I looked, and behold, an ashen horse; and he who sat on it had the name Death; and Hell was following with him. Authority was given to them over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword and with famine and with pestilence and by the wild beasts of the earth. Revelation 6:8


Feel Safe Yet?

Only greasy Islamophobes would object to a hijabbed, observant Muslim TSA worker, right? After all, to object would be to assume that all Muslims are jihad terrorists or jihad terrorist sympathizers, and that is the very definition of “Islamophobia,” now, isn’t it? We should be applauding the prospect of a devout Muslim who has dedicated her time to protecting Americans by working at the TSA, right?

All right. I am sure the TSA employee pictured here is as loyal and patriotic as the day is long. This is the question I have: just imagine the possibility — admittedly wild and remote, virtually inconceivable — that jihadis would want to infiltrate the TSA, so as to place operatives in strategic positions who could then ensure that airport security became lax at the precisely opportune moment. One’s immediate thought would be that they would be dressed in a secular Western style, as the Al-Qaeda playbook directs, and as Muhammad Atta and his fellow jihad hijackers were dressed on September 11, 2001.

However, another goal could be in view as well: the placement of people dressed in “Muslim garb,” as Juan Williams memorably put it, in the TSA forces non-Muslim air passengers to place their safety in the hands of people who clearly hold the same belief-system as did those who made all these security procedures necessary in the first place. Thus we are forced tacitly to acknowledge either that that belief-system had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks — even though the attackers themselves invoked it and only it as their motivation — and that therefore we must do nothing to oppose its spread in the West, or that even if that belief-system did motivate the 9/11 jihad attacks, it is continuing to advance in the West and we can do nothing about it.

The two goals may coalesce: in other words, Islamic jihadists who wished to infiltrate the TSA may decide that a hijabbed TSA worker would be preferable to one in secular dress, as a gesture of Islamic supremacist assertiveness as well as the placement of an agent who could weaken security at the right moment. A hijabbed TSA worker is the personification of a dare: Islamic supremacists are daring the TSA to question her about her belief-system, thereby acknowledging that that belief-system has something to do with terror and violence. The TSA almost certainly did not dare to do so: it is virtually inconceivable that the woman pictured, as well as other hijabbed TSA workers and airport personnel, were ever questioned in any attempt to determine how closely their view coincided with those of Osama bin Laden. To have done so would have been “Islamophobic,” and would have invited protests from the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

And so the TSA hires observant Muslims without making any effort at all to determine whether or not they are jihadist infiltrators.

Yet on what basis can that possibility be ruled out?

Feel safe yet?


Institution of Marriage in Islam: A Whorehouse for Men, Jailhouse for Women

In the Quran, there is no word for marriage. The only word used is nikah, which means 'having sex' or 'sexual intercourse' in Arabic.

Islam's whore-house for men


According to Quran a wife is some one with whom you have sex with.

Different types of wives are:

  1. A paid wife with an open ended contract (House wife)
  2. A paid wife with a fixed term contract (Muta wife)
  3. A paid visitation only wife with a visitation contract (Misyar wife)
  4. Slave girl (bought gifted or captured)

The price paid for vagina is called Mahr. Thus according to Quran a contract wife is like a whore who gets paid for her vagina called Mahr while a slave girl wife is like a whore who does not get paid a Mahr for her vagina.

Q 4.24: Seek out wives by means of your wealth, and give those with whom ye have cohabited their price.

Islam: Wife or bondswoman


A wife has no say in the way the husband approaches her for enjoyment.

Prophet said (Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 62, Number 81): "you are given the right to enjoy the women's private parts”.

Q 2.223: Your women are a tilth for you, so go to your tilth (have sexual relations in any manners), when or how you will. (trs. Hilali & Khan)


Like a client can dump a whore at will and pick up another one, the Quran says a husband can dump his wife and get another one.

Q 4.20. If you want to exchange one wife for another than don’t take back any part of what you paid her.

Hadiths say that Hasan Bin Ali, Prophet Mohammad’s beloved grand son, who died young, went through more than 70 wives in his short life.

Women are tilth for men: approach her as you wish

The husband is like a client of a whore. Once a wife is paid Mahr she is obliged to submit her private parts 24/7 to him.


If a whore changes her mind and does not want sex she can. She can return the money and kick him out. However, in Islam a wife does not have that liberty. Once the Mahr is paid her vagina is his to enjoy. She must submit to him any time he gets an urge.

Ibn Majah 1854: “Prophet said if he asks her to surrender herself to him for sexual intercourse on a camel’s back, she should not refuse him even on a camel's saddle."

However in our prophet’s case, whenever he had a huge urge (erection) and his child-wife got scared and ran away during foreplay, he had to catch her, bribe her with a new doll and drag her back to bed.

Muhammad & Aisha: Marriage or child sex abuse?


If a wife refuses sex to a husband Allah ordered husbands to give her a good whipping.

Quran 4.34: Scourge (whip) your wife if she does not obey.

And ordered angels to curse her all night.

Bukhari 4.54.460: "If a husband calls his wife to his bed for sex and if she , he angels will curse her till morning".


Once a wife is whipped badly, she cannot lie down and have sex without severe pain, seriously limiting the ways a husband can approach her thus violating aya 2.223. Our prophet told the momins to postpone sex with her.

Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 132:

The Prophet said, "When you flog your wife like you flog your slave then postpone the sexual intercourse."



A n open ended contract is signed for a negotiated price for an undetermined period. In addition wife gets boarding lodging and clothing. However if the husband decides to dump her, he can break the contract verbally and kick her out (4.20) any time he wants to but he cannot get any money back he paid for her vagina even if he used it for five minutes.

Q 4.20: if you replace a wife by another, you cannot get any part of Mahr back even if it was a large sum.

A broken contract cannot be renewed until the her vagina is used by another momin and is then released (halala).

Q 2.230: And if he has divorced her, then she is not lawful unto him thereafter until she has sex with another husband. And if he has divorced her then she is not lawful unto him thereafter until she has married another husband. Then, if the other husband divorces her, it is no sin on both of them that they reunite.

Female slaves are for sex & enjoyment in Islam

On the other hand a wife has no right to break a contract similarly. She can only break it if she can prove him to be impotent or insane in a court of law.


A man can sign a contract with a woman to use her vagina for a pre-determined period at negotiated price.

The contract can be renewed without the requirement of interim use of her vagina by another man.


In this contract a husband visits a misyar wife for sexual pleasure and pays her for each visit. The husband does not have to provide her boarding and lodging.


A slave girl doesn’t get paid Mahr for her vagina. She is acquired as a free gift (Maria was a free gift for Prophet from Egyptian king), bought from another owner (sometimes prophet took away pretty girls for free from their owners*) or captured after killing her father or husband (prophet took 20% of the captured women from a raid booty).

Sahih Muslim, Book 019, Number 4345:

It has been narrated on the authority of Salama (b. al-Akwa') who said: We fought against the Fazara and Abu Bakr was the commander over us. Abu Bakr bestowed a young girl upon me as a prize. She was one of the prettiest girls in Arabia. So we arrived in Medina. I had not yet disrobed her (had not have sex with her) when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me in the street and said: Give me that girl, O Salama. I said: Messenger of Allah, she has fascinated me. I had not yet disrobed her. When on the next day, the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me again in the street (Salama was parading the young beauty to make other jihadis jealous). Prophet said: O Salama, give me that girl, may God bless your father. I said: She is for you. Messenger of Allah! By Allah, I have not yet disrobed her.


Quranic ayas 4.3, 4.24, 23.6, 33.50 & 70.30 allow a Muslim man to have sex with slave girls. A slave girl can be bought or acquired by killing infidels and capturing their wives and daughters.

Slave girls are the best bargain Islam has to offer to Muslim men but unfortunately Muslims are denying themselves this great reward from Allah just to appease infidel west. The uses of a slave-girl are:

1. They provide sex 24/7.

2. They are used as house maid

3. Offered as sex partners to overnight house guests.

4. Offered as gifts to family and friends for a few days or for good*.

(*The History of Tabari, vol 8, pge 29-30: From his share of captive women, prophet gave his son-in-law, Ali a slave girl, Raytah bt Hilal to enjoy her at his will. He also presented Uthman b. Affan, his son-in-law, another slave girl Zainab b. Hayan, and bestowed another girl (name unknown) to his father in-law Omar Ibn Khattab. Omar gave that girl to his son Abdullah. Most of Prophet's other elite companions received slave girls as gifts).

5. Sold to raise cash, if the need be.

Sex-slave examined by momin Muslim buyer


Islam is the only religion which allows momins to pimp the bodies of their slave girls for side incomes. Thus Quran taught 1400 years back what modern day pimps are learning now, that is to control many prostitutes and get rich on their income.

However Islam is a very compassionate religion. While many pimps force their prostitutes to sell their bodies, Islam prefers that momins avoid coercion.

Q 24.33. Do not compel your slave girls to prostitution to drive income from her body if they are not willing.

But of course Allah is a forgiving God. In case momins do beat them up and force them to prostitute, Allah said he will forgive them.

Q 24.33. (continued) But if you did force her to prostitute Allah can forgive you because he is forgiving and compassionate.

Muslim Women's Lucky Number: 'Lucky to be Beaten by Husband'

An erudite Islamic scholar explains why!

“Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and [as to] those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in their sleeping places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great,and merciful also!” [Quran 4:34]

Islamic clerics never cease to amaze us with their dazzling intellects and their incredible application of truly dizzying logics. Here we have an interview from some MEMRI TV, where a reporter (and I use that term very loosely) has an Islamic Scholar [cleric] explaining the proper ways to beat your wife (or wives as the case may be)!


All of the contents below are captioned, because after you watch this video you are probably going to need to read it again since you aren’t going to believe your eyes [I mean ears] the first time around.
Reporter: Would you believe that the European women in our times, yearns for a husband who would be like a guardian to her? I would like to provide the viewers with some statistics: 90% of British women do not want to marry a weak man, who sits down and cries the moment there is a problem. They say: No, such a man looks more like a woman. We want a manly man. Wife beating is a serious accusation [leveled against Islam]. Let us examine this matter bit by bit.

Cleric: Allah honored wives by instating the punishment of beatings.

Reporter: Honored them with beatings? How is this possible?!

Cleric: The Prophet Muhammad said: “Don’t beat her in the face, and do not make her ugly.

See how she is honored? If the husband beats his wife, he must not beat her in the face!”

Even when he beats her, he must not curse her. This is incredible! He beats her in order to discipline her. In addition, there must not be more than ten beatings, and he must not break her bones, injure her, break her teeth, or poke her in the eye... There is a beating etiquette. If he beats to discipline her, he must not raise his hand high. He must beat her from chest level only.

All these things honor thy woman!

She is in need of discipline!!

How should the husband discipline her? Through admonishment!!!

If she is not deterred, he should then refuse to share the bed with her [have sex with her].

If she is not repentant, he should beat her, but there are rules to the beatings. It is forbidden to beat her in the face or make her ugly. When you beat her you must not curse her. Islam forbids this…[?]

Reporter: With what should he beat her? With his bare hands? With an iron rod?

Cleric: If he beats her, the beatings should not be hard, so that they do not leave a mark. He can beat her with a short rod. He must avoid beating her in the face or in places in the head where it hurts. [I believe it is to HIDE these injury visible marks]

The beatings should be on the body and should not come one right after the other. These are all choices made during the process, but beatings are allowed only as a last resort.

The honoring of the wife in Islam is also evident in the fact that the punishment of beating is permissible in one case only: when she refuses to sleep with him.

Reporter: When she refuses to sleep with him?

Cleric: Yes, because where else could the husband go? He wants her, but she refuses. He should begin with admonishment and threats…

Reporter: Allow me to repeat this. A man cannot beat his wife… over food or drink.

Cleric: Beatings are permitted only in this case, which the husband cannot do without.

So, what do you think? Do all of you non-muslim women YEARN for a man who will beat you and instill some discipline in you? And by “discipline”, of course, I mean sexual desire – because the only time it’s acceptable to beat a woman is when she doesn’t want to have sex.

I mean personally I have found that the best way to warm a girl up to amorous advances is with a little punching bag foreplay, but I’m sure you already knew that, right?



Germans Expose Islamist Domination Plot

A recent raid by German police of a Islamic fundamentalist network in three states serves to expose what many of us have known for a long time but what has been denied in the mainstream media and by many individuals classified as "liberals" and "leftwingers": There is a dangerous plot among fanatic (devout) Muslims to impose fundamentalist Islamic rule on non-Muslim countries.

Although this particular group in Germany is not claimed to be connected to terrorism, this usurpation and imposition of Islamic law will certainly be accompanied by violence in many parts of the world.

As mentioned, this plot for an Islamic state - which many Muslims, in fact, wish to be global - has been pointed out numerous times by a wide variety of observers, from the full spectrum of political and philosophical opinions, including "rightwinger" American Christians and "leftwinger" African and Middle Eastern ex-Muslims. As the Germans are discovering, this scheme is not only real, it is powerful enough to cause serious concern. Denying or ignoring this plot for the violent overthrow of democratic governments and the imposition of bigoted, misogynistic and brutal Islamic law, as practiced in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, Pakistan and Afghanistan, among others, is not only utterly foolish but extremely perilous. In the case of citizens in countries with democratic constitutions, it would also constitute treason. Moreover, "moderate" Muslims who go along with this violent imposition of Islam on an unwilling non-Muslim world in effect are aiding and abetting this subjugation and essentially agreeing that non-Muslims have little or no rights to live freely.

Those who continue to disbelieve that there are individuals within the Muslim community in their country aiming for the same thing - i.e., the imposition of Islamic or sharia law - remain in denial or uninformed.

Raid on Islamic Groups in Germany
Published: December 14, 2010

BERLIN — The German Interior Ministry ordered simultaneous raids in three states on Tuesday against what it called Salafist networks suspected of seeking the imposition of an Islamic state. The action signaled growing concern over the radical messages of some Islamic groups.

The raids, in Bremen, Lower Saxony and North Rhine-Westphalia, were not linked to a recent terrorism alert reportedly inspired by phone calls from a man who said he wanted to quit working with terrorists and who warned of a pending Mumbai-style attack, the Interior Ministry said.

The ministry statement said the raids were directed at two groups: Invitation to Paradise in the cities of Brunswick and Mönchengladbach, and the Islamic Culture Center of Bremen, on the North Sea coast. The two groups work closely together and share the same ideology. The authorities are seeking to outlaw both groups....

The ministry’s statement emphasized this shift in approach. “For a well-fortified democracy, it is necessary and demanded, without waiting for the jihad to occur in the form of armed struggle, to take action against anti-constitutional organizations.”

The statement said the groups were suspected of opposing constitutional order by seeking to "overthrow it in favor of an Islamic theocracy." There was no indication that any arrests were made.

“The group is very influential and is especially active in converting people,” a senior German security official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the investigation was still under way. The best-known figure in the group is a German citizen, Pierre Vogel, a former boxer and convert to Islam. "They do have the aim to change Germany and make it Islamic, but there is no evidence that they were or are involved in any terrorism," the official said.

The Interior Ministry statement, signed by the spokesman Stefan Paris, said one of the leaders of Invitation to Paradise had called for the imposition of Shariah law, the statement said, adding that the raids had been carried out under Germany’s laws of association. Shariah is the legal code of Islam based on the Koran....

German intelligence authorities have said they regard Salafist institutions as a potential source of terrorism....

Islamic Terrorism and Public Fear

Dr. Babu Suseelan

Our lifestyle has changed drastically to accommodate fear producing, life threatening criminal culture of Jihadis during the past 20 years. We experience deadly Jihadi terrorism in New York, in the Middle East, London, Paris, Mumbai and Madrid. Last week several innocent Hindus, Christians, and Kafirs were murdered in Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Indias and Bangladesh. The Islamic criminals and Jihadi terrorists are terrorizing innocent citizens in every democcratic nations in every nook, cranny, peak and valley. And why not? Innocent people are being robbed, raped, assaulted, murdered, battered, stabbed and maimed and the average arrest clearance record of these Jihadi criminals by Islamic government is shameful.

Gone are the days when our culture, and liberal tradition which, was a trademark of the great democratic nations. The social problem, fear and anxiety caused by Jihadists and Muslim criminals is a fallout tragedy of our compromising attitude, indifference, apathy and passive lifestyle.

Marxist-phony-liberal intellectuals are in a hurry to accuse infidels suffering from Phobia.

Yes, we are afraid of Jihadi-terrorists and Muslims with apocalyptic criminal ideology. Fear is natural, warranted and necessary for human survival from violence, dangerous animals and calamities. Phobia is an unnatural and irrational fear. Anxiety is unnecessary anticipated worry about the unknown.

Because of the criminal culture of Jihadis, we have become a nation that is wary of Jihadis next door. We are afraid to associate with their apocalyptic culture. Our fear is warranted.

The public has natural, rational genuine fear of Islamists hiding in our communities with hidden agendas. Muslims in general are phobic and paranoiac towards Kafirs. Islamic irrational paranoia and phobia are projected skillfully on to infidels by Jihadis.

Fear created by Jihadis through terrorism and violence is clear and alarming. jihadi terrorist acts and their scare mongering preachers can electrify infidels with fear. There is a logical reason for our fear of jihadis living next door. our fear and paranoia cannot easily be undone unless Muslims are willing to reform Islam and change their fear producing Jihadi terrorism. Fear of Islam is nothing new.It is thousands of years old. Islam promotes fear, and deviant amplifying jihadi communities around the world repeats and repeats fear producing heinous crimes. Recently jihadis have created a self-sustaining cycle of fear because of their irrationality and paranoia of infidels.

To protect our life, limbs and liberty from jihadi terrorists, from the petty sociopath leaders of Islamic terrorist groups who violate our lives, and those mullahs who amplify our fears, it is natural and rational to express our fear against Islamists living in our communities.

jihadis want psychologically devastate us and our children. Infidels are venerable, as individuals and as a population. Those who are in denial, ignorant or indifferent, will deny their fear of Jihadis.

Throughout history, non-Muslims have been intrigued by the deviant behavior of Muslims. Islam wants to establish Dar-ul-Islam around the world and want to make non-Muslims as Dhimmis. Violence and terrorism are justified and used as an Islamic legitimate ways to conquer infidel lands and subdue non-Muslims and collect Jaziiya (religious Tax) from those who refuse to convert to Islam. The Islamic doctrine indoctrinates Muslims at an early age that infidels are evil and they should be either converted or slaughtered in the name of Allah. The purpose of Muslims is to correct this evil infidels and strive toward Dar-ul-Islam. Since Muslims used Allah’s dictates in the Koran as the criteria for judging others, infidels who did not conform to Islamic standards was considered “bad”.

For many centuries this concept was part of Islamic dogma and so was given additional authority by Islamic religious leaders and rulers. Even today the Islamic principle of hatred against kafirs and infidels are bad are accepted by Muslims in all walks of life, including Islamic professionals.

The concept that non-Muslims are evil make Muslims consider the world as a battle ground for Dar-ul Islam against Dar-ul-Harb. Jihadis constantly resort to violence, terrorism, homicide bombing and all destructive means for supremacy over infidels.

The concept of duality in Islam can be found deeply embedded in Islamic tradition. It exists in the Koran, Hadith and Sura. If we fail to understand this Islamic mindset, we are doomed to eventual defeat against Islamic violence and Jihadi terrorism. Jihadis hiding in our communities must be regarded with suspicion. Law abiding non-Muslim citizens and law enforcement personnel must always be on guard for signs of violent Jihadi activity and ready to head of such tendencies as they appear.

The methods required to deal with such perverse Islamic tendencies must be powerful ones. Saving citizens from Jihadi terrorism calls for vigorous measures.

Every time we bargain with our deadly criminals, we are compromising with our enemies, every time we show leniency we are compromising with terrorists. Our corrupt political leaders and phony intellectuals appease the masses with political rhetoric and empty slogans year after year, but criminals march ahead with their murder mayhem and the causalities increase.


“Palestinian” Arabs and the Forgotten Iranian Arabs

To Muslims and their left-communist allies, the only persecution of Muslims matter is that of the Palestineans. Worse persecution of the Arab Muslim minorities in Iran are of no concern, whatsoever.

The Islamic Republic of Iran—which would be better known as the Islamic Occupation Regime—has for over thirty years championed itself as the “Palestinian” Arabs greatest supporters in the Islamist quest to extirpate the State of Israel from the world. Yet, while the non-Arab, Persian Shi’ite regime demonizes Israel and “Zionists” twenty four hours a day, it aligns itself with the Arab Sunni fundamentalist terror gang called Hamas, while also aligning itself with the Arab Shi’ite terrorist gang - Hizbullah - which has a strangle hold on Lebanon.

However, a dirty little secret unknown to most of the world, is Iran’s ethnic cleansing of its own minority Arab population. The ignorance and silence of the world—particularly that of the twenty two member League of Arab States—is absolutely blinding, appalling, and the epitome of hypocrisy. It is long overdue for the selective “poster child” of oppression (the “Palestinians”) to cease to exist, as the world’s cause célébre, and that if real peace is to come in the Middle East, then all Middle Eastern conflicts must be addressed. Whether it is the Arab-Israeli dispute, the Kurds, the Copts, the Maronites, Kashmir, or Iranian territorial designs and its nuclear program, all of these problems must be addressed equally. Regardless, this article would like to concentrate on the plight of the Arabs of Iran, a small quiet minority that has been oppressed for decades with no one to speak for them.

Arabs living in the Persian Gulf area goes back to antiquity, and certainly pre-dates the rise of Islam by centuries. Two major Arab tribes played a role in the great wars between Rome (and later Byzantium), and Parthia (Persia). These were the predominantly Christian Lakhmid tribe—which aided the last pre-Islamic dynasty in Iran and the Ghassanid tribe, also Christian, but who were allies with Persia’s deadly enemies, Rome, and later Byzantium. Many historians believe that the bloodletting between Parthia/Persia and Rome/Byzantium led to the power vacuum that would give rise to Muhammad and the religion of Islam. Indeed, the Persians and Romans had so bloodied themselves over the centuries that it didn’t take much for a small Arab army infused with a new religion to bring down both severely weakened world powers.

Arabs conquered Sassanid Iran in the 7th century

Regardless, when the Arabs conquered Sassanid Iran in the 7th century, Iran became Islamized and Arabized. Luckily, they were able to resurrect the Persian language (albeit, written in Arabic characters), but they were not able to throw off the yoke of Islam. As the Arab invasion, deracination, and decimation of Iran continued, Muslim Arab settlers joined the Arab tribes in the area and began to settle down in parts of what today constitute Iran.

The majority of Iranian Arabs are of Shi’ite background and live in the Iranian province of Khuzistan with its capital of Ahwaz (or Ahvaz). Thus, they are known as Ahwazi Arabs . It is in this province and city that deadly force has been used by Iranian Pasdaran and Basij against the Arab inhabitants for years.

Unconfirmed rumors have even spoken about Arabic speaking Basij with Lebanese accents taking part in these massacres. Which of course would only show how the Iranian/Hizbullah axis has reached across the Middle East.

The reports of expulsions, killings, jailing, land confiscation, “Persianization,” banning of Arabic, and general persecution of Iran’s Arabs are well documented by the National Liberation Movement of Ahwaz, the Ahwaz Studies Center, and the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization. Unfortunately, due to the severe and deadly crackdown of the Islamic regime against its own people over the last year and a half, ongoing events out of Iran, let alone Khuzistan, has been severely curtailed.

Why the silence of the world—especially the Arab world—to Iranian atrocities against its Arab minority?

Yet, the questions remain. Why the silence of the world—especially the Arab world—to Iranian atrocities against its Arab minority? (Not to mention world silence against the Iranian people in general.) Granted, Persians and Arabs have despised one another since the Arab Muslim Conquest, yet all are united under the banner of Islam (even with Shi’ite—Sunni and ethnic differences). Certainly, the Islamic regime, Hamas, Hizbullah, the PLO, and the Arab League are united in their ultimate goal of seeing the dissolution of Israel. Yet, why the double standard when it comes to so-called “Arab Palestine” as opposed to the rights of the Ahwazi Arabs? Why no talk of “self-determination,” “inalienable rights,” and “autonomy,” for the Khuzistani Arabs? Are these slogans nothing but claptrap and mantras only to be used against Israel? Why no world protests over the plight of the Iranian Arabs and other minorities living under the Islamic regime? And how ironic that the man who currently occupies the Oval Office is totally silent on Iranian atrocities against its own citizens, while excoriating Israel at every opportunity.

While most of the world knows about the Arab-Israeli dispute, and the “Palestinian plight,” most people have probably never heard of Khuzistan, Ahwaz, or the fact that not only are there Iranian Arabs, but that they are being systematically oppressed and murdered. One can only compare the two scenarios with that of selective criticism to the exclusion of all else. No matter what Israel does—or does not do—it is excoriated, vilified, denounced, and delegitimized. Yet Iran goes happily along giving the finger to the world as it continues with its oppression of its own people, boasts of its nuclear might, and threatens to complete Hitler’s job on the Jews of Israel.

This article is not meant as a slap against the Iranian people who have suffered for over thirty years from a bloodthirsty regime. And this article is certainly not advocating a twenty third state in the Arab League. (“Palestine” is counted as one of the twenty two states of the LAS.) Yet, it is ironic that while non-Arab and even non-Muslim countries have been invited to have observer status at the Arab League (Venezuela, Brazil, India, and Eritrea) - no such observer status - let alone membership - exists for Khuzistan (or as the Arabs calls it, “Arabistan.”) Ironically, even the Republic of Turkey will soon become an observer to the Arab League.

While the Khuzistan Arabs would probably eschew any kind of support from Israel, it would be most interesting if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli government had the intestinal fortitude to call Iran on the carpet in regard to the treatment of its own people and own minorities. Even Israel merely criticizing Iranian treatment of its Arab minority would no doubt infuriate and shame the Arab and Muslim world. While Arabs sit in the Israeli Parliament and Arabic is an official language of Israel, no such accommodations exist for the Arabs of Iran.

It would be a most interesting scenario if a secret poll could be taken amongst “Palestinian” Arabs and Iranian Arabs. The question to ask is how many Iranian Arabs would rather be living under the “Zionist regime” and how many “Palestinian” Arabs would rather be living under the Islamic regime. The world knows the answer to this question. Unfortunately, it is a question that will never be asked.

In the meantime, the leftist liberal establishment (including the media) would do itself justice if it ceased its fixation on the “Palestinians” and began to concentrate on issues such as the Iranian oppression of its own peoples and all of the other ethnic and religious conflicts in the Middle East. Until all of these issues are addressed, peace will never come to the Middle East—or to the world at large.


Democracy: The Trojan Horse for the Islamization of Europe, Part 1

As concern the Islamization of Europe: Democracy – Thou art a Trojan horse.

The Hindi proverb “Loha Loheko Kaat-ta hai” means “iron cuts iron”. The meaning is obvious. One cannot cut iron with copper, bronze or brass. You can cut iron only with tempered steel. Similar is the case with Islam. Today, Islam is the most stubborn, savage and uncivilized totalitarian creed. It is not possible to tackle such a cruel and violent creed with the liberal and civilized legal system of modern democracy. It has to be tackled with firm, effective measures. The Muslims in non-Muslims countries are using the liberal and democratic laws of the host countries to multiply their kind so as to gain in strength. The purpose, or the ultimate impact of it, would be: overpopulate the native population and conquer those nations through a nonviolent, even somewhat democratic, way.

In the olden days of dictatorial and totalitarian monarchy in Europe, Muslims had to fight with European forces to make their foothold in that continent. In 711, Moors, after the Umayyad conquest of Hispania, occupied large parts of the Iberian Peninsula establishing the Al-Andalus (Moorish Spain), but further advancement was arrested. That monarchy, today, has been replaced by democracy, which is facilitating the Muslim invasion of European countries as they come in as innocent immigrants, who are treated as civilian residents and even valued citizens. It can also be recalled that European monarchies had once organized the Crusades in order to recover Jerusalem from the Muslim occupation. But in today’s democratic Europe, organizing such an effort would be impossible. In this context, it would be relevant to discuss the Muslim conquest of Spain.

Islam in Spain

Islamic rule in Spain began with the Umayyad conquest of Hispania in 711 and lasted until 1492, when the Muslims of Granada were either converted to Christianity or massacred or driven out. Hispania was the Latin name given to the whole Iberian Peninsula (covering the territories of present-day Spain and Portugal). After the fall of the Western Roman Empire (476 AD), the Teutonic tribe of Visigoths captured and ruled the whole peninsula until the Islamic conquest. It is frequently stated in historical sources that Spain was one of the former Roman provinces where the Latin language and culture grew deep roots. After the fall of the Empire, the Visigoths continued that tradition by becoming probably the most Romanized of all Teutonic tribes.

On April 30 of 711, Berber leader Tariq ibn-Ziyad landed at Gibraltar and by the end of the campaign in most of the Iberian Peninsula (except for small areas in the north-west such as Asturias and the Basque territory) were brought under Islamic rule. The turning-point of the campaign was the battle of Guadalete, where the Visigothic king Roderick was defeated and killed on the battlefield. After a eight-year-long campaign, Muslim forces attempted to move north-east across the Pyrenees Mountains toward France, but were defeated by the Frankish Catholic Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours in 732. In fact, all areas previously under the rule of the Visigoths went under Islamic rule.

Islamic rule in the Iberian peninsula lasted for varying periods ranging from only 28 years in the extreme northwest (Galicia) to 781 years in the area surrounding the city of Granada in the southeast.

Lessons from Granada

Resistance to Muslim occupation started since the very beginning. And as Muslims were successively ousted from parts of Spain, their last fortess of power was a small settlement called Granada (88 sq. Km.), situated at the foot of the Sierra Nevada mountains, at the confluence of three rivers, Beiro, Darro and Genil---now a province of Spain.

On January 2, 1492, the last Muslim sultan in Iberia, Emir Muhammad XII, known as Boabdil to the Spanish, surrendered complete control of Emirate of Granada, to Ferdinand II and Isabella I after the last battle of the Granada.

By 1499, the Muslims and Jews of Spain were given a choice of baptism or emigration. As a result, the Muslim population of Spain were subjected to persecution, execution, or exile---a treatment, which is now unthinkable in Europe. It nonetheless brought peace in Europe, which is now being perturbed again by the new influx of Muslims as refugees and immigrants. As of 2007[update], an estimated over 1 million Muslims live in Spain and most of them are recent immigrants from North Africa, Middle East, and South Asia; although there are some 20,000 converts.

Ottoman Empire and Europe

Similar is the history of the invasion of Europe by the Ottoman Turks. During the 8th and 9th centuries, Turkish nomadic tribes converted to Islam, were pressured out of their homes in the Asian steppes by the Mongols. One of the Turkish tribes, the Seljuk, had become a significant power in the Islamic world. However, many other Turkish groups remained nomadic, sought to conquer land for Islam and to acquire war booty for themselves. This led them into conflict with the Seljuk Turks, and to pacify the nomadic tribes, the Seljuks directed them to the eastern domain of the Byzantine Empire, Anatolia. The tribe known as the Ottomans arose from one of the smaller emirates established in northwestern Anatolia after 1071. The dynasty was named for Osman (1259-1326), who began to expand his kingdom into the Byzantine Empire in Asia Minor, moving his capital to Bursa in 1326. The empire lasted from 1299 to 1923. At the height of its power, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the empire spanned three continents, controlling much of Southeastern Europe, Western Asia and North Africa during the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent (r. 1520-1566), the empire was at the center of interactions between the Eastern and Western worlds for six centuries.

In the century after the death of Osman I, Ottoman rule began to extend over the Eastern Mediterranean and the Balkans. The important city of Thessaloniki was captured from the Venetians in 1387. The Turkish victory at the Battle of Kosovoin 1389 effectively marked the end of Serbian power in the region, paving the way for Ottoman expansion into Europe. The Battle of Nicopolis in 1396, widely regarded as the last large-scale crusade of the Middle Ages, failed to stop the advance of the victorious Ottomans. To consolidate his claim, Mehmed II wanted to gain control over the Western capital, Rome, and Ottoman forces occupied parts of the Italian Peninsula.

Later on, the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople in 1453 by Mehmed II cemented the status of the Empire as the preeminent power in southeastern Europe and the eastern Mediterranean. During this time, the Ottoman Empire entered a long period of conquest and expansion, extending its borders deep into Europe and North Africa.

Selim's successor, Suleiman the Magnificent (1520–1566), further expanded upon Selim's conquests. After capturing Belgrade in 1521, Suleiman conquered the southern and central parts of the Kingdom of Hungary.

He then laid siege to Vienna in 1529, but failed to take the city after the onset of winter forced his retreat.[20] In 1532, he made another attack on Vienna with an army thought to be over 250,000 strong, but was repulsed 97 kilometres (60 mi) south of the city at the fortress of Güns.

As a treachery, France united with the Ottoman Empire, as their mutual opposition to Habsburg rule in both Southern and Central Europe, became strong allies during this period. The alliance was economic and military, as the sultans granted France the right of trade within the Empire without levy of taxation. By this time, the Ottoman Empire was a significant and accepted part of the European political sphere. It made a military alliance with France, the Kingdom of England and the Dutch Republic against Habsburg Spain, Italy and Habsburg Austria.

Battle of Vienna in 1683, which marked the end of Ottoman expansion into Europe. In the final assault the Ottoman forces were swept away by allied Habsburg, German and Polish forces spearheaded by the Polish king Jan Sobieski at the Battle of Vienna. Then after the Treaty of Karlowitz (January 26, 1699), which ended the Great Turkish War, the Ottoman Empire was forced to surrender control of significant European territories.

The Ottoman Empire came to an end, as a regime under an imperial monarchy, on November 1, 1922. It formally ended on July 24, 1923 under the Treaty of Lausanne. It was succeeded by the Republic of Turkey, which was officially proclaimed on October 29, 1923.


The history of Europe, narrated above, tells us how resolutely the European monarchies had to fight for saving the continent from being overrun by the Islamic hordes – firstly by defeating the Moors in Spain in January, 1492, and secondly, by defeating the Ottoman Turks in January, 1699. But today, with liberal democracy in place as a system of governance, which demands human rights to all and is against any form of discrimination based on religion or race. But collectively Muslims are as determined as ever to fulfill their God-ordained command to conquer the world for establishing Islamic theocracy globally. And liberal democracy, undoubtedly, presents Muslims with the golden opportunity for Islamizing Europe and by extension of whole world, by over-breeding and influx of Muslim immigrants from Islamic countries.

This prospect of Islamizing Europe through increasing Muslim population through migration and fast breeding was expressed most eloquently by none other than the Libyan president Muammar Gaddafi, who said: There are signs that Allah will grant victory to Islam in Europe without swords, without guns, without conquest. We don’t need terrorists, we don’t need homicide bombers. The 50+ million Muslims (in Europe) will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades.

Therefore, as concern the Islamization of Europe: Democracy – Thou art a Trojan horse.


Leaked documents refute US President Obama’s fundamental assumptions

Yoram Ettinger

Recently published Wikileaks documents expose the failure of President Obama's counter-terrorism policy.

While reaffirming a 1,400 years old Muslim track record, the documents refute Obama's fundamental assumptions, which have shaped his counter-terrorism policy: that the Palestinian issue is a root cause of Middle East turbulence and anti-Western terrorism; that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are allies of the US; that there is no Islamic terrorism since Islam promotes peace and not terrorism; that there is no Jihadist terrorism since Jihad is a process which purifies the soul; that there is no global terrorism; that Islamic terrorists represent a Muslim minority which rejects modernity and that Islam has always been part of the American story.

to the documents, Islamic terrorism has afflicted the globe from Latin America through the US and overseas American targets, Western Europe, the former USSR, Africa, the Middle East (hitting mostly fellow-Muslims), South Asia, the Far East and Australia.

The worldwide proliferation of Islamic terrorism is orchestrated and executed, also, by multi-lingual graduates of Western universities, who proficiently use the Internet, Blackberry, iPod, Twitter and Facebook. Contrary to Obama's assumption, modern-day Islamic terrorists do not reject modernity. In fact, they leverage modernity in order to advance Islam's historical values and goals. They believe that Islam's destiny of religious and territorial domination of the globe is divinely-ordained. And, they pursue their goals via violence, intolerance toward "infidels" and "apostates," totalitarianism and "Holy Wars" (Jihad) against civilizations and entities that undermine their megalomaniac aspirations, which transcend the Palestinian issue and Israel's policies or existencem

Irrespective of the Palestinian issue and the Arab-Israeli conflict, Muslim terrorists operate along the joint border of Brazil, Paraguay and Argentina, as well as in San Paulo, Foz do Iguacu and Parana, Brazil. Independent of Israel's policies and existence, the Lashkar-E-Taiba, Jaish-E-Mohammed and other Islamic terrorist organizations - operating with the backing of Pakistan - target India. Moreover, Lashkar-E-Taiba expands its presence in Pakistan – where it collaborates with the Inter Services Intelligence - Sri Lanka and Nepal in order to intensify terrorism in India.

Tailwind to terrorists

According to WikiLeaks – quoting a December 2009 Secretary of State Clinton memo – Saudi Arabia (especially), Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates are the chief financial supporters of global Islamic Sunni terrorism, such as al-Qaeda, Taliban and Lashkar –E-Taiba, raising funds for terrorism through seemingly philanthropic organizations during pilgrimages to Mecca.

The May 31, 2010 edition of The Sunday Times reported that Afghanistan's financial intelligence unit, FinTraca, documented a $1.5 billion transfer from Saudi Arabia to Afghani terrorists, mostly Taliban. The British daily asked: "One wonders how much of this money was used to buy weapons that killed 1,268 American soldiers and maimed thousands more in Afghanistan?!"

Undersecretary of the Treasury for Financial and Terrorism Intelligence, Stuart Levey, testified at an October 6, 2009 Senate Banking Committee hearing that "money is leaving Saudi Arabia to fund terrorism…Undoubtedly, some of that money is going to Iraq, to South-East Asia and to any other place where there are terrorists…"

For example, the Riyadh-based al-Rajhi Bank was implicated in funding the Islamic Chechen Mujahedeen. Saudi involvement in anti-Western Islamic terrorism was also reported in 2009 by Pakistan's police, including a $15 million transfer to Jihadists who were involved in the murder of former Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. A November 15, 2010 report by the US Government Accountability Office (GAO), a US Congress investigative unit, maintained that Saudi Arabia made progress in curbing terror-funding within the kingdom but did not cooperate in de-funding Islamic terrorism outside the kingdom.

Saudi-funded Islamic non-profit foundations – with direct and indirect ties to terror organizations - proliferate globally. The first foundation, the Muslim World League was established in 1962, five years before the Six-Day War, before the first settlement was established, while Jordan and Egypt occupied parts of Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and Gaza and the Palestinian issue did not preoccupy Western policymakers. More Saudi-supported foundations followed, including the USA-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the North American Islamic Trust (NAIS), the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), etc.

However, President Obama has overlooked the fact that those who finance and incite terrorism are more culpable than the brainwashed terrorists who execute terrorism. President Obama has subordinated counter-terrorism to wishful thinking, oversimplification, misreading of the writing on the wall and a series of wrong assumptions, such as a supposed linkage between the Palestinian issue and countering-Islamic terrorism and preventing Iran's nuclearization. Thus, wrong assumptions have produced wrong policies, which have yielded tailwind to terrorists and rogue regimes and headwind to Western democracies.



Ishmael is a Thief! (7:33 audio)

Did you know that there was never any country called Palestine? Did you know that there is no such thing as a Palestinian people?

The ideas that the West Bank and Gaza are occupied Palestinian land, and that the Palestinian people are fighting for their land, have been accepted by most of the governments of the world and by most of the media in the world. But if you read on, you will see that these two claims are the biggest lies ever deliberately perpetrated on humanity.

Check out any map of the Middle East and see for yourself. You will find Palestine listed as a region as it always has been, but definitely not a country. We can locate the Mojave Desert on the map, but we still do not recognize it as our 51st state, let alone a country. Similarly, the region of Siberia is a region not a state. Or the Sahara is a region not a state, etc. Neither is Palestine a state. It never was a country, just a region.

Importantly, the Jews did not displace anyone, because no one permanently resided there. It was a land inhabited by nomadic, Bedouin tribes. The whole region was nothing but deserts and swamps. Only about 120,000 Arabs resided in an area that covered the territories, the state of Israel and Jordan. When Mark Twain visited the area, he wrote he found nothing but a wasteland.

Map of Israel (West Bank and Gaza included)During the 19 years that the territories, including Jerusalem and Gaza, were occupied by the kingdoms of Jordan and Egypt, (refer to http://masada2000.org/historical.html) no one talked about a Palestinian state, not the Arab countries, not the United Nations. Nobody asked Jordan or Egypt to abdicate their ownership and give it to the Palestinians. Not even the Palestinians themselves said anything about a Palestinian state or a Palestinian people, because nobody heard of a Palestinian people. It never existed.

The fact simply is that there are no Palestinians. These people are Arabs like all other Arabs, and they happen to live in a region called Palestine. They are not a separate people.

What makes a separate people? Religion, language, culture, garb, cuisine, etc. The Arabs in Palestine speak the same language, practice the same religion, have the same culture, etc., as all the other Arabs. The few minor differences that exist between them are like the minor differences that exist between the American Northerners and Southerners, Easterners and Westerners... but they are still all Americans. People in the south of France are quite different from the people in the north, but they are still all French. These inconsequential differences do not make a people.

The Arabs living in Syria or Jordan, etc., are also the same Arabs, but they are each a separate nation because they each have a separate country. The so-called Palestinians want a separate country because they claim to be a separate nation. They are not. They were never a separate people before the new state of Israel. How did they become one now?

Because of these lies, the so-called "Palestinians" feel justified in sending suicide bombers to kill women, children, babies, old men, old women and noncombatant citizens. Because of these lies, the United Nations and the media of the world are condemning Israel who is acting less harshly than any other country would act in retaliation for such heinous attacks. What is the United States doing in Afghanistan, a totally foreign country? Killing Afghanis. Why? Because they attacked us on Sept. 11. I understand this. But why do they not understand that that is exactly what Israel is doing, only on a much smaller scale?

Ask yourself this: Should the use of terror ever be rewarded? When is the use of terrorism justified as a military tactic? As a political tactic? As an economic tactic? What implications does this hold for future conflicts?

Let us examine the truths here:

Arab "Palestinian?" with Flag of "Palestine?"1) There never was a Palestinian state or a Palestinian nation. There are no Palestinian people, per se. Rather, these are Arabs living in a region that historically has been called many things, including "Palestine."

2) Israel did not go to war against a Palestinian state and occupy its land. Rather, Israel was attacked by six Arab countries at once. She defended herself, defeated her attackers, and won the so-called territories, not from the Palestinians, but from Jordan and Egypt.

3) Jerusalem was never the capital of any state but Israel. It was certainly never the capital of a country that never existed. Why should the Palestinians get any part of it? Because they want it? Because they have terrorists?

4) Jerusalem, under the current Israeli control, is a free and open city. Israel, as a democracy, guarantees freedom of religion within its borders. Contrast this fact with areas that have come under Palestinian occupation. What percentage of Christians have left in recent years because they cannot stand the harassment and persecution?

5) Most Arabs living in Palestine today are not indigenous to the region. It was not until after the Jews had changed deserts and swamps into a productive and thriving land that the Arabs started migrating there. Arafat himself was born and raised in Cairo, Egypt. Did you know that?

The belief that giving the Palestinians a state will bring peace is a delusion. The truth is that they want it all. The short-term goal is a state consisting of the West Bank and Gaza. The long-term goal is a state which includes all of "historical Palestine," including Jordan.

How do I know this?

The late Faisal Husseini, Arafat's Jerusalem representative, a man who was cultured, sophisticated and considered the most moderate of all the Palestinians, shortly before his death on May 31, 2001, expressed his true feelings in an interview with the popular Egyptian newspaper el Arav. Husseini said: "We must distinguish the strategies and long-term goals from the political-phased goals which we are compelled to accept due to international pressures." But the "ultimate goal is the liberation of all of historical Palestine." Explicitly he said: "Oslo has to be viewed as a Trojan Horse."

He even added and clarified that it is the obligation of all the Palestinian forces and factions to see the Oslo Accords as "temporary" steps, as "gradual" goals, because in this way, "We are setting an ambush for the Israelis and cheating them." He also differentiated between "strategic," long-term, "higher" goals, and "political" short-term goals dependent on "the current international establishment, balance of power" etc.

All of historical Palestine! Does not this include all of Israel and all of Jordan?

What does this say to you?

Unless the Arabs recognize and accept these truths, even if they are given a state of their own, and no matter how many agreements and treaties they sign, they will always feel wronged, cheated, and forced into giving up what they now claim is theirs. They will continue to plot and look for an opportunity to destroy Israel in order to take back what they claim is theirs, especially the younger generation that has been brainwashed to hate the occupying enemy. Whether there is a Palestinian state or not, there will be no peace.

Only a massive and ongoing re-education of the Arab people to these truths will enable meaningful negotiations to begin, followed by a lasting peace between Arabs and Jews. It is therefore critical that everyone who has an audience, whether in print or other media, use the forum they have available to repeat these truths again and again until they reach the consciousness of those waging war in the Middle East.

There is no "Palestine" and there are no "Palestinians"

Sharon Nader Sloan's article can be seen at http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26932
Graphics by Masada2000.org

Return to Homepage


Muslims Graveyard Purified

By exhuming the body of a little Hindu girl, one year after her burial, to assuage the Muslim rage...

RAWALPINDI, Dec 1: ‘Peace’ returned to Ratta Amral graveyard on Tuesday night after the body of a little Hindu girl buried there a year ago was exhumed by her family and reburied in the adjacent Christian graveyard.

Their act of assuaging ‘Muslim sensitivities’ took place in the dark of the night and under tight security.

“When we buried our Summan Prem there on October 1, 2009, we mistakenly thought it was the Christian graveyard,” an uncle of the girl told Dawn, tears rolling down his cheeks in memory of his niece who would have been 10 this year.

“We did not want to cause any controversy, or annoy anyone. If the (graveyard management) committee does not want us Hindus to bury their dead here, we won’t,” he said.

Summan’s father, Prem Kishan, was spared the pain of shifting his daughter’s remains from, so to say, Muslim to Christian grounds, as he was away in Sukkur on the day for the funeral of his nephew.

Her family, living on The Mall, Saddar, is Balmeki Hindu, some of whom bury their dead instead of cremating.

Summan’s Hindu ancestry became known only after the family put a tombstone on her grave, bearing her name and Hindu Mantras.

Tongues started wagging at this ‘sacrilege’ and agitated Muslim clerics and visitors to the Ratta Amral graveyard raised ‘the issue’ with the graveyard’s managing committee.

They accused the management of negligence and threatened to stop burying their dead in the graveyard unless it was ‘purified’ by removing the non-Muslim’s body.

Alarmed by the anger that the dead Summan was causing, the management committee requested her family to move her out of the Muslim graveyard — which it did.

“We were not aware of the Hindu burial. Clerics and people of the area brought it to our notice and their reaction made us request the family to remove it to the adjacent Christian graveyard,” said Ratta Amral Graveyard Management Committee chairman Mohammad Mohsin Mir.

There are many graves of lower caste Hindus in the Christian graveyard which had been separated from the Muslim cemetery, he said.

“It was a mistake for the grave digger to assume that Summan was a Muslim. Otherwise the management committee is well aware that non-Muslims could not be buried in our graveyard,” said Mr Mir. His fear of the angry Muslim sentiments was understandable.

Hafiz Iqbal Rizvi, Rawalpindi District Khateeb, holds that Shariat does not allow burying non-Muslims in Muslim graveyards.

Chairman of the District Peace Committee Maulana Izhar Hussain Shah Bukhari blamed the burial of the non-Muslim girl in Ratta Amral graveyard on the management committee and the grave digger who did not register the names of the dead brought to the graveyard.


Incest in Islam

Prophet Muhammad's incestuous marriage to his daughter-in-law Zaynab in well known. But not many people know that Quranic verses also leave scope for marriage with one's biological daughter and Shafii Islam, indeed, allows it...

(Caution: This essay may offend some readers)


The Oxford Dictionary defines incest as sexual intercourse between near relations.

Elaborating on this Encyclopaedia Britannica (CD ROM version) writes:

Generally speaking, the closer the genetic relationship between two people, the stronger and more highly charged is the taboo prohibiting or discouraging sexual relations between them. Thus, sexual intercourse between a father and daughter, a mother and son, or a brother and sister is almost universally forbidden. Sexual relations between an uncle and niece or between an aunt and nephew are also generally taboo, and relations between first cousins are prohibited as well in some societies.

On the harmful effect of incestuous relation Encyclopaedia Britannica also writes:

Highly inbred populations have diminished reproductive success and become gene pools for hereditary disorders.

Incest in the Qur'an: Marriage between father and his biological daughter

Muslims will find it hard to believe that Allah in the Qur'an has violated the universal condemnation of incest. Let us read verse 4:23‑24 which lists the categories of women that a Muslim man may not marry.

004.023 (Yusuf Ali)
YUSUFALI: Prohibited to you (For marriage) are:- Your mothers, daughters, sisters; father's sisters, Mother's sisters; brother's daughters, sister's daughters; foster-mothers (Who gave you suck), foster-sisters; your wives' mothers; your step-daughters under your guardianship, born of your wives to whom ye have gone in,- no prohibition if ye have not gone in;- (Those who have been) wives of your sons proceeding from your loins; and two sisters in wedlock at one and the same time, except for what is past; for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful;-
YUSUFALI: Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath Allah ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property,- desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and Allah is All-knowing, All-wise.

One might think that verse 4:23 specifically prohibits a man from marrying (that is, to have sex) with his biological daughter. However, this may not be so. Hashim Kamali, one of the most eminent scholars of Islamic Jurisprudence and currently the Professor of Islamic Law and Jurisprudence at International Islamic University Malaysia writes:

An example of the zanni in the Qur'an is the text which reads, ‘prohibited to you are your mothers and your daughters’ (al‑Nisa’ 4:23). The text is definitive in regard to the prohibition of marriage with one’s mother and daughter and there is no disagreement on this point. However, the word banatakum (‘your daughters’) could be taken for its literal meaning, which would be a female child born to a person either through marriage or through zina, or for its juridical meaning. In the latter sense ‘banatukum’ can only mean a legitimate daughter.

The jurists are in disagreement as to which of these meanings should be read into text. The Hanafis have upheld the first of the two meanings and have ruled on the prohibition of marriage to one’s illegitimate daughter, whereas the Shafis have upheld the second. According to this interpretation, marriage with one’s illegitimate daughter is not forbidden as the text only refers to a daughter through marriage. It would follow from this that the illegitimate daughter has no right to inheritance, and the rules of guardianship and custody would not apply to her. (Hashim Kamali, pp. 21‑23)

Note: The Qur'an scholars divide the Qur’anic verses into two classes: qati—definitive, no speculation and zanni—speculative. Even the eminent Sharia expert Professor Hashim Kamali admits that the Qur'an is ambiguous. (Hashim Kamali, p. 33.)

This will be a bombshell to the Muslims. Hashim Kamali testifies that at least one sect of Islam (that is, Shafi) allows a Muslim man to marry his biological daughter and have sex with her if the daughter has been born illegitimate.

We may wonder how a Muslim man could have an illegitimate daughter since in Islam all sex out of marriage, except sex with one’s sex-slaves, is forbidden. Let us ponder on the following situations:

A Muslim unmarried man has sex with a Muslim unmarried woman.
The woman gives birth to a daughter. Because of their Zina, both of them receive one hundred lashes. The punishment over, they depart---going their own way, or they decide to marry, but the daughter remains illegitimate. When the daughter turns eight or ten the biological father marries his daughter.

This incestuous marriage is allowed by the Shafi rule, according to professor Kamali. If they are Hanafi or other sect the father may not marry the illegitimate daughter.

A Muslim unmarried man (of Shafii sect) has sex with a Kafir woman. She gives birth to a daughter. The father receives the Islamic lashing. The woman may go scot free depending on which Islamic country she resides, because in some Islamic countries non‑Muslims are exempt from Sharia laws. The illegitimate daughter lives with her mother. When the illegitimate daughter turns eight or more she becomes halal for her biological father. He marries his biological daughter.

A Muslim unmarried man commits adultery with a married Muslim woman. She becomes pregnant. As per Sharia law the man receives one hundred lashes and the woman is sentenced to be stoned to death. However, her stoning is postponed until she gives birth to her child and weans the baby of breastfeeding. This condemned woman gives birth to a daughter. At age two the baby girl is taken away from her mother. Then the mother is stoned to death. The hapless child may be sheltered in a foster home or even live with her biological father. When the daughter turns eight her biological father marries her.

Let us ponder on what might happen if a Hanafi unmarried man has illicit sex with a Shafi married woman

Presumably, Malaysia follows Shafi, Bangladesh follows Hanafi.

Malaysian married Muslim woman + Bangladesh unmarried man = Zina and adultery.

Malaysia's religious police catch them in action. Both of them receive Islamic punishment as per Shafi law. The woman may not receive stoning--as it is not enforced in Malaysia.

The woman gives birth to a girl--this is the illegitimate daughter to the man. Let us call her daughter A.

What about the woman? Will the daughter be illegitimate to the mother? As per Islamic rule, yes. Later, the woman's husband divorces her. She moves on, along with her illegitimate daughter.

The sex offender man marries the woman. May be, the wife gives birth to another daughter--this time legitimate. Call this daughter B.

Now, as per Islamic Law can we say A and B are sisters? Nope.

The entire family lives under one roof. When A, the illegitimate daughter, turns 8 or more, the biological father marries her.

He now has two wives--his sex partner wife + his own illegitimate daughter. That is, the man is simultaneously married to the mother and the daughter.

So, Islamically, he may have sex with his biological daughter and her mother—perfectly legal as per Shafi rule.

I am not sure if this incidence happened, say in Bangladesh or India or Pakistan, what would happen as these countries follow Hanafi Muslim laws.

We must remember when a Muslim lives in Malaysia whether he is a Malaysian citizen or not he must abide by the Islamic Sharia of Malaysia which is largely Shafi.

Sex between sons and their father’s concubines

Stepping further on verse 4:23‑24, it may even be Islamically possible for a son to have sexual intercourse with his father’s concubines or father’s sex partners. In this case the mother is not a biological mother, but still a mother, no matter what—just as step mother.

On the restrictions women who can be married as depicted in 4:23-24 Maulana Maududi writes:

The word 'mother' applies to one's step-mother as well as to one's real mother. Hence the prohibition extends to both. This injunction also includes prohibition of the grandmother, both paternal and maternal. There is disagreement on whether a woman with whom a father has had an unlawful sexual relationship is prohibited to his son or not. There are some among the early authorities who do not believe in such prohibition. But there are others who go so far as to say that a woman whom a father has touched with sexual desire becomes prohibited to the son. (Maududi 4/34.)

Incestuous marriages among close blood relations

Here is another verse from the Qur'an that may suggest that incestuous marriages are permissible in Islam.

YUSUFALI: It is He Who has created man from water: then has He established relationships of lineage and marriage: for thy Lord has power (over all things).

Eminent tafsir writer Jalalyn writes:

And it is He who created human beings from water (sperm) and then gave them relations by blood and marriage—because men and women marry to seek progeny. Your Lord is All Powerful, possessing the power to do whatever He wills. (Tafsir Jalalyn, Tr. Aisha Bewley, p. 781).

Some scholars say this verse allows Muslim men to have sex with their daughters [incest]. See this video (Reader may find the video has been removed from the first link. When I tested I found the second link working.)

Marriage between father-in-law and wife of an adopted son

In the Arab society in which Muhammad lived the tradition of adoption was noble and sanctified. Their adopted sons were like their own biological sons and the wives of adopted sons were like their own daughter-in-laws. Zayd bin Haritha was Muhammad’s adopted son. Muhammad even got Zayd married to his (Muhammad’s) cousin sister Zaynab bt. Jahsh (Tabari, p. ix.134). But later, when Muhammad saw her beauty and sex appeal, he became passionate to have sex with her. In the Arab society this kind of marriage between father-in-law and daughter-in-law, whether of adopted son or not, was considered incestuous. But Muhammad did not care. He sought Allah’s help, and Allah promptly sent down appropriate verses to let Muhammad satisfy his desire. Zaynab became Muhammad’s eighth wife. Accordingly, Allah also changed the adoption rule—He permitted Muslims to marry their adopted sons’ wives after they obtain divorce from their husbands (33:37). Even Tabari and Waqidi admit that Muhammad married his cousin sister Zaynab bt Jahsh out of last (Tabari, p. viii. xii). Here is what the eminent Islamic historian Tabari writes about this ‘incestous’ marriage of Muhammad.

Muhammad had uncontrolled fascination for Zaynab bt. Jahsh

The Messenger of God came to the house of Zayd b. Harithah. (Zayd was always called Zayd b. Muhammad.) Perhaps the Messenger of God missed him at that moment, so as to ask, “Where is Zayd?” He came to his residence to look for him but did not find him. Zaynab bt. Jahsh, Zayd’s wife, rose to look for him but did not find him. Because she was dressed only in a shift, the Messenger of God turned away from her. She said: “He is not here, Messenger of God. Come in, you are as dear to me as my father and mother!” The Messenger of God refused to enter. Zaynab had dressed in haste where she was told “the Messenger of God is at the door.” She jumped up in haste and excited the admiration of the Messenger of God, so that he turned away murmuring something that could scarcely be understood. However, he did say overtly: “Glory be to God the Almighty! Glory be to God, who causes hearts to turn!” (Tabari, p. viii.2)

While the Messenger of God was talking with A’ishah, a fainting overcame him. When he was released from it, he smiled and said, “Who will go to Zaynab to tell her the good news, saying that God has married her to me?” Then the Messenger of God recited: “And when you said unto him on whom God has conferred favour and you have conferred favour, “Keep your wife to yourself…” (33:37)—and the entire passage. (ibid, p. viii.3)

In‑breeding: Cousin Marriages

In Islam cousin marriage is quite popular and widely acceptable. Cousin marriages, especially among first cousins, are a potentially harmful practice because the children born out of such marriages suffer from many genetic disorders. A comprehensive article about this debilitating practice among Muslims can be read here: Muslim Inbreeding: Impacts on intelligence, sanity, health and society

Let us find out why Muslims are more likely to indulge in first cousin marriage than other communities.

YUSUFALI: O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee; and daughters of thy paternal uncles and aunts, and daughters of thy maternal uncles and aunts, who migrated (from Makka) with thee; and any believing woman who dedicates her soul to the Prophet if the Prophet wishes to wed her;- this only for thee, and not for the Believers (at large); We know what We have appointed for them as to their wives and the captives whom their right hands possess;- in order that there should be no difficulty for thee. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

This verse unabashedly permitted Muhammad to have sex with his first cousin sisters even without marrying them. Why Allah permitted Muhammad to indulge in such a reckless incestuous relationship? For the answer, we need to know the context of this verse. A hadis in Tirmidhi (print version) tells us this:

Muhammad proposed Umm Hani, his cousin sister, to marry him. She declined. So Allah revealed that Muhammad could have sex with his cousin sisters who had migrated to Medina without marrying them (33:50). Umm Hani said though she was Muhammad's cousin sister, Muhammad could not have sex with her as she did not migrate to Medina. She only embraced Islam after Muhammad had conquered Mecca. (Daif)…(Tirmidhi 5.3214)

Here is the complete Hadis:

Tirmidhi, vol. 5, Hadis 3214, p. 522
Umm Hani bint Abu Talib said: “The Messenger of Allah proposed to me, but I asked him to excuse me, so he did excuse me. Then Allah [Most High] revealed: “Verily We have made lawful to you your wives, to whom you have paid their due, and those whom your right hands possess—whom Allah has given to you, and the daughters of your paternal uncles, and the daughters paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles, and the daughters of your maternal aunts, who migrated with you, and a believing woman, if she offers herself to the Prophet… (33:50). She said: “So I was not lawful for him because I did not perform Hijrah; I was one of the Tulaqa.(Daif)

[Abu ‘Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan [Sahih] we do not know of it except from this route as a narration of As‑Suddi

[In a footnote the translator describes the Tulaqa are those who accepted Islam after the conquest of Makkah.]

The readers should note that Abu ‘Eisa is Imam Tirmidhi’s kunya (that is, father of ‘Eisa). According to Imam Tirmidhi this Hadis is Hasan, meaning it is a reliable Hadis.

Umm Hani was the daughter of Abu Taleb, Muhammad’s uncle. AbuTaleb brought up Muhammad in his home. Muhammad fell deeply in love with Umm Hani, but was greatly aggrieved when he asked to marry her but Abu Taleb refused. This meant Abu Taleb, a Meccan pagan, did not like first cousin marriage. But, as demonstrated in the above verse, Allah found a way to satisfy Muhammad’s desire to have sex with his old flame.

The truth was: although Allah said in the verse that those of Muhammad’s first cousin sisters who had migrated with him to Medina were eligible to have sex with him, Muhammad never followed Allah’s instruction. The great Islamic scholar Maulana Maududi writes:

The ladies from among his first cousins, who emigrated along with him. The words "who emigrated with you" do not mean that they accompanied the Holy Prophet in his migration journey but this that they also had migrated in the way of Allah for the sake of Islam. The Holy Prophet was given the choice to marry any one of them he liked. Accordingly, in A.H. 7 he married Hadrat Umm Habibah. (Incidentally, in this verse it has been elucidated that the daughters of one's paternal and maternal uncles and aunts are lawful for a Muslim. In this regard the Islamic Law is different both from the Christian Law and from the Jewish Law. Among the Christians one cannot marry a woman whose line of descent joins one's own anywhere in the last seven generations, and among the Jews it is permissible even to marry one's real niece, i.e. daughter of one's brother or sister. (Maududi 33/87.)

To justify the marriage between first cousins among Muslims, Maulana Maududi cites irrelevant matters of the Jews and the Christians. While currently, the first cousin marriage among the Jews and the Christians is indeed rare, the same may not be true for the Muslims as the statistics from the above article demonstrates.

In fact, Dr. Mahathir the former Prime Minister of Malaysia was so concerned about the first cousin marriages among the Muslims in Malaysia that he wrote a book, The Malay Dilemma. In this book Dr Mahathir postulated that one of the main reasons for the absolute backwardness of Malays is due to their practice of in‑breeding. He was a medical professional. He wrote that because of in‑breeding the Malays have a very limited genetic pool.

Here are a few excerpts from Dr Mahathir’s book The Malay Dilemma.

Generally speaking, modern ideas on the evolution of man are not acceptable to Muslims and therefore to Malays. But even Malays admit that certain characteristics are passed from parents to offspring. “Bapak borek, anak beritek” is a well‑known Malay saying which means “A spotted father begets a speckled son.” The meaning is obvious. If this is so for an individual then hereditary influence must play a role in the development of a collection of individuals which constitutes a race. What is not generally known by the Malays is the effect of in‑breeding.

In this book I have explained how the laws of genetics, which govern the transmission of hereditary characteristics, are affected adversely by in‑breeding and other marriage practices.

There has been a lot of scientific thinking on the subject of in‑breeding and the effect on human society. Cyril Dean Darlington, a British geneticist, in his book, The Evolution of Man and Society, takes the extreme view that the evolution of human society is the product of genes. According to him, civilizations flourish and decay in obedience to genetic decrees. He pointed out that once a ruling class fixed itself in power, it sought to conserve that power by in‑breeding, thus denying the infusion of fresh stock. It was this habit, according to Darligton, that expedited the decline of the Pharaohs, the Ptolemies and the Caesars.

This interesting hypothesis is perhaps too extreme to be generally accepted even by non‑Muslims. In any case, Darligton was referring mainly to incest, a practice which is unknown among the Malays. However, the modern definition of in‑breeding includes marriages between first cousins and other close relatives, a practice fairly common among the Malays. Hereditary influence also produces an adverse effect in a society which, abhorring celibacy, insists that everyone, fit or unfit, should marry. Thus, the deformed in mind and body are somehow paired off and reproduce.

While it must be admitted that inbreeding is not general among the Malays, what cannot be denied is that the instances of in‑breeding are greater among them than among the other major races in Malaysia—the Chinese. In fact Chinese marriage customs specifically prevents in‑breeding. And so it is correct to say that in‑breeding together with forced marriages of the unfit produce a much greater percentage of human failures among Malays as compared with other races.

This explanation is offered in mitigation and defence of my views. Nevertheless it is not expected that they will be easily accepted. The implications are too depressing and hold no promise of easy or rapid remedies. (Dr Mahathir Mohamad, The Malay Dilemma, p. 1, 2.)

Mendel’s law states that offspring are not intermediate in type between the two parents, but that the type of one or the other is predominant according to a fixed law. The importance of this law lies in its rejection of the popular concept that offspring must be a dilution of the opposing characters of the parents.

Mendels’s Law is best illustrated by experiments in breeding white and brown mice. Provided that a sufficiently large series of experiments is carried out, the mating of white and brown mice will produce not spotted or brownish white mice but white mice predominantly. But if this (sic) first generation of white mice are mated among themselves, the offspring are not all white but a mixture of pure white and pure brown in the proportion of three whites to one brown. The point this illustrates is that white is a dominant characteristic which shows up in the first generation. However, even though the first generation appears pure white, it has a hidden brown factor which is transmissible to the next generation. But this brown factor is weak as shown by the fact that only one in four of the second generation is brown in colour. (Dr Mahathir Mohamad, The Malay Dilemma, p. 17)

A dominant characteristic tends to cancel a recessive characteristic, and it is clear that if the parents have different sets of dominant characteristics, then the offspring will have a combination of all the dominant characteristics of the parents. It follows therefore that the best offspring are those resulting from parents with different good dominant characteristics. Thus since close relatives tend to resemble each other and the chances of carrying similar recessive characteristics are greater, marriage between such relatives will not produce the best offspring. On the other hand, as unrelated people have more differences in characteristic, a marriage between such people would tend to produce ideal offspring with good dominant characteristics of both parents, while the recessive characteristics are cancelled. (Dr Mahathir Mohamad, The Malay Dilemma, p. 18‑19)

Predictably, after the first publication of The Malay Dilemma, the Malaysian Government banned it, and Dr Mahathir was expelled from the Malaysia’s most dominant Muslim party UMNO (United Malays National Organisation). Malaysian Law stipulates that all Malays are, by definition, Muslims. A few years later, Dr Mahathir was again admitted into UMNO, and he finally became the UMNO president, but his book The Malay Dilemma remained proscribed. Only after Dr Mahathir became the Prime Minister of Malaysia, the ban on this controversial book was lifted, and republished in 1981.

Admittedly, Dr Mahathir is very knowledgeable in genetics and his courage to tell the truth is admirable.

But Dr Mahathir did not have the supreme intrepidity to blame the genetic root of Malay backwardness to Islam—more precisely that the Malays, being deeply Islamic religious, are simply following Islamic rules on first cousin marriage and emulating their prophet, Muhammad. Dr Mahathir was too fearful to be seen as anti‑islam. He blamed the Malays for their proclivity towards in‑breeding and not Islam. It was too dangerous for him to do so.

Conclusion: Like it or not, Incest in Islam is alive and kicking well as can be illustrated from several verses of the Qur'an. The various interpretations, often contradictory, just prove that these words could not be from Allah. Allah cannot be so dim-witted not to know what is best for His Ummah. All‑knowing, almighty Allah cannot be so careless that He would leave His words in such a manner that what one group of Muslims means to be halal may be death to another group of Muslims. The topic of incest in Islam is such a dangerous game. It also possible that the inherent backward of the Muslim in general might be rooted in their limited genetic pool because of incestuous marriage practiced in many Islamic nation.


  • al-Tabari, Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Jarir, The Victory of Islam, vol. viii. Translated by Michael Fishbein. State University of New York Press, Albany, 1997. ISBN 0‑7914‑3150-9
  • al-Tabari, Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Jarir. The Last Years of the Prophet, vol. ix. Translated by Ismail K. Poonwala. State University of New York Press, Albany, 1990. ISBN 0-88706-692-5.
  • Encyclopaedia Britannica 2007 Ultimate Reference Suite CD ROM version.
  • Imam Hafiz Abu ‘Eisa Mohammad Ibn ‘Eisa At‑Tirmidhi, Jami’ At‑Tirmidhi (vol. 1-6), Tr. Abu Khaliyl, Final review by Islamic Research Section Darussalam, Darussalam, P.O. Box 22743, Riyadh 11416, Saudi Arabia, First Ed. November 2007.
  • Jalalu’d-Din Al‑Mahali and Jalal’ud‑Din As‑Suyuti. Tafsir Al‑Jalalyn, translated in English by Aisha Bewley. Dar Al‑Taqwa Ltd. 7A Melcombe Street, Baker Street, London NW1 6AE, 2007. ISBN: 1‑870582‑61‑6
  • Kamali, Mohammad Hashim. PRINCIPLES OF Islamic JURISPRUDENCE.First published by the Islamic Text Society of Cambridge, U. K.1991. Second Revised Edition, sixth printing, 2009. ILMIAH PUBLISHERS SDN. BHD. Regalia Business Centre, no. 33, Jalan USJ 1/1C, USJ 1, 47620 Subang Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia.
  • Mohamad, Mahathir Dr. The Malay Dilemma. FEDERAL PUBLICATIONS SDN BHD. 8238 Jalan 222, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia. 1981. First published 1970.
  • The three translations of the Qur’an: http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/reference.html


Islam (107) Muslims (40) Muhammad (37) Allah (21) Islamic (21) Jihad (21) America (19) Muslim (19) Quran (16) Obama (14) Sharia (10) CAIR (8) Israel (7) Terrorism (7) War (7) Democracy (6) Freedom (6) Iran (6) Islamist (6) Islamists (6) Slavery (6) Violence (6) Egypt (5) Egyptian (5) Human Rights (5) Jihadists (5) Majestic Allah (5) Religion (5) Ahmadinejad (4) Barbarism (4) Child-Marriage (4) Civilization (4) Hadith (4) Islamism (4) Islamization (4) Islamofascism (4) Koran (4) Pedophilia (4) Prophet (4) Prophet Muhammad (4) Radical Islam (4) Rape (4) Sharia Law (4) Trojan Horse (4) Turkey (4) Ummah (4) Women (4) American (3) Barbaric (3) Crusades (3) Deadly (3) Death (3) Disfiguring Women (3) Enemy (3) Fallacy (3) Free Speech (3) Ground Zero (3) Ideology (3) Imam (3) Infidels (3) Islamic Barbarism (3) Islamic Countries (3) Islamic World (3) Jihadis (3) Jihadist (3) Medina (3) Moderate Muslims (3) Mohammed (3) Mosque (3) Muslim Brotherhood (3) Muslim Women (3) Muslimah (3) Paradise (3) REAL ISLAM (3) Ramadan (3) Taqiyyah (3) Terror (3) Terrorist (3) Warning (3) 2001 (2) 9/11 (2) Acid Attack (2) Afghanistan (2) Apostate (2) Arab World (2) Arabic (2) Biography (2) Blasphemy Law (2) Brown (2) Capitol Hill (2) Christian (2) Christianity (2) Curse for Humanity (2) Delusion (2) Denial (2) Desperation (2) Dhimmitude (2) Egypt: (2) Ex-Muslim (2) Ex-Muslims (2) Extremism (2) Failure (2) Fasting (2) Feisal Abdul Rauf (2) God (2) Hindu (2) Honor Killing (2) Honor Killings (2) Humanitarian (2) Humanity (2) Infection (2) Islamic Constitution (2) Islamic Jihad (2) Islamic Justice (2) Islamic Menace (2) Islamophobes (2) Jihadism (2) Kafirs (2) Killing (2) Leave Islam (2) Liberals (2) Lie (2) Lies (2) Marriage (2) Massacre (2) Mecca (2) Minarets (2) Moon God (2) Mosques (2) Mulsim (2) Muslim Mind (2) Muslim Societies (2) Myth (2) NATO (2) Non-muslims (2) Osama (2) Osama bin Laden (2) Pakistan (2) Palestinian (2) Palestinian people (2) Palestinians (2) Prophet of Islam (2) Punishment (2) Radical (2) Radical Muslims (2) Saudi Arabia (2) Secular (2) September 11 (2) Sex Slaves (2) Sexual (2) Stoned to Death (2) Suicide (2) Terrorists (2) Tragedy (2) Truth about Islam (2) US Constitution (2) West (2) Wife Beating (2) 1948 (1) 3rd World War (1) 90 Lashes (1) ABC News (1) Adultery (1) African Americans (1) Afterlife (1) Aggression (1) Al Qaeda (1) Al-Faqih (1) Al-Qaida (1) Allah Almighty (1) Allah's Apostle (1) Allah's Whore-House (1) Allahu Akbar (1) Allan West (1) Alliance (1) Alter-Ego (1) America Hostage (1) American Muslims (1) Americans (1) Americas (1) Amil Imani and Muhammad Asghar et al (1) Anti-Jihad (1) Anti-Sharia (1) Apartheid (1) Apologist (1) Apostasy (1) Arab (1) Arab Islamic Palestine (1) Arab-Israeli Conflict (1) Arabs in Palestine (1) Archive of Articles (1) Armenian Genocide (1) Atheist (1) Atrocities (1) Attacks (1) Authentic (1) Bachelor Party (1) Barack Obama (1) Bashers (1) Bayonets (1) Beauty (1) Become Christians (1) Beheading (1) Believers (1) Bigotry (1) Bin Laden (1) Blessings (1) Blithering Idiot (1) Bloody (1) Bomber (1) Born (1) Boyfriends (1) Brotherhood (1) Buried Alive (1) Burka (1) Burn The Koran (1) Burned (1) Burned Alive (1) Catholic Church.Middle East (1) Cell Phone (1) Child (1) Child Sex-Slaves (1) Child-Sex (1) Child-Sex Abuse (1) Children (1) Choice (1) Christian Girl (1) Christians (1) Christmas (1) Cleric (1) Clinton (1) Clintons (1) Concubinage (1) Confusion (1) Consequences (1) Contempt (1) Corrupted (1) Creeping Sharia (1) Crescent Moon (1) Crimes (1) Criminal (1) Criminalization (1) Cruelties (1) Culprit (1) Cult (1) Cult.Allah.Muhammad.Quran (1) Cultural (1) Cultural Jihad (1) Cultural Muslim (1) Cyrus the Great (1) Danger (1) Dangerous (1) Daughters (1) David Koresh (1) David Mitchell (1) Da’wah (1) Deadly Virus (1) Death to Islam (1) Decadence (1) Deception (1) Decieving (1) Defeat (1) Defense (1) Demise of Islam (1) Demon (1) Deobandi Movement (1) Desecrate (1) Desert Thief (1) Destroyer (1) Destroying (1) Dhimmi (1) Dhimmis (1) Dictators (1) Dictatorships (1) Discontent (1) Discrimination (1) Disorder (1) Dogs (1) Dominance (1) Double Standards (1) Dutch (1) Economic Woes (1) Educated (1) Elections (1) Encroaching Islam (1) Enemies (1) Enemy of Freedom (1) Enslaved (1) Entrapped (1) Erdogan (1) Errors (1) Europe (1) Eviction (1) Evil (1) Evil Tactics (1) Evil in the Name of God (1) ExMuslimah (1) Exhumed (1) Expired (1) Extremist Violence (1) FBI (1) FITNA II (1) Faith Motivated (1) Fall (1) Fanaticism (1) Farj (1) Fascism (1) Fatal Consequence (1) Father Kills (1) FearFreedom (1) Fecal (1) Film (1) Flotilla (1) Former Muslims United (1) Fornication (1) Fort Hood Massacre (1) Fraud (1) Free (1) Fundamentalism (1) Gays (1) Gaza (1) Germans (1) Ghadafi (1) Glorification (1) Gospel of John (1) Grand Delusion (1) Great Britain (1) Great Evils (1) Great Virtues (1) Greatest Civilization (1) Green Movement: (1) Ground Zero Mosque (1) Gruesome (1) Guilt (1) Gutless (1) Hallucination (1) Hamas (1) Hanged (1) Hate (1) Hateful (1) Hatemongers (1) Hatred (1) Hell (1) Hellfire (1) Hero Worship (1) Heroes (1) Hijab (1) Hindustan (1) Hiroshima (1) History (1) Holy Deception (1) Holy Warriors (1) Homeland (1) Honour Killing (1) Hope (1) Horror (1) Human (1) Hypocrisy (1) I Left Islam (1) Ibn Warraq (1) Idi Amin et al (1) Illiteracy (1) Imam Feisal (1) Imam Rauf (1) Imperialism (1) In The Name of Allah (1) In memory of the tragic victims of Islamic attacks on 9/11 2001 on its 9th anniversary (1) Incest (1) India. (1) Infidelophobia (1) Inhuman (1) Internal War (1) Internet (1) Intimidation (1) Iranian (1) Iraq (1) Islam Lies (1) Islam Watch (1) Islam is Fractured (1) Islam's War (1) Islam.Pakistan (1) Islamaphobia (1) Islamic Allah (1) Islamic Appeasement (1) Islamic Circle (1) Islamic Circle of North America (1) Islamic Conquest (1) Islamic Deception (1) Islamic Doctrine (1) Islamic Jihadist (1) Islamic People (1) Islamic Prayers (1) Islamic Principle (1) Islamic Republic (1) Islamic State (1) Islamic States (1) Islamic Strategy (1) Islamic Style (1) Islamic Tactics (1) Islamic Terror (1) Islamic Tyranny (1) Islamic hatred (1) Islamic jihadists (1) Islamic legal code (1) Islamic theocracy (1) Islamist Mullah (1) Islamist lies (1) Islamization of America (1) Islamofascist (1) Islamofascists (1) Jahada (1) Jahannam (1) Jew-Hatred (1) Jewish (1) Jews (1) Jihad Terrorists (1) Jihad Watch (1) Jim Jones (1) Judeo-Christian (1) Justice (1) Kaaba (1) Kafir (1) Keith Ellison (1) Khadija (1) Kill (1) Kills (1) Lambs (1) Language (1) Law (1) Law of Polygamy (1) Lawn (1) Lawyers (1) Leader (1) Leaves Islam (1) Leaving Islam (1) Left wing (1) Leftist (1) Letter (1) Leucochloridium (1) Liberal (1) Liberal Pacifism (1) Liberate (1) Lover (1) Lunacy (1) Lynching (1) Madrassah (1) Mahdi (1) Major (1) Major Hasan (1) Malaysia (1) Malignant (1) Manhattan (1) Mankind (1) Manual (1) Martyrdom (1) Masochism (1) Mass Murderer (1) May 14 (1) Megalomaniac (1) Message (1) Michael Moore (1) Michigan (1) Middle Ages (1) Middle East (1) Middle Eastern Muslim terrorists (1) Mihrab (1) Mike Ghouse (1) Militant (1) Miracles (1) Misfits (1) Misguidance (1) Misogynist (1) Mobocracy (1) Moderate (1) Moderate Islam (1) Moderate Muslim (1) Modern Islamic Lies (1) Mohammad (1) Mohammad’ (1) Momin Muslims (1) Momins (1) Money (1) Month of Jihad (1) Moral (1) More Deadly (1) MothersSacrifice (1) Mullahs (1) Multiculturalism (1) Murdered (1) Mushrooming (1) Muslim Actress (1) Muslim Caliphs (1) Muslim Cleric (1) Muslim Enclaves (1) Muslim Girls (1) Muslim Mindset (1) Muslim Mosque (1) Muslim Woman (1) Muslim World (1) Muslim agenda (1) Muslima (1) Muslims Wife (1) Muslims chop off hands of Christian (1) Must Be Killed (1) Mutliculturalism (1) Myth of Islam (1) Nagasaki (1) Narcisist (1) Nazi murderers (1) Nazism (1) Never Forget (1) New Phenomenon (1) New Year’s Eve Attack (1) Non-Jihadi Muslims (1) Nonie Darwish (1) Nuclear (1) Obama Lies (1) Obama Statements (1) Palestine (1) Palestine Myth (1) Palestinian Arabs (1) Palestinian State (1) Parasites (1) Pastor Jones (1) Peace (1) Perfect Eternal Faith (1) Peril (1) Peter King (1) Phenomena (1) Philadelphia (1) Playboy Magazine (1) Political (1) Political Correctness (1) Political Islam (1) Poverty (1) Pray (1) Prayer (1) Prince Charles (1) Pro-Islamic (1) Problem (1) Progressives (1) Propagandist (1) Prophet of Profit (1) Prophetic Traits (1) Proud (1) Provocative (1) Psychopathology of Islam (1) Purpose Driven (1) Quran Burning (1) Quran-burning (1) Quranic Verses (1) Qurayza Massacre (1) Race (1) Radical Ideology (1) Radical Islamists (1) Radicalism (1) Radicalization (1) Raped (1) Raping (1) Raping Captured Woman (1) Rapist (1) Rayhana (1) Real Life of Muhammad (1) Reasons (1) Reformation of Islam (1) Relativism (1) Religion Disguised (1) Religion of Peace (1) Religion of Purity (1) Religious (1) Religious Imprinting (1) Repent (1) Repressive (1) Respect (1) Revolutionaries (1) Revolutions (1) Sacred Ground (1) Safiya (1) Saga (1) Sahaba (1) Savagery (1) Science (1) Seduce (1) Seduction (1) Sex Slave (1) Sex-Slavery (1) Sexual Perversity (1) Shameless (1) Sharia Rule (1) Shariah (1) Shariah Law (1) Silent Revolution (1) Sitemap (1) Slaughter (1) Slave (1) Societies (1) Socio-Economic (1) Speech (1) Spirit (1) Stealth Jihad (1) Stoning (1) Stop (1) Stop Islamization of America (1) Struggle (1) Stupid (1) Stupidity (1) Suffer (1) Sunni Islam (1) Superhuman (1) Supporter (1) Suppression (1) Supremacy (1) Sura Fil (1) Swastika (1) TSA Worker (1) Taliban (1) Taqiya (1) Taqqiya (1) Teaching Love (1) Ten Commitments (1) The Bobo Doll (1) The Left (1) The Prophets (1) The Third Jahada (1) Threat of Islam (1) Threat: (1) Thug and Fraud (1) Tolerance (1) Translation (1) Treason (1) Trial (1) Tribulation (1) True Face of Islam (1) Turmoil (1) U.S. Constitution (1) UN workers (1) USA (1) Unusual (1) Urinary (1) Value (1) Veil of Islam.Grand Jihad (1) Veiled (1) Vijay Kumar (1) Violent (1) Violent Ideology (1) Violent Jihad (1) Vulva (1) WWIII (1) Wafa Sultan (1) Walid Shoebat (1) Wanted (1) War in Afghanistan (1) War on Democracy (1) Weapon (1) West Bank (1) Western Imperialism (1) Western Infidel Women (1) Westerners (1) White House (1) Whorehouse (1) Why I Left Islam (1) WikiLeaks (1) Wisdom (1) Women's Education (1) Wretched (1) Yoni (1) Youth (1) Zakat (1) anti-Christian (1) anti-Islamic (1) anti-Kurdish (1) de-Christianization (1) deceiving (1) extremists (1) lying (1) misleading (1) psychopaths (1) targeted killing (1)