Zakir Naik Proudly Presents: "Out of Context"

“Community Cohesion Damaged!

Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari:

“It is deeply regrettable this is likely to cause serious damage to community cohesion in our country.”

Thanks to JW

Muslim Council of Britain condemns ban on Islamic hate preacher entering the U.K.

Let’s revisit some sayings of the quotable Zakir Naik:

“People who change their religion should face the death penalty”

“If he [Osama Bin Laden] is terrorising the terrorists, if he is terrorising America the terrorist … I am with him. Every Muslim should be a terrorist.”

And he has said western women make themselves “more susceptible to rape” by wearing “revealing” clothing.

Clearly, this man is a moderate, persecuted by a rabid band of Islamophobes! Er, wait… An update on this story.

“Muslim Council of Britain condemns ban on Dr Zakir Naik entering UK,” by Tristan Kirk for the Harrow Times, June 19:

“Every Muslim Should be a Terrorist”….

The Muslim Council of Britain has denounced the decision to ban Dr Zakir Naik from the UK ahead of a peace conference in Wembley.

Dr Nair [sic] was yesterday banned from entering the country by Home Secretary Theresa May because of what she called “unacceptable behaviour”, just over a week before he was due to address the Al-Khair Peace Conference at Wembley Arena.

In a statement, the council, a leading voice in the Islamic community, said it “deplores” Mrs May’s decision and described Dr Naik as a “renowned Indian mainstream Islamic scholar”.

It said: “The Home Secretary’s action serves to demonise the very voices within the world ready for debate and discussion.

“The tour would have been a golden opportunity for young Muslims who are eager to hear the true messages of Islam which promote understanding between communities.”


The council also accused Mrs May of succumbing to what it described as a “recent campaign of vilification against the scholar” in some media outlets.

Dr Naik has been quoted as saying “all Muslims should be terrorists”, but he argues these comments from a 1996 lecture have been taken out of context.

But, of course.

He has issued a statement in line of his ban from the UK saying he is “disappointed” and restating that he aims to dispel myths surrounding his religion in his talks.

Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari, secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: “This exclusion order demonstrates the double standards practiced by the government concerning freedom of speech.

Alternative reality:
“While preachers of hate such as Geert Wilders are free to promote their bigotry in this country, respected Muslim scholars such as Dr Naik are refused entry to the UK under false pretenses.

Mind you, what Geert Wilders’ Fitna did was quote from the Qur’an.

“It is deeply regrettable this is likely to cause serious damage to community cohesion in our country.”

A protest by the English Defence League and a counter demonstration by Unite Against Fascism, planned for the day of the Wembley Arena conference, are now in doubt following Dr Naik’s ban.

It is still unclear whether the conference will take place at all, or whether Dr Naik will be able to appear via a videolink.

10 thoughts on “Zakir Naik Proudly Presents: "Out of Context"”

  1. Alert

    Afghan Christians Plead for Help as they are Exposed and Threatened with Execution

    Published: Friday 18 June 2010
    Country: AFGHANISTAN

    Afghan Christians in exile are urging their fellow-Christians around the world to help stop the Afghan government from arresting and executing Afghan Christians. While international media and politicians are silent, within Afghanistan a dramatic anti-Christian furore has erupted, in which Afghan media and politicians alike are calling for the death of converts from Islam, in line with Islamic sharia law.

    I dont know how this could be happening. Its worse then what happened with Iraqi Christians.

  2. “It is deeply regrettable this is likely to cause serious damage to community cohesion in our country.”

    Sorry about that – we know it’s the muslims job to cause serious damage to community cohesion in the country .

    I don’t like the ‘our country ‘ in the sentence at the top .
    In what way can they claim UK is their country – they’re against everything British people stand for and like .

  3. From eye on the world blogspot:

    What is it with Muslims and playing the victim card???
    (UK) The new government has got off to a flying start by banning Islamic televangelist Zakir Naik from entering the UK. Theresa May, the new Home Secretary, gave her reasons for banning Zakir Naik from entering the UK:
    “I have excluded Dr Naik from the UK. Numerous comments made by Dr Naik are evidence to me of his unacceptable behaviour. Coming to the UK is a privilege not a right and I am not wiling to allow those who might not be conducive to the public good to enter the UK.”
    As usual, the left and their masters (Radical Islam) are up in arms over the refusal to allow the star of Islamic Peace TV from setting foot in the UK. The bBC opines:
    However, somebody cannot be banned just for having opinions that other people would find offensive.
    While their ideological masters have this to say:
    “It is deeply regrettable the British Government has bowed to pressure from sectarian and Islamophobic pressure groups by preventing the entry of Dr Zakir Naik, who has been visiting and delivering talks in the United Kingdom for the past 15 years.
    So just what has Dr Naik been saying which the bbC and the The Islamic Research Foundation are trying to defend by playing the victim card? Well, there’s this:
    “When a robber sees a policeman he’s terrified. So for a robber, a policeman is a terrorist. So in this context, every Muslim should be a terrorist to the robber.”

    And this:
    “There are many Jews who are good to Muslims, but as a whole … The Koran tells us, as a whole, they will be our staunchest enemy.”

    And this:
    “Beware of Muslims saying Osama Bin Laden is right or wrong. I reject them … we don’t know. But if you ask my view, if given the truth, if he is fighting the enemies of Islam, I am for him. I don’t know what he’s doing. I’m not in touch with him. I don’t know him personally. I read the newspaper. If he is terrorising the terrorists, if he is terrorising America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, every Muslim should be a terrorist.”

    And this:
    “Western women make themselves “more susceptible to rape” by wearing revealing clothing.”
    As per usual, the crowd who successfully campaigned in which to deny Dutch MP Geert Wilders entry to the UK are fighting a legal challenge in which to overrule the entry ban to the star of Peace TV.

    Update: It seems the Islamic man of peace has been booked to speak in Canada between the 2-4th of July 2010.

  4. Please explain how Geert Wilders is a “preacher of hate”? He wishes to preserve the Netherlands for the Dutch and Dutch culture. Wow! What a concept.

    Wonder if one who wishes to preserve Lebanon for the Lebanese and Lebanese culture would be considered a “preacher of hate”? Or, say preserving Jordan for the Jordans? Egypt for the Egyptians??

    Why is it only wrong and “hateful” when Westerners wish to preserve their culture?

    Eric Dondero, Publisher

  5. Talk about freedom of speech looks a bit thin, coming from people who want to kill cartoonists.

    Dr Bari’s comment about damage to cohesion is thinly veiled code for, give us our own way or there’ll be a riot. We’re a bit tired of that one.

  6. Shocka: Zakir Naik’s Islam is the Real Deal!

    As a matter of fact, this headbanger has the largest following of Muslims in India: Earlier this year, the Indian Express listed him as the country’s “89th most powerful person”

    Why doesn’t the Vast Majority of Peaceful Muslims in India denounce and shun this hateful individual? How did he get to be so mainstream and influential?

    Islamic hate preacher barred from Britain is mainstream in India

    Tiny Minority of Extremists Update, and an update on this story. “The Trouble with Dr. Zakir Naik,” by Sadanand Dhume in the Wall Street Journal, via Jihad Watch

    The Trouble with Dr. Zakir Naik

    Britain’s decision to bar an influential Muslim cleric from entering the country underscores the failure of Indian secularism.


    If you’re looking for a snapshot of India’s hapless response to radical Islam, then look no further than Bombay-based cleric Dr. Zakir Naik. In India, the 44-year-old Dr. Naik—a medical doctor by training and a televangelist by vocation—is a widely respected figure, feted by newspapers and gushed over by television anchors. The British, however, want no part of him. On Friday, the newly elected Conservative-led government announced that it would not allow Dr. Naik to enter Britain to deliver a series of lectures. According to Home Secretary Theresa May, the televangelist has made “numerous comments” that are evidence of his “unacceptable behavior.”

    The good doctor’s views run the gamut from nutty to vile, so it’s hard to pinpoint which of them has landed him in trouble. For instance, though Dr. Naik has condemned terrorism, at times he also appears to condone it. “If he [Osama bin Laden] is fighting the enemies of Islam, I am for him,” he said in a widely watched 2007 YouTube diatribe. “If he is terrorizing the terrorists, if he is terrorizing America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, I am with him. Every Muslim should be a terrorist.”

    Dr. Naik recommends the death penalty for homosexuals and for apostasy from the faith, which he likens to wartime treason. He calls for India to be ruled by the medieval tenets of Shariah law. He supports a ban on the construction of non-Muslim places of worship in Muslim lands and the Taliban’s bombing of the Bamiyan Buddhas. He says revealing clothes make Western women “more susceptible to rape.” Not surprisingly, Dr. Naik believes that Jews “control America” and are the “strongest in enmity to Muslims.”

    View Full Image

    Zakir Naik

    Of course, every faith has its share of cranks; and, arguably, India has more than its share. But it’s impossible to relegate Dr. Naik to Indian Islam’s fringe. Earlier this year, the Indian Express listed him as the country’s 89th most powerful person, ahead of Nobel Laureate economist Amartya Sen, eminent lawyer and former attorney general Soli Sorabjee, and former Indian Premier League cricket commissioner Lalit Modi. Dr. Naik’s satellite TV channel, Peace TV, claims a global viewership of up to 50 million people in 125 countries. On YouTube, a search for Dr. Naik turns up more than 36,000 hits.

    Nobody accuses Dr. Naik of direct involvement in terrorism, but those reportedly drawn to his message include Najibullah Zazi, the Afghan-American arrested last year for planning suicide attacks on the New York subway; Rahil Sheikh, accused of involvement in a series of train bombings in Bombay in 2006; and Kafeel Ahmed, the Bangalore man fatally injured in a failed suicide attack on Glasgow airport in 2007.

    Nonetheless, when the doctor appears on a mainstream Indian news channel, his interviewers tend to be deferential. Senior journalist and presenter Shekhar Gupta breathlessly introduced his guest last year as a “rock star of televangelism” who teaches “modern Islam” and “his own interpretation of all the faiths around the world.” A handful of journalists—among them Praveen Swami of the Hindu, and the grand old man of Indian letters, Khushwant Singh—have questioned Dr. Naik’s views, but most take his carefully crafted image of moderation at face value.

    At first glance, it’s easy to understand why. Unlike the foaming mullah of caricature, Dr. Naik eschews traditional clothing for a suit and tie. His background as a doctor and his often gentle demeanor set him apart, as does his preaching in English. Unlike traditional clerics, Dr. Naik quotes freely from non-Muslim scripture, including the Bible and the Vedas. (You have to pay attention to realize that invariably this is either to disparage other faiths, or to interpret them in line with his version of Islam.) The depth of Dr. Naik’s learning is easily apparent.

    But this doesn’t fully explain Dr. Naik’s escape from criticism. It helps that Indians appear to have trouble distinguishing between free speech and hate speech. In a Western democracy, demanding the murder of homosexuals and the second-class treatment of non-Muslims would likely attract public censure or a law suit. In India, it goes unchallenged as long as it has a religious imprimatur. However, create a book or a painting that ruffles religious sentiment, as the writer Taslima Nasreen and the painter M. F. Husain both discovered, and either the government or a mob of pious vigilantes will strive to muzzle you.

    In general, India accords extra deference to allegedly holy men of all stripes unlike, say, France, which strives to keep religion out of the public square. Taxpayers subsidize the Haj pilgrimage for pious Muslims and a similar, albeit much less expensive, journey for Hindus to a sacred lake in Tibet. This reflexive deference effectively grants the likes of Dr. Naik—along with all manner of Hindu and Christian charlatans—protection against the kind of robust scrutiny he would face in most other democracies.

    Finally, unlike Hindu bigots, such as the World Hindu Council’s Praveen Togadia, whose fiercest critics tend to be fellow Hindus, radical Muslims go largely unchallenged. The vast majority of Indian Muslims remain moderate, but their leaders are often fundamentalists and the community has done a poor job of policing its own ranks. Moreover, most of India’s purportedly secular intelligentsia remains loath to criticize Islam, even in its most radical form, lest this be interpreted as sympathy for Hindu nationalism.

    Unless this changes, unless Indians find the ability to criticize a radical Islamic preacher such as Dr. Naik as robustly as they would his Hindu equivalent, the idea of Indian secularism will remain deeply flawed.

    Mr. Dhume, a columnist for, is writing a book on the new Indian middle class.

  7. Hey people dont become blind of his sayings,there are most people who hates the real religion,wat dr naik said is a full sentence the wicked enemies of islam are cutting the half sentence,he is the hero of all time thats why his enemies are more.So islam is spreading more in uk britain thats why the kafir hates…

Comments are closed.