The Challenge to debate with Dr. Zakir Naik 

Scores of Muslims asked me to debate with Dr. Zakir Naik and told me he can respond to all my charges against Islam. I agreed.  This page shows our correspondence with these Muslims and Dr. Niak's refusal 

In this page there are more exchanges between a Muslim sympathizer of Dr. Niak, Dr. Niak himself or one of his buddies and me.   

These two pages are published for the benefit of the Muslims who keep inviting me to debate with Dr. Niak. It is to let them see that their hero is the one who is evading the debate and see his excuses. This is to show the Muslims that there are no answers to the charges against Islam. I hope this will convince you to read this site more carefully and find out the truth on your own. If you still think someone can answer these charges, write to him and send him one of the questions raised in this site and see what you get as response. I did that myself when I first read the Quran and was shocked. I asked many scholars whom I trusted and thought they are knowledgeable. None of them had any answers. Try that yourself and find out the truth.  

Munir Qasim is an admirer of Dr. Zakir Naik. He assured me that Dr. Naik can respond to all my charges against Islam and Muhammad. He wrote to him for the second time and this is what he got in response: 

Dear Brother Munir Qasim,  

As-Salaamu Alaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuhu.  

I pray to Allah (swt) for your health, happiness and vigour in Islamic spirits. Aameen.  

Jazakallah and thanks for your email dated 10th December 2004. We are hearing about Ali Sina for the first time. There are several such Non-Muslims who would love to debate Dr. Zakir Naik for gaining popularity.  

Dr. Zakir Naik prefers a public debate rather than a debate on email which can continue for months and years together for which Dr. Zakir Naik has no time.  

Dr. Zakir Naik would not mind debating Non-Muslims as long as he has a standing in the society and has a large following. If any Non-Muslim who can attract atleast ten thousand audience for his individual public talk Dr. Zakir Naik would not mind debating him. Other wise the person is not worth wasting time and neither would we like to make him popular.  

Please let me know whether this Mr. Ali Sina has a large following and is worth debating. If he cannot attract ten thousand audience on his own let him give his so called research on Islam to any Non-Muslim religious speaker who can attract ten thousand or more audience and Dr. Zakir Naik would love to debate such a person.  

Mr. Ali Sina is welcome to pose this challenge on his website.  

May Allah (swt) shower His Choicest Blessings on the entire Muslim Ummah and help us in our mission of bearing witness to the truth of Islam before all mankind. Aameen  

With warm regards and salaams from all of us at IRF. Jazakallahu Khairan was Salaam,  

Yours in the Service of Islam,  

MAQBOOL BARWELKAR

Public Relation Manager  

Dear Munir Qasim

Please advise Mr. Zakir Naik that my site attracts over 140,000 visitors each month and growing. According to Alexa.com faithfreedom.org is at least 12 times more popular than his site. Maybe this will deflate his condescending pomposity.  So if the statistics are of any indication, it is he who will rise is stature by debating with me and not the other way round.

You may also want to tell him that I have had debates with more important personalities than him such as Grand Ayatollah Montazeri and others, These debates are posted in the debates page of my site. Not a single person has won the debates with me, not because I am a highly skilled debater, but because I debate from the position of strength. It is easy to win when you speak the truth and your opponent does not.  

You may also tell Dr. Naik that as of 2005 I am offering $50,000 U.S. dollars of my own money to anyone who can refute my charges against Muhammad and prove that he is a prophet of God.    

Please remind Dr. Naik once again that the reason I published this invitation is because during the course of three or four years I received scores of emails from his fans daring me to debate with him. I am confident that Dr. Naik is an intelligent man and will not fall into this trap. Obviously his fans are more confident about his ability than he is about himself. He would say anything and would propose unreasonable conditions such as televised meeting with 10,000 audience to avoid debating with me. Dr. Naik, most likely, has read already some of my debates with other contenders and knows this is the kind of rough-water he can't navigate! He has made a reputation for himself and I perfectly understand his instinct to not want to jeopardize it.  However, after being dared so many times by his fans and telling them "I am ready, invite your good doctor", I felt it is important that I publish this to show the Muslims that I am not the one who is shunning the debate and stop them from constantly challenging me. I am ready at any time to engage in a written debate with anyone.    

Dr. Naik says he never heard of me. Am I supposed to think that all these people who wrote to me and challenged me to debate with him and I agreed never contacted him? 

As for face to face debate in front of camera or in public places, I consider it theatrics and have no desire for that. It is time consuming, expensive and what can you say in just two hours? Or, actually one, because half of the time is allotted to your opponent.  This kind of format suits Muslims who prefer histrionics and claptraps to substance. A gathering with 10,000 audience may satisfy the narcissistic craving for grandiosity of some individuals but I personally am not on any ego trip and my debates are not intended for my self aggrandizement. All I can say is that over 10,000 people visit my site in just two days. None of them are my "followings". They are independent and freethinkers, not sheep to follow someone else. If really audience is what Dr. Naik wants he can get plenty of the good ones here. But I suspect that is not the kind of audience he likes. He prefers those who do not think and do not understand but applaud him for his showmanship. 

Also my doctors have advised me to stay away from any public and televised meetings. They say with my condition, a public meeting with Muslims is extremely dangerous for my health.

Okay, I checked the ranking of this site and see it is five time less popular than faithfreedom.org. The point is that the excuse of Dr. Naik for not debating with less famed people than himself is not a valid one.  
 

Of course Dr. Naik is more comfortable with flashy live conferences where he can charm his audience with some claptrap without substance. But my objective is to prove Islam is false and for that we need to make a thorough study of the Quran and the character of Muhammad. This certainly can�t be done in a public conference and in a couple of hours.

I am sure people can see that Dr. Naik uses haughtiness and pomposity as a shield to protect his image. He is more aware than his fans of his limitations. Every day Muslims are writing to declare they have left Islam because of the information they got in this site. If Dr. Naik truly cared about Islam and the truth he would have come to the defense of his faith even if he thinks I am not worthy of his super inflated, ego loaded stature. 

Maybe Dr. Naik should take a look at this page and learn how to differentiate "claims" from statistics.   http://www.faithfreedom.org/webstats/  How much traffic he gets? 
 

Please inform Dr. Naik that it is easy to fool and charm the uneducated people by flashy television shows. I have been challenged by several of his fans who think he can save Islam to debate with him. I have done my job by declaring my readiness to debate with anyone including this Dr. Naik. If he had anything more lethal than showmanship in his arsenal he would not disappoint his fans. Furthermore, as a Muslim he can show his face on TV and not to worry about being assassinated. This is a luxury we the apostates can�t afford.

There is a substantial difference between those who watch television shows and those who read the Internet. These are two different kinds of audiences. The TV watchers are generally less educated thrill seeking masses who watch TV for entertainment. Dr. Naik surely can impress this group. This is very convenient medium since his audience is not able to question him.  Those who search the Internet are often educated people who are capable of critical thought, who can't be easily swayed by flashy programs and who demand proof. Yes we know Dr. Naik is a good showman and he has charmed the gullible, but can he impress the thinking people too?

This is the kind of argument that can receive applause from the ignorant masses. But certainly the thinking elite can see through evasive maneuvers and recognize the real intentions.  

Public debate for me is tantamount to death sentence. We are talking about Islam which is a cult of terror. Would I not be called a fool to put my life in danger when assassination of the opponents is the ONLY argument Muslims have? How Muhammad responded to his critiques and opponents? Didn�t he assassinate them? A public meeting would is absurd. Why my face should make any difference? Can�t he refute my claims against Islam in a scholarly way?  

Just to show you the insincerity of Dr. Naik let us compare the efficacy of a face-to-face conference and a written debate.

In a face-to-face conference, especially attended by 10,000 people the cost is exorbitant. You need to hire a big hall, actually a stadium, advertise, have a committee of organizers to prepare the event then travel half a world to attend this conference. This could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, depending where the conference is held. How much you can say then in such an event? In a talk that lasts one hour, provided it is not interrupted, you can say barely 3000 words. How many hours you can talk? I can sit in my home and write a well researched and documented article of 7,000 words in one day. A good debate on Islam can be 150,000 words. 

If really Dr. Naik was interested to discuss the issues, the written debate is the way to go. But of course he is not. The importance of these exchanges is to show his fans that he is not a scholar and he can�t respond to any of my charges. All he knows is what he has memorized to impress his credulous and unscholarly audience. I can smash all those arguments in one session. 

Boasting is free. I am ready to dispute the �truth� presented by Dr. Naik even if his highness does not think I am worth debating. I invite anyone of his fans to send me the most convincing arguments presented by this gentleman and I will refute them and post them in my site.  

These exchanges show that Dr. Naik is not willing to jeopardize his position and he is not going to debate. In order to show you he is a fraud, no better than the infamous Jimmy Swagart and not a scholar, please send me his arguments and see how I dismantle them. Let his highness stay in his clouds of grandiosity. We do not need him at all. All we need are his arguments.  

(see my refutation of all Dr. Naiks claims here)

I think, people can recognize hypocrisy when they see it and these desperate attempts to avoid confronting me are not going to help much. I have no desire to debate with Zakir Naik because I have not even seen any article written by him. I am not familiar with his intellectual capacity and his scholarship.   All I know is that he has managed to fool a good number of people giving them the impression that he is a scholar on Islam. Well, I think by now his fans should be convinced that their hero is just a paper tiger.

Let this gentleman know that if he really cared about saving the honor of Islam, he would have accepted the challenge two or three years ago when his first fan pleaded with him to refute me. Since then I have reached to at least three or four more million people and have let them know the truth of Islam. I always said if any person can prove me wrong I would remove this site. Had he had the interest of Islam in heart, he would have come forth on his own.  Dr. Naik is running a lucrative business and his business depends on his reputation and Muslims' gullibility. He is after fame and money. He does not care about Islam or truth. The likes of him have infested all the religions since the dawn of time. 

Well, I think this speaks for itself.  The insincerity of this man is obvious to any reasonable person.  

Whether Dr. Naik is afraid to confront me or his gigantic ego does not let him, is not the point.  The point is that so far no Muslim has answered these very old questions. They typically dismiss them and pretend to not willing to dignify the enquirer for he is too dumb to understand and that Allah has put a seal on his heart. So with these excuses they wash their hands and avoid the questions altogether. But ask them to assassinate the person who criticizes Islam and you'll find millions of volunteers. 

Do you really want to remain a Muslim? Isn't it clear that Islam is nothing but a huge lie? 

See a similar case here.  

Back  <   1   2   

ali sina,

           i respect u not because u sd all wrong abt islam but because ur well verse with the text of quran,now the point is no translation of the holy quran is 100% correct and ur translations are not even 50%correct.well as far debate with dr zakir naik is concerned u'll never gonna surpass him,well i know answers for most of ur allegations  but i am not a great scolar like dr zakir naik to answer u with the quranic references,but still u do one thing u come straight to the office of dr naik in mumbai and challenge him for a debate,or else u publish a big front page article to challenge dr zakir abdul karim naik.and i challenge u to convert me to athiesm and i'll guarantee u never in ur whole life will be able to do so,do u know y?'coz islam is the best and only way of life.well i demand a reply from u,jazakallah khair,allah hafiz, and assa lamalikum wr wb

        well dont get stubborn that i've greted u with an islamic greetin,but my religion asks me to even greet a non muslim with a salam that is what called islam.long live islam.  

Dr. Naik is already challenged by nearly a hundred of his fans to debate with me and he has refused. I have also written to him an open letter and have challenged him. He has declined pretending superiority and hiding in his shell of haughtiness. However I agree with you that I will never be able to convince his because Dr. Naik�s gigantic ego has blinded him. He runs a business and makes good money selling religion to gullible. He is not after the truth. He is a businessman and he is wise enough not to kill the goose that lays the golden egg by debating with me and ruining his reputation.  

Dr. Naik is not a scholar. There are many Muslim scholars but this doctor is not one of them. He is a showman. He likes flashy presentations but nothing deep and scholarly.  

As for going to Dr. Naik�s office to challenge him, you must be kidding. Muslims kill those who criticize Islam. Then what is the purpose of debating with him. He is not an important person. I only posted these letters here because people like you keep asking I should debate with him. I want them to see it is he who has no guts to do such thing. I am always ready.

Dear Sir:  

         I am just an interested party possessing only a basic knowledge of Islam. My basic knowledge has led me to believe that Islam kills people, usually innocent civilians like some of my friends who were working in the WTC when those monsters ran the planes into the buildings.  

This debate that Sina is requesting is not just a debate that would satisfy one man. It would also help a lot of us in Western countries understand that Islam is really a religion of peace and not just a barbaric relic dating back 1000 years, which was conceived by a murdering, child molesting thug who was using the pretext of religion to rape, pillage and enrich himself.  

The debate would also clarify for us Westerners who understand and are forever grateful that we live in a part of the world that is enlightened, modern and caring about our fellow man. It is also a part of the world that doesn't celebrate some dumb, useless Islamic thug going into a pizza parlor and exploding nails into teenagers� bodies, who hopes to die, go to heaven and pick up 72 virgins and romp around in bed with them.  

The debate would also help a lot of us in the west understand there may be a good reason why a poor defenseless woman is thrown into a hole exposing the top half of her body while a murderous uneducated rabble who are unable to find even the most menial job because of a stupid government throw rocks at her head until she is dead.  

It will also help some of us in the West understand why a 14 year old boy is lashed d to death because he ate something while he was hungry.  

The debate would also help clarify why nearly all Islamic countries are so poor that they can't feed their own people and those that are wealthy are so because they happen to have oil deposits under the ground- an accident of nature.  

It will help us understand why Muslims don't seem to be able to assimulate themselves in countries of the modern world but live in ghettos infested with extremism and hatred for the very people that send out a monthly unemployment check.  

Your superstar debater could also explain why women are treated like slaves and have virtually no rights in Muslim law.  

These of course are all little things which I am sure your superstar debater will be able to demolish in a few minutes by debating Mr. Sina over the web.  

Kind Regards

Thank you Joe, 

I read a few pages of Zakir Niak's page. He is not a scholar of Islam by any means. He is just a showman. Nonetheless, he has managed to impress a lot of poor Muslims who think he is capable to answer me. These invitations and his refusal should suffice to open the eyes of at least some of his fans. 

from Huzefa Kazi <kazihuzefa (at)gmail.com> to faithfreedom2 (at) gmail.com cc nisaar_yusuf (at)yahoo.com, zakir (at) irf.net, peace (at) irf.net date Sun, Jun 1, 2008  subject Debate with Dr. Zakir Naik     Mr Sina,  I came across your web-site (faithfreedom.org) around 2-3 months back. I read many of your articles and specially your refutation of Dr. Zakir Naik on his debate with Dr. William Campbell. I also the read debate section in which you had posted the letters regarding debate with Dr. Zakir Naik. Since I know some people at IRF(organization of which Dr. Naik is President), I personally went to IRF and requested one of its authorised representative to have a debate of Dr Zakir Naik with you. On my communication with them I came to know that the letter which you had personally written to Dr. Naik dated 2004/12/11 was infact not received by Dr. Naik and his organization. The email id [email protected] is not of Dr. Naik or his organization. Letters written to this domain are not received nor responded to by IRF. IRF's website is www.irf.net. So your boosting that you personally wrote to Dr. Naik is entirely wrong. One of letters which was received by people at IRF was from Mr. Munir Qasim which was replied back. With reference to this letter, you replied to Mr. Munir Qasim(not to IRF) on 06 Jan, 2005. I am posting my personal conversation with a responsible person from IRF, Mr. Nisar Nadiadwala, regarding the debate with Dr. Naik within the context of this letter and there after. Comments of IRF representative Mr. Nisar to your reply is in blue and highlighted in grey. In between I have given my own comments which I have stated as applicable.   How Many Hours do you require? We are ready to give you the no of hours as agreed by you.  IRF Visits 20 Lac homes every day through satellite channel.  You are lying. Your job was not done as no readiness was received by irf.net from you. You had addressed to an email which is neither received nor responded to by IRF. The mail received by IRF was from a third person and not you. Regarding showing your face in public, you can veil your face by wearing a mask made by Hollywood make up and enjoy the luxury of not revealing your face in public.  It is a total lie to say that TV is generally watched by less educated. Both educated as well as uneducated masses watch TV and they can't be fooled when two personalities are debating live. Our debates are not entertainment but academically well researched from Muslims and non-Muslims. In our live talks, we give chance to non-Muslims to pose any questions on Islam. Dr Zakir Naik receives invitations from hostile Non-Muslims too.   My Comment: Through a live debate lets see if you can impress both these groups of people by your truth.   It is not an argument, it is an offer. As you say they are intelligent so let them decide. Why are you shying away from a live debate?     Salman Rushdie and Tasleema Nasreen are still alive. Debating is not killing. Where do you want to arrange the debate? We are ready to debate in an anti-Islamic country of your choice where you can be assured of your security. Internet debate via chat or email can continue for months and years without any conclusion. In internet debate the identity of the debating person cannot be verified and these debates can be edited or not published at all. Who is Ali Sina? we don't want to debate with a ghost via internet. In debating live there can no chance of any foul play, requires less time and has a wider reach through satellite TV. These recordings can be seen by millions later and can also be posted on the internet as well. Mr. Ali Sina if you are so shy of speaking in front of the public then a closed door live debate is possible without audience.  And you don't have to worry about the cost. IRF is ready to bear all the cost for organizing this debate and also give you executive class to-and-fro air tickets to the venue of the debate. 3000 words are enough to put forth your allegations against Islam. Any way we are still giving you a better option. As you have agreed that 150,000 words are required to have a good debate and as per your statistics, 3000 words can be spoken in an hour so for an 150,000 word debate it would require around 12 days, with a 4 hours daily session. Are you ready for this?.  You can bring your scholarly audience here. How long that session would be?   My Comment: Remember your words here, you can smash all his arguments in one session then there is no need for a 150,000 word, 12 session debate? Why Fans? You can debate live with Dr. Zakir Naik?   Dr. Naik never claimed he is a scholar. He always says he is a student of comparative religion. People and other scholars say he is a scholar. Why don't you come forward to give your arguments in recording?  My comment - You don't need to worry about paying one million dollar. Giving of US$ 50,000 is your own offer, which you will definitely fulfill if you loose, apart from publicly declaring that Islam is a true religion and removing your site and accepting Islam. Off-course you can't put similar conditions to other party if he looses as this is your own offer. Either you loose your money and credibility or gain your authenticity if you win. My Comments: If you are truthfull in your allegations then you would accept this challenge now. If you don't accept this challenge then the same thing can be said about you. You are running a lucrative business of fooling people with your lies and your false reputation depends on these lies. If you accept this challenge then you will have to close your shop of fooling others.  This is a blatant lie. Many have answered. It is a different question if answered convincingly or not.  To whom have you written? And when did he refuse? Can you show any letter from Dr. Naik or his organization which is addressed to you where he flatly refused to debate. He has not declined but it is you who is avoiding by giving excuses for not having a live debate. Who is in shell? No body knows who the person behind the veil of Ali Sina is. Is it wrong to have flashy presentations? (My comment � In Dr. Naik and William Campbell debate, it was William Campbell who had used flashy presentations and not Dr. Naik.)  My Comments � You don't need to go to his office. I have spoken on your behalf, with all the conditions favoring you and excluding all the conditions to which you had objected to for not having a live debate.  As it is already made clear that the debate can be conducted in an Anti-Islamic country of your choice. And you can veil your face so there is no harm to you. My Comment - Same question goes for you as well. What can one say in writing that one cannot say in public. Isnt It is more stupidity to be defeated in view of millions of viewers, both scholarly as well as non-scholarly.      My Personal comments   Mr. Ali Sina,   It can never get better than this and I see no reason why you should not come forward for a live debate now. This is the opportunity which you would not like to miss. On your entire site you have boosted about your truth and validity of your arguments and falsity of Islam. It is your best opportunity to expose Islam in front of millions worldwide. I was told that Ali Sina will never accept this live debate offer even after this. Let's see what is your call on this? Will you still continue giving silly excuses of debating on internet only, after all the excuses given by you for not debating live being done away with. I would just like to conclude that If you decline then readers can make their own mind about your authenticity."   Waiting for your response.   Huzefa Kazi   P.S: Personal Appeal:- Apart from sending this letter to you, I am also sending it to the IRF representative, Mr. Nisar Nadiadwala on his personnal email-id along with other domains of IRF, putting their names in CC, so that you can reply to all. While publishing this letter on your site please remove all the email ids from the CC for the purpose of spam protection.

 Mr. Huzefa Kazi,  

I have already said that I will accept a live debate anywhere provided that I am defeated first in writing.  Why this is so difficult?  I have refuted not only Dr. Naik in writing but also his prophet. Why can�t he do the same?  

My job is done. I am not seeking debates with Dr. Naik.  It is now up to him to respond to my refutation. If he pleases to do that in writing or in a televised show it is up to him.  

Now why I do not consider live debates as effective as written debates becomes obvious when one watches the debate between Dr. Campbell and Dr. Naik.  The Muslims who attended that debate came out convinced that Dr. Naik was the winner. The gloating expression of rapture on their faces, as captured on the video, shows they are very pleased of the outcome.  However, I took that debate apart and analyzed every word stated by both Dr. Campbell and his opponent. I have shown with clarity that far from being a winner, Dr. Naik has proven to be wrong on every statement.  The only part that he won was when he questioned the contradictions in the Bible, to which Dr. Campbell responded he has no answer.  This only proves that Dr. Campbell is an honest man. The Bible indeed contains contradictions and errors. This however is not a proof that the Quran is flawless.  Finding errors in other religious books, does not show the Quran is right. It is tu quoque, red herring and a non sequitur argument. All of which are logical fallacies.    

As some experts say, communication is 95% body language.  It is possible to make a lie sound truth with postures. Oratory is an art. Hitler had the right body language for his audience and could, not only convince them, but bring them to tears by telling them nothing but lies.  He wrote: "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.� Mein Kampf, 1925 (James Murphy translation, page 134). It is how you deliver a lie that makes it believable. If a lie is said emphatically, forcefully and with conviction it will be believed more than a truth stated in low key.     

Hitler had mastered this art, so did many other narcissists of history including Muhammad. Dr. Naik has that ability too. This is clear to anyone who watches the videos of his debate with Dr. Campbell.  Dr. Campbell debunked completely the claim that the Quran is scientific. He used science and facts to back up his claims. Nonetheless, Dr. Naik managed to pull wool over the eyes of his Muslim audience by lying persuasively.  The approach of Dr. Campbell was scholarly, that of Dr. Naik was showmanship. Dr. Campbell won the debate while the audience got the impression that Dr. Naik was the victor.  The truth of the matter can be exposed when one reads the transcript of that debate. In writing there is no posturing, no bravado, no jeering or cheering. All that matters is the weight of the arguments.  

I am not a showman and not a flamboyant orator. I have not memorized tons of verses to impress my audience with my memory.  None of these have anything to do with the truth or falsehood of an argument. However they can leave an impression on the listeners who become impressed by the memory of the orator and forget to pay attention to what he says.  It is a fact that many judge a book by its cover. Likewise many can be impressed by these external factors and overlook the lack of evidence in the speech of the orator. My focus is on research. I am interested in scholarly approach. I want people to judge the strength of my arguments by the evidences that I present and not by HOW I present them. I am more interested in the content and less in the form.   

Dr. Naik is a master magician. His props are words. He can pull rabbit out of his skullcap with his words and effectively give the impression of winning even when the reverse is the case.  I want Dr. Naik to beat my argument and not my oratory skills. Oratory is an art. I have not mastered it and I am not interested in it. I am a private person and prefer to communicate my thoughts in writing.    

Despite all that, I have expressed my readiness to confront Dr. Naik in person and in public, even if that public is in Pakistan, provided he refute me in writing first.  I am bending backwards to accommodate your demand. But I know for a fact that Dr. Naik will never debate in writing. He relies on his showmanship skills.  He knows that without it he is helpless.  It is like taking the props of a magician away from him and then asking him to perform his magic. He can�t.  Just as a magician cannot perform any magic without his props, Dr. Naik is speechless without his showmanship skills.  There is no content in what he says, it is all how he says it that makes the impact on his less than educated Muslim audience.  

If you are convinced that he can win in a written debate, here is your chance. Ask him to refute me in writing and then we meet anywhere you specify for your final blow.  How difficult is that?  What does it take to write a few pages of refutation?  I can give you my word that you will never be able to convince Dr. Naik to engage in a written debate.   No one said he is stupid.  It would be stupid for him to accept a written debate just as it would be for me to accept a public one. I know the damage that FFI is causing to Islam. My book, Understanding Muhammad will undo Islam. All it needs is publicity. I have not forgotten the fatwas against my life coming from India. He will have his live debate with me ONLY if he defeats me in writing, and we both know that means never.

My book The World Greatest Showman that refutes all Dr. Naik's claims is on line.  All he has to do is prove me wrong.   

Now, may I ask why he refuses to debate with my friend Sam Shamoun  who has been asking for a debate with him for years? Sam has emerged as a scholar and a great orator too.  Why is his invitation is ignored?

Mr Ali Sina,

Why did you not post my entire letter which I had written to you giving comments to your previous replies step by step. You just pasted my comments removing your replies so that readers cannot understand the context of my statements. This is the way you quote things out of context to prove islam wrong. This is the reason you want email chat so that you can play around with the transcripts to suit your dirty tricks. You claim your self to be a charlatan of humanity but you couldn't consider my simple request of not to publish email Ids for spam protection.

Ali Sina: You repeated everything that was written in this same page.  That makes the page too long. Why don�t you just quote just the part that you want to respond to?  

I tweaked the email addresses by replacing @ with (at) so you won�t get spammed, but it is important to publish them as Muslims often accuse me of fabricating  correspondences to make my opponents look silly.

Huzefa Kazi: In your previous letter you had said "Several Muslims asked me to debate with Dr. Zakir Naik. The following correspondence should make it clear that I am ready and it is Dr. Naik who is unwilling to debate." And now you say "My job is done. I am not seeking debates with Dr. Naik." Now every body can recognize your hypocritical stance.

Ali Sina: I never sought debate with Dr. Naik. I said I am ready to debate with anyone including Dr. Naik and I even sent him an email letting him know that because of so many requests from Muslims I am ready to debate in writing.  I have not changed my position.

However, since I have already started this debate by writing an entire book refuting Dr. Naik, the ball is now in his court.  My job is done. It is up to him to respond.  

Huzefa Kazi: You say "Despite all that, I have expressed my readiness to confront Dr. Naik in person and in public, even if that public is in Pakistan ". Ali Sina Boosting is free which you do so convincingly. You had given various excuses for not debating live, about your safety, less time, not showing your ugly face and cost. we took care of all these excuses and gave you a proposal. And as exactly I was told, you refused.

Ali Sina: I said I will debate in public, with one simple condition that Dr. Naik defeat me in writing first.  Can you explain why this is so hard?  It does not have to be long.  Just pick up any of my charges against Muhammad and write a couple of pages and prove I am mistaken.  If you can do that I will come to wherever you want.  Is this not fair?

It is more than fair. However, you know that this condition is impossible. You guys know about my challenge for a long time and if you could have refuted any of my charges against Muhammad you would have done it by now.

Huzefa Kazi: After reading your articles, I thought that may be there is some truth in what this man is saying and he will accept the challenge. I had sent you a letter as per my discussion with Research department in IRF. But now I have come to the conclusion that you are a liar and Dr Zakir Naik is not required to debate with a rat like you, as we dont require to fire a cannon to kill a mouse. I think any good Muslim can defeat you, Inshallah, but again the condition is the same "on TV camera" so that you have chance to eradicate Islam as per your mission. On internet you dont have much of a chance to reach out millions.

Ali Sina: I do not need to reach millions. All I have to do is kick-start the movement. The movement will run by its own momentum. I do not seek to be the center of anything. There are many other wonderful ex-Muslims who are doing what I do in their own way. Many of these friends once argued with me for years and now they are my allies. Some of them may even disagree with me on my methodology. That is fine. We do not have to agree on everything. I am not after followers. The point is that Muslims are waking up and they are rising to the challenge to awaken other Muslims. 

Huzefa Kazi: You will never ever get ready to debate live because once your lies are exposed in front of millions of viewers you will have to close down your lucrative business of collecting donations from Jewish and christian lobbies.

Ali Sina: I told you the condition. First you must prove me wrong in writing and then I will meet you anywhere.  I suppose you know that is impossible. There are more than half a dozen websites set up exclusively to refute me. None of them has been able to refute anyone of my charges.  You do not need so many websites. All you need is one good article that disproves, not all, but one of my charges in a logical and definitive way.    

I am going to make an offer to Dr. Naik that if he truly believes Islam is true and he can prove it, he should not hesitate to accept.  I am proposing that Dr. Naik and I, debate on several topics and then publish that debate as a book. The book can be about 100,000 words (50,000 words each). This would be a great opportunity to set the records straight and let truth win over falsehood. Does he accept this offer?  I know that if any Muslim scholar makes such an offer to me, I will jump on it.

Huzefa Kazi: As far as debating Sam Shamoun is concerned, IRF gets lots of letters asking Dr. Naik to debate with them. Dr Naik is not free to debate with each and every Tom, Dick and Harry in the world who stands up to challenge him.

Ali Sina:  Sam Shamoun is not every Tom, Dick and Harry.  He is a scholar whose knowledge of Islam surpasses many Muslim scholars including that of Dr. Naik. Dr. Naik is a good orator, but scholar he is not. His analysis of facts is very superficial. It was funny to listen to Dr. Naik saluting Yazid ibn Mu'avia with "may Allah be pleased with him."  This shows the shallowness of this man's knowledge.  Yazid did not even consider himself to be a Muslim. He simply ruled a nation of fools. I don't say Hussein whom he killed was a better person, but Hussein was a grandson of Muhammad, while Yazid was the grandson of Abu Sufyan the archenemy of Muhammad. It takes a very ignorant Muslim to salute the non believing murderer of the grandson of his prophet with "may Allah be pleased with him."   

Sam knows Islam better than Dr. Naik. He is also a great orator. He is a Christian and not an apostate of Islam and although it does not mean that he is completely safe, there are no fatwas against his life.

Huzefa Kazi: As far as your leaving Islam is concerned, you are hiding the fact that you were a Shia and hence you have left shiaism. This is what the majority of Muslims who visit your site does not know. Why haven't you refuted the Imamate of twelve imams of shias including imamate of Hazrat Ali on your website? I challenge you to answer this question on your website.

Ali Sina: I have not hidden the fact that my background is twelver Shiite.  My view of Shiism is clear. Shiism is a compounded lie - a lie within another lie. All the Shiite �sacred� imams were hungry for power, pervert and corrupt. They all were as brute as their ignoble grandfather, Muhammad. Ali was an inept ruler and a ruthless butcher. He killed those who disagreed with him.  That was the extent of this man's diplomacy and political acumen.  Sadly, I descend from this disgraceful house. But do not hold it against me. After this many generations the amount of their gene in me is less than a drop in an ocean.