|Posted by Mohammad Khan on September 29, 2011 at 2:50 PM|
Some allegations were made in the previous post. I have filtered through these allegations and my response is as follows. I do not expect anybody to agree with my answers and neither do I want to engage in a crossfire with the questioners. I do not have the time.
1. “Mohammed Khan, you know what you are - a stalker. You are like a hyenia - you stalk people and keep attacking them. But like a coward you never show your own face and just sit back. You probably think all this is funny too. You are a bully and a hatemonger. Leave people alone - send them an invitation, if they accept - ok. If not, get lost. You're a disgrace to humanity if I've ever seen one.”
I do not stalk people. Ergun Caner is guilty of a countless number of lies and it is my duty, when possible, to expose these lies. The questioner is under the impression that I am doing this as some kind of joke just to annoy Ergun, but that really isn’t the case. If writing responses to lies and exposing discrepancies makes me a bully and hatemonger, then yes, I am the biggest hatemonger in the world. With regards to not showing my own face, this is completely irrelevant. I do not use a fake name, my name is Mohammad Khan, I am who I say I am and everyone on my facebook knows where I studied, how old I am and the kind of person I am. What will me showing my face to people like “Richard” achieve? This is a clear example of attacking the messenger and ignoring the message. The individual should just refute what I have presented or go away.
2. “Show your own face and stop being so scared. But instead you attack people constantly, and then run and hide. You are a coward, stalker and hatemonger. Is this typical for the followers of paedophile muhammad's ideology? I assume it is.”
I am not scared of anything. If I were scared, I wouldn’t have risked having legal action taken against me to restore my YouTube channel when John Ankerberg and Liberty University tried to shut me down. The scared ones in fact are, Ergun, Norman Geisler and Ergun’s gullible supporters who fail to sit down and spend an hour or two to study what it is that I have presented. With regards to running and hiding, this is actually funny. Where have I run to? Where am I hiding? I am always available! In fact, it is Ergun who is running and hiding from answering even a single point I have raised. With regards to the remainder of “Richard’s” statement about the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), I refer him to the following videos - 1 2 3 4 and 5.
3. “Mohammad Khan just can't accept the fact that millions of people leave Islam and come to Christ. He made many clips, not just about the Caner's. But he singled out Ergun especially and has been relentlessly attacking him from behind his computer screen for years now. I find such behaviour cowardly and really just below any human decency."
This is a common allegation against me. And I have made it clear many times – I don’t care whether people leave Islam for Christianity, may Allah guide those who have been misguided on to the path of Shirk. But, when we have people like Ergun Caner who claim to have been Muslim for nearly 20 years and fall on their face when demonstrating their knowledge of Islam; the issues must be clarified. The questioner is under the impression that I am just talking nonsense about Ergun just because I can’t handle the fact that people are leaving Islam. If this were the case, how is it that I am able to compile 26 full videos that show blatant lies on behalf of Ergun? Or have I made nearly 30 videos that just go around in circles not dealing with any issues? Not forgetting to mention everything that is mentioned on the issues pages of this website. He says he finds my behaviour cowardly, but he is shooting himself in the foot when he makes such a statement. Allow me to define cowardly – cowardly is when you write books against Islam, say you are an ex Muslim, lie about Islam on stage and then refuse to speak to any Muslims. That is cowardly. Cowardly is when you don’t admit that you are a liar. Cowardly is when you tell your own Christian supporters to not invite Muslims to your events in fear of being exposed in public. So for me to be “hiding” behind a computer screen, what does this have to do with anything? If I am able to deal with this scandal from behind a computer screen then that is how I shall do it. Despite this, many people have met me in person and know what I do, it’s not like I am concealing my identity in any way, shape or form. By doing this work in my spare time, I have personally met people such as Shabir Ally and Adnan Rashid, both of whom saw me in person (obviously). My face is not important, if I were to ever meet Ergun in person, it’s not like I am going to shy away; I will happily be there.
4. "How about I'll take a picture of Mohammad or you Elvis Abdul Hakeem and then attack your for several years over the internet making clips that try their best to smear your character, family and story. Would you like that? No, I didn't think so. Well neither will anyone else. So learn some respect before you treat people like dirt and encourage such behaviour from others."
I most certainly would not like that. But this would not happen. Why? - Because I have not lied. If I had lied, then I am open to public exposure. So if the questioner can shed light on where I have lied, he should write a post as to why I am a liar. Also, this is nothing about smearing Ergun’s character. Had the questioner read the content of this site and watched the videos on YouTube he himself would realise that this is not the case. This site, along with the videos, take clips of Ergun and his brother Emir; and explains why they are either wrong, lying or making contradictory statements. That’s all. And by shedding light on these lies and contradictory statements, one will conclude that Ergun and Emir Caner are liars. It’s not about smearing their character.
5. "Now what has happened is that someone says he is an Ex-Muslim who has converted to Christianity, and has, as is his right, then criticized Islam (after all, Islam has a lot of things that can easily be criticized). Since then, Mohammad Khan has been relentlessly attacking Ergun and his family - without compassion or any kind of humanity. Sure, he doesn't agree with Ergun's views - fine, make a clip and state your opinion, I have no problem with that. But Khan has been attacking him and his family for years now - there is no boundary this person sets."
This is a wrong statement to make. Ergun Caner is not an ex Muslim as he claims. Ergun Caner was born to a Swedish mother and had a secular Muslim father who was the exact opposite as to what he described. During his early childhood, he did live with both secular parents but when he was less than 10, he lived with his non-Muslim mother who opposed Islam anyway. And it is this upbringing that explains why he does not know the fundamentals which even Muslim children would know. I have made clips and stated my opinions, so what’s the problem? The problem is that despite the evidence being so clear, people such as “Richard” refuse to accept it and resort to angry comments such as these. Not forgetting the fact that ‘til this day, Ergun does not bother to interact and explain his wrong doings. This accusation of relentless attacking is just a joke. How have I attacked him? By making videos that expose his lies? By posting articles on this site? By posting links to his supporters about his wrong doings? If that is what you call attack, then yes, I am a professional attacker. To say that I have been “attacking” him and his family for years is a huge exaggeration. Firstly, it’s not attacking – it’s publicly shedding light on a public figure’s lies. Secondly, I started this when I was 22, I am now 24 and last year I had a full years break in order to complete my university degree. So this accusation of relentless “attacking” is nothing but anger of being exposed on behalf of the questioner. Additionally, for him to say that I have no boundaries is totally wrong. If I lacked any boundaries, I would lie in order to expose to Ergun, but not once have I lied. Therefore, my boundary is a boundary of truth and integrity. If I were to lie even a single time, do you not think that his people would be on to me straight away? The fact that I have not once lied is what bothers them. They can’t refute me, not even on a single point.
6. "It's cyber bullying of an extent I have never seen before. People like Mohammad Khan should be thrown in jail - and I'm surprised he hasn't yet. He's the kind of person that would attack a schoolboy online so much until the schoolboy hangs himself. That's how far Khan would go - he really has really ZERO respect, tolerance or boundaries for others."
Cyber bullying? Does the questioner even know the meaning of bullying? Clearly not. All I am doing is taking clips of Ergun, analysing them and explaining them for people to see. And if my analysis of these clips demonstrates fraudulence on behalf of Ergun then so be it. I did not know one could be thrown in jail for exposing an evangelical fraud. I have been told I deserve an award, but here I have a person telling me I should be thrown in jail. On what charges? For breaking down audio and visual presentations of a public figure and explaining why he is wrong? And this statement of me being the kind of person that would attack a school boy to the point of suicide is outrageous. I love children, but I dislike liars. And for the record, this “attacking” and “bullying” can easily be stopped if Ergun were to drop the lying in his speeches. It’s that simple. He can continue to claim to be an ex Muslim, that’s fine. He can talk about Islam, that’s fine. But he should stop lying.
7. "Specifically, what are the lies about Islam that Mr Caner has stated?"
8. The other questions were regarding the trial of a supposed former Muslim in Iran.
I answer questions relating to Ergun Caner because that is what I know. However, in terms of the death penalty for apostasy, this is also in the Old and New Testament. I explained this to the Senior Pastor of Fairview Baptist Church. It is not my problem if Christians decide that their man made laws are superior to the laws of God. What we must understand is that the death penalty is only the last resort for an apostate. The way it is sometimes presented by Christians is as though it is Islamically sanctioned to heartlessly behead an apostate within a second of them renouncing their faith; this is not the case. If Christians say that death penalty for an apostate is wrong, then they have to agree that their scripture which says to kill apostates is also wrong.
To conclude, I believe that what I have stated above fully answers all the questions put to me. The links provided above will require ample amounts of time to go through, so if they decide to begin commenting and arguing without hesitation, we will understand that they are not genuinely looking for answers, rather, they are looking to argue. These are my answers, they will not change, if they are unhappy with them then, that's their problem.