The Constitutions of Islamic Countries: A Critical analysis

Islamic Constitution and equality of all citizens are a term in contradiction...

---

Introduction

In this article, I show a problematic contradiction in the constitutions of Islamic countries. This stems from the fact that Islamic countries adopt, in their state constitutions, Islam as a religion of the state, and, at the same time, establish, or try to establish, equality under the state’s law amongst all its citizens.

What Islamic constitutions claim

The newly written Libyan constitution establishes Islam as the religion of the state in its first article, and establishes equality amongst the state’s citizens in its 6th article.

This inclusion of Islam as a religion of the state and that all citizens in an Islamic country are equal under the law is not a recent phenomena that came with the newly designed constitutions of Iraq and Libya. It is an old phenomenon that appeared and took hold in all countries that had Muslim-majority populations. Here are two articles from the Jordanian constitution:

Article 2: Islam is the religion of the State and Arabic is its official language.

Article 6: (i) Jordanians shall be equal before the law. There shall be no discrimination between them as regards to their rights and duties on grounds of race, language or religion. (ii) The Government shall ensure work and education within the limits of its possibilities, and it shall ensure a state of tranquillity and equal opportunities to all Jordanians.

Critical Analysis

A constitution that establishes a specific religion (Islam in our case) and the equality of its citizens at the same time is establishing a contradiction that cannot be resolved (it can only be resolved by dropping Islam out of the constitution altogether). First, establishing Islam as a religion of the state is no more than affirmative discrimination against all other religions. Why can’t other religions enjoy the same status as Islam and be religions of the state also? After all such states claim establishing the equality of all citizens of the state. If this is the case, then why their religions (any other than Islam) are not considered the religions of the state too? Are not such constitutions establishing affirmative discrimination against all other belief systems that are considered “a religion” by one group of people or another in that state?

Second, such constitutions of Islamic countries are not discriminating in a “theoretical” fashion against other religions. They are, in fact, discriminating against the adherents of all other religions. For example, the Sunni form of Islam is taught in all levels of schools in Jordan (Elementary, Middle, and High Schools). Teachers who teach “Sunni Islam” are state employees. They are paid by the state like other teachers, who teach Mathematics or Science. No other religion is taught in those same schools. For instance, no teacher of the Christian religion is employed by the state to teach the Bible and the Christian teachings in state schools. Isn’t such a behavior by the state an affirmative discrimination against the Christian community in Jordan? The reader can generalize this example of Jordan to other venues of practice in Jordan, and to other practices in other Islamic countries.

The above contradiction in the Constitutions of Islamic countries translates into numerous practices of discrimination against non-Muslims. For example, in Egypt, those who leave Islam and become Christians cannot change their names, IDs or passports to reflect this change. They are also hunted down by Muslims in an attempt to kill since apostasy in Islam carry death penalty. The same does not apply when someone, say a Christian, becomes a Muslim. No one is allowed to harm him/her. They can change their names and IDs to reflect the change in their religion.

Islamic constitutions, thus, establish state-directed legal discrimination its non-Muslim citizens, and speaking of equality of all citizens in such states is not only a contradiction, but also a shameless farce.

Conspiracy behind the Daily 5 Times Prayers & the Mid-Night Prayers

Muhammad designed Islamic prayers and their timings not for spiritual purposes but for ensuring his personal protection and security from likely attacks by his victims.

---

Muhammad: A Bad Atheist

Muhammad was Atheist! Don’t get shocked! Muhammad was not only an Atheist, but also a bad one. Generally, atheists are good people, who fundamentally believe in equality and liberty for all human beings. They are certainly better than all brands of divisive Theists. But we are also humans, born with the capability of doing good as well as bad, irrespective of whether we are Theists or Atheists. And Muhammad was one of the worst cases among Atheists.

Muhammad case was unique. His ultimate goal was to rule the Arab Peninsula, behind a religious mask, which he did achieve successfully.

He protested against the centuries-old belief of his forefathers. He abused and broke the idols of the Gods, he used to worship in his pre-Islamic Pagan days. Just to condemn and subsequently annihilate the Jews of Medina, he perverted the Jewish doctrine of monotheism by fabricating the story about Azra or Uzair as the son of God (absent in Jewish scripture). He denied the crucifixion of Jesus, the central pillar of Christianity. He condemned the sacred scriptures of the Jews and Christians as fabrications and perversions by them.

Atheists believe in truth, not in in-vogue myths and blind beliefs, and they call for critical inquiry to unravel the mystery of the world as a way of enlightening and freeing ignorant masses from superstitious believes. Whereas Muhammad, instead of enlightening the ignorant masses, created his own cult with a religious mask mixing old myths, superstitions and beliefs. He needed a God to proceed with. Uncreative as he was, he stole the name of one of the old Gods of his forefather, i.e. of Allah, so as to persuade the Pagans towards his cult, when he was in Mecca. After he failed badly in Mecca, he migrated to Medina and started praying towards the Jewish Temple of Jerusalem, so as to persuade Medina's thriving Jewish community to join his cult. But again he failed.

Having failed in Mecca, he had already started terrorizing and plundering the Meccan trade-caravans, which was critical to their livelihood. After his second failure in Medina, Muhammad now decided to terrorize and exterminate the Jews of Medina and capture their wealth.

During this period, he had stolen the names and fetishes from other religions. He created 99 different names of his God in confusion. Among them, Ar-Rahman was the name of a Yemeni idol-God. He copied the vast portions of his ideas from previous scriptures and embedded it in his Quran. He plagiarized the doctrine of paradise (Jannat Al-Firdous) from the Persians.

So, he certainly wasn’t afraid of any God. He cheated his own God, Allah, to fulfill his ambitions and lust, by fabricating verses and stories in His name.

From the above-mentioned facts, one can easily come to a conclusion about Muhammad’s uniqueness. There wasn’t any bit of spirituality in his cult. Every action of his was designed to his own benefit, to attain his goal and satisfy his lusts and desires. Let us put some of his actions on trial for scrutiny.

Devoties or security gaurds?

First, let us ponder over the fact of 5-time daily prayers and the mid-night prayer (Tahajut), and how it helped Muhammad in his career.

Those, who read the hadiths, know that Muhammad had married 15 wives or more, and at the time of his death, he was living with 9 of them in a house, adjacent to his mosque, with a curtain separating his house and the mosque. Muhammad was a coward and always wanted somebody to die for his cause. He and his house were protected by security guards round the clock on a shift basis (Sahih Al-Bukhari 7:734), while he engaged in merry and sexual orgy inside the house, often copulating with all 9 wives on the same night [Bukhari (62:6): "The Prophet used to go round (have sexual relations with) all his wives in one night, and he had nine wives."]

Allah, the most merciful and passionate, it is claimed, loves his creation 70 times more than a mother loves her children. Yet, the merciful Allah ordered His children to line up and salute him 5 times a day at “Muhammad’s mosque” only. When some of his male followers started praying to Allah at a separate houses (mosque) of their own, Muhammad ordered to burn the house, and it was burned down when those men were praying inside (Bukhari Vol 1:617 & 1:626). Praying to Allah from their own house (mosque) makes Allah, alias Muhammad, angry -- because it would not have served Muhammad’s purpose. So, he had made it obligatory for his companions to pray at his mosque annexed to his house.

Muhammad lived in constant fear that the victims of his barbaric crimes might attack him in revenge. So, he wanted to be surrounded by his male followers all the time. That’s why he ordered all his male followers (even if they are blind) to assemble in his mosque-cum-house for each prayer. And he led the prayer to maintain his absolute command over them.

Mosque or terrorist training camp?

The actual purpose of assembling all his followers at his mosque was to ensure his personal security, as well as, to give military training to them for the next raid on the neighboring settlements of Pagans, Jews and Christians, who had refused to accept Muhammad as their king.

Narrated Aisha, “Ethiopians (whom Muhammad has purchased with Khadeeja’s wealth) were playing in the mosque (displaying the skill with spears), I saw the Prophet and the Ethiopians were playing with their spears.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari 1:445).

Modern Muslims! Please pay attention! Besides praying, Muhammad and his companions were playing with “spears” at his mosque.

Muhammad also conducted horse races and spear competitions among his companions cum soldiers. (Bukhari 1:412/ 442 & 443).

Tahajut prayer or nightshift of security gaurds?

Muhammad’s usual practice of attacking his so-called enemies was during the dark hours of the night, often the early-morning darkness hour (Khaybar attack). So, he felt insecure during the night hours, lest he becomes the victim of the same tactic from his victims. Muhammad, therefore, conveniently adjusted the timing of 3 prayers (Fajr, Maghrib and Isha) out of 5, to be prayed during the dark hours. Moreover, he intentionally prolonged the praying time of the 5th Isha prayer, so as to retain his followers in the mosque as long as he could. He was very particular about the 1st and the 5th (Fajr and Isha) prayers. He went to such an extent that he commanded his followers not to obey their mothers, if they restrict them to attend the congregational "Isha" prayer with him. (Bukhari Vol. 1, The Chapter of Adhaan, Chapter 29)

And it did not end there. Muhammad went further and ordered his gullible followers to pray mid-night prayers (Tahajut) at their homes. This prayer was performed by his followers in shifts, i.e. one group after another:

Narrated Abu Uthman: I was a guest of Abu Huraira for seven days. Abu Huraira, his wife and his slave used to get up and remain awake for one-third of the night by turn. Each would offer the night prayer and then awaken the other. (Bukhari 7:352).

The purpose, definitely, was to keep his followers, mostly the slaves, awake throughout the night in case of a night-attack by victims by copycatting his own tactic. This prayer was nothing but a defence strategy to ensure Muhammad’s own protection and security. This hadith alone is sufficient to understand the vacuousness of spirituality of Islamic prayers.

Purpose of Itikaaf, Qhiyaam Al-Lail, Tarawih & Lail-Al-Qadr

As mentioned earlier, Muhammad used the cowardly tactic of attacking innocent tribes during night-hours without prior warnings. Actually, those were not wars, but robbery-raids upon innocent people. He did not spare them even during their sacred months. So, Muhammad had to be very vigilant during his proclaimed sacred month, the Ramadan, with the fear of being attacked by his victims. Though he was, as usual, guarded by his guards round the clock, he wanted to have as many guards as possible during the nights of Ramadan. So, he fabricated the theology of ITIKAAF, QHIYAAM AL-LAIL & LAIL-AL-QADR etc. Out of which, his theology of ITIKAAF (Seclusion in a mosque for the purpose of worshipping Allah only) helped him a lot during Ramadan. At first, he began his Itikaaf with his companions, for the first 10 days of Ramadan, and then he extended it to another mid-ten days, and finally to the last ten days of Ramadan also.

Itikaaf for the first 10 days of Ramadan (Bukhari Vol 3:242 & 243)

Itikaaf for the mid ten days of Ramadan (Bukhari Vol 3:244)

Itikaaf for all thirty days of Ramadan (Bukhari Vol 1:777)

Did Muhammad fear Allah?

Muhammad didn’t considered prayers as a spiritual duty for attaining closeness with God. Instead, he designed, changed or prolonged the prayers and its timing according to his personal need.

1. In most occasions Muhammad purposely extended the timing of Isha, the 5th prayer, so as to retain his followers around his as long as he could. In many instances, he came out of his house to lead the Isha prayer very late, when his assembled followers had already gotten tired and were sleeping in the mosque. Muhammad often said: “If supper is served and the Iqaama for Isha prayer is proclaimed, start with your supper first” (Bukhari 1:640-642 & 7:373-374). This instruction is exclusively for the Isha prayer only. Whereas, for the Fajr, the early-morning-darkness-time prayer, his instructions were just the opposite, because he wants his protectors to come to his mosque as soon as possible. How could he change the timings of prayers, ordained by Allah?
2. When Muhammad had no fear of attack by his enemies on heavily raining and very cold days, he allowed his companions to pray at their homes. (Bukhari 1:590, 605, 635 & 637). (No burning of their houses in this case.)
3. Muhammad’s fear of Allah: Once the Iqama is pronounced and the Prophet was talking to a man in a corner of the mosque, and he did not lead the prayer till the people had slept. (Bukhari 1:615-616) (In this way, Muhammad showed his respect toward his Allah. Why should he fear unnecessarily from his own shadow, Allah)
4. There was no harm if the muadh-dhin laughed while pronouncing the Adhaan or Iqaama. (Bukhari Vol. 1, The book of Adhaan, Chapter 10). (What is wrong in that? After all it was only a get-together of Muhammad’s soldiers).
5. Muhammad forbade his followers to spit in the direction of Qibla during prayers, because they were speaking in private with their Allah and should not spit on their right, as there is an angel standing. However Muhammad allowed spitting on their left or under their left foot. (Bukhari 1:399, 404, 405, 408)
6. When Muhammad arrived at Medina, he first stayed in the house of his maternal uncle to protect his life. (Allah didn’t see fit to protect his life).
7. He started praying facing toward the direction of the Jewish Temple Bait-Al-maqdis on his own for 17 months, leaving aside Kaaba, the house of Allah. (Bukhari 1:39).

CONCLUSION: There is nothing spiritual in Islamic prayers; instead, they were designed solely to Muhammad’s personal benefits and advantage, primarily as a strategic measure for his personal protection. The 5-time daily prayers or any other Islamic prayers are, thus, meaningless today, because their real purpose, namely ensuring the security and protection of the commander of Muslims, are not at all a factor today. Nonetheless they do serve a somewhat different purpose today, which is safeguarding the hold of the Arab rulers upon their thrones under the shade of Islam. What is written above on prayers is only a fraction of such embarrassing information; there are much more scattered in Islamic sources.

It is high time for my Muslim brethren to critically analyze these Islamic sources, written by Allah alias Muhammad and the very respectable scholars of Islam, and get enlightened, instead of wasting their valuable time in lifelong head-banging.

Why We are Losing the War against Encroaching Islam and Terrorism

Osama bin Laden is dead, but his battle plan is on its course to victory -- thanks to the misguided war strategy undertaken by the non-Muslim world...

---

The death of Usama Bin Laden (UBL) at the hands of U.S. Navy Seals has caused jubilation to many people. Although UBL could not be brought to justice, justice was appropriately brought to him. A man, who lived by violence and encouraged others to do so, should not complain that he himself suffered a violent death.

As the state of the battle against Islamic resurgence stands, this is where we are heading.

However, I fear that UBL’s death may have given us, non-Muslims, a false sense of victory in the war on Islamic terror, when we are actually losing the war. Such a statement will no doubt come as a surprise to many, and I suspect, they will read this and go through a recitation in their mind of the many victories against the terrorists on the battlefield and in the form of numerous foiled terrorist plots as an internal argument against my opinion.

However, this war is unlike most wars. It has already raged far longer than either WWI or WWII with no end in sight; if at all, the end is favorable to none other than devout Muslims with a solid understanding of and belief in the actual tenets of Islam.

The reason the non-Muslim world, led by the United States, is losing this war, is the characterization that we are not at war with Islam, the ideology that is actually driving the conflict. And that ideology, the religion of Islam, is expanding even in the West in an increasingly radicalized form.

Equally important: this is a long-term war of attrition, and Islamists are fighting an asymmetrical war, which they can not only maintain, but also, in all probability, will be able to expand. Conversely, the United States and its allies are fighting, even living, on borrowed money that will eventually bring these nations, particularly the U.S. to a state, where it will no longer be able to sustain the battle. This is especially true when one considers -- as one rightfully must -- that the United State’s ability to successfully fight the war long-term is contingent upon its financial well-being. Western Civilization may well be brought to its knees as spending on the war on terror and social programs deplete financial capability of the U.S. and its allies, when that the global economy is tied to the U.S. economy in myriad ways.

The reason non-Muslims are losing the war is that, despite the massive expenditures in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and in homeland security programs, all that the U.S. is accomplishing is curbing the Islamists’ success in the short term, but Islam, the driving force behind this battle, itself continues to expand and spread its influence. More important, still, is the fact that the entire Islamic World and Muslim populations everywhere are going through an Islamization process, wherein Muslims are becoming increasingly fundamentalist in nature. Islam continues its ominous advance in Europe and the United States, seemingly unfazed by the war on terror, made possible not only because it has been left alone to advance, but also with the persistent connivance and support of both conservative and liberal governments. Governments in the West, particularly in Europe, and to somewhat lesser extent in North America and Australia, have brought in Muslim immigrants into their societies without pragmatic considerations. On one hand, it has enabled Muslims, most of whom come with a islamization agenda, to literally colonize parts of Western nations; on the other, this adds economic burden, already overburdened by extravagant social programs, and increases unemployment and drives down working wages as labor supply expands at a faster pace than the economy.

To understand why the war is being lost, it is also crucially important to understand the difference between what fundamentalist Muslims are seeking to achieve and what non-Muslims seek to achieve in this conflict. Fundamentalist Muslims seek absolute victory such that Islamic rule and law will reign everywhere. They realize that once Sharia law is imposed, all other religions and ideologies will fade over time. Conversely, non-Muslims, at best, seek only to stop the acts of Islamic violence, leaving Islamization free to advance. This means that Islam will gradually win the struggle eventually -- even if the violent approach fails -- by stealth Islamization, and non-Muslims won’t be able to do anything since they do not seek actual victory. This war is going on as if a sporting event, which will be played until one of the teams win. This, in all likelihood, would go on for a very long time; indeed, the battle between Muslims and non-Muslims has raged for centuries, from the very inception of Islam to be precise. And the eventual end-result is quite predictable. Non-Muslims are having and will have some short-term advantages, but those advantages will be squandered on an unsustainable war strategy as has been undertaken.

Non-Muslim countries are much more technologically advanced, have far better military capabilities, and have much stronger, more diverse economies even in the worst of times than Islamic nations. There is no question that the U.S. and its allies have seize certain territories deemed important to secure, and that many terrorists and terror supporters have been killed. Numerous Muslim terror-plots have also been disrupted. But measures put in place to achieve these successes cannot be sustained in the long-term, and these measures itself helps little to resolve the conflict in the long-term. The manner in which the war has been characterized, and the resulting method by which it is being fought, is so expensive that such a financial draining defence strategy is unsustainable in the long-term.

Is it possible to stop an ant-infestation by going after individual ants as they come of the ant-hill, while leaving the nest intact? Metaphorically, that is exactly how the war against Islamic terror is being fought. Islamic doctrine is the nest that breeds Islamic terror. Other factors play a role, but make no mistake about it that Islamic doctrine is the central motivating factor. However, Western nations ignorantly perceive Islam as a welcome addition to the multicultural mix, and see danger only in violent actions of Muslims, wilfully disregarding the fact that those violent actions are simply an effort to implement the Islamic doctrine of Jihad. Could you imagine allowing Nazis to immigrate during the WWII and only perceiving them as a threat when they acted upon their ideology?

When one comprehends the error in tactics, one quickly realizes that the massive expenditures abroad -- in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and elsewhere -- are destabilizing the United States and its allies financially with little or no long-term benefit. For example, the United States provides major bulk of the forces and money to fight the Taliban, but how much longer it can afford to do so remains to be seen. Simple mathematics suggests that a nation of 310 million people, already burdened with a debt of over $14 trillions, cannot afford to police the world indefinitely. If the United States cannot maintain its financial integrity, it cannot maintain its security. It follows that spending vast sums of borrowed money to fight a war of indefinite attrition, which is unwinnable thanks to the strategy undertaken -- it not only wastes American lives, but also hurts its long-term national security, because as America’s debt level rises, her ability to resist Islam and other threats declines. Viewed in the proper light, whatever successes achieved in the war on terror so far will be nothing but a Pyrrhic victory.

Therefore, the manner in which Western nations are resisting Islam’s modern resurgence is playing into UBL’s strategy. UBL is dead, but he died knowing that his strategy has been successful and that the U.S. is well on its way to defeat. On November 01, 2004, the Arabic-language network Al-Jazeera released a transcript of a videotape from UBL, wherein he acknowledged that his goal is to force America into bankruptcy as he stated: "we are continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy. Allah willing, and nothing is too great for Allah."

Given UBL’s background and experience in business, undertaking an approach to economically drain America was the only prudent strategy he possible could successfully pursue. Given the current state of the American economy, the rate at which it is accruing more debt, as well as the myriad of other economic woes such as federal and state liability for various unfunded social programs and pension obligations, you can be sure that UBL died with the knowledge that Islam is well on its way to victory. Even as the “war” raged, Muslims continue to settle in the West in large numbers. The influence of Islam continues to grow in the U.S. and Europe. Muslims are winning elections to high offices and are being appointed judges. Islam’s coming victory is being facilitated by Constitutions of the Western nations. The First Amendment Freedom of Speech and Religion rights of the U.S. Constitution, for example, allows unperturbed spread of a violent, supremacist, misogynist, alien ideology, which will extinguish the very First Amendment Freedoms itself.

It is high time that the U.S. withdraws from intervention in the Islamic World. However, I am not a strict isolationist. The U.S. should carefully choose interventions that have high probably of advancing peace in the world. For example, American and allied intervention against Nazi Germany made sense. And we must not forget that in that conflict, Americans sought to, and did, destroy the Nazi ideology as a significant influence and power. Islamic ideology is more malevolent than the Nazi ideology. Islam, like Nazism, is a militaristic and supremacist ideology, which is just as full of hatred and violence toward Jews and also of Christians, and furthermore seeks annihilation of the polytheists. If America and its allies were fighting to discredit and contain Islam, the true enemy, any financial sacrifice would have been worth it, because one could be assured that the West were fighting to build a better future for humanity.

Unfortunately, the West is not only failing to fight the ideology of Islam, but the issue of Islam has, much to my surprise, become a conservatives versus liberal-leftists political agenda, even though the tenets of Islam are at odds with the values held by most Western political ideologies.

Given the hopeless state in which the West find itself in the battle against Islamic challenge, the best strategy for them now may well be to withdraw from the Islamic world, and try to contain Islam outside its boundaries. While this is the best strategy to undertake at this time, but I am also aware that it may be impossible to implement when large number of Muslims are already within the West’s borders. And Muslim growth rate much higher than that amongst non-Muslims, thanks primarily to unrestrained breeding amongst Muslims -- Islam’s encroachment and expanding influence on the Western culture and polity is all set to become unbeatable. And as Western nations become more and more financially insolvent -- due, at least in part, to the misguided wars of attrition in Afghanistan as well as to Muslim immigration, and unsustainable social programs -- their ability to resist Islam will decrease and Islam will advance at an even greater pace. Increase in Muslim population in the West will certainly lead to further assorted internal problems within non-Muslim nations, like those we witness happening in the Islamic world.

In conclusion, in the battle against Islamic resurgence, the non-Muslim world stands in a losing state, with little hope of a reversal.

Women’s Worth in Islam

In 1973, the General Assembly of the United Nations opened for signature and ratification the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (ICSPCA). It defined the crime of apartheid as: "Inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial [religious] group of persons over any other racial [religious] group of persons and systematically oppressing them."[Italics are mine]

The declaration prohibits, “Acts such as murder, infringement on freedom or dignity, arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, imposition of inhumane living conditions, forced labor, or enacting measures calculated to prevent a racial [religious] group from ‘participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country’ such as denying them ‘basic human rights and freedoms, including the right to work, the right to form recognized trade unions, the right to education, the right to leave and to return to their country, the right to a nationality, the right to freedom of movement and residence, the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.’"

Islamic member countries of the time, such as Egypt, Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia are signatories to the above declaration condemning the barbaric practices of apartheid. Yet, these same countries, as well as other Islamic nations, are the most blatant violators of the declaration.

It is the discriminatory Islamic teachings that condone and even promote wanton practices in violation of the United Nations declaration. Islam is a primitive barbaric ideology for the benefit of the male believer.

Islam, by fiat, discriminates against women. Qur’an 4:11 “Allah directs you in regard of your Children’s (inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females…. These are settled portions ordained by Allah.”

There are many more “directives” that for all intents and purposes make women chattel of men. Here are some of the shameful rules and practices of Islamic misogyny.

Women are inferior to men:

“Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them. Surely God is most high. Qur'an 4:34

Women are worth half of man:

“Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: The Prophet said, "Isn't the witness of a women equal to half that of a man?" The women said "yes". He said "This is because of the deficiency of the women's mind." Sahih Bukhari 3:48:82

Women are sex slaves:

“And now, people, you acquire certain rights over your wives, and they do you. The right you acquire over them is that they should not let someone you hate sleep in your beds, and not to commit a manifest obscenity [or adultery]. If they do [commit it], then God has given you permission to leave them alone in their beds and give them a beating, though not too hard. If they give over, they get their provision and clothing with kindness; I command you good-will for your wives, for they are your captives that do not own anything of their own. You have taken them by the faithfulness of God, and made their sexual organs lawful for you by the words of God.” Ibn Hisham, al-Sira al-nabawiyya (Cairo, 1963), 4:251.

Women are Toys:

“Omar [one of the Khalifs] was once talking when his wife interjected, so he said to her: 'You are a toy, if you are needed we will call you.” Al-Musanaf Vol. 1 Part 2, p. 263

Women are Weak:

Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet had a Had (a camel driver) called Anjasha, and he had a nice voice. The Prophet said to him, "(Drive) slowly, O Anjasha! Do not break the glass vessels!" And Qatada said, "(By vessels') he meant the weak women." Sahih Bukhari 8:73:230, See also: Sahih Bukhari 8:73:228 & Sahih Bukhari 8:73:229

Women are a Tilth for Men to Cultivate:

“Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will; but do some good act for your souls beforehand; and fear Allah. And know that ye are to meet Him (in the Hereafter), and give (these) good tidings to those who believe.” Qur'an 2:223

Women are Like Devils

Jabir reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) saw a woman, and so he came to his wife, Zainab, as she was tanning a leather and had sexual intercourse with her. He then went to his Companions and told them: The woman advances and retires in the shape of a devil, so when one of you sees a woman, he should come to his wife, for that will repel what he feels in his heart. Sahih Muslim 8:3240

Woman are Evil Omen:

Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: I heard the Prophet saying. "Evil omen is in three things: The horse, the woman and the house." Sahih Bukhari 4:52:110

Men May Marry up to Four Women”

“If you fear you can not treat orphans (girls) with fairness, then you may marry other women who seem good to you: two, three or four of them. But if you fear that you can not maintain equality among them, marry only one or any slave girls you may own, that will be more suitable. And give the women their dower as a free gift; but if they, of their own good pleasure, remit any part of it to you, eat it with enjoyment, take it with right good cheer and absorb it (in your wealth).” Qur'an 4:3

Violence Against Women”

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

The Afterlife of Women:

“Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: Once Allah's Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o 'Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle ?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion." Sahih Bukhari 1:6:301

Women are relegated in Islam at best, to a second-class status, depriving them of many rights enjoyed by men. Thus, life goes on for the Muslim women with all the trappings of the Islamic misogyny. Such is the plight of women under Islam. There is hardly the need to provide an exhaustive list of Islamic misogyny to qualify it as a shameful, discriminatory and oppressive religious apartheid.

Will Muslim women ever break out of their bondage and claim their rightful place among emancipated non-Muslim women? It is the long sub-humanized Muslim women who must discard Islam and claim their equal human rights. Muslim men will resort to every means to maintain their privileged position and their cruel dominance over women, citing the Quran as justification. Any document that consigns one half of the human race to second-class status is null and void.

Its constitutional sub-humanization of women aside, Islam has a raft of beliefs and practices that violate fundamental human rights of non-Muslims in general. A few cases should suffice to fully substantiate the contention that Islam is religious apartheid. And there is no need to draw cases from the repugnant “extremist” Islamic groups such as the Taliban to make the case. Even the most “mainstream” and “peaceful” Islam is guilty of systemic apartheid. Just a couple of examples should suffice for now.

* On December 16, 2006, Egypt’s Highest Administrative Court decreed that in order to receive an Identity Card, only Islam, Judaism, or Christianity must be entered on the application. No one of any other religion or no religion at all is permitted to list his belief or even leave it blank. Without the identity card, just about all the rights of citizenship are denied to minorities such as Baha’is, Hindus, and Buddhists. People are forced to choose between falsely claiming an approved religion and depriving themselves of just about all rights of citizenship such as jobs, education and medical care.

* In the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Islamic law denies dyyeh to any and all people who are not Muslims or members of the only other three recognized religions. Every one of the 500,000 members of the Baha’i Faith can be murdered without the family receiving justice or compensation. As a matter of fact, the Islamic government itself has executed Baha’is for the sole “crime” of being Baha’is and has demanded that the innocently murdered person’s family reimburse it for the bullets they used to execute him.

* The Islamic Republic of Iran’s President’s repeated threat to wipe out Israel from the map is ignored by some as an empty rhetoric of an unhinged fanatic. Yet, Ahmadinejad’s threats are far from the baseless saber-rattling of a zealot. Ahamadinejad’s government has recently ordered the comprehensive gathering of data regarding the Baha’is and all their activities. This order is deeply troubling, since it is almost a replica of what another fascist, Hitler, did before launching the genocide of six million Jews and some four million other “undesirables”. Ahamadinejad is an Islamofascist whose aim is to have a practice run on the Iranian Baha’is before embarking on destroying the Jews and other “undesirables,” following in the footsteps of the German fuehrer.

Islamic societies shamelessly practice all the sanctioned injustices listed in the U.N. charter on apartheid (see paragraphs 2 and 3, above). Islam is religious apartheid. And apartheid, by universal agreement, is an inhumane, unjust and condemned practice.

Islam cruelly practices its oppressive dogma on minorities in its lands; it is in clear violation of the provisions of Universal Human Rights. Ominously, Islam is encroaching in the traditionally non-Islamic parts of the world and doing all it can to impose its horrid doctrine on others.

It is for this present and imminent danger that the free people of the world must rise and do all they can to preserve their birthright of liberty. Muslims in the non-Islamic lands may seem harmless, and many of them indeed are harmless. Yet, Islam compels its leaders to uphold and promote its tenets at any and all costs to anyone. It is for this reason that on the one hand the Islamic governments sign the U.N. Charter that condemns apartheid, and on the other hand, these governments violate every provision of it when they are in power.

Islamofascism, the enemy of liberty, is already inside the gate. It is the duty of every free human to defend freedom by defeating the enemy.

MALAYSIA BANS BOOK: "ISLAM -- EVIL IN THE NAME OF GOD"

Islamic tyranny in display in modern, moderate Malaysia. Malaysian government has banned the book, "Islam: Evil in the Name of God". One can be jail for three years, plus fined, for possessing, publishing or distributing the book.

---

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia - The Home Ministry has gazetted a prohibitory order against the publishing of a book entitled Islam Evil in the Name of God on July 7 for containing false narrative facts.

The ministry's Publication Control Section and Al-Quran Text secretary Abd Aziz Md Nor said the narrative facts in the book were totally false, especially those involving the character of Prophet Muhammad and the sanctity of Islam.

* "The publication is the evil effort of certain quarters to sow hatred and negative sentiments against Islam among non-Muslims. If the publishing is allowed, it could threaten peace."

* He said the ban was in accordance with Section 7 (1) of the Printing Presses and Publication.

Real Islam is Nothing Like What I Thought It Was

slamA new apostate's letter to Dr. Ali Sina, the ex-Muslim founder of faithfreedom.org.

Hi brother,

I am a Muslim. I am deeply interested to read your book, not for a lame try to refute your arguments but it makes me happy when I read those “mass murderer”, “rapist” and all these things about Muhammad.

I was not like this. I was a true believer, I thought Islam was true religion until I came across that "sex slave" hadith from somewhere on the Internet. Then I was looking for a proper website that criticizes Islam to know more about the reality of it and I came across your website. It was really shocking. The Islam I practiced and thought to exist is completely different from what the Quran and hadith teach.

In the beginning i couldn’t withstand those "murderer", "rapist" and all other words referring to my "beloved" prophet. But i also couldn’t also ignore them because it was clear according to our own hadith that Muhammad had sex with 9 year old Ayisha and raped the women captured in wars. Slowly I accepted the fact that Islam was a lie and I started hating it.

I also want to say that most of the Muslims in non-islamic countries think Islam means peace and love and they practice it that way (like I once did). They are really caring people.

With lots of love and respect

Your student

----

Hello friend.

Thank you for this email. I know that these adjectives I use hurt Muslims and many have told me to tone down and not use words that may turn Muslims away. I wish I could do it but I can’t. If one wants to tell the truth one must not be politically correct. That is the reality that everyone, Muslims and non-Muslims must deal with it.

I agree that the Islam Muslims believe and practice is not the same Islam of Muhammad. Muslims all over the world, not just in the west project their own idealistic views in Islam. The truth is that Muhammad was not that holy man Muslims think he was.

That is the difference between Islam and other faiths. You may find all faiths are logically wrong, but there is also some good in their teachings. There is nothing good in Islam. The only good you find in Islam is in the aspiration and thinking of the believers. That goodness is part of the human nature shared by all the people. But when these good people become influenced by Islam they are transformed into terrorists and murderers.

Now that you found the truth, tell others. Truth will set the world free. Muslims’ faith is strong. But that is zealotry. No one wants to live in a lie. Once the truth is known Islam will be demolished and Muslims will be set free.

Truth is out. Now all is left to do is spread it. If each Muslim who learns the truth spreads it to others, in no time Islam will become history.

Ali Sina

On the Question of God and Punishments in Afterlife

Cerebrum123, one of our readers, wrote the following comment, directed at me, on the question of God's existence and his punishments in the afterlife, as projected by monotheistic creeds:

You are an atheist; am I right? The question is: can you be 100% sure that there is no life after death, and no punishment for those, who have rejected their Creator?

I am glad you are out of Islam and this site has been a great resource for me, but can you be certain that the path you have chosen is the truth?

I have been through a lot, and seen things that cannot be explained by science, and personally experienced God in my life, and I would like others to have this kind of relationship with God as well. This is why I'm asking you a couple of questions. You can just ignore them if you want to, but I am personally curious.

* Are you 100% certain there is no God?
* Are you absolutely certain there is no afterlife?
* Are you absolutely certain that there will be no form of judgement in such an afterlife?
* Do you see Christianity as basically the same thing as Islam without the orders to kill unbelievers?

Again I'm just curious. I've always been a curious person. I think understanding someone else's worldview helps me understand the person.

These questions have been debated and discussed too many times in various forums in recent years. Christopher Hitchens is probably the best and more eloquent person to answer them most convincingly (you may refer to some of his debates on youtube). And my understanding of these questions and answers would not be different from his.

To the question of the existence of God, there is no evidence whatsoever that He/She does exist. There might be a Creator, but we have no way of knowing that. Many people claim, as you have done, that they have experienced God. But what those experiences are! If you can experience God, then I should be able to experience Her/Him too. The only thing is: I may not have the methodology of experiencing Her/Him. But if you teach me your methodology, then I and every human being will, ideally, be able to experience God in the same way you do. That's how science works. If your methodology of experiencing God does not work for others -- then what you claim to have experienced about God is questionable; it's probably a delusion, like that of many frauds who claim to communicate with ghosts and spirits simply to cheat gullible people. Your experience should be reproducible, at least, by the majority of your likes, but a delusion may not be.

To the question of punishments after death, as most monotheistic creeds propagate (some polytheistic creeds have picked up the idea in more recent times), this is even more ludicrous. On what grounds would God punish us in the afterlife? And why God decided to do so only over the past 3-4 thousands of years ago, when modern humans have existed on earth for no less than 100,000 years. Before punitive monotheism made its mark about 3.5 thousand years ago, there were many Gods and religions -- but there was no concept of afterlife punishments in them. Even in the Jewish scripture, we don't see a solid foundation of the modern idea of heaven and hell, and punishments in the latter. If I'm not wrong, the idea of punishments in hell after death, as we understand today, was first conceptualized in the Zoroastrian Scripture. Other religions, certainly Islam, have borrowed it from there.

The idea of punishments in afterlife turns even more ridiculous when considered its modus operandi. If my father punishes me, he must set certain clear-cut conditions beforehand and warn me not to violate them. Only after that, if I violate those rules, he can claim justification of some sorts to punish me. But for me, the responsibility of a child's failure to heed father's advice/warnings also falls, to good extent, on the father because of his failure to inculcate proper values and teachings in the child. Nonetheless, the father is punishing his child with proper accountability, i.e. with setting a guideline of behaviour and warning the child about its violation beforehand. The same standard applies to authorities. Police punish criminals only after the latter have been informed of not violating certain rules or committing certain crimes clearly and beforehand. And in punishments by a father or authorities, they generally show good degree of decency -- limited punishments for limited crimes or punishments commensurate with crimes/faults. That's the greatest hallmark of civilized societies and conscience.

Now turn to God's punishments: He/She, my Creator, never informed me what I can do, should do, and what I should not. Of course, He/She is claimed to have talked in intimate privacy of a few, ages ago, but there is no way for me or others to know that those alleged prophet's really talked to God. And human history has witnessed hundreds of thousands of prophets. Most powerful religions that existed 4,000 years ago are dead today. Most, if not all, of the powerful religions of today will experience the same fate 2000, 5000 or 10000 years later. And, most likely, others -- suiting the ideas and understanding of the world in those times -- will take their place. The points I want to make is that:

1. There is no way to know whether the alleged prophets -- Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, or Joseph Smith -- ever truly talked to God, even if He/She exists. If God wants to punish us for certain actions, He/She must warn us about it in terms convincing to all of us, just like the fore-warnings that comes from our parents or authorities. Indeed, God's fore-warnings is expected to be more explicit, convincing and lasting.
2. God, after a while, allow us to commit things, even opposite things, that He/She had made capital punishments before (i.e., many teachings of the Old and New Testaments are conflicting). In other words, God wants us killed for certain actions of ours today, but will let us go scot-free for committing the same a few thousand years later.
3. What God(s) told us to follow 4000 years ago are a laughing-stock today, and what the God's of our time tell us to follow will, surely, be laughing-stocks for our future generations, who will come 5,000 year from now (Hasn't many teachings of Jesus are being mocked already, less we talk about those of Moses?).
4. God asked the Hebrews, a tiny part of humanity, to kill the adulterers by stoning some 3300 years ago, which he has even nullified already some 2000 years ago, but a big part of humanity probably still do not know about it. We humans are the same, and should deserve the same punishments for the same crime in God's eyes. But God is, ideally, killing the Hebrews for adultery for the last 3300 years, but letting a large part of humanity go scot-free for the same crime even today.

While this discussion can go on and on, let me conclude that we deserve much greater accountability and justification from the all-knowing and all-just God, if He/She wants to punish us for our actions. And He/She has certainly not set a solidly justified ground, not as yet, for punishing us in afterlife, even if there is one. If we compare the grounds human agencies -- such as parents or governments -- use for punishing us for certain actions of ours, God's ground for punishing us in a perceived afterlife is ludicrous. And the kinds of God's punishments in afterlife the religious people invoke make the agency of God not only ludicrous, but also make Him/Her immeasurably barbaric. A father or government punishes not only with proper forewarning but also in a limited measure, but God punishes infinitesimally and in the most barbaric manner (like burning alive for eternity) for a limited, often a petty crime, and even for non-crimes.

That being the truth about the idea of God's punishments in afterlife, I -- call me atheist or whatever -- refuse to bow to a barbaric God as believers present Him/Her to be, just like I will refuse to bow to my unjust father or government, and will embrace death in protest. He/She doesn't deserve my respect, neither of any other decent human being with civilized conscience.

If there is a God, it is He/She, Who has created us with the instincts and capability of doing good as well as bad. He/She can't punish us for the actions He/She has made us capable of committing.

Money That Mattered “the Prophet of Profit” Most

Zakat, paid during Ramadan, is said to earn Muslims 700 times more reward from Allah. In reality, it was Muhammad's ploy to fulfill his greed and strengthen his power.

It is Ramadan again, a month of Charity, of repentance and of 10 to 700 times rewards for every good deed for Muslims (Sahih Muslim). So, it is natural that Muslims get busy to grab those rewards during Ramadan.

There are many non-Muslim critics of Islam, who seek every opportunity to criticize and blame Islam. But they unanimously agree and appreciate the institution of ZAKAT in Islam, because it's a tradition of charity that benefits the poor (Muslims). This article will address the following questions:

* What caused Allah alias Muhammad to implement such ordinance about Zakat on his subjects?
* Whether Islam really deserves the credit?
* Who were the real beneficiaries of Zakat, while it was actually implemented?
* On whom the compulsory Zakat was imposed and implemented?
* What are its norms?
* Is there any chance for the Muslims to get those promised 700 time rewards?

Let us analyze these issues from Islamic sources itself.

Muhammad’s false Prophesy and the reality
Indonesia: Stampede during zakat distribution
Indonesia: Stampede during zakat during that
killed 23 people.

In a prophesy as recorded in Sahih Al-Bukhari 2:492-495, Muhammad ordered Muslims to pay Zakat without fail in order to grab its rewards from Allah before it is too late, because there will no poor Muslims to take Zakat from the rich as Allah was soon going to make every Muslim well off economically.

It's not difficult to understand how was false this prophesy of Muhammad! The Islamic world, poorest in the world, are full zakat-takers and unfortunately the number of Zakat-taking Muslims are drastically increasing every year. Stampedes during the zakat distribution become very common. For the past 10 years, hundreds of poor Muslims have died and got injured around the World while rushing to take zakat (see, 1. Indonesia: 23 die in stampede in zakat distribution; 2. Mecca: 7 dead in stampede trying to receive Zakat; 3. Bangladesh: 9 dead in stampede while rushing to receive zakat). This reality is patently opposite to what Muhammad had dreamt in the above-mentioned prophesy.

The present form of Zakat is not the one that Muhammad had imposed on Muslims 1,400 years earlier. He openly said to his followers to give the specified amount of zakat from the booty, which he used to give to them from the spoils of his plundering raids. He spent the collected Zakat on purchasing new slaves (soldiers) for using on the war-front, for purchasing weapons, and he also used the zakat fund to bride non-Muslim males, who opposed to his cult, to join him. His idea of Zakat helped him and his successors to a great extent to expand their rule in the neighboring territories.

Reasons for the implementation of Zakat by Muhammad, the first king of Islam

Once studied the life and brutal character of Muhammad, it is easy to ascertain the purpose of his first marriage at the age of 25 with the elderly rich businesswoman Khadeeja, 15 years his senior, which was her third marriage. It is obvious that Muhammad’s greedy mission started with this marriage and continued till his death at 63. In order to fulfil his greed, he compromised the desires of his youth to remain content with the old woman Khadeeja. But as soon as Khadeeja died, leaving her wealth to Muhammad, he was on a mission compensated his earlier sexual compromises and fulfilled his lust by marrying Aisha, aged only 6, and many other young girls about the age of sweet 16, during his remaining years, age 52 to 63.

Khadeeja died when Muhammad was 50, some 10 years after his alleged prophethood. After failing utterly in his 10 year mission, to conquer the peninsula in peaceful manner, Muhammad determined to change his policy and decided to “buy the power” by utilizing Khadeeja’s wealth. Khadeeja’s death opened the gateway for him to succeed in his mission. It is still unclear the reasons of very “timely” death of Khadeeja, whether her death is a natural one or a case of murder. Muhammad stayed 3 years in Mecca after the death of Khadeeja and purchased slaves, weapons and horses to attack the Meccans. When Meccans were repulsed by his abuses of their Gods, he sought the help of his maternal uncles in Medina, and determined to loot the caravans of Meccans with the help of his handful of gangster followers, whom he purchased or who had joined him, he took refuge there. After some of his successful piratical raids and the cruel way of murdering his Meccan kinfolks, Muhammad emerged as the Boss of a criminal Mafia group o Muslims. Through mass-murders and threats, he now had a complete hold on the scared Medinans, who had offered him asylum. With Medina within his clasp, Muhammad then wanted to expand his territory by strengthening his military power. And for that, he needed money. And collecting Zakat was the way to go.

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 1:24: Muhammad said, “People can save their lives and property from me, if they pay the compulsory zakat.”

Muhammad appointed his official representatives to collect Zakat.

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 2:482: Muhammad said, “Pay Zakat to the appointed representatives by me and pay 1/5th of the booty to (Allah) me.”

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 2:576: Muhammad appointed a man by name Al-Lutbiya to collect Zakat exclusively from Bani Sulaim and checked the account with him personally.

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 2:576: Muhammad and his successors appointed the official Zakat collectors and “trained” them with its norms.

Muhammad's shameful means of collecting Zakat from women

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 2:511, 524, 541:- Muhammad said, “Women! I have shown that the majority of the dwellers of Hell are women. So, give alms even from your ornaments to protect yourselves from Hell fire”. So they started giving their fore-arm bangles, ear-rings and necklaces.

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 2:486: Muhammad said, “A bald headed poisonous male-snake with two black spot over the eyes will circle the neck and bite the cheeks of the Muslim, whoever doesn’t pay the Zakat."

Muhammad didn’t spare even the poor shepherds from paying zakat. He imposed Zakat on the owners of Camels, cows and sheep too. He received animals as Zakat, according to their numbers. Muhammad didn’t accept the male-animals as Zakat. They should give him only the She-animals, so that Muhammad could milk them and breed them into multiples. Muhammad used to brand those animals, which came into his account through zakat, with heated iron-rods on their back.

SAHIH AL BUKHARI 2:439, 485: Muhammad said, “Whoever had camels or cows or sheep and didn’t pay their Zakat, will be given punishment by Allah, with the same animals, on the Day of Resurrection”.

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 2:534, 539: Muhammad, the first Sultan of Islam and his successors imposed Zakat on the owners of camels, cows and sheep.

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 2:535: Abu Bakr said, “Allah ordered Muhammad not to accept male goat as Zakat!”

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 2:578: Muhammad branded an identification mark on the Zakat camels, which he received, with heated iron rods.

Muhammad imposed 1/10th as Zakat on the yields of agricultural land and 1/5th as Zakat on buried wealth from the pre-Islamic period.

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 2:560: Muhammad said, “1/10th Zakat is compulsory on the yield of the agriculture land.”

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 2:575: Muhammad said, “1/5th Zakat is compulsory on buried wealth from the pre-Islamic period.”

Exemption from Zakat

Muhammad exempted horses and slaves (a kind of animal in Islam) from Zakat. It is because both were the very essential “things” in the battle-field. So, he spared the owners of horses and slaves for his own cause. He also kept women exempted from Zakat, similar to horses and slaves (i.e., he didn't collect women as zakat like he collected camels). With this, he satisfied his male-followers, who used to own many women as wives and slaves.

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 2:542: Muhammad said, “No Zakat is applicable, either on a horse or a slave belonging to a Muslim.”

Earlier and later economical status of Muhammad’s Companions

Some of Muhammad’s clever companions refuse to pay the ordained Zakat. On that, Muhammad felt that he has the rights to force them to pay a fraction of amount, which he has given to them by looting the Jews, Christians and pagans of the neighboring settlements. Muhammad was correct. Because, it was he, who made them rich, albeit at the cost and risk of their lives. Many hadiths reveals impoverished economic situations of his bandit companions prior to joining him and in the early days of Islam, but they became very rich and lived sophisticated, luxurious life during later years.

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 2:547: On Jameels refusal of paying Zakat, Muhammad said, “What made Ibn Jameel refuse to give Zakat, though he was a poor man, and was made wealthy by Allah and me?”

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 2:497: Narrated Abu Masood, “In the beginning of Islam, we worked hard and gave little grains as charity. Those were the days of poverty, and today some of us have one hundred thousand.”

SAHIH AL BUKHARI 2:323: Narrated Saad, “I was one of the 7, who had embraced Islam with Muhammad, and we had nothing to eat then, except the leaves of the Habula tree, so that our stool used to be similar to that of sheep.”

How Muhammad spent the enormous wealth which he obtained from Zakat?

1. Muhammad purchased a number of slaves (to be engaged in his piratical attacks). (Quran 9:60)
2. Muhammad intentionally bribed the Zakat amount to the rebellious non-Muslims, who hated him severely, to draw their hearts closer to his cult, and succeeded in his mission. (SAHIH MUSLIM 2:752, 4:1806)
3. He refused to help those, who are Muslims for the namesake, i.e. those, who refused to go with him for jihad. (Fath Al-Bari 3:399)
4. He paid salaries from the Zakat wealth to those, who collect alms. (Quran 9:60)

Continuation of desert piracy after Muhammad’s death

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 2:534/539: After the death of Muhammad, Bedouins of the desert felt liberated from the tyranny and oppression of the desert-pirate leader, Muhammad. But their joyful days were limited. Abu Bakr, the first Caliph of Islam, brought them into subjugation again through heavy bloodbath (Battle of Ridda or Apostasy). Islamic tyranny continued forever.

SAHIH AL-BUKHARI 2:536: During his regime, Abu Bakr said, “If the Muslims stop paying the She-Kid along with their Zakat as they were paid to Muhammad, I will fight with them for it.”

On that Omer said, “It was nothing but Allah, who opened Abu Bakr’s chest to fight the Muslims (on She-Kid business).”

CONCLUSION: If the above-mentioned Quranic verses and Hadiths are the basis of Zakat, then how come Muslims dream about the 700 times reward from their Allah, alias Muhammad. From the above hadiths, it is crystal clear that it was only Muhammad, who had profited 700 times through zakat.

Is Reformation of Islam Possible?

The idea of reforming Islam is not new. Islam cannot be reformed. Keep in mind that Islam claims that it is the perfect eternal faith for mankind. Splits have occurred and will continue to occur in Islam. Yet, reformation has not happened in nearly 1400 years and is not going to happen. Islam is carved in granite, just the way it is. No change. Allah's book is sealed.

About the only universal agreement that exists among Islamic authorities is that every word of the Qur’an is the word of Allah and is not subject to human modification, ever. The ‘Hadith’ also enjoys a similar sacrosanct standing. And of course, the faithful Muhammad’s conduct as recorded in the Sunna is the model to be emulated. Hence, one can pick and choose, but one cannot discard or revise any part of the scripture. For this reason a Martin Luther type reformation has not happened and will not likely ever happen within Islam.

Numerous people have tried it in every imaginable way. The Mu’tazelis tried it, the Sufis tried it and hundreds of old and new schools tried it and they all failed. Islam is not reform-able for at least the following reasons:

* At the heart of the problem is the Quran, Islam’s sacred book, considered as a literally perfect and the immutable words of Allah.

* Islam is a perfect religion:

Quran 5:3: Today have I perfected your religious law for you, and have bestowed upon you the full measure of My blessings, and willed that self-surrender unto Me shall be your religion.

How can fallible limited humans possibly reform or improve the handiwork of the all-knowing, all-wise author of the universe?

* Freedoms of all forms are anathema to Islam that is squarely based on total submission to the dictates and will of Allah. Muslims must obey Allah and His Messenger:

Quran 33:36: And it behoves not a believing man and a believing woman that they should have any choice in their matter when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter; and whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he surely strays off a manifest straying.

* Violence is part and parcel of Islam.

Quran 2: 216: Fighting is ordained for you, even though it be hateful to you; but it may well be that you hate a thing the while it is good for you, and it may well be that you love a thing the while it is bad for you: and God knows, whereas you do not know.

* Reforming Islam requires discarding Shari’a, but also purging the Quran itself from enormous suras that are not only patently false, but totally repugnant to a civilized humanity. This line of thinking, to sanitize Islam is explicitly forbidden in the Quran:

Quran 2:85: Do you, then, believe in some parts of the divine writ and deny the truth of other parts? What, then, could be the reward of those among you who do such things but ignominy in the life of this world and, on the Day of Resurrection; they will be consigned to most grievous suffering? For God is not unmindful of what you do.

* Islam is a super religion:

Muslims consider Islam, a super-religion and the final religion of Allah. Judaism and Christianity are the only other two religions that are granted a grudging minimal recognition by Islam. All other religions and those without religion are blasphemy and blasphemous. In short, Islam is not reform-able. Reforming Islam requires purging of its sacred book, the Quran. By so doing, then, we have a different religion, not Islam.

Let us look at some other points by explicit provisions of the Quran:

• Islam is misogynist. Men are superior to women. Women are to obey men and are to be beaten when they disobey or misbehave.
• Islam is racist. The Quran stipulates that the Arabs are superior to all others and it clearly condones slavery. It explicitly stipulates discriminatory laws for slaves.
• Islam denounces other belief systems and marginally recognizes the validity of only two religions, Judaism and Christianity.
• Islam is violent. It not only condones jihad, it recommends it and promises great reward for the jihadist.
• Islam is already splintered in a number of major sects and innumerable numbers of secondary sects that harbor huge disagreement and animosity toward one another as well as toward all infidels.
• Those who claim that they want to reform Islam, in fact, they want to transform it by stripping it from a great many provisions that are anathema to civilized humanity. These people are in fact trying to make a new religion out of the old with no divine authority that supposedly bestowed upon Muhammad to form and launch his religion.

Religious high authorities play a critical role in steering the masses toward or away from hate. The late Pope’s public pronouncement, for instance, absolving the Jews as the Christ killers has reduced anti-Semitism among the rank and file Christians. Fatwas—religious decrees—by Islamic Muftis and Ayatollahs carry considerable weight with their respective followers. Sadly, most decrees and adjudications of these high Islamic authorities are exclusionary and even hostile toward the out-groups.

These high divines are the suppliers of opinions as well as the teachers of the rank and file clergy who take the same ideas to the masses in villages and cities. Madrassas in Pakistan, schools in Saudi Arabia and Maktabs—religious schools—in Iran, as well as numberless mosques serve as places where the disease of hate can be transmitted with considerable success to the just too willing believers.

In Islam’s theocracy, religious authority is conferred by an informal consensus of the peer group. One becomes an Ayatollah, for instance, by demonstrating to other ayatollahs his undeviating devotion to the dogma they hold. If one deviates from the accepted line, he is not likely to make a village mullah, much less an Ayatollah. This is a systemic problem that is not amenable to change. It is a pathological theological inbreeding.

Religions in general are sources of energy. The energy can achieve magnificent things or destroy anything. It is up to us to put religion to good use, as people have done for millennia, and to avoid using it as a weapon of death and destruction—again, as people have done so for millennia.

In conclusion, Islam is not only divided, it is shattered. It is in shambles, long past fixing itself, much less ruling the rest of the world. It is time that Muslims, those who consider themselves good and peaceful, as well as those who want us to accept their ideology of barbarism at the point of the sword, to take the fateful step and join the free and emancipated family of humanity. There is no going back. Barbarism is in our past.

---

Amil Imani is the author of the riveting book Obama Meets Ahmadinejad and the upcoming thriller Operation Persian Gulf.

Tariq Ramadan and Cultural Jihad

On July 27, 2011, at the Hyatt Regency Hotel, in Richardson, Texas, the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Dallas chapter, featured Dr. Tariq Ramadan, a highly controversial Islamic scholar, for their annual fundraising to Support Religious Freedom & Sharia Awareness.

ICNA, an offshoot of the Muslim Students' Association (MSA), was founded by Muslim immigrants from the Indian subcontinent, and its members are mostly South Asian descent, primarily Pakistanis, Bengalis and Indians. Among many of its goals, "shall be to seek the pleasure of Allah through the struggle of Iqamat-ud-Deen [establishment of the Islamic system of life] as spelled out in the Quran and the Sunnah of [Muhammad]."

Steven Emerson and the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) have documented the fact that ICNA is a militant Islamic fundamentalist organization, and supports terrorism. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has accused ICNA of inviting extremist and anti-Semitic speakers to its conferences that serve as platforms for extremist views. ICNA has also put up huge billboards, festooning major highways, such as the one along Highway 101 and Tully Road in San Jose, California, with crafty messages. Bold letters on the billboard proclaim: Islam You Deserve to Know. A toll-free number, 1-877-WhyIslam and website, WhyIslam.org beckon the public to get the real scoop about the “religion of peace” with its ceaseless violent record from its inception to this day.

Dr. Ramadan’s presence could have gone relatively unnoticed in the Dallas Metroplex, except for the man’s lengthy record of subversive campaigns and activities. Tariq was banned from the United States for six-years (a visa restriction lifted last January by Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton).

Why is he welcomed again in this country? Has he mended his ways? Not a chance. Secretary Clinton, for whatever reasons, has decided to let the man come and carry on with his dangerous work.

Tariq Ramadan is a faithful flag bearer to the violent Islamic order of the Muslim Brotherhood, founded by his grandfather, Hassan al-Banna. Tariq’s U.S. visa was originally revoked due to his connections to Islamic terrorism. A devoted champion of the religion of peace that he is, Ramadan is uncompromisingly committed to the elimination of the State of Israel, and not necessarily by peaceful means. This religion of peace that Ramadan and his ilk promote, rides at the tip of the sword. Peace, in Islamist’s terms offers no room for negotiations or live and let live.

The tumultuous road to get into the event aside, the star performer, Ramadan, at the meeting, lived up to the expectation of the rabid rank-and-file Islamist by exhorting the faithful to carry out their duty of what I call “Soft Jihad,” and others term it “Cultural Jihad,” in the United States. Soft Jihad is practiced where the sword jihad is not advisable, where Muslims are not strong enough to unsheathe their sword, where the true nature of Islam is exposed and when the general public would likely stamp them out.

A critical tool of soft jihad, Ramadan outlined, involves penetrations of the American educational system, by use of means such as Da’wa-a religious duty of each Muslim to convert non-Muslims in order to strengthen the Islamic Ummah.

Freedom of belief is a treasured feature of enlightened societies where different views clash in the marketplace of free ideas and vie for acceptability without resort to deception, dissimulation or violence. Ideas and beliefs sink or survive on merit as judged by the public.

In Islam, that is not the case. To Muslims, there is no need for various ideas and beliefs to contest on merit. Muhammad has brought the perfect belief system directly from Allah. A flawless belief that is the best and good for eternity. To Muslims, people are like children. They are incapable of deciding these weighty matters and they should accept the faith of Allah like a patient should take a medicine prescribed by an infallible physician, no matter how unpalatable the medicine may be.

Sugarcoating of Islam is, therefore, universally practiced, these self-described doctors of Islamic religion. They keep ranting about the importance of accepting things on faith, denigrate reason, dangle carrots and sticks, and demand unconditional surrender in return for guaranteed bliss and salvation. The masses toe the line, support the clergy’s lavish parasitic lifestyle and the charade continues. It works like a charm. Use the Jihad of the Sword when it can and use the Soft Jihad until the sword can be unsheathed to finish the job. And don’t forget, the end justifies any and all means, Ramadan and company keep on preaching to the hordes.

Islam is the most successful fraud in the history of humanity and it is a great success. Millions of mullahs and imams keep the fraud going and over a billion and a half of the faithful pay for it. They pay in funds, labor and even life, for the IOUs issued to them by the likes of Ramadan who glide through life without breaking a sweat for earning their daily bread.

Ramadan and his co-lice, should be given credit, not only for their part in this well-acted play, but also for demanding their flock to play; namely, deception, dissimulation, a laundered version of Islam, and even outright lies.

Ramadan, for instance, never presents the naked face of Islam. He never speaks of the Islam that thrives on hate, throws acid in the face of women who fail to don the hijab or girls going to school; flogging people for sporting non-Islamic haircuts, stoning to death, violators of sexual norms and other forms of Islamic brutalities such as Honor Killing. He never talks about institutionalized pedophilia in Islam. The fact that Muhammad “married” a six year old and consummated the marriage when Ayesha was only nine, when he himself was pushing sixty.

Confronted with this repulsive behavior of the founder of their perfect religion, a few exercise the defense mechanism of denial and say it did not happen, dismissing their own most trusted historical record. Some say that it wasn’t exactly marriage. It was a politically expedient act, an act of the perfect emissary of Allah. Then we have numerous instances of the same child molestation happening in the Islamic world ever since the example set by Muhammad. Marriage of pre-pubescent girls to older men. Just the other day Dr. Salih bin Fawzan, a prominent cleric and member of Saudi Arabia’s highest religious council, issued a fatwa proclaiming that there is no minimum age for marriage, and that girls can be married “even if they are in the cradle.”

This is only one of numerous shameful and barbaric provisions of the Islamic Sharia that Ramadan and other Soft Jihadists want to transplant to America. Islam is a great deal for the savage sexually driven male while a true bondage for women who seek their right to equality with men.

To this day, the state of Saudi Arabia, the custodian of the twin holy cities of Islam and purportedly a shining example of an Islamic society, forbids women from driving automobiles. And now this is the cult that Ramadan and company want to import to America and impose it on all of us, as they have successfully done to parts of Europe.

Misogynist practices aside, Islam Sharia provisions make any civilized human recoil with horror.

He defends Islam with the same mantra of “We against Them,” “We the righteous against the heathens,” “We the servants submissive of the Great Allah against the rebellious enemies of Allah.” To Islam, a non-Muslim is a combatant against Allah and he is fair game to be subjugated and killed. Ramadan conveniently sidesteps this and other features of this discriminatory cult.

Tariq Ramadan claims Muhammad was the most perfect man, the kind of saintly man that each and every Muslim should adulate and aspire to follow. On the top of his list is the desire to lead their lives in such a way that would please Allah, if they can.

Ramadan speaks of Muhammad’s perseverance in preaching to the Meccans’ his dogma that seemed more like a confused verbiage of a hallucinatory man that revelation from the one and only super-god Allah. Ramadan asked the Muslim community to spread the word of Islam in America, even if they face stiff resistance as the Prophet Muhammad faced stiff resistance in Mecca, at first. Muhammad, during his Mecca years, was ridiculed for his confused sayings by his own tribe of Quraish. He was called “shaeron majnoon”—crazed poet.

The death of his first wife and wealthy employer Khadija left Muhammad even more vulnerable to the ridicule and harassment of the Meccans. He fled from Mecca for Medina and in the relative safety of that city with a large tolerant Jewish community, Muhammad found more people willing to join his clique.

Once in Medina, Muhammad hit on a most powerful formula for success. He justified everything by claiming that Allah wants it this way. And Allah was nothing to trifle with. He held the key to the most magnificent paradise as well as to a dreadful hell. The duty of every good Muslim became unquestioning obedience to everything that Muhammad said and wished. Muhammad became Allah’s gatekeeper to paradise and hell.

Muhammad’s formula worked magic with the Bedouins of Arabia who thrived on robbery and killing. His religion spread like a pandemic disease in no time at all.

As Muhammad gathered more and more followers, he turned on the Jewish community of Medina, killed the men, plundered their belongings, and captured their women and children as slaves. That was the birth of Soft Jihad. Be meek and deceptive first, until you gather enough power then unsheathe the sword. It worked then and it is working today.

And here we are in the 21st -century facing the onslaught of the Islamists and a “cultural jihadist” like Tariq Ramadan. Tariq Ramadan and other Islamic apologists cover a wide spectrum. Ramadan said, “Enshallah, our future in the West is going to be positive. We are not here by accident. We are here to reassess the essence of our religion.” He blamed Tea Party activists and conservatives for giving Islam a bad name. You don’t need the Tea Party, Ramadan, to give Islam a bad name. Islam is its own bad name and mired in bad deeds.

It is repugnant, yet understandable that Ramadan goes around and sings the praises of Islam in low and high notes and every other note that he can disguise and improvise. He makes a very good living at it. What is baffling is some very high-ranking non-Muslims, for whatever reason, helped launder Islam and present it as what it really is not. Former President George W. Bush, for one, did a great disservice on several occasions by exonerating Islam from the crimes of radical Muslims by attributing the horrific violence committed under the banner of Islam to a small band of extremists. The President’s assertion was either based on ignorance of the facts about Islam or his attempt at political correctness. In any event, truth was sacrificed and the public continued to cling to the false notion that Islam is a peaceful religion. People who dare to disclose the true nature of Islam run the risk of being castigated as bigots and hate-mongers. Some businesses are subjected to boycotts and individuals are sued.

Ramadan should know better, and he most certainly does: the so-called small band of Islamic extremists is the true face of Islam.

Hence, it is a fact that Islam is misrepresented, as Ramadan likes to claim. It is misrepresented by people like himself as well as by non-Muslim individuals and institutions who are generously rewarded by the modern day Islamic conquerors. This time around Muslims are using the immense petrodollar they extract from oil-addicted non-Muslims. The sword is temporarily replaced by just as deadly a weapon—the petrodollar. Before long, the Muslims aim to add a more deadly modern version of the sword—the Islamic bomb.

Lastly and most dangerously, Islam has a powerful unwitting ally in the masses of good-hearted gullible Americans who bend over backwards protecting the long cherished principle of religious freedom. And it is this magnificent provision of our society that makes Hillary Clinton reissue a visa to likes of Ramadan to come and exploit the benign provisions of a benevolent system for establishing Islamic enslavement.

"Freedom is never more than one generation from extinction," said Ronald Reagan. We do well to remember that.

---

Sacred Ramadan: The Month of Jihad

The holy fasting month in Islam, the Ramadan, starts today. It's a month Muslims claim to be meant for inculcating self-restraint, spirituality and for comprehending the pain of the less fortunate in society. But our author Mirza Ghalib has already told us that for the Saudis, the kins of the holy prophet, Ramadan is a month of fun, frolicking, and indulgence. And historically Ramadan was born as a month of Jihad and the most illustrious Jihad wars of Islam -- from the Battle of Badr to that of Tours (732) to the initiation of Jihad for the independence of Pakistan (1946-47) --- were all conducted in sacred Ramadan. Following two articles in our site would help our new readers understand what Ramadan is all about.

• How Ramadan and Eid became Noble Rituals in Islam
  
• Ramadan Jihad and the Scholars' Ignorance