Crazed Christian Missionary makes another stupid claim

Crazed Islamophobe calls Muslims “blackstone lickers”


Sam Shamoun is a middle-aged Islamophobe (+ a Christian fundamentalist who believes an ANGEL is God in the OT!!!) who spends more time abusing Muslims on the internet than in the church

Well, here it is; a debate challenge for this nutty Islamophobe. I guess Muslims could not take any more wacky lies from Sam Shamoun and his colleagues. So Sam Shamoun (answeringislam) is called out to defend one of his latest lies. (This will be a regular theme from now on in)My money is on Sam shamoun running to the hills for cover. Sam likes to pretend everybody is afraid of debating him; it is not the case – most ppeople don’t take him seriously; this is the reason why people circumnavigate his empty debate challenges

Well here is the challenge the Islamophobe was fearing:

 Why do people give money to dodgy “christians”on the net???

Christians: PLEASE stop supporting people who are insincere and who lack regard for honesty. If you want to learn about Islam then learn from a serious Muslim and not from a dishonest anti-Muslim website. Jesus NEVER taught you to follow such people…think about it. Thanks

More info on Sam Shamoun:

Shamoun’s immature claim of “black stone lickers” is refuted here:

Those who want to learn about Islam please view:

If you have further info please send it to:




Christians Arrested at the Arab Festival, Dearborn

Yes, the title says it all. The controversial evangelical group has had its co-founders arrested. You may remember the controversy they caused at last years Arab Festival in Dearborn; they were ejected from the event by security. This year they top that by getting arrested.

Here is Nabeel Qureshi letting us know of this embarrassing occurrence:

Yes, you heard it here first, folks. David and I, along with Negeen and Paul Rezkalla, were arrested and spent last night in jail. It is a long story which we will elaborate in full detail when we can, and we will post footage when the police give us back our cameras.

David Wood and Acts17Apologetics Were Looking For Trouble Under the Guise of Evangelism

Prior to this festival, in learning of David Wood’s intentions to return to the Arab Festival in Dearborn I warned my friend (Antonio Santana) from travelling with David Wood as Wood seemed to be intent on controversy.

In preparation for the Arab Festival 2010 David Wood bought a camera and asked his supporters to help him with the cost, he ominously appended his desire to have a camera handy for the event with the words:

We hope the dialogues at the Arab Festival are peaceful, but we need cameras in case Muslims decide to kick our heads in

I recognised David Wood was looking for controversy (hence my advice to my friend Antonio Santana (MBI3030) who was planning to accompany them); he got his controversy by spending the night in Dearborn City Jail.

To further point to David Wood’s desire to incite controversy at this years Arab Festival we can take a look at this comment he made prior to leaving for Dearborn:

Muslims have threatened us with death if we return to the festival, so now we definitely have to show up.

Eye Witness Account?

UPDATE: An alleged eye-witness on Pam Gellar’s blog points the blame at David Wood:

I was among many Christian groups that were at the festival, evangelizing Muslims. None of us had problems. We all saw David Wood and his video group trying to cause a scene.
They are trying to showboat, please stop believing them

Thinking logically

Now, if you are not looking for controversy why would you turn up to such hotbed of “hostility”? It is clear David Wood was not going there to preach the Gospel; Wood admitted to me that his blog is not designed to preach Christianity but warn against Islam. Thus, it appears, Wood was looking to provoke inflammatory Muslim behaviour in order to film it to get his propaganda video clips to warn people against Islam. This is insincere to the hilt.

The Police Clearly Saw Reason to Arrest David Wood and Co

David Wood and Nabeel Qureshi can plead their innocence all they like, but the police are an upstanding group of men and women who clearly saw Wood and Qureshi contravening American Law, hence their arrest and subsequent incarceration.

As David Wood’s (and Nabeel Qureshi’s) reputation for honesty has been sullied in the past we are more likely to believe the American Police force than Wood and Qureshi in any case. they can protest all they like; the fact remains the Police deemed the “evangelists” at Acts17Apologetics as people who were breaching the peace

David Wood is Harming Sister Negeen

Negeen is a young convert to Christianity (ex-Muslim) and David Wood seems to be manipulating her naivety and using her to further his hate and ego laden agenda. Quite what Negeen’s family think of her spending the night in jail is beyond me. David Wood needs to have more concern for others rather than having tunnel vision for his anti-Muslim agenda.

Perhaps this episode will provide Negeen with a moment of clarity and she will realise the folk at Acts17Apologetics are not the most “christian” or the type you want to be mixing with.

Damage to the Church

David Wood’s Church must be absolutely ashamed. At a time where controversy is upon the Church and many evangelists such as Ergun Caner our friend David Wood acts in the most reckless fashion conceivable and pours more controversy on Christian evangelism and the Church. Sad.

Damage to Dr James White (Alpha and Omega Ministries) and Reverend Tony Costa

Dr James White has his lot in with the folk at Acts17Apologetics, this just further intensifies the investigations and controversy which pursues White. White would do well to disassociate himself from such a controversial group.

Reverend Tony Costa is affected to a lesser extent as he seems to be free from any association with David Wood’s group. Perhaps this is wisdom paying off for Costa.

The Future of Acts17Apologetics

Acts17Apologetics clearly has a fan base who provides financial support thus it is an established group. All this means Wood and Qureshi will probably still stick around and keep the Acts17Apologetics group open despite another shameful episode which further sullies their credibility as a genuine place for information and evangelism.

Christians need to stop shooting themselves in the foot by supporting people who are simply looking to gain fame and feed their ego

Any questions… please direct them to the author of this article, Yahya snow

Appendix 1

James White has his fair share of controversy:

Is Sex With Animals Allowed in Islam?

Allegation of Bestiality against Islam is Discussed

Bestiality is not allowed in Islam but some people who are looking to demonise and degrade Muslims (and Islam) erroneously claim it is allowed in Islam.
Expert: Sheikh Ibn Hajar Haytami (1503-1566)

The expert we shall refer to is Ibn Hajar Haytami; he was a classical Muslim scholar who was an expert in Sacred Law (Islamic Law) and a well renowned authority.
This is overwhelming evidence to show the mud-slingers to be wrong.

To be even more thorough we shall offer the reader a chance to browse through (and analyze) the prominent supporting arguments used by those who claim Islam allows sex with animals (bestiality)
The Critics Spin Fiqh (Jurisprudence) Literature

As Muslims have to pray (perform Salah) five times a day whilst being in a state of purification there is a plethora of Fiqh (jurisprudence) literature on what mode of purification (i.e. bath or ablution) is required after a whole range of different occurrences. The critic tries to capitalise on this in order to support his/her malicious claim
So spinning Fiqh literature related to purification is deceptive, especially so if the one spinning the literature knows that the classical scholars considered bestiality to be a sin (i.e. not allowed in Islam)
A Typical Claim Examined

For good measure I have appended a rebuttal, by Bassam Zawadi, to a Christian who was making the argument that Islam allows sex with animals. This Christian’s (Sam Shamoun) work was characterized by the spin of Fiqh which we have touched on in this article and bizarrely enough this Christian was so desperate to see his claim stick he even resorted to making up his OWN translation of a Quranic verse. How debauched can one get! (see appendix 1)
Overall Effects of this Claim

The lack of believability factor in this argument against Islam only serves to counteract the work of the mud-slingers and thus their other claims are further doubted;
as in the case of the boy who cried “wolf”.

Article put together by Yahya Snow

“Bestiality” in this article refers to “Sexual relations between a human and an animal” [1]

Of course, those who have studied religion will find it inconceivable that any religion would allow this practice as religions are forces for conservatism. As a keen student of religion I would disbelieve any religion would allow a sexually depraved practice such as bestiality.

Sadly, Islam is a religion which is being targeted by mud slingers, a worrying side show is that amongst these mud slingers are serious evangelical Christians (see appendix 1)

In an effort to be thorough and treat the claim seriously we shall go through this hateful claim and show it to be false. The quickest way to show a claim to be false is to call in the experts. Let us simply ask an expert on Islam whether sex with animals is allowed or not.

In his list of enormities (sins) he listed bestiality (w52.1, 338-43) as a sin, thus clearly showing sex with animals is not allowed in Islam and is deemed as sinful [2]

That is unequivocally telling us those making this malicious claim against Islam are completely incorrect.

Hadith Literature Denounces Sex with Animals

In fact the experienced apologist, Bassam Zawadi, has already discussed this allegation and brought forward a saying from the Prophet Muhammed (p) which teaches us the prohibition (not allowing) sex with animals:

…Cursed is he who goes in unto (has sex with in other words in Arabic) an animal. Cursed is he who does what the people of Lot did (sodomy; the people of Sodom and Gomorah). (See appendix 1for the full Hadith which is presented by Bassam Zawadi, Sahih Al-Jami’a, page or number 5891)

Thus we see a saying from the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) warning against sex with animals and pointing it out to be a sin, thus not allowed in Islam (see appendix 1)


Here we have the classical expert on Islamic Law who teaches us sex with animals is a sin and we have a saying from the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) teaching us the same thing.

The Accusers Use Anecdotal Stories of Muslims and Falsely Impute this on Islam

You will read/hear the accuser point to stories of Muslim men committing this lewd act in Muslim countries. This will be their basis for claiming Islam allows sex with animals. This type of reasoning by the accusers (mud-slingers) is long on rhetoric but extremely lacking in rational reasoning.

Well, I could give you anecdotal stories of Muslims drinking, eating pork and gambling; would this mean Islam allows such acts?

Of course not, there are many “bad” Muslims who do not practice the religion of Islam in a full capacity and these “bad” Muslims contravene (break) many Islamic rules which a sincere Muslim is meant to observe.

To highlight the fallacious nature of the reasoning on the part of the accuser we can use the examples of Christian sex scandals amongst Christian spiritual leaders or the widespread availability of pornography in “Christian” countries.

Does this mean pornography and extramarital sex is allowed in Christianity? No, certainly not. Thus it would be silly and desperate to claim Islam allows bestiality just because you heard a story of a Muslim committing the depraved act of bestiality.

The fact remains, Islam as a religion disallows this practice.

You may see critics present literature of Fiqh which explains what a man must do in order to purify himself for prayer after committing the act of bestiality and append such material with lurid and sensational claims such as “ISLAMIC LAWS ON HOW TO HAVE SEX WITH ANIMALS”. Of course, this is downright dishonest

As Fiqh is a science which covers all areas of life (and a whole load of possibilities) you will come across some Fiqh literature explaining what a person must do in order to purify himself after sex with an animal.

It is obvious to the reader that the Fiqh literature is not approving the act of bestiality but just giving rulings on purification after certain events.

To highlight a couple of examples we could look at Reliance of the Traveller (A Shafi Fiqh manual); in its purification section (e7.4) we learn a person must perform ablution if he/she touches the private parts of oneself or somebody else’s private parts. [3]

Of course, the Fiqh manual is not saying it is allowed for Muslims to touch other people’s privates but merely gives us rulings on purification if such an instance occurred.

Perhaps these rulings were initiated by questions from people who were tasked with the job of circumcising, doctors or mothers nursing young children.

From the same section we also note ablution is required (for prayer) if one touches the private parts of a deceased person [4]. Again, this does not mean we (as Muslims) are allowed to touch dead people’s privates.

It simply refers to purification IF such an event happened. You can imagine this ruling may have been initiated by questions from people who were tasked with washing and enshrouding bodies of the deceased.

The same applies for Fiqh literature (on purification) concerning those who commit the sin of bestiality. The Fiqh literature is not endorsing the act but simply giving us the mode of purification if somebody did commit this depraved act. (see appendix 1)

You can imagine purification rulings in Fiqh literature related to the sin of bestiality came about because somebody was caught doing such a deed (or rumours of such deeds were abound at the time of the jurist) and people asked regarding the purification route the one who committed the act must take in order to perform Salah (prayer)

Beware of the Forgeries, Spin and Other Malpractice

The critics bring forward a Shia leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, and claim he allowed this practice. His “quotes” are clouded with doubt.

However, this Shia leader did not approve of sex with animals. He was simply giving his opinion related to purification with regards to the crime of bestiality and has become the victim of the spin we have already discussed.

In any case when he spoke of such an act (hypothetically) he appended the words “Allah protect him from it” thus indicating he did not approve of such an action.

“If a man – Allah protect him from it! – fornicates with an animal and ejaculates, ablution is necessary” [5]

As for many quotes attributed to him, on the internet, there is a huge deal of suspicion surrounding the translations and whether they are forgeries or not. An alleged fourth edition of his Tahrir al Wasilah is being denied to ever exist.

For the record, in the interest of fairness, this man (Khomeini) did not appear to approve of bestiality so it would be unfair to accuse him of allowing such an act.

As a side note: any quotations of Khomeini used as a polemic against Islam should just be shrugged off as most Muslims (roughly 90%) do not view him with any authority whatsoever. This seems to be a common ploy used by insincere types against Islam; they use quotations from people who are unaccepted or on the fringe, all the while being contradicted by accepted authorities.

Bogus Argument: There is No Set Punishment in Islam for Bestiality

The other “supporting” material the accuser will use is the claim that Islam does not have a defined punishment for those who have sex with animals. This is an argument which is built on misconception and thrives on fertile imaginations.

It is spin based on a misconception; “The major myth of many people is that judges in Islamic nations have fixed punishments for all crimes. In reality the judges have much greater flexibility than judges under common law.” [6]

Just because a fixed punishment for this sin is not set it does not mean it is allowed in Islam or that it goes unpunished. In fact, it has been clearly shown the act is not allowed in Islam, thus the judge will decide on the punishment for somebody proven to have committed the degrading act of bestiality.


[1] Free dictionary

[2] Reliance of the Traveller, Ahmad ibn Naqib al Misri, edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, Amana Publications, 1994

[3] Ibid

[4] Ibid

[5] The Little Green Book at the Prophet of Doom, (doubts concerning authenticity of translations).



Appendix 1

Bassam Zawadi refutes the “bestiality” argument by a Christian evangelist:

Appendix 2

Interesting reading about Sweden and zoophiles:

Muslims Speaking Up

Have you ever heard the Muslim side to a story in the news?

Have you ever heard Muslims explain misconceptions about Islam?

Do you want to hear Muslims speak on the burning issues?

Well, here is your chance as a new Muslim radio show airs this week. It is charged with the task of discussing the burning issues, points/questions brought forward by the participants (the listeners) and much more.

The show has the potential to reach 80 million home.

The show starts 7 pm eastern, 12 midnight UK time. You can listen to the show live at, or you can listen to it on paltalk, in the social issues section, in the room paltalk news network. You can download paltalk on, or you can just use paltalk express, which does not require any downloading.

So be sure to be there, Friday nights, 2 hour show!