Update: Zakir Naik banned from Canada too

There is now an update on the Zakir Naik versus the West Controversy: Zakir Naik now appears to get banned from Canada too:

http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/06/22/controversial-muslim-televangelist-zakir-naik-banned-from-toronto-conference/

Zakir Naik banned from the UK

Home Secretary Theresa May said she had barred Zakir Naik, a 44-year-old television preacher based in Mumbai, for inflammatory remarks he was known to have made in the past.

Naik had been due to give a series of lectures in London and the city of Sheffield in northern England.

"Numerous comments made by Dr Naik are evidence to me of his unacceptable behaviour," May said in a statement, without elaborating.

The Daily Telegraph on Friday reported Interior Ministry sources saying that 2006 website footage had shown Naik telling Muslims it was acceptable to embrace terrorism in certain instances.

According to the paper, Naik said Muslims should beware of people saying Osama bin Laden was right or wrong, adding: "If you ask my view, if given the truth, if he is fighting the enemies of Islam, I am for him.

"If he is terrorising the terrorists, if he is terrorising America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, every Muslim should be a terrorist."

He is also reported by the paper to have suggested Western women make themselves "more susceptible to rape" by wearing revealing clothing.

"Western society has actually degraded (women) to the status of concubines, mistresses and social butterflies, who are mere tools in the hands of pleasure seekers and sex marketeers," the paper quoted him as saying.

May said: "Coming to the UK is a privilege not a right and I am not willing to allow those who might not be conducive to the public good to enter."

The minister made it clear she had not banned him simply because of his views, which is prohibited under the law.

A Home Office spokesman said the powers were used if an individual expressed views that "foment, justify or glorify terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs" or "seek to provoke others to terrorist acts."

He declined to elaborate on the exact nature of his comments, or when they were made.
(Reporting by Stefano Ambrogi; Editing by Alison Williams)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/7836557/Home-secretary-Theresa-May-bans-radical-preacher-Zakir-Naik-from-entering-UK.html

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/22/20100618/tuk-uk-britain-preacher-ban-fa6b408.html

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20100618/tuk-home-office-bans-indian-muslim-preac-a7ad41d.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/10349564.stm

Here is the youtube in which Zakir Naik glorifies terrorism on USA:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxk5AAA5FbI&feature=related

The previous trend of Western over-kindness to those who wish to harm to our society is deplorable. Of course we should not permit terrorists or the exponents of terrorism, supression and persecution (such as Zakir Naik) to enter our society; I rejoice over this decision of the UK.

Richard Dawkins turns to the Aliens

I recommed greatly the documentary movie of Ben Stein: 'Expelled, no Intellegence allowed'


In a interview with Ben Stein, Richard Dawkins finally admits that the earliest stages of life's development is indeed slightly complicated if we adduce from the bulk of modern wildly imagined postulates that life evolved from utter chaos by nature's random process.


Now our shaken atheist buddy suggests that life on earth might originally be created by some almost incomprehensible alien being which consequently planted this life on earth. Obviously Dawkins presumes that these alien beings were also the products of random evolution.



I am amazed, our atheist friends now believe in aliens and that life on earth was produced by aliens!



After such ridicolous statements should I still expect that atheists believers and exponents will continue to solely follow their highpriest?



At least Dawkins is ready to embrace the fact that a non-earthly being or force intelligently controlled the complexity of human life, unfortunately he hardens his mind and hearth to simply reject the possibility that such a being might be God. Secondly what gives Dawkins the authority to state that such alien beings were evolved through evolution? Seems that Dawkins has an effective explanation to the realm of the universe unknown to us and the mysterious unknown to us.