Egypt: Between Dictatorships and Revolutions

The choice in Egypt is not between good and bad, it is between bad and worse. Many in the Muslim world lack the understanding of what is hindering them as well as a lack of a moral and legal foundation for forming a stable democratic political system. I fear that my brothers and sisters in Egypt will embrace extremism...

---

Egypt’s rebellion has been lingering in the horizon for a very long time. The brutal life of the ordinary Egyptian was waiting for the right moment to explode. But instead of understanding what was surely coming, the 82-year-old Mubarak has wasted every opportunity to transfer power to another administration peacefully. He could have gone down in history as the first Arab leader to conduct a fair election and transfer power peacefully. But he kept ignoring the inevitable and, following the many sad examples in the region, kept re-electing himself for 30 years, grooming his son to take over. Now he will go down in history as just another tyrant in the long line of known and unknown ones in the dysfunctional history of the Muslim world.

Is this just a coincidence or is there something in Muslim culture that all too often perpetuates this vicious cycle? I believe the latter is true. Having been born and raised myself in the Muslim faith during the generation of the 1952 Nasser Egyptian revolution, which promised freedom, democracy, Arab Nationalism, socialism and self rule. My father held a prominent role in the Nasser revolutionary government of that time. A revolution that promised that the era of oppressive colonial rule was over. But what the revolution gave Egypt was more of the same and even worse conditions than the era before it; more poverty, illiteracy, tyrannical dictatorships and a police state.

Westerners often describe the current Egyptian government as secular when in reality it is not. It is true that Mubarak comes from a military background and neither he nor his wife wears Islamic clothes. But no Muslim leader can get away with or even survive one day in office if he is secular in the true sense of the word. It was during Mubarak’s rule in 1991that Egypt signed the Cairo Declaration for Human Rights stating that Sharia Law supersedes any other law. So even though Sharia is not 100% applied in Egypt, it is officially the law of the land. Mubarak, like all Muslim leaders, must appease the Islamists to avoid their wrath. According to Sharia itself, a Muslim head of state must rule by Islamic law and preserve Islam in its original form or he must be removed from office. That law leaves no choice for any Muslim leader. Because of that law Muslim leaders must play a game of appearing Islamic and anti-West while trying to get along with the rest of the world. It’s a game with life-and-death consequences.

I am not optimistic that the current uprising in the Middle East will bring democracy. Many Egyptians believe they can combine democracy with Sharia Islamic law; that is the first unrealistic expectation. 60% of Egyptians want to live under Sharia law but do not understand the ramifications. Many chant “Allahu Akbar” and “Islam is the solution.” But the truth is, Islam or more accurately, Sharia, is the problem.

Perhaps the most dangerous law in Sharia that stands in the way of democracy is the one that states that “A Muslim head of State can hold office through seizure of power, meaning through force.” That law is the reason every Muslim leader must turn into a despotic tyrant to survive, literally. When a Muslim leader is removed from office by force, we often see the Islamic media and masses accept it and even cheer for the new leader who has just ousted or killed the former leader, who is often called a traitor to the Islamic cause. That was what happened to the Egyptian King Farouk in 1952. Sadat’s assassination followed many fatwas of death against him for having violated his Islamic obligations to make Israel an eternal enemy. He became an apostate in the eyes of the hard-liners and had to be killed or removed from office. This probably sounds incredible to the Western mind, but this is the reality of what Sharia has done and is still doing to the political chaos in the Muslim world.

The choice in Egypt is not between good and bad, it is between bad and worse. Many in the Muslim world lack the understanding of what is hindering them as well as a lack of a moral and legal foundation for forming a stable democratic political system. I fear that my brothers and sisters in Egypt will embrace extremism instead of true democracy and thus will continue to rise and fall, stumble from one revolution to another and living under one tyrant to another looking for the ideal Islamic state that never was. The 1400year-old Islamic history of tyranny will continue unless Sharia Law is rejected as the basis of the legal and political systems in Muslim countries.

Nonie Darwish is the author “Cruel and usual Punishment” and the President ofFormerMuslimsUnited.org.

Speed of Light in the Quran and the Lies of Allah and Muhammad

Another Quranic science and how baseless and absurd it is!

---

The speed of light is a scientific discovery by humans after long and exhausting research, which revealed that it is the fastest thing in the universe, traveling at approximately 186,282 miles per second. Its astonishing speed has marveled many astronomers, cosmicists, mathematicians and philosophers throughout history.

It is important to note that light travels at a speed of 186,282 miles/second through vacuum. If light passes through water, its speed is measured at 140,000 miles/second, 124,000 miles/second through glass, and 77,500 miles/seconds through diamond.

The theory of relativity explains that when an object starts to move, the time become slower and when it reaches the speed of the light, the time almost stops for it. Its equation is very famous: E = mc².

Historical facts show us that research about the light is not merely 400 or 500 years old, but much older. Man has tried to understand the laws of light even before Common Era. Ancient Greek philosophers Empedocles (490-430 BCE), Aristotle (383-321 BCE) and Euclid (300- BCE) did valuable research into the properties of light and vision.

Muhammad's Night Journey (Mi’raj)

It is also a very popular event in Islamic history that Muslims believe Muhammad, the founder of Islam, set off on a flying horse (buraq) from the Kaaba to Baitul Maqdas; then from Baitul Maqdas, he ascended to seven skies, where he met famous earlier prophets; and finally he met with Allah on His Arsh, the throne of Allah. When he came back from that celestial journey, he found his bed was still warm.

Many Hadiths have been recorded for this incident to enhance the popularity and fame of Muhammad by boasting and exaggerating. About the event, the Quran has says:

Glory to (Allah) Who did take His servant for a Journey by night from the Sacred Mosque to the farthest Mosque, whose precincts We did bless,- in order that We might show him some of Our Signs: for He is the One Who heareth and seeth (all things) [Quran 17:1]

Allah's words in the Quran regarding Muhammad's Mi'raj in the above verse does not explain what happened after Muhammad visited the farthest Mosque, i.e. masjid-ul-Aqsa, and stopped there. How Allah can stop mentioning in the Quran about the event of Mi'raj, highly regarded by every Muslim? Even Muslim scholars cannot answer this question. It seems that the prominent Muslim biographers of Muhammad, who wrote Islamic histories and the Sunnah, were more informed than Allah.

Hadiths had, no doubt, earned a lot of praise and admiration from their contemporaries for skillfully adding lies and fabricated stories -- all attributed to their master, Muhammad.

It's notable that whether the ascension of Muhammad to Allah's Arsh was in physical or spiritual form is also an issue of controversy amongst Muslims. Some Muslims believe he just dreamt, some believe that he went in spiritual form, but most believe he went on Miraj in physical form.

Propaganda of the Quran and Muslims

Today, misperception has grown widely amongst Muslims about the Quran and its soi-disant (questionable) miracles. Many Muslims, who acquire better education in Western countries, are struggling hard to prove that the Quran is miraculous. They try to put forward various irrational reasons and claim that lunar calendar 12,000 lunar orbits/earth day assumed as the speed of light.

Islamic Education society propagates that the ‘speed of light’ is mentioned in the Quran. They have gathered this idea from Quran 32:5:

He arranges [each] matter from the heaven to the earth; then it will ascend to Him in a Day, the extent of which is a thousand (1,000) years of those which you count.

Muslim scholars believe that this verse is a hint about the speed of light, which was mentioned 1,400 years ago.

There is another verse in the same Quran, which differs from the verse cited above (Quran 70:4):

(Whereby) the angels and the Spirit ascend unto Him in a Day whereof the span is fifty thousand years.

There is a clear contradiction between these two verses. But the core of this article, however, is not to discuss these contradictions, but to prove that Allah lied and miscalculated in the verse, which puts his one day with our 1,000 years.

It proves that Allah and his angels are so slothful that it takes one day for them to cover our affairs, while it takes one thousand years on earth.

Now pay attention to this: Muhammad said that he was escorted from Kaaba to Baitul Maqdis and from there he ascended to seven skies and when he comes back, he found his bed still warm. Now, Allah says that his one day’s affairs are equal to our 1,000 years, and Muhammad, a human, says that he returned back from visiting Allah and other prophets within a short moment. Who is lying here?

Wisdom would tell us that both Allah and Muhammad are lying. Let me explain why.

If we focus on the theory of relativity, which says an object that moves with the speed of light, the time almost comes to a standstill for it. First, Allah obviously lost his/her mind completely and said things contradictory to what the theory of relativity says. Second, if Muhammad, the founder of Islam, had have visited Allah in his/her Arsh, 1,000 years must have passed by on the earth by the time he returned. Therefore, amongst those people Muhammad landed after the visit to heaven would be alien or unknown to Muhammad; he would have been amongst the people, belonging to the era of 1,000 years later than that of Muhammad’s time (i.e. 620-21 C.E.).

In the words of Hadith compilers, Muhammad lied in claiming that the distance between earth and first heaven is 500 years, then from the first heaven to the next heaven is also 500 years; this calculation keeps repeating till the final heaven and the Arsh of Allah.

Very interestingly, many Muslims on the internet are now at pain, because the distance between the earth and heaven can’t be 500 years. So, they are calling these hadiths zaeef (unauthentic, week). These Hadiths are recorded by:

Abu Dawood, Book 40, number 4723, Sunan Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah 173.

To my utmost delight, when I tried to search this hadiths in Abu Dawood Book 40, number 4723, this hadith has been skipped from his collection. Readers can personally see that hadiths number 4723 has been missing by visiting this link.

And elsewhere, Muslims are hilariously arguing with each other about whether or not the earth is 500 years away from heaven, as prophesied by their master Muhammad -- who is highly esteemed and equivalent to Allah. Read the discussion here: http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=8806

Why 1,000 years?

In olden days, thousand years were considered a very big span. When someone thought about 1,000 years, they immediately thought of the Qayamah, the Day of Judgment. There were millenarians, who thought that the Judgment day will appear after a thousand years; they couldn’t contemplate or perceive what could happen after this long period of time. Even there were millenarian Christians, who thought that Armageddon come a thousand years after Jesus; so, thousands of them from Europe travelled to Palestine, the Holy Land, in the year 1,000 after Jesus to enjoy a blessed end of the world. Thus, Muhammad and his Allah decided to add some thrill to their verses in order to show that the affairs of Allah are so fast (in their miscalculation) that it would be beyond human imagination. He sends his affairs down from skies to earth and then lift up them back in one day, which amount to 1,000 years of the human calendar.

Will Christianity Disappear from the Arab World?

Shortly after the murderous New Year’s Eve attack on the Coptic Church of the Saints in Alexandria, Egypt, several reformist Arab websites began reporting and commenting about it. On the 4^th of January, 2011, al-Awan website posted an article by an intellectual, ‘Oreib al-Rentawi, entitled: “Will the Arab World become a ‘Christian-free Zone”!?

The following is a translation of the Arabic text:

“Should the situation in the Arab world continue on its present course, it won’t be long before ‘the Arab Homeland,’ which is Christianity’s first home, becomes a ‘Christian-free zone.’ This is due to the fact that the ‘modern’ Arab states have failed to secure for their Christian citizens the proper conditions for living in their original homelands. During the last few decades, a continual hemorrhage of Arab Christians from their homelands has been occurring to such an extent, that ultimately their presence in ‘the Arab Homeland’ will become a mere ‘symbolic presence.’

“It is true that both Christians and Muslims suffer from the failure of the modern Arab states to strengthen their independence, achieve total economic development, freedom, and democracy. However, Arab Christians face their own specific problems and challenges arising from the political regimes that seek their legitimation from the Islamic religious authorities, instead of the ballot box! Added to that, is the lack of societal tolerance and the absence of a culture of dialogue between the majority Muslim Egyptians and the minority Copts whose rights are often ignored.

“Of course, we should not forget that all segments of Arab societies have been the target of terrorists who have been trying to achieve their goals by the shedding of innocent blood. It is also undeniable that the number of Muslim victims of terrorism is much greater than that of Christians. On the other hand, terrorist attacks directed at Christians have as a goal to deny them continued existence in the Arab world. They are being forced to emigrate so that ultimately Egypt, and the rest of the Arab world, would become ‘a Christian-free zone.’

“In varying degrees, we are all responsible for this criminal state of affairs. The state has proven impotent by failing to secure security for all its citizens. The government that has been unable to bring about wholesome relations between its citizens bears responsibility. Those who remain silent, simply watching a deteriorating situation are equally responsible. And there are those who claim that terrorism is coming from the outside world, in order to exempt themselves from their responsibilities to govern fairly and justly.

“And let’s not forget those who regard and treat the Christians of the Arab world as if they were newcomers, not citizens. After all, they are the original inhabitants of these lands. Radical Muslims bear a very heavy responsibility for the tragedy in Alexandria. The Christians are in their own homeland; they are neither guests, nor refugees living in ‘temporary camps.’ Just because we are bothered by certain actions of the ‘Infidel West’, when it bans the wearing of the hijab, the building of minarets and the call to prayer blaring from the mosques’ loudspeakers, is no reason to retaliate against Arab Christians. They are not responsible for such actions in Western countries. We should not attack them just because a ‘European or American racist’ has mistreated a Muslim. We must treat the Christians in the Arab world as citizens, and not as dhimmis; otherwise, we become partners in the crime perpetrated at the Church in Alexandria. We better shape up and protect the Christians of our lands. For when we take up the challenge of stopping these despicable acts of terrorism aimed at Christians and their houses of worship, we are protecting our own very existence.”

It was good to read an article which exhibits such a forthright concern for the future of Eastern Christians. Oreib al-Rentawi stresses the cruelty of denying them all the benefits of citizenship and residency wherever they live in the Arab world because they have as much claim to the lands they inhabit as the Arabs do.

Before anyone thinks that the article may have exaggerated the serious conditions surrounding the Copts of Egypt, and their fellow Christians in the Levant, attention must be given to a report that confirms its truths. The French News Agency (AFP) reported several clashes that took place in Egypt between Muslims and Copts. The report appeared on 2 January, 2011, on the widely-read Arabic online daily, www.elaph.com It listed nine major bloody clashes between 1981 and 2011, most of which had to do with the objection of local Muslims to the building or repairing of a Coptic church.

But to restrict my article only to anecdotal accounts does not go deeply enough into the endemic causes for the plight of the Christians of Egypt. A scholarly work from the last century by Edward Wakinⁱ entitled “A Lonely Minority: The Modern Story of Egypt’s Copts (William Morrow & Company, New York, 1963) goes into more detail and analysis. The author’s son Daniel, who is a reporter for the New York Times, wrote an obituary for his father, who died in 2009. In it he said that “A Lonely Minority…, was arguably Edward’s most important book. The Copts, the largest Christian community in the Arab world, were a sensitive subject in Gamal Abdul Nasser’s Egypt, and Mr. Wakin said he had to smuggle his notes out of the country hidden in his luggage,” Daniel Wakin continued: “Even 40 years later, Egyptian Copts would contact Mr. Wakin in appreciation of the book.”

The following excerpts from this valuable book should serve to give an objective and sympathetic understanding of the accelerating pace of the persecution of the Christians living in the Middle East for the last two millennia, centuries before the Arab-Islamic conquest of their original homelands. After reading this, we will surely appreciate the alarmist title of the Arabic piece posted on al-Awan’s website: Will the Arab world become “a Christian-free Zone!?”

Viewed today from the West, the Copts are a major test of modern coexistence between a large Christian minority and a Moslem majority. In the Middle East, the Copts constitute the largest body of Christians in that part of the world where Christianity was born. For Egypt which is trying to mobilize all its human resources into a modern state, the test may be decisive. For a mosaic of minorities in the Middle Eastern countries of Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and Turkey, the Coptic story can be read as handwriting on the wall. For the Christians of Lebanon, who are maintaining an uneasy dominance in a country evenly divided between Christians and Moslems, their prospects in Moslem Arab hegemony can be deciphered from the Coptic situation in Egypt. It is a problem echoed nearby in the tenuous Greek-Turkish partnership of Christian and Moslem in the island republic of Cyprus. (p. 4)

Edward Wakin described this facet of the Copt’s life in a chapter entitled: THE PEOPLE’S CHURCH.

The cross suits this cruel culture of poverty and persecution, both as identification and an outlet for the Copts. It is their brand and their balm; it gives a meaning to life when there are only blind nature and inexplicable misfortune. If Western Christianity gives prime glory to Easter, the day of Resurrection, deliverance and confirmation of Christ’s divinity — Good Friday is more appropriate psychologically to the Copts. On this day when the cross was born as a universal Christian symbol, modern Copts say “Kyrie elesison” (Lord, have mercy upon us) 400 times at home, 100 times in each direction, and flock to their churches. (p. 136)

While the Copts share the cross with the rest of Christianity, with no other group is its presence so obsessive. This ranges from the Patriarch, who holds the cross in front of himself as though it were both a shield and a weapon, to the ragged village children who run after strangers, with crude blue tattoos of the cross on the inside of their right wrists and crosses around their necks. Whenever the Patriarch appears, Copts rush forward to kiss his cross. The fixation is symbolized at baptism when the infant is anointed 36 times all over his body. (p. 137)

Crosses are painted over the doors of Coptic houses in towns and villages or formed in bas- relief in mud over the openings of mud homes. Sometimes the house and cross are brick. The Copts, who are fond of reading the family Bible at home, are aware of Exodus 12:13 and the significance of a sign in order to escape the wrath of the Lord: “And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt. (p. 138)

One of the sadder consequences stemming from the lack of tolerance Copts of Egypt experience, generation after generation, is that their own homeland is robbed of one of its greatest resources: a purposeful and energetic community of nationals. We must keep reminding ourselves of this often forgotten fact: the Copts have been in Egypt long before the Arabs. In the past the Copts’ attachment to Egypt was so great that it kept them from ever wanting to leave it. Today that is no longer so. Thousands of Copts are now found in Canada, the United States, Australia and several other parts of the Western world. Usually, they are highly educated people whose skills Egypt has lost forever. Before this migration wave became as strong as it is today, Edward Wakin wrote these moving words at the end of his book:

Both Egypt and Islam, like all other countries and ways of life in the modern world, must meet the test of toleration. For Islam it is a moral challenge spread over its proverbial range from the Atlantic to the Indian Oceans. Citing its theoretical toleration does not silence the cry of its minorities. For a Moslem nation, it is the practical problem of using human resources. The Copts themselves, within the microcosm of their history and its manifestations in church, community, nation and minority, present everyman’s tale of dream and nightmare, fulfillment and frustration in a world not of their making. Insofar as the Copts have received their due — without ignoring their blemishes — this modern story of Egypt’s Copts is an account of the human condition.

At the end of this intimate rendezvous with the Copts, a concluding moral note is unavoidable. The obligation to oppose tyranny wherever it stands, even when the tyranny is elusive and unannounced, even unintended. It begins with labeling injustice long before shop windows are smashed, icons broken, and families torn apart. This labeling is an antidote to the danger of dulled sensibilities in our time and while the Copts can be accused of hypersensitivity, their problem is by no means imaginary. They are feeling pressures that inflict suffering without mutilating, that intimidate relentlessly without exploding sporadically that wound without bloodshed.

The Copts are numbed and helpless as well as anxious as their historic cycles of acceptance and rejection, their recurring stages of toleration, discrimination, and persecution move inexorably in the direction of rejection. Persecution is still the nightmare, discrimination the reality in the latest chapter of a long story of a people. They are there in Egypt and there they remain, the “true Egyptians,” the “original Christians,” the four million Copts of the Nile Valley, that troubled, enduring, lonely minority. (p. 175-76)

i Dr. Edward M. Wakin, (1928-2009) was a communications professor at Fordham University, for more than four decades. He authored more than 20 books. A Lonely Minority is still in print, and is available at major bookstores.

Stoning for Adultery in Islam

Today we will be talking about the Islamic punishment for adultery, which is stoning. Is it barbaric as some people claim it to be? Quite the contrary, we will see the mercy of Islam in it, as the divine culmination of Judaism and Christianity. So claim Muslims!

[“Social progress can be measured by the social positions of the female sex in society” -Karl Marx]

FIRSTLY, Islam alleviated humankind from this most severe punishment for nearly all crimes. In addition, Islam introduced the Islamic Shari’ah Laws to deal with punishment and ways of living. Throughout ancient history, humanity was predominantly violent and unruly. Harsh measures needed to deter evil acts, when advanced means had not yet developed for effective policing, detention, and rehabilitation.

However, this does not justify the barbaric laws and practices of all ancient non-religious societies.

In addition, while Islam confirms the divine origin of the Old Testament, it is impossible to know for certain which of its punishments were: indeed ordained by God, OR invented by the Rabbis, OR altered by the scribes (Jer 8:8, Mat 5:20, 23:13).

In the Old Testament, stoning was prescribed for many infarctions, such as: committing adultery, fornication, worshiping other Gods, inviting people to worship other Gods, blaspheming, witchcraft, touching a mountain (Sinai), breaking the Sabbath, disobeying your parents, not screaming loud enough while being raped. Islam lifted the burden of this most severe punishment for all crimes, except one: committing adultery (because of the devastating impact of marital infidelity in society). Moreover, regarding fornication by unmarried people, Islam reduced the punishment to 100 or more lashes.

SECONDLY, regarding the "verse of stoning", Allah mercifully[?] lifted its recitation and the texts from the Qur’an, while the legislations [Sunnah and Ahadith] maintained the same! To paraphrase, Imam Al Suyuti from his book Al Itqan: ‘this verse abrogated (while its application remained) to ALLEVIATE the Islamic nation, because it is the heaviest burden and the toughest, and the most severe punishments on a human being’. In the Qur’an, stoning as a practice is only mentioned for actions of evil people against the righteous. This is in stark contrast with [the Bible, where all sorts of people were stoned for the many reasons we mentioned earlier].

THIRDLY, Islam's Shari'ah Law requirements regarding witnesses are so stringent that it is nearly impossible to obtain a conviction for adultery. For example, convicting someone [women especially] in court for adultery requires FOUR Muslim male-eyewitnesses of good character, who saw the penetration of one sexual member into another [Guess the culprit/offender has to make sure that he has four such honorable men as witness in the offense]. Not only is it very unlikely to find 4 people of good character who watched such an act together, but if less than 4 witnesses are produced, the witnesses themselves will be punished for the crime of slander.

THERE CAN BE NO LAW ABOVE THE LAW OF THE CREATOR - Akbarally Meherally

The day when Allah through His Messenger Muhammad revealed the prescribed penalty for the sin of adultery and fornication, all the past Traditions, Rulings, Examples and Directives from the Prophet and/or from all other individuals or societies do stand repealed permanently. To propagate otherwise would be to place the “Human Law” above the “Law of Allah”, which in Islam is regarded as an unpardonable sin.

STONING TO DEATH IN THE HADITH

There are a few Muslims who do propagate, based upon a “re-reported narratives” called Hadeeth, that the Second Caliph [successor to the Prophet] had said in one of his sermons that there used to be a Revealed Verse for “Death” by stoning, but it has since been lost and is not to be found in “The Holy Book”.

Stoning to death, a cruel insane Islamic punishment [still practiced across many Islamic countries] given to people who are married but still voluntarily have sex outside marriage. The “merciful” Prophet, who of course was the messenger of the “merciful” Allah, ordered this cruel punishment to be ‘practiced as the Laws of Allah'.

So, what happens in Stoning? Well, in stoning to death, the victims’ hands tied behind their backs and their bodies put in a cloth sack. Then, this human "package" buried in a hole, with only the victim’s heads showing above the ground. If it is a woman, she is buried upto her shoulders. This is to give her a seemingly equal (but nonetheless impossible) chance to escape recognizing her lesser physical strength. After the hapless individual has been secured in the hole, people start chanting "Allah hu Akbar" [meaning, God is great], and throw palm sized stones at the head of the victim from a certain distance [a circle is drawn of the goatherd crowd]. The stone then thrown until that person dies or until he/she escapes out of the hole and crosses the circle. Escaping is impossible and naturally, the procedure is extremely barbaric and bloody!

Related: Also, see The Stoning (movie)

Many hadith, including Sahih Bukhari give proof that Stoning as ordered and practiced by Mohammed, for example: Volume 2, Book 23, Number 413: Narrated 'Abdullah bin ‘Umar: “The Jew brought to the Prophet a man and a woman from amongst them who have committed (adultery) illegal sexual intercourse. He ordered both of them to be stoned (to death), near the place of offering the funeral prayers beside the mosque."

Below are the three narrations on the penalty of stoning, from the famous book of the Prophetic Traditions and Narrations known as Sahih Al-Bukhari:

Hadith No. 4.829: ‘When a Jew and a Jewess who had committed the illegal sexual intercourse were brought before the Prophet, he ordered them to be punished according to their Jewish laws that are recorded in the Torah. The couple was stoned to death. This Hadith was narrated by Abdullah bin Umar’.

Hadith No. 8.805: ‘A married man from the tribe of Bani Aslam who had committed illegal sexual intercourse and bore witnesses four times against himself was ordered by the Prophet to be stoned to death’. [This Hadith as narrated by Jabir bin Abdullah Al-Ansari].

Hadith No. 8.804: ‘Ash Shaibani narrates that when he asked ‘Abdullah bin Abi Aufa; “Did Allah’s Apostle carry out the penalty of Rajam (i.e., stoning to death)?” He said, “Yes”. When the narrator asked; “Before the revelation of Surah-an-Nur or after it?” He replied, “I don’t know.” This Hadith is narrated by Ash Shaibani and is repeated one more time under Hadith No. 8: 824

QUR’AN VERSUS HADITH

1. The Surah-an-Nur [Chapter 24 of the Qur’an in which the penalty of flogging as prescribed] as revealed in or after the sixth year of Prophet’s migration from Makkah to the city of Medinah. This confirmed by Surah verses 11 to 20. It is inconceivable that the Prophet, who as been declared by Allah as the best of the examples for Humanity, could have dictated his own edict after the revelation of Surah-an-Nur, which was delivered to humanity through him. [Did not Allah promise to Guard His Revelation failed to safeguard His “Holy Book” (see Qur’an 41:42; 15:9 and 73: 20)?]

2. It is a known fact that before the promulgation of the Qur’anic Laws, the Prophet and his followers used to follow many of the Abrahamic Traditions and the Law of Moses. Once the specific Law of the Qur’an as revealed to the Prophet in that matter, the ancient traditions and laws became invalid?

3. The Hadith No. 5: 805 does speak of a married man being “stoned to death” but it does not specify the period when that penalty as confirmed. Before or after the revelations of Allah’s Law, one cannot use this example of “a married individual” and interpret it to be applied to the revealed verse and then create the distinction between the act of adultery and the fornication?

4. There is NO recorded authentic narrations in which the Prophet has made a ruling or given the directives that there is to be observed a distinction or inequality between the “married persons” and “unmarried individuals” when the penalty for the illegal sexual intercourse is to be applied. Nor, there is any explicit directive or a command of the Prophet asking the followers that the revealed verses of “flogging” is ONLY for the “unmarried individuals”?

5. Why is the Islamic Shari’ah Law NOT applied to any Muslim MALE individuals? The Court is required to have Four Witnesses to the act of Adultery, to pass their Judgments. The Islamic Courts need no Witnesses in any such reported cases?

Allah’s Law permits the guilty person to live and remarry (see below), while the woman is NOT given this privilege in Islam?

“Let no man guilty of adultery or fornication, marry any, but a woman similarly guilty, or an Unbeliever, nor let any but such a man or an Unbeliever marry such a woman: To the Believers such a thing is forbidden“ [Qur’an Surah-an-Nur (24) verse 3 (This verse 3, follows the verse number 2 in which the penalty is prescribed and it emphasizes the fact that THERE IS NO DEATH PENALTY)].

Commentary # 2957 (of Abdullah Yusuf Ali) to the above verse: “Islam commands sexual purity, for men and for women, at all times, – before marriage, during marriage, and after the dissolution of marriage. Those guilty of illicit practices are shut out of the marriage circle of chaste men and women” [Surah-an-Nur REPEALED the previous directives permanently].

Click here for more hadith which verify that Mohammed ordered stoning

As a result, enforcing any Islamic Shari'ah punishment for extramarital sexual affair is nearly impossible in Islam. Yet, it somehow this evades the feeble mind and barbarity is practiced at large! In fact, throughout all early Islamic leaderships, there was not even one single case where 4 people testified to witnessing adultery...!!!

In addition, as for those who knew the punishment and confessed anyway, the Prophet of Islam as the supreme repentance confirmed this: worth that of an entire city. Therefore, as a punishment, stoning is not scary at all, because this can hardly ever be enforced in technical terms[?]. It is an effective deterrent, not out of fear, but because no Muslim would want to commit an act that, in the sight of Allah, "DESERVES" such a merciful punishment!

Qur’an 4:85: ‘Whoever recommends and helps a good cause becomes a partner therein: And whoever recommends and helps an evil cause, shares in its burden: And Allah hath power over all things…’

FOURTHLY, this punishment applies only to Muslims, who are not the ones complaining about it?
Islam does not interfere with non-Muslims about the Islamic Shari’ah standards they set regarding adultery. Therefore, attacking Islam's stance on adultery is like trying to FORCE
Muslims to adopt the moral values or religious beliefs of others. And as for those who will still claim that the punishment against Muslims who commit adultery is too severe... we will now discuss the top THREE ways to avoid being Islamically stoned for adultery:

3) Be faithful to your spouse.

2) Don't confess to adultery 4 times.

1) Don't let 4 people of good character witness your act of adultery simultaneously, in a well lit room, and from specific angles.

FIFTHLY, Islamic Shari’ah laws for adultery and fornication protects the Islamic society far better than evil satanic western laws. The false claim of the western society is that Islamic Shari’ah laws on extramarital sex results in the so-called honor-killings…? However, taking the law into one's own hands is a violation of Islamic Shari’ah laws. Moreover, the personal or family pride that would lead to such crimes is in itself a major sin in Islam. So again, it is ridiculous to blame Islamic laws for people who are violating them. Lastly, such crimes are far more prevalent in western societies because fornication permitted except they called crimes of passion.

Two Significant Verses of the Glorious Qur’an: Say: “Allah’s guidance is the (only) guidance and we have been directed to submit ourselves to the Lord of the worlds. [Qur’an Chapter 6, Verse 71]

Moreover, if any fail to judge by what Allah hath revealed they are the wrongdoers [Ar. Zalimuun].

[Qur’an Chapter 5: 45] If Allah –the All Knowing, had desired to convey; that while JUDGING BY what HE has REVEALED one was to observe a clear distinction between “the married” and “the unmarried” individuals for the sin of Zinnah [adultery], then HE would have Revealed the TWO distinct SETS of punishments, which He did not?

Today is there a SINLESS Man living on this planet that could step forward and say; I will be the first to cast, the First Stone???

O’ Muslims of Iran, fear Allah and remember; in the very same Surah An-Nur, just three verses later He reveals; there are exceptions for the guilty, who repent and mend their conducts, FOR ALLAH IS OFT-FORGIVING, THE MOST MERCIFUL…

It is true, as of right now, stoning does not take place in Iran. That is not to say that stoning never took place there, because from 1983-2002 stoning was a punishment, through international pressures the Iranian government have been forced to attempt to update their penal codes... Though this still has not been completed and these disturbing practices, still do persist throughout the Islamic Ummah today [Afghanistan, parts of Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Libya, etc.]. On 15 August, 2004, Atefah Sahaaleh was hanged in a public square in the Iranian city of Neka. Her death sentence imposed for "crimes against chastity". The state-run newspaper accused her of adultery and described her as 22 years old. Nevertheless, she was not married and she was just 16. The execution of a 16 year-old girl: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/5217424.stm

Islamic Stoning, Muslim Honor Killings for adultery and fornication, Islam is for Dummies.

Islam and the Future of the West

The division of Hindustan in 1947 should serve an eternal example for the West about its predicaments with the Muslim immigrants...

---

In the 1857 mutiny, when Muslims lost to the British Raj, their behavior against British became very severe and the terrorism and barbarism of 19^th century started once again after a long deep slumber since 1526. Many different terrorist groups were founded, back-up by their terror-minded Mullahs, who educated and brainwashed them openly in their mosques.

This terrorism was not only targeted at the British Empire, but also towards the Hindus, Sikhs, and non-Muslims of India. While the British came to Hindustan as traders to exploit the market there, their incidental capture of power also liberated the Hindus from the tyranny of Islamic rule, which had lasted for more than consecutive 800 years.

This British occupation of power in India deprived Muslims from their Luxurious life, such are as below:

• Tawaif (dancers + prostitution) culture

‘Tawaif’ is a Hindi word used for female dancers and prostitutes. These female entertainers danced half-naked to allure spectators, especially the Landlords and high officials, in order to make a living. Rich people, on the other side, spent lavishly. Point to be noted, the majority in these celebration parties were Muslim rulers, high officials and landlords etc. All attendees were men; their women were not allowed to join these parties.

• Alcohol

Although alcohol is haram (banned) in Islam, it was also a favorite pastime for Muslim men. They drank heavily and spent their wealth lavishly upon female dancers.

• Polygamy culture

Polygamy in Islamic culture does not require an introduction. This practice was very common among Mughal ruler and their high officials. For example, Akbar the Great had 5000 women in his harem, while Jahangir and Shahjahan had 5000-6000 each.

• Sacrificing animals

Large-scale sacrifice of animals was another widespread custom amongst Muslims, which used to cause great trauma to the Hindus. Muslims enjoyed playing with the emotion and sensitivities of Hindus. Cow is a sacred animal for Hindus; but in Islam, the same poor cow has to be sacrificed to please Muslim’s Allah. For an example, Khajwa Moinuddin Chisti, the revere Sufi saint of Ajmer, after having settled there, used to ask his followers to bring everyday a cow in front of a major temple to sacrifice it there and made its meat into kebab for eating. The Hindus could not do anything about it, because might was always been as right.

• Domination of their faith over others

If Islam would not be the religion of brutal force, I can say with certainty that this religion would not have crossed the boundary of Arabia. It is the Jihadi sword of Islam that brought this Arab Bedouin religion to far corners of the world, and in the process brutally dominated, even obliterated, others faiths -- Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism and others -- in the lands Islam conquered.

Sepoy Mutiny 1857 : The so-called War of Independence

After the British Raj toppled the South Asian Muslim Empire, Muslim’s hatemongering and barbarism in accordance with the Quran and Muhammad's footprints was stirred up. It reminds me of the Dracula movies story, where a bunch of people get together to kill Dracula by smiting his head off and burry it in a separate coffin, so that his head and body could not be reunited, lest he become live again to terrorize the earth. This exactly what happened in 1857, when Dracula’s students got together and remembered the teachings of their master, which they applied against the British—hoping to get their devilish way of life back once again.

Indeed, Muslims struggled hard and designed many evil tactics to throw the British Raj out of India in order to bring the Hindus again under their control. For this purpose, they rallied in the streets of cities, tried to convince Hindus that the British was their common enemy, hoping that they could join hands to dismantle the British hold from Hindustan. While a good number of Hindus fell to the Muslim ploy, but the majority of them were smart enough to learn many lessons from the Muslim-ruled past. They knew every snare of Muslims and their cunning designs.

Hindus were happy, after all, that they got liberation from Muslim’s tyrannies after many centuries, and they were, in one way, grateful to the British. So, while Muslims waged the 1857 mutiny against the British under the banner of Jihad, the Hindus mostly stayed away. Some foolish ones joined with the Muslim Jihadis, but others fought on the British side. The Sepoy Mutiny Jihad, thus, failed.

Then, about half a century later, came the movement for the independence of India, started by the Hindus-dominated Indian National Congress Party after its founding in 1885. This time, Muslims understood that in the Congress-led movement of independence, Muslims will lose the political domination in Independent India through democratic process. So, great Muslim leaders like Syed Ahmad Khan urged Muslims to join the British to oppose the Congress-led campaign for independence, because Christian rule was better than that of the idolatrous Hindus. Later, they formed a separate Political Party, the 'Muslim League', to counter the Congress Party.

Muslim League Party started nourishing and stirring up antagonism amongst Muslims against the Hindu-led Congress as well as the British. They started claiming their rights for a separate state, raised slogans against Hindus and British, which were echoed in the streets of India. Mob got infuriated, insurgency, revolts, protestation claimed many innocent Hindu lives. Their main propaganda was: Muslims and Hindus are two different nations and they can’t live together. Thus, Muslims demanded their separate state and the reason they put forward was that Islam does not accept Hinduism or any other religion; therefore, Muslim need their separate Islamic state, where they can practice their spiritual and religious laws freely.

Muslims were solely responsible for the chaos and mishaps across India; they killed many famous personalities before 1947. The magic spells of Muhammad the Dracula were working with full force, because their master had lifted up the ban on the killing of non-Muslims whenever needed.

Muslims have no compunction for killing non-Muslims and even so-called deviant Muslims, an example of which we saw recently in the assassination of Salman Taseer, the governor of Punjab. His assassin openly claimed that "he has no remorse for what he has committed". And support for the assassin poured in from all walks of the Pakistani Muslim society.

In short, after maintaining unrest and their evil design, Muslims succeeded in dividing Hindustan into two states -- Pakistan and India -- which was formalized on August 14, 1947.

Muslims in the West and its Future

Many Muslims around the globe migrated to Western countries in hope of better life and their successful career, which they can never get in their own Islamic homeland. Open migration of Muslims is obviously dangerous and alarming for the West. Countries, such as Germany, England, Ireland, Switzerland, Canada and America, have opened their doors and welcomed Muslims.

It is possible that Islam might never prevail among other civilizations that are inviting them as immigrants, but there is no guarantee of that. In this context, the example of Hindu-Muslim division in Hindustan should stand as an eternal lesson for the West or any other non-Muslim nation. Muslims are growing much faster through rapid breeding. So, if the magical spells that were taught to them by their master in a few decades, it might be too late for the West to cope with, and finally Muslims might start the same strategy as they did in India. The Islamic Dracula may rise here in the West from its slumber.

Muslims in the West are already trying hard to put their master's sanction of indiscriminate killing of the infidels. In time, they might start claiming that Christians and Muslims are two different nations; they can’t live together. For this reason, they might start violent campaigns to divide America, UK, Germany, etc. to create Muslim states with names, such as Americastan, Germanistan etc.

Will Arabic become the official language of America?

Since the Islamic atrocities perpetrated against the United States on September 11^th 2001, a huge array of Arabic and Islamic terminology has entered the Anglo-American lexicon. With the current (and still undocumented) resident in the White House proudly affirming his Islamic heritage in Cairo and elsewhere, and the continuing prostration to the Muslims of America, is it only a matter of time before Arabic becomes the official (or secondary) language of America? And for that matter, will Islam become the de facto religion of this once great country?

With America’s first violent encounter with fundamentalist Islam after the Iranian Islamic revolution of 1979, we were first introduced to such terms as “Ayatollah,” “Imam,” “Hojatolisam,” “Shi’ah,” and “Sunni.”(While the Iranians are of course Persian and not Arab, all Islamic terminology and prayers are in Arabic regardless of a Muslim’s ethnic identity.)

Other Arabic words have become so well known that they are also no longer in need of an explanation. “Allah,” “Jihad,” “fatwa,” “kafir,” “sheikh,” “hijab,” and “dhimmi” are only a few such words. “Caliph” and “Mahdi” are another two words which have been spoken of more recently. Certainly, the words “Qur’an” (Koran), and the founder of Islam, Muhammad ibn Abdallah (a.ka. “The Prophet”), have been known for decades. And then there is the word “Shar’iah” (Sharia) - Islamic law - which has been spoken and written of quite recently as America seems to become more and more “culturally sensitive” to the adherents of the “religion of peace.” Some more words that will soon become more popular in the English lexicon are “halal” (the Muslim version of “kosher”), “da’wa” (the peaceful way to convert the “infidels” instead of cutting off their heads), “salat” (prayer) and “wudu” (washing oneself in a prescribed manner before praying). Already, the controversy over “foot baths” for Muslims has yet to reach a climax in this country. In any event, doubtlessly, more and more words of Arabic origin—especially with Islamic meanings - will enter the English vocabulary as America becomes more and more culturally, linguistically, and religiously diverse—or perverse—depending upon your perspective.

Of course, this “sensitivity” apparently does not extend to Jews, Christians, Hindus, and other peoples of faith

Of course, this “sensitivity” apparently does not extend to Jews, Christians, Hindus, and other peoples of faith. Not to mention English-speaking people in general. Judeo-Christianity, and the Anglo heritage of this country is already well underway to being consigned to the ashbin of history. Meanwhile, Congress scuttles HR 5759, which would make English the official language of the land, (while spending billions on bilingualism and multilingualism), and all symbols of Christianity are slowly but systematically being abolished, demolished and excised . All the while, a “masjid” (mosque) is in the works to be built on Ground Zero, with the ecstatic help of such venerated public servants as New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and Manhattan Borough President, Scott Stringer. And then there is the strange silence of other major New York federal politicians such as Charles Schumer, Representative Jerrold Nadler, and Representative Anthony Wiener, who have said not a word about this proposed abomination. And the entire above listed individuals are Democrats. And of course, one more important thing: they are all “Yahud” (another Arabic term that people should be made aware of, and which means “Jews). As for Wiener, he recently married a Muslim woman of religious background whose father is a religious scholar. This means that according to Sharia (there is that term again!), he would have to have converted to Islam, since an infidel is not allowed to marry a Muslim woman. Of course, Muslim men can marry Jewish and/or Christian women. Apparently, these politicians (as well as liberal Jews in general) do not realize that as descendants of “apes and pigs,” it is they and their co-religionists who will be the first to have their heads handed to them once Islam arises full force in America. Apparently, ignorant Jews and Christians have never learned of the Islamic saying: “First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people, by the Friday people.” (As Saturday is the Jewish Sabbath, Sunday, the Christian Sabbath, and Friday, the Muslim Sabbath, the slogan should need no explanation.)

Americans of Jewish and Christian background need to resurrect the greatness of America’s history, culture, and religious heritage if this nation is to survive. Yes, America has never been a perfect country, but hasn’t America itself recognized this? If the country is to regain its moral clarity and direction, then “cultural diversity” has to be thrown out the window. That is not to say that one cannot be proud of his or her individual ethnic and religious heritage. However, if America continues to defame the founding fathers, disrespect, deride, and ignore the Constitution, while seeing themselves as “citizens of the world,” then we may very soon find ourselves living in a new country called “al-Jumhuriyah al Arabiyah—al Islamiyah al-Amerikiyah” - The Arab Islamic Republic of America. (Please forgive this non-Arab infidel if his Arabic is still not up to par.)

In the meantime, if America continues to devolve, decay, and decline by day, then indeed a day of no return will soon be among us. Especially in the era of Barack Hussein Obama, CAIR, ISNA, and other Muslim terrorist affiliated groups, along with America’s newest Islamic superstar, Feisal Abdul Rauf.

Dear American, if you have chosen to give up the fight then there is indeed one solution for you: Please remember to learn your Arabic and Islamic prayers. It may save your life one day. (Insha’Allah—Allah willing.) And this article is not written to be funny. It is deadly serious—as serious as the warriors of Allah are in destroying this country.

Democracy: The Trojan Horse for Islamization, Part 4

The West's "Muslim immigrant problem" --- special problem may require special measures...

---

What Islam wants?

In a previous article “Three Decrees of Islam”, I have mentioned that as a creed, Islam is not a religion like Hinduism, Buddhism or Jainism. In fact, Islam is a non-spiritual, violent and totalitarian political creed and its aim is to create an Islamic, rather Arab-Islamic religious empire, throughout the world. This creed rests on three fundamental postulates: (i) Millat and Kufr, (ii) dar-ul-Islam and dar-ul-harb, and (iii) Jihad. It should be mentioned here that the real meaning of Islam is, not peace, but surrender unconditionally to the dictates of Allah’s Koran and Prophet Muhammad.

The Arabic word Millat stands for brotherhood or community (of Muslims) and the word 'Kufr' stands for “to disbelieve” or “to oppose”. Those, who do kufr, are kafirs. The first postulate Millat and Kufr says that those, who surrender to the Koran and Prophet Muhammad, are imandar Mussalman and those, who do not, belong to the despicable species of kafirs. So, according to Islamic theology, each and every non-Muslim is a kafir, while all Muslims are brothers (kulla muslemein ikhuatun) and all kafirs are enemies of the Muslims. Most importantly, Islam divides the entire humanity into two camps: 1) the Muslim-camp, and 2) the kafir-camp.

The second postulate ‘dar-ul-Islam and dar-ul-harb’ of Islam tells that all the countries on the earth can broadly be divided into two categories. Dar-ul-Islam comprises of those countries that have already come under the domination of Islam. The literal meaning of dar-ul-harb is the 'land of warfare'. It refers to those countries which have not yet been conquered by Islam or come under Islamic control and Muslims must fight with those kafir nations to bring them under their control. The ultimate aim of Islam is to turn the entire world into a dar-ul-Islam, i.e. to bring the entire world under the banner of Islam. So the Koran says: “Go on fighting against them till the rule of Allah is not established (8.39).”

How to bring the entire world under the banner of Islam or convert all of the dar-ul-harb into dar-ul-Islam? Here the third decree of Islam, jihad, comes into play. In plain words, jihad means unconditional and indiscriminate war against the kafirs for killing them and enslaving them, raping their women, plundering their wealth, occupying their land and confiscating their properties. A Muslim participating in Jihad is called a mujahid (plural mujahidin) and Allah’s ultimate intention is to raise and establish His religion to reign supreme with the help of the mujahidin. Therefore, the terrorists are Allah’s mujahidin and their aim is to abolish the kafir-camp, or cause harm to it. Even seducing or raping kafir women is a part of Jihad. Islamic jihad, in fact, is the most barbaric incitement, the world has ever seen, to commit indiscriminate and large-scale homicide. For a Muslim, launching a jihad or war against the kafirs is the highest virtue, even higher than pilgrimage to Mecca (hajj), not to speak of lower virtues like prayer (namaj) and fasting (roja).

Regarding Jihad, Allah says:

• “Fighting against the kafirs is beyond one’s personal likings and dislikings as Allah has commanded to fight the pagans and all those who ascribe partners (shirk) with Allah” (2.216).
• “That you believe in Allah and His Messenger and that you strive hard and fight in the cause of Allah with your wealth and lives” (61.11).
• “Jihad is better for you than your sitting back at home and if you do so, He will forgive you your sins, your foulest deeds and admit you into the gardens of eternity (paradise)” (61.12).
• “There is nothing in the sight of Allah which may be equated to jihad.” (9.19)

So, Ayatollah Khomeini, the leader of Islamic Revolution in Iran said:

“Jihad means the conquest of all non-Muslim territories. Such a war may well be declared after the formation of an Islamic government worth of that name …It will then be the duty of every able-bodied adult male Moslem to volunteer for this war of conquest, the final aim of which is to put Koranic law in power from one end of the earth to the other. …We have no recourse other than to overthrow all governments that do not rest on pure Islamic principles. …That is not only our duty in Iran, but it is also the duty of all Moslem in the world, in all Muslim countries to carry the Islamic political revolution to its final victory.”

According to Sheikh Ahmed Ismail Hassan Yassin, the revered founder and spiritual leader of Hamas, Islam said:

“Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers]? Islam says: Kill them [the non-Muslims], put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]. Does this mean sitting back until [non-Muslims] overcome us? ….Kill in the service of Allah those who may want to kill you! Does this mean that we should surrender [to the enemy]? Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors! Sons of Islam everywhere, the jihad is a duty - to establish the rule of Allah on earth and to liberate your countries and yourselves from America's domination and its Zionist allies, it is your battle - either victory or martyrdom”.

He has also claimed responsibility for a number of suicide attacks targeting Israeli civilians.

Reality of the Muslim immigrants

So, it becomes evident that the immigrant Muslims, who come to European countries to work as laborers, in the true principles of Islam, are the Mujahids or soldiers of Allah, who must ideally fight the kafirs, wherever they are. In the core of their heart, they cherish the desire to see the host country turn Islamic or into a dar-ul-Islam, in one way or another. But the democratic states treat these treacherous infiltrators as simple citizens. This enables them to proceed smoothly toward realizing their hidden agenda. These adversaries of democracy fully exploit the democratic rights like freedom of religion, freedom of expression etc. to convert the indigenous Christians to Islam and silently go on increasing their kind by rapid breeding, so that they will be able to overthrow the present democratic governments by democratic election when they gain numerical majority.

Muslims trampling and tearing national flag of USA

There, the democratic governments of Europe are failing to tackle these foreign adversaries of their own with their liberal-democratic laws. Moreover, the political parties of these host countries, necessitated by the greed for staying in power, are wooing or appeasing them for grab their votes, which is also helping Muslims realize the hidden agenda with ease. The situation has worsened to an extent that the British government has submitted to the Muslim demands by allowing them run a parallel judicial system based on Koranic law or Shariah. France has started allowing Muslims to practice polygamy and genital mutilation (FGM) of young girls. Recently a French court in Lille also annulled Muslim marriage, because the wife was a virgin. A judge in the UK has given lighter sentence to an offender, because he is a devout Muslim. Police force has been instructed to deal Muslim and non-Muslim criminals differently. Most interestingly, even non-Muslims in Muslim-dominated localities in France have been prohibited to serve pork and wine in a feast.

These appeasement policies have embolden Muslims to break any law and intensify their jihadi activities, because they could have understood that the Muslim-appeasing governments and their law enforcing authorities would turn a blind eye not to annoy them, lest they earn their displeasure for fear of losing their votes. So, the immigrant Muslims organize mass protests for any trifle reasons, shout slogans against the governments, trample and burn the national flags of the host countries on open roads, while police remain silent spectators.

How to counter the immigrant Muslims' design for the Islamization of Europe

The political leaders in Western countries must understand that their hard-earned freedom is the most precious thing that humankind has attained, which they must preserve and defend at all cost. And they must also realize that Muslims are an enemy of that freedom. They must take Muslims' words for it. They must look at the Islamic world to understand it. And they must understand that when Muslims become the majority or the dominant group in the population, liberal-democracy would not last under their present psyche. Politicians in Western countries must also understand that whether political rivalry or the greed to stay in power is not worth the Islamic slavery of their motherland. They should realize that the civilization they have built up must not be allowed to move backward.

With this understanding, they may have to take every measures that would help reduce the rate of Muslim breeding (such as forcing family planning, cutting/abolishing welfare, reduce or stop Muslim immigration), take hard measures to assimilate Muslims, to change their psyche, instead of appeasing them and even deport those Muslims, who would not assimilate or oppose cultures and system of governance of their host countries. While such measures appear harsh or uncivilized for the present liberal democratic world, the liberal democracies must also realize that Muslim immigrants are the most difficult problem they may ever have to tackle in order to preserve itself. In this context, it is pertinent to include Danish psychologist Nicholai Sennels' observation of Muslim immigrants in Denmark:

“From my experiences with the 150 Muslims I have had in therapy, only a handful felt themselves to be Danish. Most saw themselves as Somalis, Turks, Moroccans, Pakistanis, and Iraqis who now live in Denmark. Almost none of them saw themselves as an integrated part of the Danish society….This was a real shock to me. Many of my Muslim clients were second or even third generation immigrants, but, still they did not feel Danish. Actually it seemed that many of them were even more religious and hateful towards non-Muslims than their first generation immigrant parents.”

It has also been mentioned that a French survey in Le Figaro showed that only 14 percent of the country’s estimated five million Muslims see themselves as ‘more French than Muslim’. …Only 12 percent of Muslims living in Germany see themselves as more German than Muslim. … A Danish survey published by the pro-Muslim pro-democratic organization Democratic Muslims led by the Danish PM and Muslim Naser Khader showed that, “Only 14 percent of Muslims living in Denmark could identify themselves as democratic and Danish”, Sennels adds.

The above discussions obviate the fact that Muslim immigrants in the European countries will never be loyal to the host country and assimilate themselves with European societies. They will be, first and foremost, Muslim and Islamic. Therefore, when they become the majority --- which they will under the present demographic trend --- their host country will become Islamic countries; they won't remain liberal democratic anymore. One may take a look at the Muslim-majority nations to realize what it may become of Europe when Muslims gain majority in a few decades.

Let me conclude by emphasizing that if the Western Liberal Democracies want to preserve their political and cultural ethos, they can't treat their "Muslim immigrant problem" with liberal democratic values. Unconventional, even somewhat unethical, measures would be needed to frustrate the design Muslims have in their heart for turning Europe into an Islamic continent. If not, another Dark Age, an Age of Islamic Slavery, would befall the entire humanity.

Democracy: The Trojan Horse for Islamization, Part 3

How Democratic politics are faciliatating the Islimization of Europe and other democratic non-Muslim nations???

---

[ Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3 ]

Political Rivalry: It has been mentioned in the previous article that that in 711, Moors, after the Umayyad conquest of Hispania, occupied large parts of the Iberian Peninsula establishing the Al-Andalus (Moorish Spain). Incidentally, the Islamic caliphate had not yet targeted Spain for conquest, but a political rivalry in the Visigothic kingdom, between King Roderrick and Count Julian created an opportunity that Tariq and his army to attack Spain before an order was issued from Damascus. Thus, the political rivalry among the Visigoths culminated into the Islamic slavery of Spain that lasted for over 700 years, up to 1492.

It was also mentioned that in India, there was bitter rivalry between Prithwiraj Chauhan, the Emperor of Delhi, and Jaichand, the king of Kannauj. This rivalry led Jaichand to invite Muhammad Ghori to invade Delhi. Jaichand is said to have provided active support to the Muslim army. Ultimately Prithwiraj was defeated and killed by the army of Muhammad Ghori, which initiated the Muslim rule in India that lasted for more than 700 years.

We may add another example in this context. In the 18^th century, the Hindus of Bengal, to get rid of the tyrannical Muslim ruler Nawab Siraj-ud-daula, entered into a conspiracy with Lord Clive, the then Governor General of British East India Company and according to this conspiracy the British army won the decisive battle at Plassey in 1757 and thus initiated the British slavery in India that lasted for nearly 200 years, up to August 15, 1947.

These incidents show how disastrous it can be to invite foreign enemies in solving internal rivalry between the rulers of the Middle Ages. It is a matter of serious concern that similar rivalry and bitterness has now appeared among the political parties in the democratic world. In the Middle Ages, this enmity and rivalry ended up in bloody battles that have now been replaced by the battle of ballots. In those days, the rival kings sought military help even from the enemies of the nation; today, the hostile political parties are appeasing the enemies of the nation for votes. Or more pointedly, they are appeasing Muslims for their votes.

Political enmity and Muslim appeasement: In this context, we may cite the example of the rival political between the Labour Party and the Conservative Party in the UK. All over the world, the Leftists are more sympathetic to Muslims. Accordingly, the Labour Party in the UK had a sweet relationship with immigrant Muslims. But this sweet relationship turned sour when the Labour Government sent troops to Afghanistan and Iraq. This development led the Labour MP Gerald Hain to say (May 12, 2008): “Labour needs to change tack on foreign policy to win back voters, who deserted the party over the Iraq war. …. Hundreds of thousands of Muslims had been lost to Labour as a result of the worsening situation in Iraq. …We must win back Muslim voters.”

This Muslim appeasing also has its telling effect on the Labour Party as says a political analyst: “Labour is steadily losing support among ordinary Britons, including some alienated sections of the working class. They so heartily despise, as people are increasingly starting to realise what they are about. It is sheer desperation, an unscrupulous attempt to cling onto power whatever the price may be. And without a doubt the Islamic scum will demand a heavy price for the support this despicable government so desperately needs.”

Nonetheless, as Muslims started deserting Labour, the Conservatives started wooing them. Political analyst David Sapsted wrote on April 17, 2010: “The Muslim votes would be a crucial element when both the Labour and Conservative parties are fighting a close battle to get an overall majority in the 646-seat parliament.” The present Conservative Government's Muslim appeasement is seen in its shameless submission to the Muslim demands in an instruction issued by the Bedfordshire Police on December 12, 2010, regarding how to deal with the terrorists and dangerous criminals (For detail, see “Highly Deplorable Religious Discrimination in the UK”). It is surprising that Great Britain, considered to be one of the pioneers for establishing democracy based on individual equality and freedom, can indulge in such a biased and religiously discriminatory policy. This directly contradicts the very foundation Liberal Democracy. It is to be noted here that in democracies, political parties have to depend on the voters to stay in power. But such a need does not arise in a totalitarian state, like the Communist China or Saudi Arabia.

Muslim appeasement in other democratic countries: France is another democratic country in Europe. Here, it is not possible for single political party to win election and form the government. “French politics are characterised by two politically opposed groupings: one left-wing, centred around the French Socialist Party, and the other right-wing, centred previously around the Rassemblement pour la République (RPR) and now its successor the Union for a Popular Movement (UMP). The executive branch is currently composed mostly of the UMP.” The rivalry between these two groupings has given rise to naked appeasement of the Muslim voters. Recently Ali Khalaf in his article “France: Most Islam Friendly Kafir Country” has nicely narrated the present French Government’s shocking appeasement of Muslims. [2]

India is a democratic country where Muslims constitute about 15% of the total population. In the political scenario of India, there a few national political parties like the National Congress, the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPIM) and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and there are many regional parties. All these political parties are openly appeasing the Muslims, by whatever means they can, to grab their votes. In the state of West Bengal (WB), the Left Front (a coalition of the leftist parties led by CPIM) came to power with the help of Muslim votes and stayed in power for the past 30 years. But at present, the regional party, the Trinamool Congress, led by Mamata Banerji, has succeeded in winning over the Muslims through more attractive and lucrative promises. So, in the last Parliamentary Election held in 2009, the Left Front suffered a setback. Most of the people of the state have already started to believe that in the coming Assembly Election to be held in April or May, 2011, Muslim votes would go to Trinamool Congress, and Mamata Banerji would be the next Chief Minister of the state.

The result of Muslim appeasement: The question naturally arises: Can we equate today’s Muslim appeasement with inviting foreign Muslim enemies by the discontented Count Julian of Spain or Jaichand of Kanauj. The reply is: “Yes”. In those days, inviting foreign Muslim powers led to Islamic slavery and, in a similar manner, today’s Muslim appeasement would lead to the same: slavery to Muslim domination. Today’s politicians, due to their inadequate understanding of Muslim psyche, or knowing everything well and just to fool and mislead the non-Muslim population of the country, are propagating the notion that the Muslim immigrants are just like any other immigrant groups. They also propagate the wrong notion that, like other immigrant groups, Muslim will also finally integrate with the indigenous people and adopt local culture.

So, Labour MP Barry Gardner, in commenting on the Muslims of the Wembly area of London, said: “But I say that those people are British. They are proud to be British. They are proud to be a part of this society. And I am proud to represent the most multicultural borough in this country and indeed in Europe. We have more than hundred and sixty different first languages spoken in our borough and hundred and thirty different first languages spoken in our schools. We are proud of that and we are proud of the fact that by the time our children reach to go to secondary schools, that they are achieving above the national average at the key stage two. Every single one of these schools in Britain. These children are our future.” But the stern reality is that, those Muslim children in due course of time will turn the UK into an Islamic state by simple majority.

Danish Psychologist's study of Muslim psyche: Recently, Nicholai Sennels, a Danish psychologist, has made a highly laudable research on Islamic psyche and published his results in his article “Muslims and Westerners: The Psychological Differences”. Sennels, as a psychologist, have more than a hundred Muslim clients, and this has provided him an excellent opportunity to study and observe minds of Muslim immigrants in Denmark. On the criminal propensity of immigrant Muslims, Sennels says: “We should stop talking about "criminal foreigners" and start using the more precise term, "criminal Muslims. …A serious discussion about the relationship between the Muslim culture and criminal, antisocial behavior is, indeed, very much needed.” He is also writing a book, entitled “Among Criminal Muslims: A Psychologist's Experiences from the Copenhagen Municipality”.

To quote from above article:

He says, “After having consulted with 150 young Muslim clients in therapy and 100 Danish clients (who, on average, shared the same age and social background as their Muslim inmates), my findings were that the “Muslims’ cultural and religious experiences played a central role in their psychological development and criminal behavior or Criminal foreigners". He also says, “According to official statistics from Danmarks Statistik, all non-Muslim groups of immigrants are less criminal than the ethnic Danes. Even after adjusting, according to educational and economic levels, all Muslim groups are more criminal than any other ethnic group. Seven out of 10, in the youth prison, where I worked, were Muslim.”

The Muslim way of howing anger

He says that the Muslims, as a community, are angry and often express their anger. In this regard, he says, “In the Muslim culture, aggressive behavior, especially threats, are generally seen to be accepted, and even expected as a way of handling conflicts and social discrepancies. If a Muslim does not respond in a threatening way to insults or social irritation, he, not "she" (Muslim women are, mostly, expected to be humble and to not show power) is seen as weak. In the eyes of civilized people, it looks immature and childish when people try to use threatening behavior. “The Islamic expression of "holy anger" is therefore completely contradictory to any Western society”, he says.

Sennels have found another important difference between the Westerners and the Muslim immigrants and says, “Westerners feel that their lives are mainly influenced by inner forces – ourselves. But Muslims have something else. They have strict external rules, traditions and laws for human behavior (as ordained by Allah in the Koran). They have a God that decides their life's course. "Inshallah" follows every statement about future plans; if God wants it to happen. They have powerful Muslim clerics who set the directions for their community every Friday. These clerics dictate political views.”

Will Muslims integrate in Western societies: As mentioned, the Muslim-appeasing politicians, either due to their inadequate understanding of Islam or to mislead the common people, propagate the idea that Islam is a 'religion of peace', and in the long run, Muslims will assimilate the Western way of life. But, all evidence suggests this is impossible. From the very childhood, they are trained to hate whatever is un-Islamic. They learn to hate non-Muslims as kafirs, and to hate their culture and customs. As soon as pious Muslims set their foot in a non-Muslim country, their Islamic teachings tell them: “You are entering a kafir country, a land of your enemies. You must not take them as friend. It is a dar-ul-harb, a land of war, and you have to conquer this country for Islam to turn it into a dar-ul-Islam." So, it is next to impossible to make them loyal to the host country and adapt them to its culture.

While commenting on this aspect of immigrant Muslims, Sennels writes, “European, Australian and North American politicians have spent trillions of Euros and Dollars in trying to avoid the apparently unavoidable: the failed integration of Muslims. Money has been spent on voluntary offers that our badly integrated foreigners can use if they want. They do sometimes try, but it very seldom works. What we have to understand is that we are dealing with people who grew up in cultures with an "outer - locus of control." Self reflection and self responsibility have much less importance to them.”

“We should not permit the destruction of our cities by lawless parallel societies, with groups of roaming criminal Muslims overloading of our welfare system and the growing justified fear that non-Muslims have of violence. The consequences should be so strict that it would be preferable for any anti-social Muslim to go back to a Muslim country, where they can understand, and can be understood by their own culture. …We should not permit the destruction of our cities by lawless parallel societies - Muslim gangs in Melbourne. …From my experiences with the 150 Muslims I have had in therapy, only a handful felt themselves to be Danish. Most saw themselves as Somalis, Turks, Moroccans, Pakistanis, and Iraqis who now live in Denmark. Almost none of them saw themselves as an integrated part of the Danish society”, Sennels adds.

It has been mentioned that the British Labour MP Barry Gardner, when speaking in the House of Commons, said that the children of the immigrants will feel proud to be a British citizens. It could be true for the immigrants of other religious groups, but not for the Muslims. While commenting on this aspect, Sennels says, “This was a real shock to me. Many of my Muslim clients were second or even third generation immigrants, but, still they did not feel Danish. Actually it seemed that many of them were even more religious and hateful towards non-Muslims than their first generation immigrant parents.”

“A French survey in Le Figaro showed that only 14 percent of the country's estimated five million Muslims see themselves as ‘more French than Muslim’. …Only 12 percent of Muslims living in Germany see themselves as more German than Muslim. …A Danish survey published by the pro-Muslim pro-democratic organization Democratic Muslims led by the Danish PM and Muslim Naser Khader showed that “Only 14 percent of Muslims living in Denmark could identify themselves as democratic and Danish", Sennels adds.

It, thus, becomes evident that Muslim immigrants in European countries will never assimilate themselves with Western societies and are determined to retain their Muslim identity. They are not loyal to their adopted countries; on the contrary, they are trying their best to conquer it for Islam by over populating the indigenous Christians through rapid breeding. So, a concerted effort of all the political parties of all the affected countries is the needed to frustrate their design of turning Europe into an Islamic continent.

Biography of the Prophet Muhammad Illustrated

One of the fundamental sources of Islam is the biography of Muhammad or Sirah. Unlike other biblical prophets, Muhammad’s biography is quite reliable, because during his days writing was widely practiced and there were many companions of Muhammad who were scribes. Along with the Qur'an, these scribes had also recorded various aspects of Muhammad’s life. Thus, there are many narrations where we may find descriptions of Muhammad’s various stages of progress.

However, none of these scribes had drawn any pictures or graphic descriptions of Muhammad’s life. Though rich in verbal and written narration of Muhammad’s life, these narrations lack the animated imagery of Muhammad and his contemporary society. Readers may not find any book on Islam that vividly portrays in drawings or sketches of the images of many of Islam’s stalwarts in Muhammad’s time.

Biography of the Prophet Muhammad—Illustrated, Volume 1, authored by ‘Abdullah Ibn Sa’d Ibn Sarh, fills the lacuna. Needless to say, the author’s name is a pen name—simply because that the use of real name would gravely endanger the author's life. In Islam, depiction of any images of Muhammad in any form is a serious offence that may result in the assassination of the author/artist. ‘Abdullah Ibn Sarh, by the way, was one of Muhammad’s scribes who used to write the Qur’anic verses as dictated by Muhammad, which he claimed to be Allah’s revelation to him. But when ‘Abdullah realised that the verses dictated were actually Muhammad’s own words and not from Allah, he quietly left Muhammad, returned to Mecca, and abandoned Islam. When Muhammad conquered Mecca, he caught ‘Abdullah and ordered his execution. But upon plea from Uthman, the prophet's son-in-law and later Islam’s third Caliph, Muhammad spared ‘Abdullah’s life. Though pseudonymous, the author of the illustrated biography of Muhammad has demonstrated considerable courage to tell the truth of Muhammad's life in images. This book may be one of the rarest creations where the readers may catch a glimpse of what might have been Muhammad’s time and life. We get quite a vivid picture of what could have been the then Arab society. In this respect, the illustrator has done a magnificent job. The stories narrated in extraordinarily vibrant colour, eloquence and clarity have been meticulously sourced from the most authentic sources of Islam. The bibliography and notes are in detail and easily available for verification, leaving no doubt about the reliability of the narrations depicted in pictorial form. The language is simple, fluid, and precise, thus making it easy for the children to comprehend the foundation of Islam and its Prophet. The illustrations of Muhammad’s cruelty on his adversities are truly unforgettable—especially the dismemberment of Umm Qirfa and the Uki tribe thieves.

Today, Islam has become a mortal danger to the civilised world. Islamists want to destroy the civilisation that we know of, and replace it with their brand of Islamic Civilisation. They care very little about human lives or its sanctity. These Islamists are simply following the examples of Muhammad’s actions. The current infidel world spends billions of dollars to confront this menace and at the same time also cuddle Islam through political correctness. Any depiction of Islam in an unfavourable manner is vehemently rejected even by infidel governments. Thus, the world is kept in the dark about the reality of Islam; people are lulled by their governments through political correctness, with the dose that Islam is peaceful. The best way to eradicate the Islamic menace is to tell the truth—that Islam is false, barbaric and imperialistic. This illustrated biography of Muhammad tells the truth about Islam in absolute clarity and vividness.

Biography of the Prophet Muhammad Illustrated, Volume 1

Author: ‘Abdullah Ibn Sa’d Ibn Abi Sarh

(Availability at Amazon.com)

Islamic Sharia Law in Brief

Cynicism of the Islamists to promote barbaric “Sharia-based Islam” in the west is going on uninterrupted due to the utter ignorance of the westerners about Islamic ideology in general, democratic convenience, and also by the “politically correct nonsense” spewed by many western politicians by their selfishness and forceful ignorance about the inherent danger of Islamic Sharia.

---

Many hypocritical western residing Islamists are trying relentlessly to soft-sell Islam through their speeches and write-ups and so called “interfaith nonsense” only to fool the westerners. All these Islamists are portraying Islam being compatible with western values. Using cynicism and soothsaying techniques, they are trying hard to convince the westerners that Islam is democratic, Islam is tolerant of other faiths, Islam encourages the pursuit of religious freedom, etc. They conveniently ignore/hide the fascism in Islam that originated from the primary (Quran) and secondary (Hadith) texts in the form of Sharia (Islamic law). The barbaric laws and rules of Sharia are causing the Muslims to suffer the most. Fact of the matter is, these so called Allah’s laws are nothing but the ancient Arab Paganic ruthless tribal social justice which had been cleverly ingrained in Islam and now causing the humanity to suffer.

These Islamists are often bluffing westerners by citing some non-Arab Muslim majority nations such as Bangladesh as the proof that there is no inherent discord between Islam and democracy. Many of these countries are nascent western style democracies and are not governed by Islamic Sharia law at all. Outside Middle East, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan has adopted partial Islamic laws and one can see the brutality and barbarism happening there in the name of Islam. To understand Islam, one of the important aspects is to understand the “Sharia law”. I have written this piece to inform the readers about the Sharia law that can only generate brutality, hatred, and nothing but Islamic fascism.

What is Sharia law?

The term "Sharia" (Arabic شريعة Šarīʿa; "way" or "path") is the sacred law of Islam. Sharia law literally means religious code of life. It is used to refer both to the Islamic system of law and the totality of the Islamic way of life. Sharia guides all aspects of Muslim life including politics, daily routines, foods, clothing, amusements, sports, familial and religious obligations, and financial dealings. Traditional Muslims (all mullahs, Mawlanas, Muftis, and Islamic scholars) who understand the Quran and the Hadith believe that sharia (Islamic law) expresses the highest and best goals for all societies on Earth. It is the “law of Allah” and bound to be the best of all. Because of this ardent belief, devout and fanatical Muslims all over the world are in constant struggle (Jihad) with their ruling Government to establish “Islamic Sharia” as the country’s only rule by replacing modern secular democracy (Laws made by human).

Sharia and its origin and sources:

The “sharia law” in all the four Madhabs are esentially the same. The principal sources of Sharia are: the Quran, Hadiths, and Sunnah—(the sayings, practices, and teachings of the Prophet Mohammed). The secondary sources are: Ijma (consensus), Kiyas (analogy), Ijtihad (responsible individual opinion), and Istihsan (Juristic references).

There are four main schools of Sharia law:

Hanbali: This is the most conservative school of Shari'a. It is used in Saudi Arabia and some states in Northern Nigeria. Maliki: This is based on the practices of the people of Medina during Muhammad's lifetime. Shafi'i: This is a conservative school that emphasizes on the opinions of the companions of the Prophet Muhammad. Hanifi: This is the most liberal school, and is relatively open to some limited modern ideas.

Brief History of Sharia compilations:

Muslims consider that, Sharia law was founded on the words of Allah as revealed in the Qur'an, and traditions gathered from the life of the Prophet Muhammad. Sharia continued to undergo fundamental changes, beginning with the reigns of caliphs Abu Bakr (632–34) and Umar (634–44), during which time many questions were brought to the attention of Muhammad's closest comrades for consultation.^[60] Therefore, Quran and Sunnah were the principle guidance to formulate the core issues of “Islamic Sharia”.

Although, “Sharia law” principally derived from the emulations of early Islamic rules by Prophet Muhammad and his four rightly guided Caliphs , but written format (except some hand-written notes) was not available during the early period of Islamic Caliphates. However, hand-written Sharia formulation was started right from the time of Prophet and continued thereafter during four rightly-guided Caliphs, Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphs until the time of Ottoman Empire. Sharia developed during the long period of: 750-850 CE. Actual Hand-written “Sharia booklets” were formed and compiled by four schools of Islamic scholars and were used by various caliphs as the constitution of the court and final version of the Sharia was compiled after 150 years of the death of Prophet Muhammad in 632 CE. Modern-day Saudi Courts use most conservative Sharia formulated by Imam Hanbali (Hanibali booklet) and Imam Jafri booklet is used in Iran.(Al-Cistani is the guru of Shiite jurisprudence). Actual paper-backed Islamic Sharia books were prepared during 17th Century King Auwrangazev (Alamgir) of Mugal Empire in India.

Some common laws of “Islamic Sharia” which are regularly practiced in the Islamically ruled (Sharia-based) nations with some minor variations:

1- Jihad defined as “to war against all non-Muslims to establish the religion” is the duty of every Muslim and Muslim head of state (Caliph). Muslim Caliphs who refuse jihad are in violation of Sharia and unfit to rule.

2- A Caliph can hold office through seizure of power meaning through force.

3- The head of an Islamic State (Caliph) cannot be charged, let alone be punished for serious crimes such as murder, adultery, robbery, theft, drinking and in some cases of rape (Hudood cases) - Codified Islamic Law Vol 3 # 914C of and page 188 of Hedaya the Hanafi manual.

4- A percentage of Zakat (alms) must go towards jihad.

5- It is obligatory to obey the commands of the Caliph, even if he is unjust.

6- A caliph must be a Muslim, a non-slave and a male.

7- The Muslim public must remove the Caliph in one case, if he rejects Islam.

8- A Muslim who leaves Islam (apostate) must be killed immediately.

9- A Muslim will be forgiven for murder of : a) an apostasy b) an adulterer c) a highway robber. Making vigilante street justice and honor killing acceptable.

10- A Muslim will not get the death penalty if he kills a non-Muslim.

11- Sharia never abolished slavery and sexual slavery and highly regulates it. A master will not be punished for killing his slave. Slavery still exists amongst Arab Muslims.

12- Sharia dictates death by stoning, beheading, for sins like killing, adultery, prostitutions; and other Quranic corporal punishments like: amputation of limbs (chopping hands and feet), floggings, beatings and other forms of cruel and unusual punishments even for the sins like: stealing, sexual promiscuity, robbery, burglary etc.

13- Non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims and must comply to Sharia (pay Zizzya: poll tax) if they are to remain safe. They are forbidden to marry Muslim women, publicly display wine or pork, recite their own religious scriptures, or openly celebrate their religious holidays or funerals. They are forbidden from building new churches or building them higher than mosques. They may not enter a mosque without permission. A non-Muslim is no longer protected if he commits adultery with a Muslim woman or if he leads a Muslim away from Islam.

14- It is a crime for a non-Muslim to sell weapons to someone who will use them against Muslims. Non-Muslims cannot curse a Muslim, say anything derogatory about Allah, the Prophet, or Islam, or expose the weak points of Muslims. However, Muslims can curse, criticize or say anything derogatory they like to the religions of others.

15- A non-Muslim cannot inherit from a Muslim.

16- Banks must be Sharia compliant and interest is not allowed.

17- No testimony in court is acceptable from people of low-level jobs, such as street sweepers or a bathhouse attendant. Women in such low level jobs such as professional funeral mourners cannot keep custody of their children in case of divorce.

18- A non-Muslim cannot rule even over a non-Muslims minority.

19- Homosexuality is punishable by death.

20- There is no age limit for marriage of girls under Sharia. The marriage contract can take place anytime after birth and consummated at age 8 or 9.

21- Rebelliousness on the part of the wife nullifies the husband’s obligation to support her, gives him permission to beat her and keep her from leaving the home.

22- Divorce is only in the hands of the husband and is as easy as saying: “I divorce you” and becomes effective even if the husband did not intend it.

23- There is no common property between husband and wife and the husband’s property does not automatically go to the wife after his death.

24- A woman inherits half what a man inherits. Sister gets half of what brother gets.

25- A man has the right to have up to 4 wives and wife has no right to divorce him even if he is polygamous.

26- The dowry is given in exchange for the woman’s sexual organs.

27- A man is allowed to have sex with slave women and also with women captured in battle (concubines), and if the enslaved woman is married her marriage is annulled.

28- The testimony of a woman in court is half the value of a man; that is, two women equal to one man.

29- A woman looses custody if she remarries.

30- A rapist may only be required to pay the bride-money (dowry) without marrying the rape victim.

31- A Muslim woman must cover every inch of her body which is considered “Awrah,” a sexual organ. Some schools of Sharia allow the face and some don’t.

32- A Muslim man is forgiven if he kills his wife caught in the act of adultery. However, the opposite is not true for women since he “could be married to the woman he was caught with.”

33-It is obligatory for a Muslim to lie if the purpose is obligatory and is known as Taqiyya (Islamic Deception). That means that for the sake of abiding with Islam’s commandments, such as jihad, a Muslim is obliged to lie and should not have any feelings of guilt or shame associated with this kind of lying.

The above are clear-cut laws in Islam decided by great Imams after years of examination and interpretation of the Quran, Hadith and Mohammed’s life.

34. The perpetrators of genocide, mass rape and plunder will not be punished if they repent - Codified Islamic Law Vol 1 # 13.

35. To prove rape, a woman must have 4 male witnesses. Women’s testimony is not accepted - Pakistan’s Hudood ordnance 7 of 1979 amended by 8B of 1980. Thousands of raped women and girls in many countries have been charged with Zena (physical relations outside marriage) and punished by Sharia courts for want of witnesses.

36. All modern music including sexually explicit music of any kind is strictly prohibited and punishable by Islamic Sharia code of justice. Only Islamic songs are allowed.

The above are the most important parts of Islamic Sharia law which were devoutly practiced by the early Islamic rulers (Holy Prophet and his four rightly guided Caliphs) and also by the Caliphs of Ummyad and Abbasid Dynasties ruled from Baghdad (Today’s Iraq) and later by Ottoman Empire with very little variations.

Islamic Taqiyya vs. Reality of Islamic Sharia!

Caution! Islam permits devout Muslims to lie, cheat, and deliberately bluff non-muslims to protect or promote his religion of Islam, anytime, anywhere. And this tactic is know as “Islamic Taqiyya” (read: Islamic deception), and was originally used by the Prophet of Islam to fool, and later subjugate and destroy enemies of Islam. As Prophet of Islam repeatedly asserted: “War is a deception” and with this holy-tactic, Prophet of Islam established his most intolerant religion of violence (by 80 plus bloody battles) which he later named as: “religion of peace”! Therefore, today’s Islamists will follow the holy path of their Prophet and will deny that—Sharia is really Islamic law! They will try to cheat by saying that, all these Sharia laws that are practiced in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan, and elsewhere are not true Islamic, and they have been distorted. They also will try to fool people by saying: Saudi Arabia is ruled by King (Monarch) and Islam does not permit Kingship etc. But, their dishonest assertion is furthest from the truth. Ancient Caliphs of Islam were nothing but the kings of ancient Islamic nations having supreme despotic and dictatorial authoritative rulers. In fact, ancient Islamic caliphs were more despotic and brutal rulers than the present day Saudi King.

No one should be fooled to believing that these harsh and draconian laws were invented out of any wishful imagination of the so called “Islamic radicals/extremists” who came long after Muhammad. Actually, these harsh and barbarically cruelest laws came directly from the founder of Islam in his Quran and in his example in the hadith. Almost 98% of the above samples of Sharia justice can be traced-backed to Quran and Sunnah positively. In fact, Prophet Muhammad himself actually practiced them and deliberately laid down these corporal punishments and policies to rule the ancient Islamic Caliphate. Modern Kings and Presidents of today’s Islamic nations are doing exactly the same to emulate Islamic Prophet and those ancient rightly guided Caliphs. Honorable readers can peruse the article in the reference # 8 to learn more about Islamic Taqiyya.

Some Quranic verses and Hadiths which can be directly attributed for draconian sharia justice:

Readers can check following Quranic verses to understand the sources of the corporal punishments as per Sharia Justice:[Quranic Verses: 4:34, 4:15-16, 24:2. 5:38, 5:45, 5:33, 98:6, 9:111, 9:29, 3:85, 4:89 , 3:90, 4:11-12, 4:176, 8:1, 43:18, 33:61, 4:16-20, 2:282, 2:230, 4:3, 4:11-12, 9:28, 2:96, 9:30, 3:28, 16:106-107, 2:223, 8:12-14, 8:65, 47:4, 9:39, 2:96, 9:30, 2:191, 2:216, 48:20, 5:33, 9:73, 3:85, 9:113, 9:80-84, 33:21].For space limitations, it is not possible to cite exact physical verses here; but readers can open the Quran and verify the verse numbers I have provided above only to discover that—these verses are the nucleus from which most of the above corporal punishments and practices of Sharia law have been originated. Please mind that, the verse #s I have cited here are only some examples and never exhaustive of the list. Quran is replete with harsh cruel belligerent verses for unbelievers and violators of Islamic Sharia law which very well be the real sources of Sharia justice. .

Hadith for corporal punishments of unbelievers and for sex offenders in Islam and who wedged war with Allah and Prophet (Samples only):

Hadith for stoning death: [Bukhari sahrif-vol.8, book-82, No. 817; or, Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 63, Number 196; Also please see hadiths No. 803 to 816 of the same book and volume of Bukhari.] Also please peruse myriads of sahih hadiths for punishments to unbelievers, sex offenders, and all kaffirs by clicking to the URL below:

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/082.sbt.html

Please read here some fatwas against Islamic apostates by the most famous Islamic scholar Mawlana Sayyid Abul Ala Mawdudi by clicking here:

http://www.answering-islam.de/Main/Hahn/Mawdudi/index.htm#publisher]

Government under God and Blasphemy!

In those Muslim countries where “Islamic Sharia” is the official constitution, Quran and Sunnah—(the sayings, practices, and teachings of the Prophet Mohammed) are declared to be the sources of the country’s laws. Hence, modern democracy is immediately vanished from the land. Non-muslims are considered second class citizens with very limited rights. Most importantly, citizens in general have no right to criticize anything done by their Government because the rulers only practice God’s law and it is blasphemous to criticize God’s law and thereby it is strictly prohibited, and punishable by imprisonment or even death. Moreover, God’s laws are immutable hence can never be altered or amended by any means. That is why all those strict Sharia-based nations can be taken as the true examples of ancient Islamic nations ruled by Islamic caliphates.

Sharia law has been adopted in various forms by many countries, ranging from a strict interpretation in Saudi Arabia, Iran, and northern states of Nigeria, Sudan, al-Qaeda occupied Somalia, to a relatively liberal interpretation in much of Malaysia, Pakistan, Bahrain, Yemen and United Arab Emirates. In those strictly followed Sharia nations such as Saudi Arabia—women are not allowed to drive, can not go out of home alone, remain under the guardianship of male relatives at all times, and must be completely covered in public. For long, women education was totally banned in Saudi Arabia, Iran, and many other Islamic nations.

Sharia in general are heavily misogynistic and anti-minorities. Women and minorities are the prime victims of Islamic Sharia-based nations. Women and all non-muslims live as the second class citizens in their own country. Rape cases are almost impossible to prove in the court of Islamic nations. It is quite ridiculous to consider that any rapist will do the crime in front of 4 males to observe and enjoy the scene (sexual orgy) so that they can later give testimony in the court! Therefore, it is highly impossible to prove rape case in the court and rape victims in Islamic nations end up being charged with Zena (physical relations outside marriage) and punished (floggings or stoning death) by Sharia courts for want of witnesses. Very recently, Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow, a gang raped 13 years old girl was stoned to death on the orders of a Sharia court in the "Sharia Compliant" country named Somalia.

Family matters such as marriage and divorce are the most significant aspects of sharia law practiced in most Muslim nations. Even in the democratically ruled Muslim nations such as Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia, Turkey etc, family matters (inheritance, marriage, divorce, and child custody etc) are governed by Sahrai law, still today.

Draconian and barbaric corporal punishments of Hudood law:

In all Sharia-based nations—criminal laws are practiced only by Sharia-justice. Quranic corporal punishments are known as “Hudood laws”. There are five “Hudood” crimes: unlawful sexual intercourse (sex outside of marriage and adultery), false accusation of unlawful sexual intercourse, wine drinking (sometimes extended to include all alcohol drinking), theft, and highway robbery. Punishments for “Hudood” offenses are—flogging, stoning death, beheading, amputation, exile, or execution are routinely practiced in Saudi Arabia and Iran. Honor killings, murders committed in retaliation for bringing dishonor on one's family, are a worldwide problem among the Muslims only. UN estimates thousands of women are killed annually in the name of family honor (National Geographic). Other practices that are woven into the sharia debate, such as female genital mutilation, child-marriages, polygamy, and gender-inequality.

Draconian system of Blood Money!

Islamic Quran (from which Sharia was derived) copied (Plagiarized) draconian code of law from the ancient king Hammurabi King of Babylonia, Mesopotamia (2900 B.C). King Hammarubi’s revenge/compensation for killing was: “life for life, hand for hand, eye for eye, ears for ears, tooth for tooth and wounds equal for equal”, and the Islamic Allah’s Guidance of compensation in Qur’anic Ayat: 5:45 (Translation byYousuf Ali): “life for life, hand for hand, eye for eye, ear for ear, tooth for tooth and wounds equal for equal.” It was from this compensatory concept, the “blood money” was established in Sharia law. This draconian compensatory justice system is still practiced in Saudi Arabia (details were published in Wall Street Journal, April 9, 2002). Under this system, if a person has been killed or caused to die by another, the latter has to pay “blood money” or compensation, as follows:

100,000 riyals if the victim is a Muslim man

50,000 riyals if a Muslim woman

50,000 riyals if a Christian man

25,000 riyals if a Christian woman

6,666 riyals if a Hindu (or idolater) man

3,333 riyals if a Hindu (or idolater) woman

That is, a Muslim man’s life is worth 33 times that of a Hindu woman!

Islam is utterly supremacist and racist religion on Earth!

Devout Muslims do believe that, Islam is the only true religion and all other religions are false and not accepted by the Allah. Therefore, Muslims are the superior human than any other humans on earth. According to Islamic Sharia and Koranic teachings—Christians, Jewish, and all other un-believers (Hindus idolaters etc are the worst) are less humans than Muslims and their rights are not the same as the rights of Muslims. This is the very reason why pure Muslims earnestly believe that—it is the most sacred duty of the Muslims to correct, convert, or killed all non-Muslims/infidels/kaffirs to purify this earth which belongs to only Allah. To this end—Islamic Brother-hood, Hamas, Hizbullah, CAIR, and many other Islamic organizations are doing Taqiyya business, and Talibans and al-Qaeda jihadis are engaged in holy business of armed struggle (Jihad) against all kaffirs of the world in general and against American infidels in particular.

Conclusion

Muslims consider that Islamic Sharia is the “Law of Allah (God)” which is considered divine and immutable and can never be changed or amended by any means! Hence, Islamic Sharia is still clinging to the ancient 7^th century barbaric justice system. Because of this fact, almost anywhere this “Islamic Sharia” is being established as the country’s ruling constitution, world can immediately witness exact face of despotic, barbarian, and totalitarian Islamic rule to all of the Islamic nations. Imposed “Sharia law” immediately becomes the true nightmare for the general public.

In the modern world—all the Islamically (Sharia-based) ruled nations such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Talibani Afghanistan, Sudan, Northern part of Nigeria, Somalia, Yemen, and some other Arab nations are practicing the same Sharia law (mentioned above) with some minor variations country to country, but basics are the same—they all are ruling their nation by Allah’s law. Also, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and some other Arab nations like Kuwait, Qatar, Abu Dhabi, Arab Emirate etc are practicing Sharia in variable status country to country. But, main preambles of Sharia law and their sources remain the same. Therefore, all those false claims by most Muslim scholars and Islamic apologists are plain lies and cheating (practicing Islamic Taqiyya) about the ugly face of Sharia-based modern nations such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan or Somalia. All these hypocritical western-living Islamic apologists are hell-bent to destroy western civilization from within. Gullible westerners and politically Correct western politicians should never be fooled by the utter deceptions and lies routinely and deliberately spewed by all the western-living Islamists.

References:

1. Saudi Arabia’s constitution: http://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/sa00000_.html

2. Book titled: “Cruel and Usual Punishment; the terrifying global implications of Islamic Sharia law” by Nonie Darwish.

3. Books for Sharia laws: Reliance of the Traveller, Sharia the Islamic Laws, Hedaya, and Malik's Muwatta.

4. Book: “Stop Islamic Sharia Law”: Hasan Mahmud (Director of Sharia law and former president of Muslim Canadian Congress).

5. Islam Sharia Law: A brief introduction: http://www.religioustolerance.org/islsharia.htm

6. Islam: Governing Under Sharia (aka shariah, shari'a): By Toni Jonson, Senior staff writer, Lauren Vriens (Updated: November 10, 2010).

http://www.cfr.org/publication/8034/islam.html

7. Sharia: Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia

8. Taqiyyah: The Islamic Principle of Holy Deception: By Dr. Radhasyam Brahmachari.

Set as favorite