5-year olds on the net, in the name of entertainment by the 20 billion-dollar porn industry here at home? What about the continuing violence committed against women in society at present? In none of the stinging reviews was there as much as a peep about violence perpetrated against women committed overwhelmingly by non-Muslim (white) males. Was protecting Muslim women the Toronto Sun’s real agenda or was it to brushstroke the Canadian Muslim community in a negative light?”

Here I will have to retract some of my admiration – our friend is trying to sneak in a few lies to make himself more convincing. After the condom metaphor, he takes us to the BDSM porn. (Boy, that filthy Muslim mind never sleeps…) That particular genre of porn is a very small part of that industry and it definitely is not accessible to 5-year olds.

Besides, it involves consenting adults and its presence on the net is part of the price we pay to have freedom of expression. Another part of the price is the presence of filthy drivel written by people like Shaikh.

If the fantasy world of BDSM is so important to him, let’s see what the reality is in the Muslim countries. In Egypt and other Muslim places over 90% of women have their genitalia mutilated by men. How is that for a real-life BDSM?

Homosexual pedophilia is perfectly acceptable in many Muslim countries. Wife beating, acid disfigurement, burying women alive is not a big deal. In Saudi Arabia, the castle of Islam, the tent trash hit the jackpot in the oil lottery, but the primitive Bedouin ways are still dominant – under the barbaric sharia law they still behead witches, exterminate gays, cut off the hands of thieves, and kill everybody who disagrees with Islam. Does this “brushstroke Muslims in a negative light”?

Sheikh, not all of us are ignorant idiots who take the Muslim lies at face value. For most of us your concluding statement sounds ridiculous, because it tries to hide the monstrous abuse of women in the Muslim world:

“…Under the current situation, it appears amazingly hypocritical to accuse the Muslim community of a “particularly sinister” kind of misogyny using a little known couple’s guide, all the while ignoring an ocean of a problem around us. It reeks of anti-Muslimism, nothing else.”

But Shaikh is not done yet – he brings in the heavy artillery, attacking the sacred books of other religions, especially the Bible:

“Think about this: I have five copies of the same one book that gives women a status way lower than this Muslim book ever could; it’s called the Bible. And guess what? It’s way more popular in the homes and bookstores.”

He quotes different parts from several books in the Bible, like “woman is the source of all sin, the cause of global death (Ecc. 25:13), the source of all wickedness (Ecc. 42:13), can be shameless like a dog (Ecc. 26:25), is of a sinister nature (Ecc. 7:26) is a recipient of special punishment from God (Gen. 2:15), brings shame when she opens her mouth in church (1 Cor. 14:35), becomes unclean to touch during periods/childbirth (Lev. 15:19)”, etc., etc.

The Hindus can’t get away either: “Would they take on the Hindu scripture Manusmriti, a distilled version of the Hindu Vedas out of the mouth of Lord Brahma, which orders wives to worship their husbands like gods?”

And what Muslim writing could be complete without bashing the Jews: “Similarly, when orthodox Jewish men in western countries get up in the morning and thank God every day for not making them a woman but a man.”

I understand where he is coming from on this issue – in his religion the Koran is the absolute authority, which should be the basis of all governmental, judicial, religious and moral decisions. Despite the fact that it is a poorly written compilation (mostly plagiarized from the Bible), it is considered a monolithic sacred text. Every deviation from it is potentially punishable by death.

As of the Bible, every reasonable Christian knows that it has been written over many centuries by different people. Although its books share the same inspiration, it is clear that every person has left his own stamp and view in his book. It is also clear that many of the events and opinions apply to a historic reality that is long gone.

It is very unlikely that anybody would base a women rights legislation on the views of the Ecclesiastes, who sounds like a grumpy old man, who is disappointed with everything in this world (or maybe some fundamentalist sect in the woods of Montana would go for it).

Unlike the Muslim cult, which is still stuck in the 7th century, Christianity has evolved and although its moral principles are the same, their expression in the laws has changed with the times and contributed to the prosperity of the Western civilization. The same civilization, which Shaikh loathes, but is not ashamed to take advantage of, even though with his views he should feel more comfortable in the barbaric Saudi Arabia.

The same applies to India, where not the Vedas, but the British common law is at the basis of the social interaction and that law, which respects the rights of the individual, has helped transform India into the world’s largest democracy. Israel is not that different – just like in America and India, the respect for the individual has made the country the ONLY democracy in the Middle East.

Maybe not everything is perfect in those countries, but the principles they are governed by, guarantee that they are flexible enough to evolve. But one thing is clear – no misogynic religious text will ever define and control those countries’ laws.

And that’s not the case with Islam – the tribal primitivism, frozen in the Koran, is still considered the supreme wisdom, which should guide all Muslim judges’ decisions.

And now people like Shaikh want to make this barbarism perfectly acceptable in the West. I know that Islam is based on deception and aggression, but such “scholars” simply can’t make wife beating attractive enough even to the most insane lefties, no matter how hard they try to exploit multiculturalism (which was forced on us).

That’s why we should never stop exposing the filth and violence promoted in little guides like “A Gift for the Muslim Couple” (and the religious principles that justify them).


© 2012

Be Sociable, Share!


  1. marit says:

    I wonder if Lauren Booth, sister-in-law of former Prime Minister Tony Blair and Liam Nesson who said early this year that he was considering converting to Islam know about the book. I don`t know if he has already converted to Islam and if so he is just idiot. She is idiot too.
    The stupidity and ignorance coming from Hollywood always amazes me. When it will end? Never…

  2. SM ISAC says:

    Thank you blogwrath for this well written article. I think the merit of someone like Sheharyar Shaikh is that he is rational enough to be debated as you have done here.

    (However, I also find his filthy imagery repugnant.)

  3. The Lone Ranger says:

    Before Neeson became famous, he was a regular church goer. The actor recalled how, as a boy, he would creep into the gospel hall of the politician and churchman, Ian Paisley, to hear him speak. Neeson remembered being awed by Paisley’s height and stature. He described Paisley, who is known for his impassioned speeches and sermons, as being “very, very intimidating but “extraordinary”.

    Neeson slide away from Christianity after Hollywood and all its superficial glory stripped him of his soul.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *