Cheadle Mosque (Greater Manchester) – Terrorism/Dodgy speakers

Posted on July 16, 2017


Following on from the previous Manchester post, here’s Cheadle Mosque’s statement on the Manchester Arena terrorist attack:

It with a heavy heart, that we write this post – the tragedy that hit Manchester on Monday night, has hit us all. This criminal act that has taken away so much innocent life has left us all with a loss of words and incredibly upset.

We spent all day yesterday working with many Mosques and communities to do whatever we could to support the victims of this attack and come together with the wonderful people of Manchester.

We had volunteers wanting to go out to give refreshments to the emergency services, fellow doctors wanting to turn up to accident and emergency departments and work for free to support their colleagues, fundraising pages were being set up by mosques and local charities, people wanting to attend vigils…..- in this time of darkness, we have also seen an outpouring of goodness.

At a time of such sadness and difficulty people have come closer together- it is clear we all share one humanity. It has really shown how much we really do care for each other. This is indeed beautiful.

And this is our response to the bringers of hate wherever they come from. We stand together as one and will not be divided.

We love Manchester.

Respect to them.

I have many disagreements with the man, but this live Facebook broadcast from the mosque by Abu Eesa was by far the best response to the Manchester bombing I’ve come across by an orthodox scholar.

He debunks the claim that groups like ISIS and Al-Qaeda are nothing to do with Islam, saying anyone with half a brain can see that they are. He says now is not the time to concentrate on the Muslim community’s problems – non-Muslims want answers, and quoting peaceful verses from the Quran is not what people need to hear. It’s an Islamic obligation upon any Muslim to report suspects to the security services, and for those who are worried about shopping an individual and getting it wrong, to come and put that responsibility on him. Some people see all Muslims as terrorists? Well that’s just tough shit he says (using nicer language) – it’s the way it is at the moment and it’s down to Muslims to show them otherwise. And the security services should have access to personal data if it means it might stop another attack.

Strong views indeed from Abu Eesa.

Enough arse-licking. These are the problematic speakers who have spoken at the mosque: Siraj Wahhaj, Muhummad ibn Adam Al-KawthariAbu AbdissalamHamza Tzortzis, Mahmoud Khalil Al-Qari and Mauri Saalakhan.

Wahhaj has this to say about taking non-Muslims as friends:

“Woe to the Muslims who pick kafirs [non-Muslims] for friends. Woe, woe, woe to the Muslims who take kafirs as friends. Kafir will take you away from the remembrance of Allah.

Take not into your intimacy those outside of your race. They will not fail to corrupt you. Don’t you know our children are surrounded by kafirs. I’m telling you, making the hearts of our children corrupt, dirty, foul.”

Al-Kawthari is in agreement:

“It has been prohibited in this verse of the Qur’an to make close friendship and have intimacy with the non-Muslims…Our scholars (Hanafi) say: There is nothing wrong in seeking the assistance of non-Muslims in order to fight a common enemy as long as the Muslims have the upper hand.”

Greeting the kuffar is a bit tricky, pushing them out of the way isn’t:

“A believer may greet a non-Muslim (with the greeting of salam, m) if he has a need from him otherwise it is prohibitively disliked (makruh)…Therefore, one should abstain from saying Salam to the disbelievers, for the Hadith says: “Do not commence by greeting the Christians and Jews with Salam. If you meet one of them on a pathway, force them to walk on the side”

The reason for this impermissibility of saying Salam to non-Muslims is to not show them respect. When one greets them for a need, it is not out of respect, thus permissible.

Working together with non-Muslims comes with a caveat:

“…one may conclude that if there is no other way of getting the rights of the Muslims except by working in coalition with the Non-Muslims, then this would be permissible. However, this should be part of a larger effort to ensure the strength and independence of Muslims.”

Abdissalam doesn’t see Muslims as Westerners (he’s a Westerner himself). And to imitate non-Muslims in their dress is a no-no:

“…if the dress is not specific to the kuffar but they just wear it, there is no problem in wearing this garment on the condition that one does not intend to imitate the kuffar by wearing them. So in this latter case (where the garment is not exclusively worn by the kuffar) it would depend on the person’s intention. If two people are wearing the exact same garment, one could be sinning while the other is not, such as a person who wears a baseball cap: if he intends to imitate the kuffar (e.g. the ‘Westerners’) by this then he is sinning; if not, then he isn’t.”

Al-Qari is over the moon that Muslims have established themselves in Britain. A translator relays his words to the audience at Cheadle Mosque:

“As the years progressed, the sheikh began to hear news, news of the changes that were occurring in Britain and in Europe generally, of the effort of the scholars of Islam, of the students of knowledge, of the inviters, of the merchants and businessmen, of the people generally, in establishing the deen of Allah (SWT) in these countries and inviting people towards Islam. And the sheikh would listen attentively every time someone came back from Europe…and he would begin to rejoice with the good news of the propagation of Islam in these countries. The sheikh came back about six months ago and he was extremely happy to see the changes that had occurred here in Britain. From walking the streets of London and Manchester and Birmingham as he was explaining before and not seeing any Muslims, now he’s coming to England and it’s as if he’s still in a Muslim country.”

During another visit to Manchester, Al-Qari warns the audience about those devious non-Muslims:


“…Brothers, be wary of what he’s saying, very attentive to what he’s saying. This is a plan of the non-Muslims to cause an end to the religion of Islam and to cause an end to the unity of the Muslims. And this is a plan to pull apart our generations that come after us, to take them away from the way of Rasool Allah (SAW).”

It’s proving to be quite a popular conspiracy theory in Manchester.

Abdissalam also sees his version of Islam coming under attack:

“They want to mould the Muslims to follow a certain brand of Islam, a certain modern form of Islam, not this traditional way. And if you grow your beard and if you hold traditionalist views, the views of the Sahaba, the views of the Prophet (SAW) then you’re gonna be labelled a fundamentalist, a fanatic, a terrorist. This is fact. Muslims have to wake up to this reality that, yes, we are going to be tested in this world in various forms and fashions, whether it be physically tested or whether it be ideologically tested, or whether it be simply mentally tortured, ideologically tortured so that the person feels inferior, he feels that the enemy is superior, he loses his identity, he doesn’t want to be seen as a Muslim. He feels embarrassed by being known as a Muslim. He doesn’t want to proclaim his deen. He tries to hide away in the background. He doesn’t give dawah to his neighbour who is worshipping other than Allah. He doesn’t give dawah to his university friends, his work colleagues.”

British Muslims should remember why they’re here:

“There’s no reason to be in this country except for dawah, Muslims. That’s the main reason to be in this country. Dawah!”

For Al-Kawthari, non-Muslim men are potential wrong’uns who might slip a hand down their Muslim daughter’s knickers:

“…it would be permissible for a woman to uncover besides the area between the navel and knees, and the stomach and back in front of her non-Muslim Mahrams, provided two conditions are met…that there be no desire (shahwah) or fear of temptation (fitna), especially when we live in a age where evils such as incest among the non-Muslims is becoming common…However, if there is a fear of temptation (fitna) on either side or you fear that by kissing him, he will have evil thoughts and desires, you must avoid uncovering in front of him and kissing him. The jurists (fuqaha) have stated that, covering becomes necessary even in front of Mahrams if there is a fear of Fitna or desire…Today we live in a time where sexual impropriety is becoming common in non-Muslims, thus one must be careful. If your non-Muslim father is old or you feel that he will have no evil thoughts, then it would be permitted to remove your Hijab in front of him and kiss him.”

I guess Jewish or Christian women won’t be rushing to fill this job vacancy:

“It is impermissible for a Muslim woman to uncover in front of a Jewish, Christian or a atheist woman except if she is her slave…”

Siraj Wahhaj at Cheadle Mosque

Siraj Wahhaj at Cheadle Mosque

Wahhaj isn’t keen on gay Muslims getting their way:

“Brothers and sisters, I don’t believe any of you are homosexual. This is a disease of this society.”

“I want you to be able to defend against these homosexuals, so you have good argument, Inshallah, and also to remind you last week what I told you, the news that we got from Toronto, supposedly of some Muslims coming out of the closet. Homosexuals, Muslims in Toronto, who want to establish a mosque over the land, for the gays, Muslim gays. We are against that 100%. We don’t accept it. We will never accept it, no matter how much the American government and the Canadian government legislate it in the laws that it is acceptable, it will never be acceptable by the Muslims.”

“Those brothers and sisters in Toronto must not allow those so-called Muslims to open up a house in the name of Allah, subhana wa ta’ala, under lesbianism and homosexuality. If they don’t do it there, if they don’t stop it, we’re going to come here. Whatever brother wants to go with me, we’ll go to Toronto, we’ll go there and we won’t let them establish it. Now I want to know who wants to go with me? I’ll let you know that when we go fight them, these homosexuals are going to picket the mosque.”

They should be killed for having a sex life:

“And you know, brothers and sisters, you know what the punishment is, if a man is found with another man? The Prophet Mohammad said the one who does it and the one to whom it is done to, kill them both.”

Tzortzis thinks it should be a crime punishable by the state too:

“Some people object to Islam making the public expression of homosexuality a criminal act. This is subjective and only strikes a chord amongst those who cannot escape the social constructs in their own societies.”

Al-Kawthari warns Muslims about those kuffar dykes:

“Fitnahs such as lesbianism have become so wide-spread that it has become necessary for women to observe caution with non-Muslim women.”

I can think of better presents to receive after giving birth to a baby:

“If the crime of fornication is carried out by an individual who is sane, mature, Muslim and is married to a spouse who is also sane, mature, Muslim, and that their marriage is consummated, then the legal punishment is that he/she will be stoned to death (rajm). The Imam, witnesses and other Muslims would take part in the stoning…A pregnant woman will not be whipped until she gives birth to her child and after her post natal bleeding (nifas). However, if she is to be stoned, then this may be carried out straight after giving birth.”

Wahhaj is a fan of chucking rocks at people too:

“If you commit zina and you’re single, the punishment in Islam is 100 lashes. If you commit zina and you’re married, the punishment is death by stoning—capital punishment. What you read in Qu’ran is the punishment for fornication, but the punishment for married and committing zina is death by stoning. You know how angry Allah is by the degree of his punishment for breaking a law…Punishment for adultery, zina, brother? Serious. Death by stoning.”

And chopping off hands:

“Allah is angry at you when you steal. He sees you. Punishment, chop off the hand. He’s angry. When you drink, Brother, punishment? Lashes. You take drugs? Punishment? Lashes.

The thief, the one who steals, man or woman, male or female, chop off their hands. If they steal, chop off their hands. This is a commandment of Allah, subhanahu wa ta’ala…And you know what, believe me, you chop off enough hands, all the people will get the example. And the people say, well, I’d better not do that, if I don’t feel like getting my hands chopped off.”

Abdissalam would punish Muslims for not praying:

“And in an Islamic State of course there would be, there were historically, these laws were enforced, so if a person doesn’t pray it’s not just a personal thing that, you know, the person doesn’t pray, just leave them to it as it is in the secular world. Rather in an Islamic State, if a Muslim, not a non-Muslim, but if a Muslim doesn’t pray there would be some kind of punishment attached to that because it is actually something that is, it’s part of Islamic law.”

And of course ex-Muslims aren’t getting let off the hook. Al-Kawthari explains:

“The Fuqaha are unanimous on the fact that, if the case of an offender (in offences which are the right of Allah, such as apostasy, adultery, etc…) is brought to the courts, the punishment will not be obviated, even if the guilty person repents…it is thus clear from the above that it is impermissible (haram) and sinful for an individual to flee from the Hadd punishment that he deserves…it is not permissible for a Muslim to leave Islam. Therefore, assisting in evading the legal consequences of apostasy will not be lawful.”

He’s got some funny ideas on women and sex too.

“The husband can demand sex through a court of law and is generally expected to take the initiative, and the wife must consent to his demand unless there is a genuine physical excuse or Sharia-countenanced impediment. However, in the case of the wife, even though it is religiously obligatory for the husband to fulfil her sexual needs, she cannot demand this through a court of law after he has had sex with her at least once since being married.

This distinction comes about because of various considerations, including the difference in the nature of male and female sexual desire, the husband being the head (amir) of the family, and the consideration of how each party’s “demanding” would affect marital relations. In other words, a woman does not have an explicit right to demand sex in the same fashion of a man; but this distinction exists merely because of the inherent differences between the sexes.”

I dunno, though. Could come in handy if you’ve got one of those women who needs it 5 times a day.

This isn’t such a bad idea either. It might stop your old woman going out and spunking your wages on shoes:

“…it is generally advised that women should not come out of their homes unnecessarily…Islam encouraged women to remain in their homes to prevent unnecessary intermingling with men.”

And here’s Mauri Saalakhan at the mosque bigging up the Islamofascist, Syed Maududi:


“Syed Abul A’la Maududi, one of the eminent and respected thinkers of Islam, one of the active brothers who spent his life, the major portion of his adult life, trying to serve the Ummah, trying to awaken the Ummah, he made a very significant observation in a book entitled Let Us Be Muslimsand it was written decades ago, he said, in quote “It is impossible to overestimate the harm caused by Muslims by sectarianism. On the face of it the Muslims are one Ummah. In India alone today there are about eighty million of them. If such a big community were really united, and worked together to make Allah’s guidance supreme, who in the world would have the courage to oppose it?…A Muslim belonging to one faction is often more prejudiced against a Muslim belonging to another faction than against a Christian or a Jew. At times members of one Muslim faction have gone to the extent of siding with unbelievers to humiliate a member of another Muslim faction. You should not therefore be surprised to see Muslims living in servitude to others.'”

Some more of Maududi’s desire to “to make Allah’s guidance supreme” from Let Us Be Muslims:

“…the ultimate objective of Islam is to abolish the lordship of man over man and bring him under the rule of the One God. To stake everything you have – including your lives – to achieve this purpose is called Jihad.

Merely believing in God as God and in His law as the true law is not enough. As soon as you believe in these two things, a sacred duty devolves upon you: wherever you are, in whichever country you live, you must strive to change the wrong basis of government, and seize all powers to rule and make laws from those who do not fear God.

If you believe Islam to be true, you have no alternative but to exert your utmost strength to make it prevail on earth: you either establish it or give your lives in this struggle. By this criterion alone can be tested the sincerity of your faith. With a sincere belief, you will find it impossible even to sleep comfortably if you are made to live under another Din, not to speak of giving service to it, getting rich under it, or enjoying its comforts. Every moment you spend under another Din will be a bed of thorns; every morsel of food a poison.”

Throwing rocks at people again:

Human well-being and happiness, therefore, will only come about by attacking the evil afflicting society at its roots, that is, by getting rid of all powers based on rebellion against the laws of God. If people are free to commit adultery, no amount of sermons will stop them. But if governments forbid adultery, people will find it easier to give up this evil practice.

You know what severe punishment Islam has prescribed for adultery – one hundred strokes on the bare back. The very thought makes a person shudder. And if a married person is involved, the punishment is stoning to death – one trembles at the very mention of such terrible punishment.

Cheadle Mosque held its Interfaith event a couple of weeks ago:

“Please join us for our next Interfaith event at Cheadle Mosque with our friends from St Mary’s Church in Wilmslow who have jointly organised this event.

There will of course be time for networking over cake and biscuits….”

I hope their cake was better than their choice of speakers.









Posted in: Uncategorized
Be the first to start a conversation

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: