NEVER FORGET 9/11 and Those who Danced in the Streets

2011-09-11T18:58:00.001-05:00

Never forget, this attack was done in the name of ALLAH.

10 years after 9/11, have we changed?…yes we have a Muslim born FÜHRER…?”INSANITY” Islam is winning!!!… and building a VICTORY MOSQUE at Ground Zero.
Islam and Sharia Law are coming to America!!
America is already threatened to become an Islamic country.
First of all most Americans do not understand what is happening. They also do not understand that their own Government is turning the USA into an Islamic nation. If anyone is going to stop the Islamification of America it will be too little, too late. Some Americans will realize this eventually, and then some of them may start rebelling, burning down mosques in their neighborhoods, driving out or killing Muslims. Those people who try to stop it in their own neighborhoods will be shot or jailed.
And if it finally does becomes plain to the people what is going on, by that time Islam will be so entrenched in the USA that the people will look to the American Government to save them – but it won’t because it’s the Government that caused it to happen in the first place.
The vast majority of people will do nothing at all except “go along to get along” – either convert to Islam or become Dhimmis under Sharia Law.
And that is how the US is going to become an Islamic country.

Islam is NOT a religion, it’s a Radical-Ideology!

Those pieces of CRAP were dancing in the Streets.

You want to see Islam in practice? Just see the video below. These people are just pure Evil!

Remembering 9/11 Ten Years on

2011-09-11T10:03:00.000-05:00

Today is the 10^th anniversary of the dastardly attacks on America by Islamic terrorists on September 11, 2001. More people have died in attacks by Islamic militants around the world than Americans since 9/11. It was, therefore, not an attack on America alone, but it was an attack on our collective progressive humanity globally.

Today is, therefore, an occasion to remember those, who perished in the 9/11 attacks, as well as those who have become victim of Islamic terrorism around the world over these years. It’s also an occasion to assess how we have progressed in battle against Islam’s assault on humanity.

The result-card is not very encouraging. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have lingered longer on than any major war in modern history; The United States alone has spent 4 trillion in those wars, but little real success has been achieved. As far as taming Islamic radicalism is concerned, those wars have achieved little. Arab Springs in the Middle East and North Africa are becoming new springboards for fuelling Islamic radicalism further. In the battle fields, we have achieved nothing except spending colossus sum of money, and wasting thousands of valuable lives.

But we can only measure some success in the battle of ideas, in the front of truth-telling about Islam. The world is much more aware today about where lies the root of Islamic radicalism and terror. Truth-telling about Islam over past years has enlightened large number of Muslims about the troubles with Islam. The number of Muslim apostates are growing at an exponential rate. If we can hold on for another ten years and continue the battle of truth-telling about Islam, we will be standing a very strong ground to fight and bring down Islam.

Humanity’s ultimate salvation in face of Islam’s long-lasting assault doesn’t lie in the battlefields of Iraq or Afghanistan, not in guns, tanks, drones, bombs or even nuclear weapons. It lies in the battle of enlightening the Muslim mind. And we have made considerable progress. Let us hope that we can press on and let not the sacrifice of victims of the 9/11 attacks, as well as of those who have fallen victim to Islam since its founding, go waste.

Will Islam Kill Multiculturalism, the Greatest Experiment of Human History?

2011-09-10T10:12:00.000-05:00

YES, ISLAM WILL BE THE DEATH-KNELL OF MULTICULTURALISM

Multiculturalism -- Watch out for your nemesis, Islam

The Enlightened modern West has created the Greatest Civilization humanity is yet to know. We have invited into our countries tens of millions of people from 5200 different nations, tribes, clans, ethnic origins, religions, religious sects etc. They emigrate and live their lives in freedom and equality. They practice their customs and religion without interference. We grant them full protection of the Rule of Law. Citizenship is offered with very few, if any, restrictions. Unlike the Roman Empire which used to bring people acquired by conquest to their cities as slaves, the modern West has welcomed immigrants as free and dignified residents and citizens from all corners of the world. Such an integration of humanity on such a grand scale has never been attempted in the history of mankind.

It is rightfully stated that the greatest generation was the generation that fought the Second World War. As citizen soldiers, they came from the farms, towns, villages, cities aged 17, 18, 19 … to sacrifice their lives to save our civilization from the threat of Nazi/Fascist racial dictatorships. Furthermore, after that great victory, these patriots were immediately plunged into defending the freedom of Western Civilization from the totalitarian ideology of Communism.

WE, their descendents, by bringing together the people of the world into our cities, neighborhoods and schools, are the next great generation in history. The evolution of mankind has instilled in us a FEAR of other humans, who are different from us – different races, tribes, religions. This survival mechanism was instilled through millions of years of evolution. Overcoming this deeply ingrained fear of the different other was never easy. Our willingness to attempt this great project – the integration of the world – is the greatest endeavor of our time. It is both heroic and historic.

During the Cold War, we welcomed millions of East Europeans who fled Communism for democracy and freedom. At no time did we ever have to worry about them blowing up planes or buses and subways. They brought their culture/customs and integrated into our society. We have invited millions of Asian peoples to live as equal citizens offering them and their children the American dream. Hispanics have poured into the country in huge numbers bringing with them their unique culture. Although there are problems with this massive influx, Hispanics do not pose a danger to democracy and freedom. They are not a threat to the constitution or the rule of law. Hispanics will integrate into the United States and the best of their culture will merge with the existing culture making it stronger and better. There are millions of Hindus and Buddhists living in the West worshipping in their temples in total equality and freedom.

Unfortunately, there are some amongst these invited others, who -- instead of getting down on their hands and knees and kiss the soil of their new homeland, instead of welcoming with open arms the freedom and democracy, equality and human rights, being offered to them -- want to destroy the very foundation of Western Civilization. It need not mention that this peculiar group of immigrants are Muslims, who have emigrated to the West not to embrace it as such, but with a colonist mindset, who want to conquer our lands by numbers or any other means so as to destroy our democracy and freedom and the rule of law, and imposed their worldview and the Islamic rule of Sharia Law upon us all. All peoples in the country must either convert to Islam, or be subjugated to it and adopt the superiority of the Muslim people and culture. That certainly kill Multiculturalism experiment!

To understand the destruction Islam has wrought on the world, the obliteration of peoples and cultures, we only have to look at the conquest of Persia in the 7^th century, one among the top-two great civilizations of the time. The Persians were destroyed as a people. Their culture was laid to waste. Their religion Zoroastrianism was decimated from millions to 20,000 adherents. Persians are a pathetic shadow of their conquered ancestors.

Before, there was a West and there was an East. Muslims fell upon the East in a bloody onslaught unmatched in history. Some 80 million Hindus and 10 million Buddhists perished in the Islamic holocaust. Before, there was a West and there was a South. Muslims destroyed the great black civilizations of Africa. Some 120 million blacks were murdered by their Muslim conquerors. Before there was a West and there was a Middle East that was heavily Christianized. From Egypt to Iraq, Syria to Lebanon, to Turkey -- 60 million Christians were slaughtered and the survivors forced to live in dhimmi subjugation. And the West was not left untouched either. Islam put its greatest effort at destroying the West, but failed – Islam’s only past failure. But Islam may just succeed in achieving the same, in making good of its past failures vis-à-vis the West, if we fail to protect and defend our democracy.

MULTICULTURALISM IS NOT THE PROBLEM, ISLAM IS!

Today, we no longer have to worry about Islamic armies invading the West. While most Westerners and non-Muslims may feel that Islamic terrorism, probably a nuclear one, is the greatest danger of Islam we face today, greater is the danger that we may lose our freedoms bit by bit through the slow process of Islamification of our polity and way of life. Thus, our generation today are engaged in another deadly struggle to defend Western Civilization against the onslaught of the 7^th century ideology of barbaric Islam, based on the Quran. This battle is waged by our enemy quietly which our people, our politicians and the military have no clue about or are just ignoring.

It is high time for us to acknowledge and face the cold, hard reality that Islam is an antithetical ideology that threatens our democracy and freedom. Our society is slowly getting assimilated to Islam; Muslims are not assimilating into our democracy and freedom. It is not us who must change. Democracy and freedom, equality of all peoples, the rule of law, and our democratic constitution are non-negotiable. We must demand that Muslims abandon Islam or embrace our secular ethos of the separation of religion and state. We don’t have to try to be Mr. Nice Guy and be politically correct. We must unabashedly and resolutely demand this from whoever comes to our shore.

But our leaders, so far, have failed in demanding that. And by so doing, the West is paving its own downfall. Through the fear of offending others, through appeasement -- the West is creating the prospect of a greater war or the destruction of our civilization. In this context, Winston Churchill’s House of Commons speech on May 2, 1935 is relevant:

“Want of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong - these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history.”

It is foresight and resolve like that of Churchill’s which helped us win the Second World War against the Nazis. We could learn similar lesson from the West’s Cold War against Communist Russia that was an “Evil Empire” by Ronald Reagan.

We must also remember and preferably understand that Islam is greater and more resolute enemy than others, and no less resolve and straightforwardness will work against it. If we fail in that, it is not only the greatest experiment of Multiculturalism, but also the greatest achievements of human civilization – our liberty, democracy and human rights – will all be lost.

Jake Neuman is the author of “Islam and Sharia Law Are Treason: Jihad Is Treason” (free download). His book ISLAM -- EVIL IN THE NAME OF GOD was banned in Malaysia.

The Audacity of Muslims in the USA

2011-09-10T10:08:00.000-05:00

Muslims are trampling upon the US flags on American streets with the shouts of "Allahu Akbar", and even replacing American flag with the Saudi flags in educational institutions....

On one evening, I was searching for videos in Youtube to find out how Islam is progressing in America. Suddenly, I landed upon a video, entitled “Muslims in America”. The audacity of Muslims living in the US amazed me.

The video shows a demonstration by US Muslims against the USA. The US national flag are seen to be trampled upon by Muslim protesters with the shouts of “Allahu Akbar”, “La Ilaha Illalah, Muhammadur Rasullah” and so on. White Americans are seen to quietly watch the show, none protesting the disgrace of their national flag. While this is possibly covered under the freedom of expression in Western countries, it nonetheless reflects upon the attitude and audacity of Muslims, despite small mainly immigrant community in America.

I have been amazed to see another incident, reported by the Daily Mail on 6 Sept. 2011, that took place in an elementary school in Colorado, where someone, most probably a Muslim, had lowered the American national flag and a Saudi flag was placed above the US flag.

Someone has replaced and lowered the American flag with the flag of Saudi Arabia.

The US won the Cold War with the fall of communism in Soviet Russia and emerged as the lone superpower in the world. But in the face of Muslim audacity, superpower America look like a paper tiger, whose honor and dignity is trampled upon by its own Muslim residents.

Arif Alikhan

Saudi flag above American flag in Colorado school

In his article, “America sleep tight! The foxes are guarding the hen house”, Ali Sina describes how the important US departments, like the Department of Homeland security, are going under the grip of devout Muslims. He writes, “The wolves will be herding the sheep! … Obama and Janet Napolitano appointed Arif Alikhan, a devout Muslim, as Assistant Secretary for Policy Development. DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swore in Kareem Shora, a devout Muslim, who was born in Damascus, Syria, as ADC National Executive Director as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC). ... Has anyone ever heard a new government official being identified as a devout Catholic, a devout Jew or a devout Protestant…?”

So, there is no doubt that these developments encourage the Muslims for intensify their jihadi activities.

An Islamic Strategy - HOW TO USE AMERICA versus AMERICA

2011-09-09T18:35:00.003-05:00

Europe have recently witnessed riots and protests from the Muslim immigrants who have legally entered their country. The policy is simple and well tried and successful … as it has been in the case of India.The ideology of Islam is to Islamise all the countries of the world.

They are attacking America now…How they will invade America is explained as follows.

The Strategy
You may have noticed, that the media in the US is pro-Islamist these days. Any American who is vocal about his/her concerns for the well being of this great nation, is labeled as communal….and his argument is dismissed as “Islamophobia” . You will realize how they have a complete hold on the media. This is the first step.
The next step is to get into the judicial and political system of the country. While the media is used to brainwash people regarding the plight of minority Muslims, a lot of money is also spent to hire local Americans (in media and politics) who fight for the equal rights and religious rights of Muslim minorities. The local Americans are however those people who try to project the liberal side of America. The law and the political system is used to make this convenient. Amendments are made in the law of the land to legally have a representative of Muslims in the country’s parliament.
The next step is to use the law to declare innocent those Muslims who are under suspicion of terrorist acts or have been convicted and are serving a sentence, or are under trial. The law here is again used to relieve them of sentences and they are declared innocent. In this process, people who were responsible (cops, judges, lawyers, etc) for arresting these criminals, the ones who risked their lives to book the guilty are humiliated by either being dismissed from their duty and/or they are accused of falsely implicating muslims as criminals.
At the same time, they use their influence to distort the history of the country. Claims are made that Islam became popular because it is a religion of peace. History books in schools and colleges have chapters singing praises of how Islamic rulers and clerics influenced your country in a positive manner. However, the original historical heroes of the country who contributed and built the nation are projected in poor light. This is done to humiliate the local people of everything that they have been so proud of in the history of that nation. Watch out. It won’t be long before the Muslims claim that America was originally an Islamic country, and people of other faiths are actually immigrants so they should either leave America or revert to Islam.

As the number of Muslims grow in a country, their very next step is to present themselves as a vote bank. No politician would like to lose a large vote bank. This is how they get political backing. The Muslims use this as a tool to make amendments in the law of the land once they have their representative in the parliament.
Another aspect that is really worked hard upon is the ‘conversion to Islam’ factor. Islam is glamorized. False propaganda is circulated where they claim that thousands and thousands of people are converting to Islam. You will hear their propaganda that Islam is spreading like wild fire and people are submitting to Islam. Actually the fact is, that after 9/11 many Muslims have given up Islam and converted to other religions because they were ashamed of being Muslims and following the ideology of destruction and hate (this aspect is however never highlighted by them). In the US itself there are several organizations that have ex-Muslims who are educating the rest of the world about the real ideology of Islam. See YouTube. You will find several videos showing people converting to Islam, but the videos showing Muslims converting to other religions are flagged and removed. Please Google for these organizations that have ex-Muslims. Their statements should be valid enough for anyone to wake up.

The War Today
A majority of people who are being converted into Islam these days in USA are the African Americans….especially those from the ghettos and with criminal backgrounds. This is being done on purpose. Also being targeted are the illegal Mexican immigrants. Islamist know the history of America and how the Africans came to USA. These people are shown “Islam as a religion of tolerance and brotherhood”. They are told, “they will regain their pride and dignity if they embrace Islam. Islam will give them the equality that the white Americans always denied them and suppressed them”. Using Islam as a tool, these converts are now being brainwashed into believing that they must fight the Jihad for Allah. They will use the frustrations of African Americans against the White Americans. This is how they are going to use America versus America in their Jihad!!!

This is war, my friends……….this IS “THE WAR”.

Open your eyes….before it is too late. ?

What if the Muslims win the 3rd World War (their Global Jihad)?

2011-09-08T15:17:00.000-05:00

Before we get down to this subject let us make it clear that we are opposed to all forms of fanaticism - religious or otherwise. While all fanaticism is negative; fanaticism that is based on religion is the most virulent and among the fanatics of various religions, the Muslims are the most violent and cruel.

The impelling reason to focus on Muslims is that they are psychologically the most organized worldwide into one community 'Ummah'. Again it is they who are day-by-day becoming a threat to world peace. Hence we look at the scenario in the event of the remote possibility of an Islamic victory over the rest of the world in an unfortunate but probable Third World War.

In this scenario people all across the world would be given a choice of submitting to Islam or be treated as second class citizens (by wearing a badge to identify themselves as non-Muslims as is being done today in that "ideal" Islamic society of Taliban ruled Afghanistan). In addition they would have to pay the penal tax (Jaziya) to the Muslim rulers. The honour of their womenfolk would always be in danger of being violated by the Mujahideen and Ghazis (Islamic warriors). The lives of non-Muslims would always be in peril and at the mercy of the whims of the Muslim rulers, who would have a perpetual and perennial hatred of the non-Muslims.

In addition to this day-to-day real-life scenario, in the regular cases of the waves of more acute fanaticism that would sweep the world ruled only by Muslims; the non-Muslims would be given the choice of embracing Islam or be killed by the more zealous among the fanatical Muslim rulers of the globe. This possibility is based on the experiences today in different parts of the globe under Muslim rule and also from other parts of the globe that came under the intermittent sway of the Islamic armies in the 14 centuries since the year 632 C.E., like Spain, Portugal, Greece, Serbia and Kosovo, Croatia, Albania, Romania, Bulgaria, et al.

On the contrary if, during the Islamic rule all across the globe, we gave up our religions (or lack of religion) and embraced Islam, the scenario would be like this:

1) Our role-models would be cruel war-mongers who would keep having bloody fights with each other even after the entire world population is converted to Islam.

This is based on the observed fact today that a majority of the Muslims (who take to the streets) across many countries, lionize and idolize extremists and war-mongers like Osama Bin Laden, Ayman Zawahiri, Samir Kuntar, Zarqawi, et al, but not progressive and constructive reformers like Ataturk or the former King Amanullah of Afghanistan.

2)We would be living in theocratic dictatorship all across the world. There would be no democracy, no elections and no public accountability for any act. The only arbiter would be the Quranic prescriptions for all times in the future.

This is so since today most of the Muslim majority countries cannot sustain democracies. Except Turkey, and Egypt, no Muslim majority country has a sustained democratic tradition. But most Muslim populations look up upon Islamic dictatorships or monarchies.

The list of such theocratic dictatorships would include Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Jordan (despotic monarchies), Syria, Iraq, Chad, (dictatorships) Iran (nominal democracy under strain from clerics), Kuwait (nominal democracy under emirate), UAE, North Yemen (and occupied South Yemen which had a sort of democratic set up earlier), Libya, Sudan, Tunisia, Algeria (Military rule of secularized military), Malaysia (civilian dictatorship of Mahathir Mohammed), Indonesia (fledgling democracy), Pakistan, Bangladesh (spells of democratic rule and military dictatorships), Central African Republic (kingdom of former "Emperor"; Bokassa), Uganda (a Christian majority country that had a taste of Islamic dictatorship under Idi Amin), Afghanistan (theocratic dictatorship of the Taliban), etc.

3) There would be ill-treatment of women, Women would not be allowed to have an education, pursue any career. Men would be forced to wear turbans and grow beards.

This possibility is based on the observation today that a majority of the Muslim countries do not give equal rights to women like education, free-movement, driving, apparel, and even participation in mass-prayers in the mosques alongside their menfolk, (no doubt the scripture will be quoted to explain this, but this is the reality). The hijab, Chador or burqua (veil and full length gown) for women is still a common feature in Islamic societies.

In the ideal Islamic society of Talibanized Afghnaistan adult men are forced to grow a beard and wear the prescribed Islamic dress, they cannot sport normal (Western) hairstyles and even students above the age of three are forced to wear turbans.

4) We would have to send our kids to get the highly jaundiced and narrow scrap of education in religious schools that would teach only the Quran.

This is based on the observation today that a majority of the devout Muslims in the Islamic world prefer talim (religious education) in Madrasas (Muslim theological schools) as against professional education.

5) There would be no respect for human rights and no freedom of thought and expression. Anyone speaking out against Islam or the Quran or the Prophet would be punished with death. Flogging and stoning to death, cutting off of the limbs would be the prescribed punishments for common crimes like stealing.

This is based on the observation today that some leading and vocal Muslim organisations and some governments in power, practice the politics of fatwah (Muslim religious decree) of death towards those who express themselves against Islam. A Muslim who publicly declares that he is no longer a Muslim is considered a Murtad and he is punishable by death (although there are various interpretations of the Koran on this)

6) There would be no public media like the TV, Cable or Internet. Since these would be looked upon as the Satan's tools in corrupting humankind with information and entertainment.

This is based on the observation today when many Muslim sects frown upon mass communication media like the Television. In some instances, TV sets are dumped as an act of piety.

7) The Dictatorial Rulers all over the world would be Muslim Clergymen

This is based on the observation that most Muslims oppose the separation of the State and Clergy. Temporal power is vested in the clergy in most countries in Dar-Ool-Islam or the Islamic world.

8) All aspects of life would be regimented with what is stated in the Quran. There would be no evolution of new laws and in fact no new thoughts

This is based on the observation today where a majority of the Muslim countries prefer some variant of the Sharia i.e. Muslim laws based on the Quran, as against modern civil laws. The Sharia laws include stoning to death, cutting of limbs, castration, etc.

9) Even if you were a Muslim and belonged to a minority sect like the Shias or Ahmediyas, you would be considered to be an infidel or heretic and be subject to harassment.

This is based on the observation today where a majority of the Sunnis (a majority sect among the Muslims) look upon the Shias as heretics. So also are the other smaller Islamic sects.

10)There would be no scope at all for having any opinion, idea, innovation outside the Quran-al-sharif or anything that is considered non-islamic. This would in fact freeze all progress.

This is based on the observation today where most Muslims look upon anything non-islamic as Kufr and Jahiliyat (infidel, ignorance) and also the entire non-islamic world as Dar-ul-Harb (literally 'Hostile zone') or the Infidel world. And anything that even a Muslim chooses to do, which is frowned upon by the clergy, is considered as Haram (illegitimate).

11) There would be a complete ban on dance, music and entertainment.

This is based on the observation today where most devout Muslims spend all their spare time in reading the verses of the Quran and in Namaaz (mass invocation of Allah). Their minds are closed to anything outside the Quran. They live an insular life and shun socializing with non-Muslims. The Taliban rule in Afghanistan epitomizes what an "ideal" Islamic society the World over would look like.

12) Aggressive, quarrelsome attitudes would be a common feature of human behavior and social relations would be perpetually violent whether at the family level, local area level, province level, national level or global level. The crime rate would be high. The all Muslim world society would be perpetually at war with itself.

This is based on the observation today where most of the criminals (in non-Muslim countries) are Muslims. Muslims are also dominant in global terrorism. Even at the national level they (Iraq, Libya, etc) specialize in the making of chemical weapons of mass destruction. Soon the nuclear capability that is today limited to Pakistan will proliferate to the Arab and rest of the Muslim world and we shall soon see a mushrooming of small rogue states armed with nuclear capable missiles that would bedevil the rest of the non-Islamic world.

Even as organisations Islamic gangs would terrorize the world. Examples of such gangs are the Al Qaida, Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Muslim Brotherhood , Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, Harkat-ul-Mujahedeen, Hizb-ul-Mujahedeen, Jaish-e-Mohammedi, Abu Sayyaf, etc

Thus a victory for the Muslims over the rest would spell doomsday for humankind, it would mean the end of all technological progress. In fact, for the thinking species of Human beings, an Islamic victory would mean the end of meaningful human existence. A scenario, where we would still have our capability to think, to innovate and to progress; but we would not be allowed to use any of our human faculties. This would be even worse than the scenario had the Nazis won the 2nd World War.

This is the logical scenario in case of a victory for the Islamic Jehad over all non-Islamic people across the globe. In this scenario, the ultimate saviour of humanity would have to come forth from within Islam itself. A saviour who would repudiate Islam and re-establish a civilized human way of life.

But till then it would be a frightful existence under the twilight of Islam, with no hope for the future. It is for these reasons among others, why the rest of the world (including some modernized Muslims) look askance at the growing clout of the Muslim clergy over the Ummah i.e. the general Muslim populace. And the resultant growing disturbances that Muslims cause in areas where they live alongside non-Muslims - like Chechnya, Macedonia, Egypt (Coptic Christians), Southern Sudan, Ethiopia/Eritrea, Southern Philippines (Mindanao), Indonesia (Malaku), Kashmir (India), Israel, etc.

In fact even many modernized (non-Islamized) Muslims are scared to death to speak their mind about Islamic orthodoxy, even after having lived in the West for more than one generation.

But some time or the other one has to address these issues in the context of freedom of thought and action for a future liberal democratic society the world over; and in the larger context of saving human civilization from the mortal danger it faces today from the growing strength of Islamic Terrorism of JIHAD.

The cardinal fact is that across the fourteen centuries of Islam's existence, it has been its death threat that converted people to Islam and it was the same death threat that kept them Muslim. The same death threats are used today to intimate Ayan Hirsi Ali, Salman Rushdie and many others like them to keep them from speaking the truth about Islam.

He who was born by the sword shall die by the sword

Modifying the age-old adage "He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword." We can say that "Islam which was born by the sword shall die by the sword" As it was a death threat that made people into Muslims and kept them as Muslims, the only way these scum can be shaken out of their adherence to the savagery called Islam is a death threat. Not individual death threats as the Muslims hurl today at Hirsi and Salman, but a death threat of extermination through a nuclear holocaust of the entire Muslim population across the globe!

Only when the beastlike Muslims see the determination of a world to do them in, upto their last man and woman, can the Ummah of Islam be smashed.

When the Muslims see that there is no option other than death, if they persist in remaining Muslim, will the fort of Islam be breached and once the first trickle of Muslims who renounce Islam starts, the trickle will turn into a flood and an avalanche that will wipe out Islam.

Yes there will certainly be many Muslims who will try to kill those who renounce Islam, but when these murderers are themselves hunted down with equal ferocity, will the lay Muslims believe that it is safe for them to give up Islam. Then and only then, shall we see Muslims coming over in droves to give up Islam. But this can happen only we seriously hurl and start executing a death threat of mass killing of all Muslims across the globe. There are no soft options here.

Do we have it in us to do that?

The answer decides whether civilization wins or Islam wins!

_____________________________

* For those uninitiated, PBUH expands to Perpetual Battle Upon Hagarism (Islam) - founded by the mass-murderer and pedophile pretender prophet Mohammed-ibn-Abdallah (Yimach Shmo - May his name and memory be obliterated).

_____________________________

______________________________________

Select Bibliography The Mummy, Funeral Rites & Customs in Ancient Egypt, by Ernest A. Wallis Budge, reprint of 1893 edition by Senate Studio Editions 1995

The Twilight of Ancient Egypt, First Millennium B.C.E., by Karol Mysliwiec, translated by David Lorton, Cornell University Press2000

Egypt in The Age of Cleopatra, by Michel Chauveau, translated by David Lorton, Cornell University Press, 2000

Women in Ancient Egypt, by Gay Robins, Harvard University Press, 1996

Women and Society in Greek and Roman Egypt: A Source Book by Jane Rowlandson, Cambridge University Press, 1998

The Chronicle of John Coptic Bishop of Nikiu (circa 690 A.D.), translated by Robert Henry Charles, reprint from 1916 edition, APA-Philo Press Amsterdam, Holland

The Vanished Library, A Wonder of The Ancient World, by Luciano Canfora, University of California Press

The Story of The Church of Egypt, Volumes I and II, by Edith L. Butcher, reprint of 1897 edition by AMS Press Inc, New York, N.Y 1975

Coptic Egypt, by Murad Kamil, Le Scribe Egyptien, 1968

Traditional Egyptian Christianity, A History of the Coptic Church, by Theodore. Hall Patrick, Fisher Park Press, 1999

Muslim Extremism in Egypt, The Prophet and the Pharaoh, by Gilles Kepel, University of California Press 1993

Ancient Egyptian Culture, published by Chartwell Books, Edison, N.J. 1998.

Samson Blinded: A Machiavellian Perspective on the Middle East Conflict, by Obadiah Shoher

Jihad in the West: Muslim Conquests from the 7th to the 21st Centuries (Hardcover) by Paul Fregosi

The Sword of the Prophet: History, Theology, Impact on the World by Srdja Trifkovic

Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World's Fastest Growing Faith by Robert Spencer

Studies in Muslim Apocalyptic (Studies in Late Antiquity and Early Islam) by David Cook

Why I Am Not a Muslim by Ibn Warraq

Onward Muslim Soldiers by Robert Spencer

Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis by Bat Ye'Or

Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide by Bat Yeor

What the Koran Really Says: Language, Text, and Commentary by Ibn Warraq

Islam and Terrorism: What the Quran Really Teaches About Christianity, Violence and the Goals of the Islamic Jihad by Mark A. Gabriel, Mark A. Gabriel

A Concise History of the Crusades by Thomas F. Madden

The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) by Robert Spencer

The Great Divide: The failure of Islam and the Triumph of the West by Marvin Olasky

The Myth of Islamic Tolerance: How Islamic Law Treats Non-Muslims by Robert Spencer

Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World's Fastest Growing Faith by Robert Spencer, David Pryce-Jones

The Koran (Penguin Classics) by N. J. Dawood

Don't Keep me Silent! One Woman's Escape from the Chains of Islam by Mina Nevisa

Christianity And Islam: The Final Clash by Robert Livingston

Holiest Wars : Islamic Mahdis, Their Jihads, and Osama bin Laden by Timothy R. Furnish

The Last Trumpet: A Comparative Study in Christian-Islamic Eschatology by Samuel, Ph.D. Shahid

Unleashing the beast: How a fanatical islamic dictator will form a ten-nation coalition and terrorize the world for forty-two months by Perry Stone

Contemporary Muslim Apocalyptic Literature (Religion and Politics) by David Cook

Islam and the Jews: The Unfinished Battle by Mark A., Ph.D. Gabriel

The Challenge of Islam to Christians by David Pawson

The Prophetic Fall of the Islamic Regime by Glenn Miller, Roger Loomis

Prophet of Doom : Islam's Terrorist Dogma in Muhammad's Own Words by Craig Winn

The False Prophet by Ellis H. Skolfield

The Approach of Armageddon: An Islamic Perspective by Muhammad Hisham Kabbani

The Cube and the Cathedral: Europe, America, and Politics Without God by George Weigel

Infiltration : How Muslim Spies and Subversives have Penetrated Washington by Paul Sperry

Unholy Alliance : Radical Islam and the American Left by David Horowitz

Unveiling Islam : An Insider's Look at Muslim Life and Beliefs by Ergun Mehmet Caner

Perfect Soldiers : The Hijackers: Who They Were, Why They Did It by Terry McDermott

Islam Revealed A Christian Arab's View Of Islam by Anis Shorrosh

Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out by Ibn Warraq

The Origins of the Koran: Classic Essays on Islam's Holy Book by Ibn Warraq

________________________________

Unfortunately for humankind, the end of the death-seeking fiery cult of Islam can only come about through a fiery death-giving weapon. Ironically such nuclear mushroom clouds would be the blazing hell-fire that the Quran talks about and acknowledges will bring about an end to Islam such that there will be no one across the globe to say "Lah ilah il Allah, Mohammed ur Rasoolallah" (There is no god but allah and Mohammed is his prophet).

Osama Bin Laden Is Dead but the Threat of Islam Lives On

2011-09-07T10:15:00.001-05:00

PROPHET MUHAMMAD -- THE FIRST TERRORIST OF ISLAM

In the divine code of the Quran, Osama bin Laden and all like-minded Muslim terrorists of our time are pious Muslims, fulfilling the divine orders of Allah so as to bring almighty Allah's wrath upon the Kafirs (unbelievers).

They are following the divine teachings of the Quran and Sunna of Prophet Muhammad. In Islam, Kafirs are a sub-human species; and if they refuse to embrace Islam, they can be exterminated, tortured, terrorized, raped and enslaved. These are not crimes, but holy duties of Muslims, which guarantee them access to Islamic Paradise, a whore filled with numerous celestial virgins for the blessed Jihadis to indulge in eternal copulations. The Quran sanctified these barbaric acts; Prophet Muhammad initiated and practiced it; and Osama bin Laden and Jihadi Muslims piously obeying the true, blue Islam. This is a cold hard reality of Islam and our failure to understand, or attempt to ignore, it will work to the detriment of our life, liberty and civilization. It’s that simple.

Islam is a totalitarian political ideology with no separation of the mosque and state. Sharia law governs all and very aspects of life and society. There is no free will in Islam: only submission to the will of Allah. Violence is an eternal canonical imperative for establishing and maintaining the supremacy of Islam.

Osama bin Laden, and 19 Jihadi foot-soldiers involved in the 9/11 attacks succeeded in achieving beyond their wildest dreams. Through the successful attacks on 9/11, they not only jolted America and the West, but it has also awakened the slumberous common Muslims, who have since embarked on the Islamization and conquest of the West by one means or another. If this Islamization process is not halted, history will record 9/11 attacks of 2001 as the beginning of the end of the Western Civilization. Make no mistake about this!

With the death of Osama bin Laden, politicians and media pundits have been busy declaring victory in the war against Islamic terrorism. They are now calling moderate Muslims to rise up and take back Islam from the clutch of radical Islamists, who, they claim, have usurped Islam, a peaceful religion, and turned it into a terrorist ideology. President Obama have emphasized repeatedly that the US is not at war with Islam but only radical Islam. But for the edification of the president, in the eyes of Islam, Osama bin Laden was a good, devout, pious Muslim, who simply tried to enact what Islam’s teachings as enshrined in the Quran, the Muslim holy book, and in the Hadith and Sira, Prophet Muhammad’s life-examples, considered ideal for Muslims at all times and places.

President Obama justified the killing of Osama, because he had killed thousands including Muslims, therefore suggested that he was not a Muslim. Then, Prophet Muhammad, too, would be deemed a non-Muslim, because he had ordered nearly 100 raids and massacres, and had personally participated in 27 of them, and himself engaged in beheadings and raping infidel women. So, Osama bin Laden is nothing when compared to the murderous record of Prophet Muhammad.

And, what about all the nonsense that Muslims don't kill Muslims! Muhammad had killed his own followers, who had failed to follow to his commands and who deserted Islam. Throughout history, Muslims have killed and murdered Muslims. It is estimated that 11 million Muslims have been killed by fellow Muslims since 1948. When there is no rule of law, no-one is safe.

Osama was obeying the divine orders of God to strike terror into heart of the kafir societies that refuse to submit to Islam. Osama was simply a good old Muslim man of the league of Prophet Muhammad and numerous Muslim heroes thereafter, obeying the commandments of God. There was no misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the teachings of Islam by him whatsoever, nor any hijacking and perverting its teachings. He was as much a Muslim as Prophet Muhammad was a Muslim. If you deny the Muslimness of Osama, you have to deny Muslimness of Prophet Muhammad as well.

Obama is right to say that we are not at war with Islam. Instead, Islam has brought war upon us through the 9/11 attacks. Indeed, Islam has been at war with non-Muslim humanity for the past 1400 years. And make no mistake about the reality we face; Osama’s death means nothing. The forces he unleashed on 9/11 are destroying the West from within. We will be on the losing end of history if we do not defend our civilization: our democracy and freedom, which we have achieved and have been defended by the life and blood of millions of valiant martyrs. If we do nothing, Osama will be enjoying the last laugh in his grave.

In my book, “Islam and Sharia Law Are Treason: Jihad Is Treason” (free download), readers will learn much more about the fundamental doctrines of Islam, its threat to civilized societies and creeping Islamization of the West by various violent and nonviolent Islamist fringe groups and organizations as well as by self-destructive apologists. The message of this book is succinct and clear: Destroy the Quran by exposing its true message and teachings, or let us be destroyed by it.

Jake Neuman's book "ISLAM -- EVIL IN THE NAME OF GOD" has been banned in Malaysia.

Constitutions of Islamic Countries: From Contradiction to Practical Discriminations and Inequities

2011-09-01T10:18:00.000-05:00

In Islamic constitutions, the declaration of Islam as the "state religion" not only turns the declaration of "equality of all citizens" contradictory, but also leads to state-sanctioned practical discrimination and inequities against members of non-Islamic faiths.

In a previous article, I showed that there is a clear contradiction in a state constitution that adopts Islam as the religion of the state, and simultaneously adopts the premise of equality of all its citizens. I have shown that such a constitution establishes state-institutionalized affirmative discrimination against all citizens, who do not believe in or belong to the “official” and “constitutional” form of Islam, adopted by that state.

If a state wants to treat all of its citizens equally and adopts Islam as the religion of the state, then that state has to adopt all the religions and belief systems of each and every citizen as the “state religion” as well. When a state adopts only one religion as the state religion, it automatically declares inequality of its citizens, belonging to a different religion or belief system. Islamic constitutions dignify Islam as the state religion, ignoring others. Inequities lie in this fact itself, whereby the state violates premise of “equal citizenry” to all its subjects.

In this article, I try to show how adopting Islam as the state religions leads to practical discrimination, inequity and violation of the rights of citizens belonging to other faiths. At the end of this article, I try to offer a commonsense approach to eliminate such a contradiction in any “Islamic” constitution.

The Logical Form of the Argument

Constitutions of Islamic countries adopt the following two premises (axioms):

1- Islam is the religion of the state

2- All citizens of the state are equal under the law

Please note that premise (1) excludes all other religions (Baha’i, Ahmadi, Christian, Hindu, etc.) from the privilege of being the “state religion”, from having a “constitutional” status as Islam does.

Thus, premise (1) by itself establishes affirmative discrimination against other religions, different from Islam. This amounts to apriori Constitutional Discrimination. This form of discrimination is easily translated into practical discrimination against citizens of other persuasions of the state. Many examples can be cited. In such a state, apostates of Islam will be hunted down by the state or the mob for punishing with death, because they left the “state religion” Islam, and Islam demands so. Followers of other religions are free to choose any religion of their liking, especially Islam, without fearing the threat of being killed. But the state’s Muslim citizens are deprived of the same right. Sharia, the divine laws of Islam the “state religion”, prohibits non-Muslims from holding public offices. There are many discriminatory practices in Islamic countries, solely because they are Islamic countries. These discriminations are institutionalized by its constitution.

Now let turn to premise (2): “All citizens of the state are equal under the law”. My above analysis shows how premise (1) establishes a contradiction to premise (2). That is to say, premise (1) renders the practice of premise (2) impossible. Hence, premises (1) and (2) establish a contradiction that exists in almost all constitutions of Islamic countries. Implementation of premise (1) turns the implementation of premise (2) null and void.

What is the solution to the contradiction?

Premises (1) and (2) of Islamic constitutions as cited above establish a logical as well as practical contradiction. One cannot believe in a geometric form that is a Circle and a Square at the same time.

When faced with a contradiction in her/his belief system, one has to reconcile this difficulty by eliminating at least one of the factors that causes this contradiction. In our case, we have an easy way out by rejecting one of the two premises mentioned above. In a modern civil state, one cannot but affirm equality of all subjects of the state under a common law. This obviates that fact that constitution’s declaration that “Islam is the religion of the state” is the culprit. It is an assumption (axiom) that has to be rejected in any constitutional civil society (State). In other words, expunging premise (1) from the constitutions of Muslim countries is the only way to out of this farcical contradiction.

-----

In a comment left by one of the readers of my previous article, the commenter wrote about my analysis of certain points in the Jordanian constitution, which is an example of a contradictory constitution that affirms and adopts axioms (1) and (2) above,

Text of the comment below:

[The article (writer is speaking about my previous article on the subject) stopped at the Jordanian second and sixth clauses of the so-called constitution. A couple of years ago, I read the newly approved civil status law in Jordan (in Arabic) as published by local newspapers. Examples of the (sigh) equality given to non-Muslims follow:

A married Christian woman who converts to Islam is automatically divorced from her Christian husband (because of the higher status of the Islamic religion over Christianity).
A Christian man who converts to Islam automatically converts ALL of his CHILDREN to Islam regardless of their wishes. The wife may remain as Christian because Muslims are allowed to married people of the book (Christians and Jews).
There are other laws that prohibit (or restrict) the marriage into women from non people of the book. E.g., Hindus, etc. However, in Islamic sharia these women may be part of sexual unions under the owned-female clauses of Quran.

In Jordan, there are other laws that make it an offence to criticize any aspect of Islam just like the ones you hear about in Pakistan. You would not dare talk to anyone about Islamic religion (especially the ones claiming they want to become Christians) for fear of being agents of salafi or the government.

The latest constitutional changes which were rushed to attempt to placate the restless Jordanians are simply hogwash and cosmetic changes which produce no real changes to add more equality of freedoms. For example, freedom of the press is guaranteed (great you say), but as long as they do not conflict with the norms of society or common decency (uh oh, there goes the guarantee, I say).]

The above comment shows that indeed a constitution of an Islamic country does reject the assumption of equality of its citizens in favor of Islam, thus affirming the fact that a constitution of an Islamic country is no more than a discriminatory belief system that is bigoted in nature.

The Constitutions of Islamic Countries: A Critical analysis

2011-08-28T10:21:00.001-05:00

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

2011-08-24T10:28:00.001-05:00

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.

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?
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.)
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)
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).
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)
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).
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

2011-08-23T10:35:00.000-05:00

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

2011-08-21T12:13:00.003-05:00

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"

2011-08-14T12:19:00.000-05:00

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

2011-08-10T12:29:00.001-05:00

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

2011-08-10T12:25:00.001-05:00

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

2011-08-09T12:35:00.000-05:00

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?

2011-08-08T12:43:00.000-05:00

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

2011-08-04T12:47:00.000-05:00

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

2011-08-01T12:50:00.000-05:00

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.

Honor killing in Pakistan: Father Kills Six Daughters for Having Boyfriends

2011-07-30T12:54:00.000-05:00

How far Islamic barbarism can go is beyond any civilized person can imagine. Here's a case: a Pakistani father, who was told by his son that two of his six daughters were having boyfriends in the neighborhoods, killed all of his six daughters to save honor.

From the Express Tribune on July 27, 2011:

Honour killings: Man guns down six daughters

---

FAISALABAD: A man gunned down six of his daughters on suspicion that two of them were in relationships with boys in the neighbourhood.

On Tuesday morning, Arif Mubashir called his teenage daughters to his room and shot them while the rest of the family, including their mother, watched. His wife Musarrat called the police after the incident.

Mubashir shot the girls after their brother said two of them were in a relationship. He told police officials that he had killed his daughters because they were both “without honour”. The man said his daughters Sameena, 14, and Razia, 16, were in a relationship with college boys from the neighbourhood and the sisters had helped each other. “I should have been told immediately but the girls sided with each other. They were both corrupt,” Mubashir told Tandlianwala Police Inspector Javed Sial.

Police officials have taken Mubashir into custody and filed a case against him. “He does not regret what he did. He boasted that he would do it all over again if he had to,” Sial told reporters.

Pakistan has repeatedly been termed as one of the least women-friendly countries. In June, the Thompson Reuters Foundation ranked Pakistan as the world’s third most dangerous country for women.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 27^th, 2011.

Enlightening My Father about the Real Islam and the Fatal Consequence

2011-07-29T12:56:00.000-05:00

This article is to make those Muslims, who wish to discover the truth about their religion, aware of the fact that the truth about real Islam can be hard to come to terms with; it may even turn fatal as happened with my father. (Read in Bahasha Indonesia)

I am a non-Arab Indian Muslim. I went for a job to Saudi Arabia as a pious Muslim and returned to my beloved country as an Atheist after ten long years of service there. I was trained by my parents to pray five times a day from childhood and read the Quran daily in "Arabic". In a simple term, I was the perfect Muslim according to the Indian standard of Islam.

There were several factors behind my conversion to Atheism from Islam in Saudi Arabia. Out of them, the very important factor was: I was teased by my Arab colleagues for not being a perfect Muslim. I found it an insult to my religious pride, because I was thinking that I was the perfect Muslim.

The mental torture, which I had received from them, forced me to study and analyze Islam. They laughed at me for not knowing the meaning of the Quran. So, I read the translation of the "Holy Quran" in my mother tongue URDU, which I hadn't done before. In India, we never read the Quran in our own mother tongue. Instead, we were made to read it in the holy language of Allah and the Prophet -- “the language of afterlife” -- which is Arabic. Though we don’t understand the meaning of a single Arabic word, it is thought to bring more virtue (swaab).

When my Arab colleagues teased me of not understanding the Quran, I took to reading it in Urdu so that I could understand its meaning and could become a more pious, a better, Muslim.

As started reading it in Urdu, I had a shock and was confused after few pages. Many of the verses seemed barbaric. And what I did: Instead of suspecting the teaching of the supposedly perfect divine Quran, I suspected my proficiency in Urdu. Then, I read it in other languages I knew, including English. All the translations were consistent: Whether in Urdu or English, those verses gave the same meaning. Then only was I sure that my knowledge in Urdu was not the problem; the Quran itself is problematic.

After coming back from Saudi Arabia to my motherland as an Atheist, I felt pity on my aging parents, who are wasting their precious time in praying five times a day, plus in additional midnight prayers. Apart from that, they were always in fear about their death and the tortures they may receive in their graves as per the teachings of Islam. As a filial, loving son, and a responsible human being, I vowed to liberate my beloved parents from the shackles and tyranny of the Islamic dogma.

But it was a very difficult tusk to explain the faults of religion to people in their 70s so as to change their belief. I explained to my religious parents the complete scenario of my experience in Saudi Arabia: the disrespectful behavior of most of the Saudis and their “(in)hospitality” toward non-Muslims and non-Arab Muslims.

They simply rejected my words and were not prepared to hear anything odd about their Arab brothers. It's because the non-Arab Muslims hold great reverence for the Saudis, since they belongs to Islam's holy land, the land of their beloved prophet. Let me, here, make it clear that I do not hate the Saudis, who have been fooled by Prophet Muhammad and his Islam. Instead, I feel pity for them, as they are the first and worst victims of Islam.

Determined to enlighten my parents about the true face of Islam, I persisted and my parents eventually accepted my words about the Saudis. But to absolve Islam of the Saudi's bad behaviour and attitude, they now switched argument: Maybe you are correct, because the bad Saudis had given so much trouble to our beloved prophet during his lifetime.

Here, my parents now tried to shield Prophet Muhammad, the only one Saudi man, thanks to tremendous reverence they hold toward him. Then, I revealed the true character of Muhammad to them from his hadiths, which also make the Saudis behave in such manners. Then they said, they don’t trust the hadiths, as most of them were written by the enemies of Islam.

Since they said they don't trust the hadiths, I told them, in frustration, to stop praying five times a day, because the Quran never mentions anything about praying five times a day; it is only mentioned in the hadiths.

While Muslims overwhelmingly believe hadiths as the holy tradition of the Prophet, it has now become a new tactic amongst non-Arab Muslims of our age that if a hadith preaches something about Islam and Muhammad, which is contrary to local ethics and morality, then it is a weak hadith. They are taught by the mullahs that most of the hadiths, which reveals the true character of Muhammad, but does not suit the culture of the locals, were written by the enemies of Islam.

The culture of Saudi Arabia, which fits well with teachings of the Islamic scriptures, can’t fit with cultures of the rest of the World. I like to share with the readers one such “cultural difference”, which I witnessed in Saudi Arabia. I witnessed an old man, aged over 75 years, with his two wives alive, took a third time -- a 17 year old Jordanian girl (Because the “cost” of the girl is comparatively cheaper in Jordon. Readers please excuse my language. But this is the reality). As he returned with the young bride, he was given a very warm welcome by his well-educated sons, aged between 40 and 50. They took him on their shoulders, clapping and singing. They don’t even bother about the fate of their own mothers. They shared the joyful moments by praising their father's “manliness” with their neighbors and friends. The language they used to glorify their father’s “manliness” can’t be explained here, as it is too crude, pornographic. Given the sons were well-educated, we can't blame their lack of education for such behavior. It is impossible for the civilized societies to adopt such culture, not even by the cultured non-Arab Muslim societies.

The blame lies on the culture, created and encouraged by Muhammad, which can be seen in many hadiths. After all, it's a central doctrine in Islam that Muslims must emulate the Prophet as best as possible.

So, the mullahs do their best to reject such hadiths, which contradicts the local culture, as non-authentic and weak, although they are from Sahih Al-Bukhari, which Muslims accept as the authentic collection -- a book, regarded next to the Quran in the Muslim world.

I explained to my parents about the six authentic collections of hadiths, out of numerous collections. Their faith towards the dogma of Islam was so deep that I failed to convince them in this effort. But I am not of the sort, who would give up easily. So, this time, I showed them the Quranic verses, in which Allah asks Muslims to follow Muhammad’s sunnah and also the other important, but unacceptable, verses of the Quran.

Then my father, in his 70s, also started reading the Quran, like me, in his mother tongue Urdu for the first time. For the past 70 years of his life, he had been reading the Arabic Quran daily, which he didn’t understand. As for my mom, she is an illiterate, like most of the Muslim women of her age in India, and never read the Quran even in Arabic.

After reading a few pages of the Quran in Urdu, in a language that helped him understood the meaning of verses, my father, too, become disturbed because of many unacceptable verses. Having gotten a shock, he started doubting the reliability of the author, the translator and the publisher, and stopped reading it. He now scolded me for purchasing the Quran, which has been printed by the enemies of Islam -- either Hindus or Christians.

I was able to convince him with facts that the translation was done by the scholars of Islam, and that it was published for the benefit of Muslims. He now asked me: why Muslims are printing such wrong translations of the Quran?

I told him that those scholars and publishers were not to blame; the problem was his lifelong misunderstood perception of Islam as a divine and perfect creed. My father was not ready to accept my explanations, neither was he ready to read the Quran further -- even if it was published by a reliable Muslim publisher -- because he was now afraid of losing his faith.

At this point, I tried to encourage him to continue reading it, saying that it was not a good sign that he is afraid of losing his faith. But he totally refused to read it, and I, kind of, failed again in my mission at this point. Here, the readers can sense the level of ignorance amongst moderate Muslims, who know nothing about the real Islam, and their obdurate refusal to enlighten themselves about it.

I continued nurturing hopes that my father would eventually discover the truth about Islam and free himself from its shackles. And It took me almost 10 years for my father to, eventually, read the whole Quran in Urdu. To my joy, he, at the age of 80, showed courage to read it completely. The atrocities perpetrated by Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda over recent years were vital in my convincing him to read and understand the Quran's messages. Initially, whenever he would hear a news of Al-Qaeda's heartless terrorist atrocities, he would start abusing Osama. But I used to argue with him so as to defend Osama as the best amongst Muslims as per the teaching of the Quran and hadiths. The atrocities committed by Osama's Jihadi followers in the name of Islam, coupled with my arguments with him, induced my father to read the Urdu Quran, hoping to understand its real message. All thanks to Osama.

Then my father requested me to brief him about some hadiths, which I had previously tried to explain to him to show Islam in a negative light. But I felt embarrassed to explain the semi-pornographic hadiths about Muhammad to my father, as a major portion of the hadiths glorifies sex and violence. So, I told him to read them by himself, instead of hearing it from someone else to be more credible. He read only a few hadiths and stopped, because he couldn’t go beyond. He had lost his faith already and declared it scrap.

The reading of the Quran, biography of Muhammad and few Hadiths in a language he understood led my father into depression and may have effected his health. He was not able to come out of this shock. He repeatedly asked me, like an innocent child, about the outcome of his 80 years of worship of Islam, and the valuable time he had spent in five-time daily prayers, mid-night prayers and other Islamic deeds. I consoled him by saying not to worry about the past; instead, I encouraged him to feel happier, as he has been freed of the fear of all alleged punishments and tortures during death, in the grave and in the hereafter. He was convinced, but still, he couldn’t tolerate the way he had been cheated by the mullahs all his life. He thanked me for rescuing him from the fear of the horror of the Islamic grave and the Hell.

Sadly, I have lost my beloved father within a few months of his enlightenment about Islam, as he was unable to come to terms with the shock, which not only perished his faith but also deteriorated his health.

He was very dedicated Muslim and spent all his life (except the last few months) praying and reading the Quran in Arabic -- "the language of Paradise" -- without understanding its meaning. During his last days, he felt heavily not only about his wasted precious years, more so about the way he -- an educated and intelligent person -- was deceived by the mullahs for 80 years, which accelerated the worsening his health and eventually his death.

At the first instance, I felt a sense of guilt for his early death, which was caused, to a good extent, by my being able to convince him to study and understand Islam. But when I recall his last days, I also feel satisfied that he faced his bodily end on earth with confidence, without the fear of tortures and hellfire as taught in Islam. Indeed, I feel proud of myself for being able to liberate him from the barbaric beliefs of Islam. I believe he would have accepted my effort at his enlightenment about Islam as the best return for the fatherly love and affection he had bestowed upon me.

For a Muslim, getting to the truth about Islam is the toughest battle in life. And the shock they get when they find out the truth can be tough to come to terms with, as was with my father, for whom it, to some extent, turned fatal. Muslims, who seek to discover the truth about Islam, should be mentally prepared before doing so.

Islam Set to Become the Dominant Primer of Future Extremist Violence by Non-Muslims?

2011-07-28T13:01:00.000-05:00

From India to Nigeria to Norway, Islam is forcing non-Muslims, too, into extremist violence.

This article appeared in Jihad Watch

In recent decades, Muslims have obviously been the overwhelmingly dominant perpetrators of religiously-motivated extremist violence, targeting non-Muslims and their allies within the Muslim community, as well as Muslim sects which they consider deviant from orthodox Islam. But over the last couple of decades, extremist violence by non-Muslims, targeting people of differing faiths, has been becoming increasingly frequent. And disturbingly, an Islamic connection is becoming a common motivator of these non-Muslim extremist violence: Non-Muslims commit those violence due to instigation by Muslims or as retaliation to preceding violence by Muslims.

In the West, the last time a non-Muslim extremist committed a major terrorist massacre was the Oklahoma City Bombing by Timothy McVeigh (professed to be an atheist of Christian heritage) on April 19, 1995 that killed 168 people and injured 450. McVeigh's motive was his anger at the Waco Siege at Texas (February 28 to April 19, 1993) by the FBI that left 76 people of the infamous David Koresh-led Davidian Sect dead.

And whenever extremist Muslim groups or individuals have committed similar terrorist atrocities in recent years, we have been reminded by Muslims and their apologists with reference to the McVeigh incident that people of all persuasions -- Islam, Christianity, Judaism, White Supremacism, Communism, and such -- can commit extremist violence. So, Islam should not associated with extremism and terrorism for the actions of its individual followers, just as violence by a Christian or Jewish extremist must not be attributed to their faiths.

Now, in the West, we have a new extremist massacre in Norway: Bombing and a horrendous shooting spree in Oslo, both apparently committed by Anders Behring Breivik, a Norwegian Nationalist extremist and a Christian, have left nearly 100 innocent people dead. This Oslo extremist violence incident will certainly add further fuel to the Islamic apologists' attempt to shield Islam from criticism for the atrocities radical Muslims commit in the name of their religion.

The purpose of this note is, however, to highlight how Islam is also becoming the dominant motivating or instigating factor behind the extremist violence committed by non-Muslims around the world.

The connection of Breivik's motivation to Islam is already crystal clear. His 1,500-page manifesto, entitled "2083: A European Declaration of Independence”, is all about Europe's "Islam problem" caused by unrestrained Muslim immigration and aided by the predominantly leftist political elite. About Islam's historical problems, Breivik writes (p. 39):

Since the creation of Islam in the 7th century and to up to this day, the Islamic Jihad has systematically killed more than 300 million non Muslims and tortured and enslaved more than 500 million individuals. Since 9/11 2001, more than 12 000 Jihadi terrorist attacks have occurred around the world which have led to the death of one or more non-Muslims [2] per attack. In other words; there are around 150 deadly Jihadi attacks per month around the world. This trend will continue as long as there are non-Muslim targets available and as long as Islam continues to exist.

He mentions of the Norway government's cowardly handling of the Muslim rage surrounding the publication of Prophet Muhammad's cartoons in Danish magazine (2006-2007). His major concern: Muslim immigration, actively promoted by present leftist governments, was bringing in chaos to Europe. When thousands of Muslim enclaves in Europe -- in Norway, Sweden, Britain, France, Netherlands, and other countries -- have already become "no-go zones" for the native Europeans, and more and more neighborhoods with growing Muslim populations are becoming inhospitable to the natives, who are often forced out of those areas through intimidation and even violence by Muslims, Breivik's concern is not at all groundless. And he sees solution to this Tsumani of Europe's "Islam problem" in the waging of a "Western European Resistance Movements (anti-Marxist/anti-Jihad movements)" -- a European Civil War -- by the so-called "patriotic European political activists" against Muslims and their leftist allies; and he predicts it will eventually be won by the Resistance Movement in 2083 with the annihilation of the Leftists/Marxists and deportation of Muslims. His terrorist actions on July 23, 2011, are declaration of that Civil War, in which he targeted youths of Norway's Leftist ruling party.

Apart from the Norway incident, India is another hotspot where we see extremist homicidal violence committed by non-Muslim Hindus that are also connected to Islam: Hindus commit those violence either upon instigation by Muslims or in retaliation to preceding violence by them. An example is the infamous 2002 Gujarat Violence, in which Hindus attacked Muslims and Muslims counter-attacked. The violence resulted in 790 Muslim and 254 Hindu deaths. What is often omitted from discussion about Gujarat riot is that Hindus committed it in retaliation to an earlier Muslim atrocity, in which they set fire on a train full of Hindu devotees, mostly women and children, burning 59 Hindus to death.

Over in Africa, Christians in Nigeria (and other countries) have suffered sustained horrendous violence at the hands of increasingly radicalized Muslims in recent years. And on a few occasions, Christians have hit back in retaliation, causing large-scale homicide of Muslims.

One must consider the fact that the Chinese and Indians (Hindus) are also immigrating to Europe in large numbers, but they are no concern to Breivik; his concern is exclusively directed at the Muslim immigrants. The reason is: the non-Muslim Chinese and Indian immigrants integrate in European societies, or, at least, live peacefully with their native neighbors. But Muslims not only refuse to integrate in the host societies, but also have become a major source of social scourge and violence: all sorts of criminal activities, terrorist attacks, as well as rapes and eviction of the natives.

And source of these problems is Islam, not the individuals. Britain is facing problems with Muslim immigrants from Bangladesh and Pakistan, but not with the equally-large Hindu immigrant community from the same region. The Hindu and Muslim immigrants from the subcontinent are the same as individuals; religion is the only difference between them.

As the burgeoning and increasingly radicalized and violent Muslim populations distress non-Muslims all over the world, including in non-Muslim-majority countries, extremist violence by non-Muslims, like the acts committed by Hindus in India, Christians in Nigerian and the Norwegian nationalist Breivik, are set to become increasingly frequent. A full-scale Civil War in Europe, as anticipated by Breivik, cannot be ruled out. Instead, it remains a real possibility and may spread to other parts of the world.

The indiscriminate and ruthless killing of innocent young people by Breivik to draw attention to Europe's "Islam problem," as well as those committed by the Hindus in India or Christians in Nigeria, are tragic and indefensible. But as the state of affairs stands now, the occurrence of such tragic incidents with increasing frequency in future also looks to be a definite possibility. It is in the hands of governments as well as of Muslims themselves to mitigate the problem. Muslim immigrants can learn from the Hindu or Chinese immigrants in their host countries, while the governments should pay serious attention to a real problem, instead of turning a blind eye to it, which they have done for way too long.

---

M. A. Khan is the author of Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism and Slavery and the editor of islam-watch.org.

Prophet Muhammad was an Apostate of Islam

2011-07-28T12:58:00.001-05:00

Muhammad violated too many of Allah's divine laws at whims to serve his interests, desires and lust. He was, thus, an apostate of Islam. He managed to avoid the punishment of apostasy -- death by beheading -- on earth. But what's happening to him in next life. Frolicking with 72 heavenly whores? The Quran may give an inkling (46.9): "I do not know what will be done to me"

MUHAMMAD'S OVER-RULING OF ALLAH

Allah says in many places in Quran that he made Mohammad the last prophet after whom he will not send any one else. But Mohammad over-ruled Allah and announced that Jesus will be the last prophet and will come after him.

Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 34, Number 425:

Allah's Apostle said, "Son of Mary (Jesus) will shortly descend amongst you people”

Muslims party during the night after fasting but Prophet
Muhammad partied during the day while fasting

MUHAMMAD DEFIED THE QURAN

Allah said in Quran that his message and words in Quran are final and nothing in it will be changed (15.9). His final words about people of the book are that either they will pay Jizya or they will be killed (9.29). However Mohammad changed it. He said that Jizya will be abolished.

Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 34, Number 425:

Allah’s Apostle said, "Jesus will break the Cross and kill the pigs and abolish the Jizya"

MUHAMMAD VIOLATED MARRIAGE LAW

Allah allowed Muslims to have up to four wives (Q 4.3) at one time. Mohammad had at least 9 wives with him when he kicked the bucket.

MUHAMMAD ATE AND DRANK DURING FASTING

Allah set rules of fasting in Quran as follows:

Quran 2.287: "Allah Hath ordained (for fasting in Ramadan) for you not to eat or drink from dawn to dusk."

But Muhammad ate and drank as he pleased

Tabaqat by Saad Vol. 1, p. 369:

Muhammad found it difficult to abstain from food and water, from dawn to dusk, so he ate whenever he pleased. Ibn Sa’d writes: “The Messenger of Allâh used to say ‘We the prophets are required to eat our morning food later than others and hurry in breaking our fast in the evening.'” [3]

MUHAMMAD'S SEXUAL ACTIVITIES WHILE FASTING

Allah prohibited any sexual activity during fasting.

The Quran says (002.187): Approach your wives only in the night after completing the fast.

But Prophet Mohammad approached his wives whenever he got turned on.

FOOLING AROUND WITH YOUNG WIVES

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 1, Book 6, Number 319:

When fasting Prophet saw naked little Aisha playing
with her doll, he got all worked up

Prophet’s wife in her izar during menstruation, waiting
for a midmorning fondling session by fasting prophet

UM-Salama said, “Allah's Apostle, while fasting called me and took me with him under the woollen sheet."

(Ordering his wife to get under a woolen sheet with him).

MUHAMMAD'S FONDLING, TONGUE SUCKING

Sunaan Abu Dawud: Book 13, Number 2380:

Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) used to kiss her and suck her tongue when he was fasting.

MUHAMMAD'S HUGGING, PETTING AND DISCHARGING

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 3, Book 31, Number 149:

Ayesha said "The Prophet used to kiss and embrace his wives while he was fasting. The person who gets discharge should complete his fast."

MUHAMMAD'S JOINT BATHING AFTER EJACULATION

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 1, Book 6, Number 319:

"Um- Salama said. The Prophet and I used to take the bath of Janaba from a single pot”

MUHAMMAD VIOLATED THE IDDAH LAW

Allah said in Quran that for a widow there is a waiting period (iddah) of three menstrual periods before remarrying (2.234). Mo banged Juavaria, Safia and Rehana the same night he killed their husbands without giving any prescribed waiting period.

Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 512:

Narrated Anas:

Prophet attacked Khaybar unannounced. Their men were killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives. Safiya was amongst the captives, She first came in the share of Dahya Alkali but later on she belonged to the Prophet (he banged her the same night) .

Bukhari vol 3, Book46, No. 717:

Prophet had suddenly attacked Bani Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives; the Prophet got Juwairiya on that day (he banged her the same night).

"Sirat e Rasulullah" by Ishaq, p. 464: "The apostle divided their property, wives and children as booty. He took Rayhana d. Amr b. Khunafa for himself (he banged her the same night)."

MUHAMMAD FROLICKED WITH MENSTRUATING WOMEN

Allah has ordered men to keep away from menstruating women.

Quran 2.222

YUSUFALI: They ask thee concerning women's courses. Say: They are a hurt and a pollution: So keep away from women in their courses, and do not approach them until they are clean.

Muhammad did exactly the opposite. He hugged and kissed them, sucked their tongues, fondled their private parts and even slept with his between their naked thighs.

MUHAMMAD FONDLED YOUNG MENSTRUATING WIVES

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 1, Book 6, Number 298:

Narrated 'Aisha:

The Prophet and I used to take a bath from a single pot while we were Junub. During the menses, he used to order me to put on an Izar (dress worn below the waist) and used to fondle me. While in Itikaf, he used to bring his head near me and I would wash it while I used to be in my periods (menses).

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 1, Book 6, Number 319:

Narrated Zainab bint Abi Salama:

Allah's Apostle said, 'Have you got your menses?' I replied, 'Yes.' Then he called me and took me with him under the woolen sheet."

MUHAMMAD PUT HIS CHEEKS BETWEEN NAKED THIGHS OF MENSTRUATING WIVES

One of Prophet’s favourite activities was to lie on top of naked menstruating wives with his chest on their thighs.

Sunaan Abu Dawud: Book 1, Number 0270:

Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:

One night he entered (upon me) while I was menstruating. He said: Come near me. I said: I am menstruating. He said: Uncover your thighs. I, therefore, uncovered both of my thighs. Then he put his cheek and chest on my thighs and I lent upon he until he became warm and slept.

MUHAMMAD COMMITTED ADULTERY

Miraaj: Prophet rode to heaven on a woman-faced buraq or
had an adulterous ride in bed with cousin Hani??

Allah has called adultery (sex outside marriage) evil and an abomination.

Quran 17.032: "And come not near unto adultery. Lo! it is an abomination and an evil way."

Quran 24.030: "Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty"

Muhammad violated this prohibition discreetly in Mecca and then openly later in Medina,

MIRAAJ: CELEBRATED ADULTEROUS NIGHT OF THE PROPHET

Islamic literature says (Martin Lings, p.33, 101, 103-104, 299; Ibn Ishaq, p.184, Tabari, vol. viii, p.186) that Muhammad passionately loved his first cousin Hani, daughter of his uncle Abu Talib. She was married to a pagan Hibayrah, but Mo had an adulterous relationship with her. He often sneaked and banged Hani whenever Hibayrah was not around after Khadija had died.

Muhammad’s most famous adulterous night is celebrated all over the world by praying, and cooking special meals. It is called “shab e Mairaj”. Muslims think that Mohammad entered into Heaven that night. Little do they know that Mohammad had entered into Hani, not heaven, that night. Here is the story.

One early morning when Muhammad was sneaking out of Hani’s house after an all night steamy action, his followers who were looking for him, caught him with his pants down. They asked angrily what was he doing with Hani when her husband was out of town. Very embarrassed, he concocted the ridiculous story of having gone to heaven all night riding an animal with a beautiful face of a woman. Most of his die hard followers believed that silly story (but some smarter ones considered it bullshit and quietly left Islam). Actually Muhammad’s story was allegorical. He did ride beautiful Hani who was a wild animal in bed; and he did feel like he was in heaven all night...

Later, when Muhammad became militarily strong and conquered Mecca, he went to Umm Hani's house and stayed there overnight. Umm Hani's husband had foreseen the fall of Mecca and had fled to Najran. And this time probably his followers cheered when he came out of her home after an adulterous night. No body dared to criticize him this time; they had seen his critics getting their heads chopped off.

Prophet Muhammad lusted for men

MUHAMMAD'S LUSTING FOR MEN

The Quran clearly prohibited men for lusting for other men.

Quran 7.81: "…ye practice your lusts on men, ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds."

But Mohammad, who lusted for beautiful women like his son Zaid’s wife Zainab, also lusted for good-looking men like his son Zaid.

Tafsir of al-Qurtubi—an authoritative exegesis in Islam.

Aisha said that, one day, while Muhammad was lying naked in bed, Zaid came knocking; Muhammad, without getting dressed, opened the door and “hugged and kissed him”.

Mohammad also had a crush on a young and handsome young man Zahir.

Sunan Bayhaqi and Al Halabi

According to this hadith, a man named Zahir, who used to say, "The prophet loves me," said that one day Muhammad crept unawares behind him and put him in a bear-hug. Zahir, alarmed, yelled, “Get off me!” After turning his head and discovering that it was Muhammad, he stopped struggling and proceeded to “push his back into the prophet’s chest.”

APOSTATES ARE BEHEADED IN ISLAM

Allah (R), Muhammad's imaginary slave, gave whatever he
wanted and needed

In Islam, an apostate is killed by beheading and bleeding to death. When Mohammad was dying a very painful death he thought that Real God was cutting his aorta and bleeding him to death for his sins.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 713:

Narrated 'Aisha: The Prophet in his ailment in which he died said “I feel as if my aorta is being cut."

MORAL OF THE STORY

Muhammad had lied to the world that he received Quran from Allah. He often felt guilty for this deception to gain power wealth and women and causing so much bloodshed; he prayed for forgiveness from the real God whoever it was. He was worried that the l God may punish him in the afterlife. His statement in Quran points to it.

Quran 46.9: I do not know what will be done to me

(No wonder he thought God was beheading him when he was dying).

Ramadan: When Time No Longer Mattered

2011-07-24T13:04:00.000-05:00

The Muslim fasting month of Ramadan may begin on August 1 this year. Or perhaps it will not. The start of Ramadan must be determined by religious clerics observing the new moon with the naked eye. Also, Ramadan may begin in different countries on different days – because the new moon appears on different days as it orbits the earth. Islamic obsession with physically observing the new moon obscures the embarrassing truth that the accuracy of time doesn’t really matter much in Islam.

Scientific calculatians can predict the time of moon-rise with an
error of only a few seconds. But in Islamic tradition, Ramadan
fasting cannot start until the moon has been sighted by naked
eyes, which is grossly inaccurate.

Today’s quartz watches have an accuracy of 10 to 20 seconds a year. A watch that gains or loses even a few minutes a day would be discarded, or at least sent to the jeweler for repairs. So it is remarkable that Muslims use a calendar which is out-of-sync with the solar year by eleven days a year. A wristwatch marking Muslim time would be off by 43 minutes a day!

The explanation for this phenomenal inaccuracy in keeping time is that Muslims observe a lunar year, while the rest of the world observes a solar year. Long ago, observing the moon was a crude but convenient way of marking the passing of calendar months, but almost nobody was foolish enough to believe that 12 cycles of the moon constituted a full year. Long before Islam was introduced, astronomers adjusted between the lunar year and the solar year by inserting the missing days in a “thirteenth month” – a process called “intercalculation.”

But the moon is a central element of Islamic ideology. In the Quran, Allah swears by the moon (Surah 74:32). The crescent moon adorns the tops of mosques and the flags of Muslim countries. Some scholars even assert that Allah is actually the Moon God of the Meccan Quraysh tribe. Because the moon is so central to Islam, using the moon to mark time became an important religious distinction for Muslims – even if it failed to mark time accurately. So in his final address to Muslims, Muhammad made a major point of condemning the practice of intercalculation:

"Intercalculating a month is an increase in unbelief whereby the unbelievers go astray; one year they make it profane, and hallow it another, [in order] to agree with the number that God has hallowed, and so profane what God has hallowed, and hallow what God has made profane... The number of months with Allah is twelve: [they were] in the Book of God on the day He created the heavens and the earth." (Al Tabari, Vol. IX, para. 1754, and Surahs 9:36 and 9:37)

The origins of Islam were basically urban, with many allusions to trade and commerce in the texts. Seasons were not as important to urban dwellers as they were to farmers. Islam had a poor understanding of agriculture, as reflected by the claim that rainfall was important for farming in Egypt (Surah 12:49) or that the moon could be used to determine the seasons (Surah 10.5). So it was probably disconcerting to Muhammad that the farmers around Medina used the Jewish intercalculated solar calendar in preference to the Muslim lunar calendar. Ultimately, Muhammad and Quran condemned that as un-Islamic.

For Muslims, the calendar wasn’t used primarily for planting or harvesting crops. Rather it was used for determining when Muslims could engage in fasting, pilgrimages, and most importantly, collective jihad. Read Surah 9:36 again: "...And fight against those who ascribe divinity to aught beside Allah, all together – just as they fight against you, [Oh, believers] all together."

Modern Islamic apologists extol the virtue of the shortened year, because it allows the fasting month to occur during all the seasons of the year, and thus helps Muslims experience and understand the plight of needy fellow Muslims during all seasons. There are plenty of studies, however, that show that Muslims actually consume 50% more food during Ramadan than during other months in the year. So much for experiencing poverty! Anyone who has seen farmers harvesting their crops at night by lamp-light during Ramadan -- because they physically cannot work the fields without food and water during the harvest season -- would have no sympathy for the merits of a seasonally rotating fasting season.

So this year, I hope my Muslim friends will take time to reflect on the abject failure of Islamic timekeeping to be useful for anything – whether it is knowing when to plant crops or when to schedule a major holiday. A $20 Timex watch almost 50,000 times more accurate.

How the Establishment of a Palestinian State Would Affect the Life of Arabs in Palestine

2011-07-20T13:11:00.000-05:00

With a corrupt P.A. or lawless militant HAMAS in power -- who are incapable of instituting a viable economy -- it's anybody's guess.

"In a war of ideas, it is people who get killed". (Stanisław Jerzy Lec)

History knows many proofs of the famous proverb: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions". High-minded dreams of some result in sweat, tears and blood of others.

Supporting the Palestinian state is a modern tendency. The problem is that nobody has asked Palestinians themselves what that wanted. It is clear that any inhabitant of Jenin or Nablus would without a hitch tell the BBC or CNN correspondents that he longs for Free Palestine. Any other reaction is impossible in a patriarchal or totalitarian society. When foreigners asked a "Homo Soveticus" about his vital values, he immediately recollected his "Love for Motherland". It didn't stop him from savoring jokes about communist leaders, and having a yen for American tape recorders and jeans.

The recent (May 2011) poll of the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion (PCPO) has revealed that 35% of East Jerusalem Arabs would prefer Israeli citizenship, and the same number refrained from answering the question. In case of dividing Jerusalem, 40% said they would try to get over to Israel.

According to a similar poll by Pechter Middle East Polls Institute conducted in January 2011 in 19 Arab quarters of East Jerusalem, 54% of Palestinians prefer to remain under Israeli jurisdiction. 39% were sure that their neighbors were eager to get Israeli passports.

Another PCPO poll was conducted in June 2011 after the reconciliation between FATAH and HAMAS. It showed that Palestinians wanted independence but their major concerns were corruption, unemployment and poverty (36%). Only 30% thought that their most serious problems were Israeli occupation and settlement activity.

This is hardly a sensation. When in 2000 in Camp-David Ehud Barak, the former Israeli Prime Minister expressed readiness to transfer significant parts of East Jerusalem to Arafat, Arab inhabitants of Shuafat and Beit Hanina villages in the North of Jerusalem started buying dwellings in the village of Beit Safafa in South Jerusalem, which would remain within the borders of Israel.

Over many years, Arabs of the West Bank have tried to move to East Jerusalem and obtain Israeli citizenship. Today Arab speeches can be heard in many Jewish quarters of the city. Arabs, both Christians and Muslims, buy apartments here. However, they don’t hesitate to speak in favor of an independent Palestinian state.

These are the realities of the Middle East that are incomprehensible to a Western observer. However, the phenomenon of "split consciousness" has a simple explanation. On the one hand, Palestinians cherish the dream of their own state and destruction of Israel. On the other hand, they want to exist normally here and now putting off their expectations for an uncertain future.

They don't have any sympathies either for the Jews, or for their state. But they want to get jobs in Israel. Moreover, the citizens of East Jerusalem have numerous advantages: medical and social insurance, good job possibilities, government protection from extortion, corruption and gangster bands. They are also protected from HAMAS -- in case it comes to power -- from imposing on them its cruel way of life as in Gaza.

According to official Palestinian data, a couple of years ago about 12,000 Palestinians worked on settlement construction in the West Bank. It was their main and sometimes the only source of livelihood, which they lost after the Palestinian Authority (PA) prohibited Arabs from doing jobs in the construction of Jewish settlements.

But the PA itself is not able to provide any reasonable alternative. From their own contractors, Palestinians receive 100-150 shekels per day but 350-450 shekels a day from the Israeli contractors. Palestinians hope that the houses constructed by their own hands will one day become their property. But today they desperately need money for existence and look sadly at Romanians and Thais replacing them in construction sites in Israel.

The enlightened world was exulted over Israel leaving the Gaza strip. However, the people of Khan Younis hardly shared that enthusiasm, because they used to earn in hothouses of Gush-Katif more in a month than they now receive in a year in the form of humanitarian help or doing odd jobs.

It is not difficult to foresee what will happen when the world unilaterally recognizes the Palestinian state as the Arab nations are now planning to. Existing economic ties between Israel and the PA will collapse; the West Bank will be cut off from Israel; the political atmosphere will make it impossible for Arabs to work in Israel; and the Palestinian economy that has hardly recovered after long years of crisis will again be plunged into chaos.

According to a PCPO poll, today 26% of Palestinians are ready to leave the West Bank. This is anyone's guess how this number will increase in case of sharp deterioration in the economic situation of the new state.

A Palestinian state, unilaterally or otherwise, will probably be proclaimed one day. But its impact on the life and livelihood of Palestinians is not hard to foresee?

Courageous Australian Political Advisor Sacked for Speaking the Truth about Islam

2011-07-10T13:16:00.001-05:00

All he did is posted violent Quranic verses and duly called Muhammad "the first terrorist in the name of Islam" on his Facebook page.

Joseph Adams

Joseph Adams, who worked in the electorate office of the Smithfield Party Liberal of Australia NSW as an adviser, was sacked on Friday for posting violent passages of the Quran on his Facebook page including a description of Prophet Muhammad as "the first terrorist of Islam".

Mr. Adams’ comments angered some of his 1000 Facebook “friends”, which include 15 state government MPs and four ministers.

He was labelled a "bigot" and the ”biggest f—ing racist ever" by his Facebook "friends."

No one will accuse anyone of racism for criticizing Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Communism or any faith or ideology. Yet somehow, some people are convinced that Islam is a race. This false narrative is inculcated in the western world by Muslims many people who refuse to think have bought into it.

”The religious babble you refer to is Islam,” he commented on June 4. ”There was no war. It was terrorism. Muhammad was the first terrorist in the name of Islam.”

He followed up with: “Why are you getting upset? I’m not the one who is teaching others to kill in the name of Islam. Mohommed is not my hero.”

On March 24, he responded to a Facebook ”friend,” Faten Dabs with the comment: ”If you leave Islam it is HALAL for you to be EXECUTED. Lol. No wonder people are afraid to leave Islam.”

Joseph Adams has spoken the truth. The Quran promotes violence and Muhammad was a terrorist. Muslims are afraid of leaving Islam for anyone who does do so, would be killed.

When someone made an absurd comparison between Jesus and Muhammad, and branded him as “a bigot” Adams responded: ”Your biblical quotes are as ridiculous as your comparisons. I guess you never paid attention at Sunday school. Jesus spoke in parables. Mohommed on the other hand gave orders to kill.”

”You seem to like standing up for killers and murderers. Is Ivan Milat a good person too? Perhaps you think Hitler was a great Prophet too? After all he did put a book together called Mein Kampf. Don’t waste our time here Aaron. The only bigot here is someone with an uninformed view.”

Joseph Adams is a courageous man for merely speaking the truth. He, who identifies himself as an Australian of Assyrian Christian descent, told The Sun-Herald on Friday that he was not ”thinking politically” when he made the remarks. It is politically suicidal to speak the truth. ”Rather than listen to what people say about the Koran I decided I would read it myself,” he said.

”It was nothing political. I didn’t think it would be used against me and people would accuse me of being racist.” But sadly we live in a world of bigots and ignoramuses who think Islam is a race and those who speak against this ideology of hate face discrimination and even prosecution.

Facing loss of job, Joseph Adams tried to retract and said, “’What I did was a mistake, I did not think it would be used for political purposes. In my mind I was living in a free society where we value free speech. Why should religion be a taboo subject?”

However, his mistake is to apologize. He should instead fight against being discriminated for speaking the truth. Apologies will only embolden Muslims and they don’t work. The Premier, Barry O’Farrell, did not agree with the apology. Late on Friday a government spokesman said in a statement: ”The comments were totally inappropriate and the staff member has already been terminated.”

Adams’ comments were truth. It is shameful for the O’Farrell to punish a man for speaking the truth. This is a blatant violation of human rights and the freedom of speech. It creates an atmosphere of terror in Australia where those who speak the truth fear doing so and those who promote hate and violence will be emboldened.

Mr O’Farrell won from Labor at the election in one of Sydney’s most multicultural electorates, with 60 per cent of constituents born overseas, primarily Muslims. The politicians who pander to Muslim vote are selling out their freedom for their own politial gain.

White House infiltrated by Muslim Brotherhood

2011-07-07T13:27:00.001-05:00

Canadian anti-Islamist Muslim activist and author Tarek Fatah in a speech claimed that the White House of Obama has been infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood. Well, it's all too obvious.

This is a great speech that everyone should hear. Tarek Fatah is a Canadian-Pakistani Muslim writer who recently beat cancer. Says he:

"In the closing time that I have, I want you to focus - and I hope you can talk to your families and your friends and your neighbors - that when someone says that there is a penetration of jihadi Islamists within Canadian society, do not dismiss it as some right-wing, xenophobic, racist rant."

"Today, in the White House there are three members of the Muslim Brotherhood that influence Obama's policy."

What's the problem with the Muslim Brotherhood? In their own words:

"The Ikhwan [Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions." (Source: An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America)

It is not Islamaphobic

2011-07-01T13:56:00.001-05:00

It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Jihad. Excerpts from the e-book, “Islam and Sharia Law Are Treason: Jihad Is Treason”, which can be downloaded from http://www.godofmoralperfection.org/p9.htm.

In order to immediately stop law abiding citizens from exercising their right of freedom of speech with regard to exposing the hateful, murderous reality that is Islam -- anyone who opposes Islam is branded an evil, racist, bigoted, Islamaphobic to intimidate and shut them up. (For 10 translations of these Quranic verses go to: (http://www.quranbrowser.com/ ). Use this web site throughout this book.

It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Jihad; there are 164 Quranic teachings of Jihad.

JIHAD IS TREASON (Quran 29.6, 29.53, 22.52)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Pre-Pubescent Child Rape (65:4)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Rape (4.3)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Gang Rape (24:13)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Sex Slavery (4:24)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Torture (22.19-22)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Whipping (24.2)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Amputation and Crucifixion (5:33)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Beheading (8:12, 47:4)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Wife Beating (4:34)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Inferiority of Women (2.228, 4.11, 4.176)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Women as Sex Objects (2.223)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Murder (2:191, 9:5)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Killing kafirs (47.4)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Terrorizing kafirs (8.60, 3.151)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Immoral Paradise guaranteeing accession to Paradise for Muslim men who kill kafirs or who die in the process of trying to kill kafirs (9.111)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Massacre (8.67)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Genocide (8.17)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Theft and Robbery (Entire Chapter 8 called Booty)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of All other religions must submit to Islam (2.103, 2.286, 3.19, 48.16)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Your children are your enemies (9.23, 64.15)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Revenge (5.45)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Hate (5.60, 2.61)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Slavery (2.178)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Extortion (9:29)
It is NOT ISLAMAPHOBIC to have a rational fear of Lying (3:28, 5:51)

What is following next in this book is such diabolical evil that you will immediately come down with the dreaded disease of ISLAMAPHOBIA for which the only cure is the Guts and Courage you will need to muster to stand up for democracy and oppose Islam.

In many EU countries it is hate speech to quote from the Quran punishable by large fines and/or jail. The UN is in the process of trying to pass hate speech laws that would criminalize any criticism of Islam worldwide. There have even been mutterings of passing such laws in the US. Islam is hate speech. Below is a very, very small, introductory sampling from the thousands of intolerant, hateful and violent passages inciting extermination, murder, torture, terrorism from the Quran/Hadith. If laws against “Hate speech”, blasphemy, etc. have any meaning today, they should be used against the Quran and Islam, or be entirely abolished. Go to: http://www.islamreform.net/new-page-132.htm

There are no “Palestinian people” and never has been

2011-06-30T12:05:00.002-05:00

According to Arab sources, and authoritative Islamic personalities there are no “Palestinian people” and never has been.

A Muslim Cleric: There Was NEVER A "Palestinian People"

Palestinians are the newest of all the peoples on the face of the Earth, and began to exist in a single day by a kind of supernatural phenomenon that is unique in the whole history of mankind, as it is witnessed by Walid Shoebat, a former PLO terrorist that acknowledged the lie he was fighting for and the truth he was fighting against:

“Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?”
“We did not particularly mind Jordanian rule. The teaching of the destruction of Israel was a definite part of the curriculum, but we considered ourselves Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem. Then all of the sudden we were Palestinians - they removed the star from the Jordanian flag and all at once we had a Palestinian flag”.
“When I finally realized the lies and myths I was taught, it is my duty as a righteous person to speak out”.

This declaration by a true ”Palestinian” should have some significance for a sincerely neutral observer. Indeed, there is no such a thing like a Palestinian people, or a Palestinian culture, or a Palestinian language, or a Palestinian history. There has never been any Palestinian state, neither any Palestinian archaeological find nor coinage. The present-day ”Palestinians” are an Arab people, with Arab culture, Arabic language and Arab history. They have their own Arab states from where they came into the Land of Israel about one century ago to contrast the Jewish immigration. That is the historical truth. They were Jordanians (another recent British invention, as there has never been any people known as ”Jordanians”), and after the Six-Day War in which Israel utterly defeated the coalition of nine Arab states and took legitimate possession of Judea and Samaria, the Arab dwellers in those regions underwent a kind of anthropological miracle and discovered that they were Palestinians - something they did not know the day before.

The Roman emperor Hadrian was utterly upset with the Jewish Nation and wanted to erase the name of Israel and Judah from the face of the Earth, so that there would be no memory of the country that belonged to that rebel people. He decided to replace the denomination of that Roman province and resorted to ancient history in order to find a name that might appear appropriate, and found that an extinct people that was unknown in Roman times, called ”Philistines”, was once dwelling in that area and were enemies of the Israelites. Therefore, according to Latin spelling, he invented the new name: “Palæstina”, a name that would be also hateful for the Jews as it reminded them their old foes. He did so with the explicit purpose of effacing any trace of Jewish history. Ancient Romans, as well as modern Palestinians, have fulfilled the Hebrew Scriptures Prophecy that declares: “They lay crafty plans against Your People… they say: ‘come, let us wipe them out as a nation; let the name of Israel be remembered no more’.” - Tehilim 83:3-4 (Psalm 83:3-4). They failed, as Israel is still alive. Any honest person would recognize that there is no mention of the name Palestina in history before the Romans renamed the province of Judea, that such name does not occur in any ancient document, is not written in the Bible, neither in the Hebrew Scriptures nor in the Christian Testament, not even in Assyrian, Persian, Macedonian, Ptolemaic, Seleucian or other Greek sources, and that not any ”Palestinian” people has ever been mentioned, not even by the Romans that invented the term.

There is no reference to any Palestinian people in the qur’an (koran), although muslims claim that their prophet was once in Jerusalem (an event that is not mentioned in the koran either). It appears evident that he did not meet any Palestinian in his whole life, nor his successors did either. Caliph Salahuddin al-Ayyub (Saladin), knew the Jews and kindly invited them to settle in Jerusalem, that he recognized as their Homeland, but he did not know any Palestinian… To claim that Palestinians are the original people of Eretz Yisrael is not only against secular history but also against Islamic history!

The name ”Falastin” that Arabs today use for ”Palestine” is not an Arabic name, but adopted and adapted from the Latin Palæstina . How can an Arab people have a western name instead of one in their own language?

An Arab writer and journalist declared:

“There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of one percent of the landmass. But that’s too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today… No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough”.

- Joseph Farah, ”Myths of the Middle East” -

Arabs have said:

“There is no such country as Palestine. ’Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. ‘Palestine’ is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it”.

- Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -

“There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not”.

- Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -

“It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria”.

- Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -

When the State of Israel was reborn in 1948 c.e., the ”Palestinians” did not exist yet, the Arabs had still not discovered that ”ancient” people. They were too busy with the purpose of annihilating the new Sovereign State and did not intend to create any Palestinian entity, but only to distribute the land among the already existing Arab states. They were defeated. They attempted again to destroy Israel in 1967, and were humiliated in only six days, in which they lost the lands that they had usurped in 1948. In those 19 years of Arab occupation of Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip, neither Jordan nor Egypt suggested to create a “Palestinian” state, since the still non-existing Palestinians would have never claimed their alleged right to have their own state… Paradoxically, during the British Mandate, it was not any Arab group but the Jews that were known as “Palestinians”!

Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:

“There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity… yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel”.

- Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -

“You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people”.

- Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -

“As I lived in Palestine, everyone I knew could trace their heritage back to the original country their great grandparents came from. Everyone knew their origin was not from the Canaanites, but ironically, this is the kind of stuff our education in the Middle East included. The fact is that today’s Palestinians are immigrants from the surrounding nations! I grew up well knowing the history and origins of today’s Palestinians as being from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Christians from Greece, muslim Sherkas from Russia, muslims from Bosnia, and the Jordanians next door. My grandfather, who was a dignitary in Bethlehem, almost lost his life by Abdul Qader Al-Husseni (the leader of the Palestinian revolution) after being accused of selling land to Jews. He used to tell us that his village Beit Sahur (The Shepherds Fields) in Bethlehem County was empty before his father settled in the area with six other families. The town has now grown to 30,000 inhabitants”.

- Walid Shoebat, an ”ex-Palestinian” Arab -

How long do ”Palestinians” live in “Palestine”?

According to the United Nations weird standards, any person that spent TWO YEARS (!!!) in “Palestine” before 1948, with or without proof, is a ”Palestinian”, as well as all the descendants of that person.

It is thoroughly documented that the first inhabitants of Eretz Yisrael after some centuries were the Jewish pioneers, and not the Arabs so-called Palestinians. Some eyewitnesses have written their memories about the Land before the Jewish immigration:

“There is not a solitary village throughout its whole extent (valley of Jezreel, Galilea); not for thirty miles in either direction… One may ride ten miles hereabouts and not see ten human beings. For the sort of solitude to make one dreary, come to Galilee… Nazareth is forlorn… Jericho lies a mouldering ruin… Bethlehem and Bethany, in their poverty and humiliation… untenanted by any living creature… A desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds… a silent, mournful expanse… a desolation… We never saw a human being on the whole route… Hardly a tree or shrub anywhere. Even the olive tree and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil had almost deserted the country… Palestine sits in sackcloth and ashes… desolate and unlovely…”.

- Mark Twain, ”The Innocents Abroad”, 1867 -

Where had the Palestinians been hidden that Mark Twain did not see them? Where was that “ancient” people in the mid XIX century c.e.? Of course, modern biased Arab politicians try to discredit Mark Twain and insult and blame him of racism. Yet, it seems that there were other people that did not achieve in recognizing a single Palestinian in those times and earlier:

“In 1590 a ’simple English visitor’ to Jerusalem wrote: ’Nothing there is to bescene but a little of the old walls, which is yet remayning and all the rest is grasse, mosse and weedes much like to a piece of rank or moist grounde’.”.

- Gunner Edward Webbe, Palestine Exploration Fund,
Quarterly Statement, p. 86; de Haas, History, p. 338 -

“The land in Palestine is lacking in people to till its fertile soil”.

- British archaeologist Thomas Shaw, mid-1700s -

“Palestine is a ruined and desolate land”.

- Count Constantine François Volney, XVIII century French author and historian -

“The area was underpopulated and remained economically stagnant until the arrival of the first Zionist pioneers in the 1880′s, who came to rebuild the Jewish land. The country had remained ”The Holy Land” in the religious and historic consciousness of mankind, which associated it with the Bible and the history of the Jewish people. Jewish development of the country also attracted large numbers of other immigrants - both Jewish and Arab. The road leading from Gaza to the north was only a summer track suitable for transport by camels and carts… Houses were all of mud. No windows were anywhere to be seen… The plows used were of wood… The yields were very poor… The sanitary conditions in the village [Yabna] were horrible… Schools did not exist… The rate of infant mortality was very high… The western part, toward the sea, was almost a desert… The villages in this area were few and thinly populated. Many ruins of villages were scattered over the area, as owing to the prevalence of malaria, many villages were deserted by their inhabitants”.

- The report of the British Royal Commission, 1913 -

The Bottom line is that the So called “West Bank” (The Biblical lands of Judea and Samaria) were lands under the sovereignty of Jordan till they attacked Israel and lost the war and the land.

Gaza also was ruled by Egypt till that they attack Israel and lost the war and the land.

Egypt now does not want Gaza back and neither does Jordan want back The Biblical lands of Judea and Samaria.

There is no “Palestinian people” and never has been.

The United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine was a resolution adopted on 29 November 1947 by the General Assembly of the United Nations. Its title was United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) Future Government of Palestine.

The resolution recommended the termination of the British Mandate for Palestine and the partition of the territory into two states, one Jewish and one Arab, with the Jerusalem-Bethlehem area being under special international protection, administered by the United Nations

The proposed plan was accepted by the leaders of the Jewish community in Palestine, through the Jewish Agency.However, the plan was rejected by leaders of the Arab community (the Palestine Arab Higher Committee etc.), who were supported in their rejection by the states of the Arab League. In a communication to the United Nations Palestine Commission dated 19 January 1948, the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine stated that it was ”determined [to] persist in rejection [to the] partition and in refusal [to] recognize UNO resolution [with] this respect and anything deriving therefrom”.

On the day before the United Kingdom was to complete its withdrawal, (i.e. 14 May 1948) the Jewish community in Palestine published a Declaration of Independence as the State of Israel, and five Arab armies crossed into the former Mandate as the start of the 1948 Arab–Israeli War.

Arab leaders threatened the Jewish population of Palestine, speaking of ”driving the Jews into the sea” and ridding Palestine ”of the Zionist Plague”. On the eve of the Arab armies invasion, Azzam Pasha, the General Secretary of the Arab League, “describing the fate of the Jews” is said to have declared: ”This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades”

and

http://www.imninalu.net/myths-pals.htm

Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands The Arabs lost their wars with Israel and need to get over it, and get on with their lives.

Israel is mentioned in the Bible 2498 times!

The Truth About the Palestinian People

2011-06-30T12:00:00.000-05:00

The 1948 Israeli War of Independence was between the neighboring Arab countries and the newly formed state of Israel. The Arab countries did not send troops to help the people that are today known as "Palestinians" but rather they sent troops to drive the Jews into the sea. Most of the "Palestinian Arabs" fled to avoid the fighting. Remember, in 1948 they were not referred to as "Palestinians". This name was invented by newspapers around the world after 1967.

United Nations Resolution 181 partitioned the territory from the British Mandate for Palestine into two states - one for Jews and one for Palestinian Arabs. All of the Arab countries objected to the creation of the Jewish state and fought a war against its creation. This was Israel's War of Independence in 1948. Despite their superior numbers, the Arab countries lost the war and the Palestinian state never materialized because of this loss. In the war that was waged, the territory allotted to be the Palestinian state by the UN partition resolution was divided between Israel and Jordan. The "Palestinian Arabs" were rejected by every single Arab country, with the exception of the small percentage that ended up in refugee camps in Jordan where they remain to this day.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=09pmTh64vD8

The History of the Region

To understand the truth of modern day Israel, you must first have a clear understanding of the history of the region.

Judea was an autonomous state in the Persian Empire following the return from Babylonian exile thanks to Cyrus, King of Persia. Following the death of Alexander the Great who had captured the Persian Empire, it became part of two Hellenistic.

Following the Maccabean revolt, Judea became an independent state. Following the death of King Herod, the Romans seized it and it then became a Roman province. Judea was briefly independent during the first revolt against the Romans until it was finally destroyed when the Romans put down the revolt and destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in the year 70.

Judah lost its independence to Rome in the year 70 and became again a colony. In the year 135, the Romans gave the country the name "Palaestina". The name Palaestina, which became Palestine in English, is derived from Herodotus, who used the term Palaistine Syria to refer to the entire southern part of Syria, meaning "Philistine Syria." This was to add insult to injury against the Jewish people. The intent was to remove any memory of a Jewish presence. The name was kept by the next possessors, the Byzantine Empire, and then by the conquering Arabs and their successors, the conquering Turks. Note that we have a succession of different nationalities, none of whom thought of themselves as Palestinians. They were the Romans, Byzantines, Arabs, or Turks.

About 61 B.C., Roman troops under Pompei invaded Judea and sacked Jerusalem in support of King Herod. Judea had become a client state of Rome. During the seventh century (A.D. 600's), Muslim Arab armies moved north from Arabia to conquer most of the Middle East, including Palestine. The Seljuk Turks conquered Jerusalem in 1071, but their rule in Palestine lasted less than 30 years.

During the 7^th century, Muslims invaded and the Crusaders from Europe ruled for a time until they were driven out. The Crusaders left Palestine for good when the Muslims captured Acre in 1291. During the post-crusade period, crusaders often raided the coast of Palestine. To deny the Crusaders gains from these raids, the Muslims pulled their people back from the coasts and destroyed coastal towns and farms. This depopulated and impoverished the coast of Palestine for hundreds of years.

In the mid-1200's, Mamelukes, originally soldier-slaves of the Arabs based in Egypt, established an empire that in time included the area of Palestine that lasted until the Ottoman Empire defeated the Mamelukes in 1517, and Palestine became part of the Ottoman Empire. The Turkish Sultan invited Jews fleeing the Spanish Catholic inquisition to settle in the Turkish empire, including several cities in Palestine. The Ottoman Empire ruled until the British took control of the area in 1917.

In 1922, the British declared that the boundary of Palestine would be limited to the area west of the river. The area east of the river, called Transjordan, which is now the country of Jordan, was made a separate British mandate and eventually given independence. The British maintained control until 1948.

There was always a Jewish population in the region, most of them resided in the religious communities in Jerusalem, Tz'fat, Tiberius, and Hebron. With Jewish immigration suddenly on the rise from the 1880's on, the economy of this very under populated and very poor country began to rise dramatically, attracting a parallel stream of Arabs from the surrounding countries who came in looking for jobs. At the same time, Arab/Muslim nationalism and extremism began to rise, spurred by the influx of what they considered "Infidel Jews" and the breakup of the Turkish Empire followed by the occupation by European countries of much of the Middle East.

From this time through the War of Independence in 1947-49, there were local Arab leaders who called for an independent Palestine (Arab state) in the entire country with not a single inch for a Jewish state. During the 1948 Israeli War of Independence, the local Arab armies and leaders identified with Syria, Jordan, and Egypt and thought of themselves as such. At the end of the war, the Arab allotted land was divided between Israel, Egypt (Gaza), and Jordan. The Egyptians refused to let the Gazans become independent or Egyptian citizens. Eventually, the Jordanians did allow some refugees become citizens, but not all. The Arab states are content to let their brother Arabs remain in those refugee camps that are really crowded and squalid towns and live like that since the UN supported them. Because of this, they make a great political tool used to invoke sympathy, especially in regard to the European countries. That is crass, unfeeling politics, but these same people do not hesitate to strap bombs to their young men and women.

Another reason why the Palestinian Arabs fled is that they refused to live in a Jewish dominated state. Ironically, had they accepted the partition and those in Israel not fled, Israel would have had a huge and growing Arab population and indefensible borders.

A Few Forgotten Facts

1. Israel became a nation in 1312 BCE, two thousand years before the rise of Islam.

2. Arab refugees in Israel began identifying themselves as part of a Palestinian people in 1967, two decades after the establishment of the modern State of Israel.

3. Since the Jewish conquest in 1272 BCE, the Jews have had dominion over the land for one thousand years with a continuous presence in the land for the past 3,300 years.

4. The only Arab dominion since the conquest in 635 CE lasted no more than 22 years.

5. For over 3,300 years, Jerusalem has been the Jewish capital Jerusalem has never been the capital of any Arab or Muslim entity. Even when the Jordanians occupied Jerusalem, they never sought to make it their capital, and Arab leaders did not come to visit.

6. Jerusalem is mentioned over 700 times in Tanach, the Jewish Holy Scriptures. Jerusalem is not mentioned once in the Koran.

7. King David founded the city of Jerusalem. Mohammed never came to Jerusalem.

8. Jews pray facing Jerusalem. Muslims pray with their backs toward Jerusalem.

9. In 1948 the Arab refugees were encouraged to leave Israel by Arab leaders promising to purge the land of Jews. Sixty-eight percent left without ever seeing an Israeli soldier.

10. The Jewish refugees were forced to flee from Arab lands due to Arab brutality, persecution, and slaughter.

11. The number of Arab refugees who left Israel in 1948 is estimated to be around 630,000. The number of Jewish refugees from Arab lands is estimated to be the same.

12. Arab refugees were intentionally not absorbed or integrated into the Arab lands to which they fled, despite the vast Arab territory. Out of the 100,000,000 refugees since World War II, theirs is the only refugee group in the world that has never been absorbed or integrated into their own people's lands. Jewish refugees were completely absorbed into Israel, a country no larger than the state of New Jersey.

13. The Arabs are represented by eight separate nations, not including the Palestinians. There is only one Jewish nation. The Arab nations initiated all five wars and lost. Israel defended itself each time and won.

14. The PLO's Charter still calls for the destruction of the State of Israel. Israel has given the Palestinians most of the West Bank land, autonomy under the Palestinian Authority, and has supplied them.

15. Under Jordanian rule, Jewish holy sites were desecrated and the Jews were denied access to places of worship. Under Israeli rule, all Muslim and Christian sites have been preserved and made accessible to people of all faiths.

16. The UN Record on Israel and the Arabs: of the 175 Security Council resolutions passed before 1990, 97 were directed against Israel.

17. Of the 690 General Assembly resolutions voted on before 1990, 429 were directed against Israel.

18. The UN was silent while 58 Jerusalem Synagogues were destroyed by the Jordanians.

19. The UN was silent while the Jordanians systematically desecrated the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives.

20. The UN was silent while the Jordanians enforced an apartheid-like a policy of preventing Jews from visiting the Temple Mount and the Western Wall.

The Modern Day Conflict

From the 1948 Israeli War of Independence, "Palestinian Arabs" have been sacrificed as pawns by all other Arab countries as they are to this day. No other Arab country has ever offered to accept any of these people into their own countries even though they are well able to do so. To the Arab countries and the rest of the anti-Semitic world, the "Palestinian Arabs" are useful only as a tool to exterminate Israel and the rest of the Jews in the Middle East. Otherwise, their welfare is of no concern to the rest of the Arab world.

What about the ingrained notion that the Palestinians are fighting for their ancient homeland annexed by the Jews? The truth about this matter has been so deliberately obscured that even to raise the issue seems strange to many people.

In the 1967 war, also known as the Six Day War, did Israel annex territory from a Palestinian nation? No, Israel did not take a single inch of territory from Palestine. That is because there is not, nor has there ever been, a Palestinian nation. Israel captured the West Bank and Eastern Jerusalem from Jordan's King Hussein and the Gaza Strip from Egypt, after they declared war against the Jewish State. It was only following the Six-day War in 1967 that Arab refugees living in these territories began identifying themselves as the "Palestinian People" because the global media labeled them as such. One cannot help but wonder why these Palestinians suddenly discovered a national identity after Israel won the war, but not during the "Jordanian Occupation" or the "Egyptian Occupation"?

There Was Never A Country Called Palestine

If you consider Palestine to be a "Sovereign" and "Independent" country that goes back through most of recorded history as many would have you to believe, then a few questions need to be answered:

When was it founded and by whom?

What were its borders?

What was its capital?

Who was the President?

What was its form of government?

What were its major cities?

What constituted the basis of its economy?

Who was the Palestinian leader before Yasser Arafat?

Was Palestine ever recognized by a country whose existence, at that time or now, leaves no room for interpretation?

What was the language of the country of Palestine?

What was the prevalent religion of the country of Palestine?

What was the name of its currency and what was the approximate exchange rate of the Palestinian monetary unit against the US dollar, German mark, GB pound, or Japanese yen on any particular date?

And, finally, since there is no such country today, what caused its demise and when did it occur?

If these so-called "Palestinians" are anything but a generic collection of Arabs from all over the rest of the Arab world and if they really have a genuine ethnic identity that gives them right for self-determination, then why did they never try to become an independent and sovereign nation until Arabs suffered their devastating defeat in the Six Day War in 1967?

The Ten Commandments of Arab Lies

The "Palestinian People" have an historic connection to the land.
This is very interesting since there is no such thing as a "Palestinian People". When the Romans changed the name of Israel to Palestine, the people living there at the time were Jews, not Arabs. If there had been a "Palestinian People", which there never was, they would have been Jews.

The Palestinian People have been in the land from time immemorial.
For centuries pre-Israel Palestine was a forgotten, desolate wasteland inhabited by a remnant of Jews, along with some Christians and wandering Bedouins who certainly had no thought of a national identity of any kind.

There were no Jews in Palestine until Israel became a state in 1948.
The Romans officially banished the Jews from Israel (Palestine) in 135 CE. However, historical records show there was always a Jewish presence in the land. While many were scattered, other Jews simply moved out of harm's way until a less hostile power ruled the land. Jews were returning to what is now Israel well before 1948. Many left Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917.

Arabs and Jews lived in harmony before Israel became a state.
Throughout the centuries, Jews as well as Christians, living under Islamic rule suffered persecution and humiliation, the intensity of which was determined by the character of a particular Moslem ruler. As second-class citizens, there was never a "good time" for non-Muslims living under Islamic rule. Because of the way that most Islamic countries look down on non-Muslims, they are always considered second-class citizens and less than equal. Arabs have rarely lived in harmony with anyone if they were the majority.

The returning Jews displaced the Palestinian Arabs
The ancestors of most of the present-day Arab population migrated to the land after Jewish pioneers began to reclaim the land. They came from many different countries and were not original inhabitants of the land.

The Jews stole Arab land
Jews returning to the land settled on unclaimed, unoccupied land or bought land from absentee Arab landowners at outrageously high prices. This is a matter of record.

The Jews forced Arabs to flee Palestine
When Israel was declared a state in 1948, leaders from the surrounding Arab countries declared war on Israel and instructed the Arab civilians living in the land to flee until the Jews were annihilated. Israeli leaders, to no avail, urged the Arabs to stay. Property that they owned was abandoned.

The Jews caused the Arab refugee problem
If Arab countries would assimilate and care for the "Palestinian" refugees, as Israel did for their Jewish refugees, there would be no refugee problem. Instead they use the refugees as political pawns in their struggle against Israel. No Arab country that wants "Palestinian Arabs" in their country as they would rather use the "Palestinian Arabs" as pawns rather than assimilate them into their populations and bring peace to the Middle East.

Israel is the aggressor against defenseless Palestinians
In its brief history, Israel has had one war after another and each time they are blamed as the aggressor. The Arabs do not recognize the right of Israel to exist and are in a constant state of hostility against Israel. Their aim is to destroy Israel.

Jerusalem is holy to Muslims
While Jerusalem is mentioned over eight hundred times in the Bible, it is not mentioned one time in the Koran. Muslims have had little or no interest in Jerusalem until the Jewish presence in modern times.

THE JEWISH SITUATION
by
Larry Miller

A brief overview of the situation is always valuable, so as a service to all Americans who still do not get it, I now offer you the story of the Middle East in just a few paragraphs, which is all you really need. Don't thank me. I am a giver. Here we go:

The Palestinians want their own country. There is just one thing about that: There are no Palestinians. It is a made up word. Israel was called Palestine for two thousand years. Like "Wiccan", "Palestinian" sounds ancient but is really a modern invention. Before the Israelis won the land in war, Gaza belonged to Egypt and there were no "Palestinians" then. The West Bank belonged to Jordan, and there were no "Palestinians" then. As soon as the Jews took over and started growing oranges as big as basketballs, what do you know, say hello to the "Palestinians", weeping for their deep bond with their lost "land" and "nation." So for the sake of honesty, let us not use the word "Palestinian" any more to describe these delightful folks, who dance for joy at our deaths until someone points out they are being taped. Instead, call them what they are: "Other Arabs From The Same General Area Who Are In Deep Denial About Never Being Able To Accomplish Anything In Life And Would Rather Wrap Themselves In The Seductive Melodrama Of Eternal Struggle And Death." I know that is a bit unwieldy to expect to see on CNN. How about this, then: "Adjacent Jew-Haters."

Okay, so the Adjacent Jew-Haters want their own country. Oops, just one more thing. No, they do not. They could have had their own country any time in the last thirty years, especially two years ago at Camp David. But if you have your own country, you have to have traffic lights and garbage trucks and Chambers of Commerce, and, worse, you actually have to figure out some way to make a living. That is no fun. No, they want what all the other Jew-Haters in the region want: Israel. They also want a big pile of dead Jews, of course - that is where the real fun is - but mostly they want Israel. Why? For one thing, trying to destroy Israel - or "The Zionist Entity" as their textbooks call it - for the last fifty years has allowed the rulers of Arab countries to divert the attention of their own people away from the fact that they are the blue-ribbon most illiterate, poorest, and tribally backward on God's Earth, and if you have ever been around God's Earth, you know that is really saying something. It makes me roll my eyes every time one of our pundits waxes poetic about the great history and culture of the Muslim Mideast. Unless I am missing something, the Arabs have not given anything to the world since Algebra, and, by the way, thanks a hell of a lot for that one.

Chew this around and spit it out: Five hundred million Arabs; five million Jews. Think of all the Arab countries as a football field, and Israel as a pack of matches sitting in the middle of it. And now these same folks swear that if Israel gives them half of that pack of matches, everyone will be pals. Really? Wow, what neat news. Hey, but what about the string of wars to obliterate the tiny country and the constant din of rabid blood oaths to drive every Jew into the sea? Oh, that? We were just kidding.

My friend Kevin Rooney made a gorgeous point the other day: Just reverse the numbers. Imagine five hundred million Jews and five million Arabs. I was stunned at the simple brilliance of it. Can anyone picture the Jews strapping belts of razor blades and dynamite to themselves? Of course not. Or marshalling every fiber and force at their disposal for generations to drive a tiny Arab state into the sea? Nonsense. Or dancing for joy at the murder of innocents? Impossible. Or spreading and believing horrible lies about the Arabs baking their bread with the blood of children? Disgusting. No, as you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death.

Mr. Bush, God bless him, is walking a tightrope. I understand that with vital operations coming up against Iraq and others, it is in our interest, as Americans, to try to stabilize our Arab allies as much as possible, and, after all, that cannot be much harder than stabilizing a roomful of supermodels that have just had their drugs taken away. However, in any big-picture strategy, there is always a danger of losing moral weight. We have already lost some. After September 11th our president told us and the world he was going to root out all terrorists and the countries that supported them. Beautiful. Then the Israelis, after months and months of having the equivalent of an Oklahoma City every week and then every day, start to do the same thing we did, and we tell them to show restraint. If America were being attacked with an Oklahoma City every day, we would all very shortly be screaming for the administration to just be done with it and kill everything south of the Mediterranean and east of the Jordan. (Hey, wait a minute, that is actually not such a bad idea... uh, that is, what a horrible thought, yeah, horrible.)

To see the true agenda of what the "Palestinians" and the rest of radical Islam really stand for and the hatred that is at their core beliefs, look at "Islam - A Religion Based on Terrorism".

Palestinian terrorists use the "Road Map to Peace" to plan their next attack

Courtesy of John Pritchett

Below are some additional links on the true dangers of Islam that might prove informative.

10 Obvious Reasons Why Islam is NOT a Religion of Peace

15 Iraqi War Myths

HAMAS Charter of 1988

Islam - A Religion Based on Terrorism

Islamic Terrorism in Israel

Jews and Muslims - An Intellectual Comparison

Quotes From The Islamic World

When World War III Started

On a final note, in all of the writing and reporting on Israel, there is one undisputed fact that is consistently forgotten and ignored. That fact is that Israel is the only nation in the Middle East who has ever properly protected sites holy to each religion and the rights of all to worship in Jerusalem and all of Israel. No Islamic nation can come close to making that claim.

Back to Editorials

Islam Commands Honour Killing Woman Stoned to Death

2011-06-26T13:26:00.000-05:00

Muslims in Pakistan stoned a woman to death on charges of adultery by following the Prophet's command 100%.

Multiple authentic hadiths say that Prophet Muhammad had ordered stoning to death of a number of people for adultery. For example

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

Volume 8, Book 82, Number 842:

Narrated Abu Huraira and Zaid bin Khalid Al-Juhani: A man came to the Prophet and said, “I beseech you to judge us according to Allah’s Laws.” Then his opponent who was wiser than he, got up and said, “He has spoken the truth. So judge us according to Allah’s Laws and please allow me (to speak), O Allah’s Apostle.” The Prophet said, “Speak.” He said, “My son was a laborer for the family of this man and he committed illegal sexual intercourse with his wife, and I gave one-hundred sheep and a slave as a ransom (for my son), but I asked the religious learned people (regarding this case), and they informed me that my son should be flogged one-hundred stripes, and be exiled for one year, and the wife of this man should be stoned (to death).”The Prophet said, “By Him in Whose Hand my soul is, I will Judge you (in this case) according to Allah’s Laws. The one-hundred (sheep) and the slave shall be returned to you and your son shall be flogged one-hundred stripes and be exiled for one year. And O Unais! Go in the morning to the wife of this man and ask her, and if she confesses, stone her to death.” She confessed and he stoned her to death.

Following this sacred tradition of the Prophet, Muslims in Mardan, Pakistan, stoned a woman adulterer to death three days ago. More blood on the hands of the 'Prophet' of Islam.

Five held in Mardan honour killing case

dawn.com | June 23, 2011

MARDAN, June 22: The local police on Wednesday arrested five of the 14 accused who stoned and shot a woman to death in Bairoch village here on Tuesday.

Police said that they had been conducting raids for the arrest of the remaining accused, including Mohammad Saeed, husband of the victim Shazia. Rustam police station SHO Shah Mumtaz Khan said that according to the postmortem report, the victim received several injuries on her head, face and other parts of body.

It was learnt that sometime back Saeed had killed his own brother on suspicion of having illicit relations with Shazia.

A resident of the area, who requested anonymity, said that Shazia, 23, had received injuries in that occurrence following which she had left her husband's home and started living with her mother, Noor Jehan. Sources said that Saeed had been required to police in the murder of his brother.

According to preliminary investigation, the SHO said that Shazia, a resident of Barikot in Swat district, had entered into a love marriage with Saeed of Bairoch village six months ago.

He said that according to their information Shazia had left her husband's house after some domestic dispute and was residing with her mother, who is complainant in the present case.

Islam Will Be Destroyed in 20 Years

2011-06-26T13:20:00.001-05:00

In around 2002 or 2003, I was frequently searching for reading materials in websites about atheism. Most of the available literature was about refuting the Christan belief. There was virtually no anti-Islamic literature on the internet. But....Now-a-days, anti-Islamic literature on the internet is skyrocketing.

Dear Ali Sina (editor of Faithfreedom.org),

Thank you very much for your good work for the humanity. I am a Bangladeshi ex-Muslim. For safety concern, I used my pseudonym here.

You Ali Sina once wrote on FFI that Islam will soon be destroy and there is a probability that we will see the destruction of Islam in your lifetime.

When I read that article, I could not believe your claim that Islam will be destroy so soon.

But now, I firmly belief that claim. I can see hope for the humanity.

I had doubt about God since I was young. At that time, there was no anti-Islamic book or reading materials that I managed to collect.

But since 4-5 years ago, the situation started to change. Now-a-days, anti-Islamic literature on the internet is skyrocketing. The amount of anti-Islamic writings are growing exponentially.

Peoples are becoming more and more conscious about the danger of Islam. Now I see the light of hope. I can see that within next 5 years, the dishonest liberal-leftist dominated governments of the western world will be replaced by honest, true freedom-loving parties. During the next 10 years, the western civilized world will actively start to fight back against the most barbaric evil ideology ever created in human history. I believe that like Nazism and communism, Islam will be destroyed in the next 20 years.

Your work ignited in the change which already happened in the internet world. In the coming days, we will see change in the real world. Continue the good work.

Best wishes.
David Angel

Personal blog: http://david-angel.blogspot.com/

Muslim and Proud! What Are Muslims Proud of?

2011-06-25T13:16:00.002-05:00

It is common to find instances of a Muslim proclaiming either in person or on the internet that he is "Proud to be a Muslim". Every time I hear this statement, I never fail to wonder: What exactly are Muslims are so proud of?

Their women are enslaved and treated like children, their countries are third-world backwaters stagnated by an obviously out-dated religion, their youth is constantly angry, they are lacking in all fields of studies whether it be science, literature or discovery, illiteracy is extremely high, they have failed to reform Islam to make it a more acceptable religion in a world much different from the 7th century, their countries have no freedom of speech or expression…

I can go on at length and possibly write a whole book on pervasive and serious problems, many of which are unique to Muslim communities and caused by Islam. Islamic countries’ crimes and problems are ignored and hidden, not dealt with because problems are not suppose to exist in an Islamic society. Muslims have developed a fetish for finding faults with the West as if that makes their own faults disappear.

Again, What is it that Muslims are so proud of?

Muslims follow a dead Arab who could not resist his sexual attraction to a child and ended up having sex with a 9 year old baby girl called Ayesha, as admitted by Ayesha herself in countless hadith. They follow a dead Arab who ordered people to be stoned to death, who ordered people’s hands and feet to be cut off over petty theft, who is responsible for the murder of thousands of non-Muslims. Muslims follow a complete fraud who taught hate and a divisive religion.

Again, What is it that Muslims are so proud of?

Give this madness up. Allah does not exist… Muhammad lied… everything is explained when you recognize that simple historical fact. All the countless failures of Islam start making sense. Islam is the noose that strangles the Muslims and prevents them from producing a modern country.

This article is not to ridicule or insult Muslims but to make them think about their circumstances and face reality. How long will Muslims live in denial and say these problems somehow do not exist. To improve, the first step is to acknowledge that there is a problem. This is why this article was written, so the Muslim reading it can acknowledge that there is a problem and start doing something about it. Instead of wasting time bowing down to the wall in their rooms, Muslims need to spend it solving the problems facing Muslim majority countries. Sorry Muslims, but following a dead warlord who had sex with a child is not something to be proud of, but something to be ashamed of.

RADICAL ISLAM - The Number One “ ZOMBIE PARASITE.”

2011-06-24T17:35:00.000-05:00

It is accurate to compare radical Islam with other forms of parasitic lifeforms who hijack their host bodies, creating zombie slaves to spread themselves even farther.

One such example of parasitic control is the Leucochloridium,( related to tapeworms), which inhabits the body of a snail but must complete its life cycle in the body of a songbird. Birds don’t find snails to be particularly appetising and would not normally notice them lurking in the shadows, but the parasite is able to control and alter the snail’s behaviour ( mind control) so that it is forced to endanger itself by seeking the open sunlight and, more disturbingly, it also warps the snail’s appearance to resemble something tastier

Leucochloridium’s colourful, pulsating ‘brood sacs’ grow within the snail’s eye stalks, transforming them into what resemble fat, striped caterpillars or maggotts.

Birds spot the lure from the air, rip the snail’s face off, and end up spreading the parasites around in their droppings.
The snail, meanwhile, will grow back its tentacles to repeat the grim process again and again.

In our example we witness radical Islam’s subtle ‘mind control’ which is cleverly cloaked under the guise of “Political Correctness.” and creeps under the radar of the host’s self imposed censorship.

Western culture has long ago set itself up for such a take over, having laid the groundwork by the acceptance of such nonsensical admonishments from parents to children that it is “not polite to discuss Religion or Politics” in open company.

The result is a generation of soft minded, apathetic people who will pretty much roll over for anything.

How bizarre in our case that the “victim” is rendered mute and unable to sound a warning against the foreign invader but must continue to nurture and harbour the parasite as it feeds on the victims lifeblood until it destroys it.

In recent times we have seen ample evidence of the emerging influence of a vocal , minority group, of do-gooder; well meaning; namby pamby; wishy washy ;bleeding heart Civil Rights activists and professional campaigners. All jumping up and down and attempting to deny the majority of individuals the right to criticise or voice concerns about any moral and social issues.

Remember, don’t talk about Religion or Politics – you will be vilified and shunned. !!

In Sweden and Denmark it has already been Legislated that it is illegal to criticise any ethnic; cultural or religious group and there is no such thing as a free press in that country.

Let’s not talk about the extraordinarily high numbers of brutal rapes by Muslim men against Swedish women.

The thing that typifies these offences is the extremely high level of violence involved – which speaks of the core attitudes of Muslim extremists towards Western European women.

According to the Swedish press this is not happening – but in neighbouring Norway they are free to reveal the true story of what atrocities are actually being committed.

Even in Australia our Law enforcement officers in recent times have been gagged - to prevent them from describing serious sex offenders as being “of middle eastern appearance .”

Anyone who dares to resist this attempt to be gagged is promptly labelled a racist or bigot or some other equally derogatory title.

In Holland we see even worse developments as typified by the death threats made against Geert Wilders (Elected Member of the Dutch Government) because he has the courage to speak out against the very real threat that radical Islam and Muslim extremists pose to our Western societies.

On a local level, I am a little disappointed that the radical Islamists in our midst did not seem to realise that Australia was a Christian country before they fled their war torn, impoverished and ravaged countries. It is only now, after we have accepted their request to share in this “Lucky Country” that they are conspiring to influence our Australian way of life and attempting to impose their foreign culture and anachronistic views, as they have succeeded in doing throughout Europe and Asia.

For example, could you imagine being able to publish any literature in the Islamic, middle eastern countries which expounded on our Western values; lifestyles; attitudes and religious beliefs. ?

To further stretch your imagination – how about having this funded by a local charitable group ?

But wait, there’s more !. How about also being sponsored by a prominent, local University and being invited by the local ruling Regime to actually distribute this ‘inflamatory’ literature amongst their Primary and Secondary Schools !!

No way you say ! And I would have to agree – that is pushing things beyond the fringe of credibility.

Well how ironic that this is exactly what we have allowed the Isalmists to do right here in Australia.

Ladies and Gentlemen, please welcome “Learning from One Another” (Bringing Muslim perspectives into Australian Schools.) by Eeqbal Hassim and Jennet Cole-Adams.

This publication has been funded by The Myer Foundation and sponsored and published by the University of Melbourne.

In addition to this debacle it is also being distributed by the Australian Curriculum Studies Association and the ACSA is encouraging widespread use by all Australian Primary and Secondary School teachers as a teaching resource.

This weighty political publication is outright propaganda and seeks to present Islam in a false light while deliberately omitting the hard core issues that put Islam at odds with Western civilisation.

Critical issues such as the oppression of women; Islam’s views on World domination and attitudes towards the infidels (non believers in Islam) – that’s you and me…..

Let us not make the same mistake that Nazi Germany made when they refused to either read or believe what that crazy little guy ( Adolf Hitler ) wrote in his book – ‘Mein Kampf’ –“My Struggle”.

Hitler made it very clear as to his plans and intentions for World domination and exactly how he planned to achieve this goal. Even spelling out his hatred for certain ethnic and cultural groups.

The World ignored this blueprint for terror and paid an enormous price in suffering and human lives lost.

Radical Islam has adopted at least one strategy from Hitler and that is his belief that “The great masses of the people will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one”.

So we are told “Islam is a religion of Peace”.

The Christian Bible (Mat.7:16-20) says “The tree is judged by its fruits –by their fruits you shall know them”……… What do you think. ?

Australia today stands at the crossroads where tough choices need to be made.

Let us learn from the mistakes of Paris; London; Germany and Scandinavia. Let us not have our freedoms and values hijacked by a small but vocal group of peasants; bullies and cowards – Muslim Extremists.

History has shown us how our previously elected Australian Governments have made some monumental errors of judgement. Poor decisions that are still costing our country dearly today.

Let us remember their decisions to import into this country such curses as :

Blackberries.
Paspalum.
Rabbits.
Cane Toads.

And, finally, the worst scourge of all………………….

Radical Islam.

Islam’s text is sugar coated in translation:

2011-06-22T17:19:00.000-05:00

Non-Muslims or exMuslims who know Islam’s text in the Arabic and particularly those who know classical Arabic (few people) will tell you that the text is ‘worse’ meaning more horrifying and more deadly in the original classical Arabic than we are led to believe in English ‘translations.’ Islamic terminology carries with it concepts, cultural practices and a worldview belonging to an ancient Arab society. The words translated into English or modern European languages fail to convey the full meaning that would be understood in an Arabic/Muslim society. Only the original classical Arabic koran is the true text which cannot be changed and anything else is merely an interpretation and can be ‘modified.’ Dr Mark Durie a linguist and specialist in Islam explains some of the problems with our correct understanding of Islamic text which is often a translation of the ‘meaning’ as explained by the commentaries rather than a direct translation. He notes that the real meaning can be ‘lost in translation’ with possible disastrous results as we fail to comprehend the real message in Islamic text.

Dr Durie notes -- Reading the Quran presents many challenges. One is that the Arabic of the Quran is often just hard to understand. It contains many opaque words and expressions, and the mode of expression is often highly elliptical, leaving out material which the reader must infer.

Translations are often ‘translations of meaning’ eg ‘The Noble Koran: English translations of the meanings and commentary’ -- Endowment for allah’s sake from the custodian of the two holy mosques King Abdullah ibn’Abd al-‘Aziz al Sa’ud.

Does the supposedly divine origin of the koran render it untranslatable? Or are there problems?
Ibn Warraq (1995) notes the use of at least 275 ‘foreign’ words ie not Arabic while the koran is supposed to be in perfect Arabic –eg Hebrew words and concepts plus a great many Aramaic and Syriac words and ideas, also Ethiopic, Persian, and Greek. The word koran comes from the Syriac (Warraq 1995 p 108) .
There are variant versions of the koran so the claim of one pure unaltered version is false. Immense errors are noted in the style, the broken or missing sequence of events, the poor connection of ideas, sentences where the beginning and end don’t fit grammatically, and phrases and words which are repeated.

“Seemingly unrelated verses often sit side by side, for example, while duplicate material, exact phrases, or even entire verses may be situated in entirely different contexts’(Reuven Firestone, Islamics professor)

Stories from others have been plagiarised and distorted and are better read and understood from their original, non-Muslim source. Verses seem to have been added while others are missing and many inconsistencies show that considerable revision has occurred.

Arabic writing was far from settled at the claimed time the koran was revealed with possible confusion over consonants and vowels resulting in many possible ‘readings.’ Yet claims are made that it is ‘clear’ or mubeen (eg Koran 5:15, 12:1; 15:1; 26:2; 27:1; 28:2; 43:2; 44:2)

But all these problems are smoothed over and we are fed a sugary version of the ‘meaning’ of the text as the aim is to attract people to Islam and blind us to its real aims.

Fight, commonly used in translation is better understood as KILL
While translations use the word ‘fight’ Dr Durie explains that this is a ‘deficient translation’ which fails to convey the instruction to kill. For us the term ‘fight’ might mean an argument, or a wrestle with no-one killed but this is an incorrect understanding of Islam’s text. There is a mass of text in the koran translated as fight when a better translation would be 'engaged in an intentional, sustained activity with the purpose of killing.'

There are many verses in the Quran which refer to fighting and killing. I would like to consider the difficulty inherent in reading verses which attempt to translate the verb qātilū, found, for example, in Sura 9:29 'Fight the People of the Book…'; Sura 2:190 'Fight in the path of Allah those who fight you' or Sura 2:193 'Fight them until there is no more temptation (fitna)'......

To understand what the word qātilū means, one needs to recognize that it is based upon a root q-t-l which means 'kill'. From this root several other Arabic words are formed for example qatala 'kill, murder'; qatīl 'someone killed, a casualty'; qatl 'homicide'; maqtal 'vital spot on the body (injuring which brings death)'.

If you look up 'murder' and 'kill' in an English-Arabic dictionary, most likely the first option in both cases will be q-t-l because the semantic range of q-t-l covers both 'murder' and 'kill'. There is a distinction in Islamic law between lawful and unlawful killing, but both types of killing are referred to under the semantic range of the root q-t-l.

The form qātilū, which we are focusing on here, is known as a 'form III' verb. A common feature of form III verbs is that they denote an intentional, sustained activity directed towards an object. For example form I kataba means 'he wrote', but the form III verb kātaba means 'he kept up a correspondence with someone'. Form I ḍaraba means 'he hit' but form III ḍāraba means 'he fought against'. The form I verb ṭarada means 'he drove away, pushed away', but form III ṭārada means 'he assaulted, launched an attack, stalked, gave chase to.'

The form I qatala means 'he killed', but the corresponding form III qātala is the normal word used in the Qur'an for doing battle, hence the standard translation 'fight'. The fact that this is a form III verb would lead one to expect a meaning 'he engaged in intentional and sustained activity with the purpose of killing.' This is not the same meaning as English fight. In English, fight means to engage in a physical struggle for supremacy (with various non-physical, metaphorical extensions). Although fight could involve killing, it does not necessarily imply it. A contest between boxers is a fight, as is a wrestling match between boys in a school yard. In contrast the Arabic form III qātala (qātilū in the 2nd person plural imperative), which is translated as 'fight' in English versions of the Qur'an, includes the connotation of killing.

Arabic has another root '-r-k which can be used to describe conflict ranging from an argument between neighbors through to military battle, without the connotation of killing, but the words formed from q-t-l imply the act of killing.

The form III of q-t-l is very difficult to translate into English. To simply translate qātilū as 'Fight!' is deficient, because the sense of 'killing' is lost in translation. However no word in English means 'intentional sustained activity directed at another with deadly intent'. None of the English expressions with meanings similar to fight – such as combat, assault, wage war, do battle or duel – have such a clear connotation that the core activity involves killing.

In contrast the form III of q-t-l implies that killing is taking place. It refers to a kill-or-be-killed struggle, a 'fight' where death is in view, one way or another.

Dangerous consequences of our misunderstanding of the real ‘meaning’ of Islamic text.

In English cultural understandings, the purpose of war is not to kill your opponents, but to defeat them (killing is merely a means of defeating the enemy). In contrast, the form III of q-t-l reflects a different understanding of combat, one which is ultimately based upon pre-Islamic Arab culture, in which the point of battle is either to bring one's enemies down to the grave, or to subjugate them, after which the vanquished owe you their lives.

There is no word in the English language which captures the idea of 'deadly combat' which appears to be part of the meaning of the form III of q-t-l. Therefore, to simply translate qātilū as 'fight' offers a watered-down reading which dilutes a core aspect of the meaning of the Arabic, and distances the text from its cultural context. It squeezes the Arabic text into the presuppositions of an English understanding of conflict.

When Sura 9:29 is translated as 'Fight the People of the Book', without any qualification, this misleads English speaking readers. Clearer might be 'Engage in a deadly fight with the People of the Book'. And when Sura 9:123 says 'O you who believe, fight the disbelievers who are close to you', this could be better translated as 'Fight a deadly war against the disbelievers'.

It must be stressed once again that form III of q-t-l is the normal way to refer to military fighting in Qur'anic Arabic. However this fact alone is not enough to make English fight an accurate translation, because the Arabic lexicon encodes a very different understanding of combat.

These observations have implications for understanding the Islamic sharia's rules of combat. They align, for example, with the observation that the sharia law allows adult male captives of war to be killed, since killing is integral to the meaning of qitāl 'fighting', and when you vanquish someone, their lives are considered to be in your hand. On the other hand, in English cultural understandings of 'fighting', killing unarmed captives is considered a criminal act.

This difference in understanding what 'fighting' actually is has a very practical impact on how battles are fought on the ground today. Jihadis in Iraq understand that if they capture American soldiers, they are free to kill them, but if they throw down their arms and put their hands in the air, their American enemies are not supposed to kill them, but are expected by their superiors to take the jihadis prisoner.

These cultural differences create the conditions for an asymmetrical war. American soldiers dislike the fact that if they are captured, they will most likely be killed, but if they capture and execute an enemy they could be found guilty of murder by a US military tribunal.

As another implication of these cultural differences, when in Sura 9:29 it says to 'fight [form III qātilū] the People of the Book' 'until they pay tribute out of hand and are humbled', the meaning conveyed by the use of qātala is that paying tribute and being humbled are what stops the deadly war, i.e. it stops the killing.

The eminent commentator Al-Suyuti explained in relation to Koran29:46 (the very same verse cited at the head of the Amman letter to the Pope, which was discussed in my previous blog post) that when non-Muslims reject the arguments of Muslims and refuse to surrender to Islam, "by fighting you and refusing to pay the jizya, then argue with them by means of the sword until they become Muslim or pay the jizya.."

This is also relevant for understanding the theological background of recent massacres of non-Muslims in Muslim countries, in the context of claims being made by some that the non-Muslims do not enjoy the benefit of a 'covenant of protection' which grants them their right to life.

All this highlights the difficulty of reading classical Islamic texts, not least of all in translation. In part it also explains why Westerners, schooled in the linguistic norms of 'Standard Average European' languages, have so much difficulty understanding Islam, and why translations of the Quran into English are inadequate for comprehending its message. (Durie Part B 2011)

Dr Durie also notes efforts to obscure the real meaning of jihad where ‘the principal meaning of jihad in the hadiths is the use of military force against unbelievers to make Islam victorious and dominant. This is most significant because Islamic Law is based upon the sunna......We also find that military jihad is given extensive treatment within the Koran

He notes the claimed ‘spiritual jihad’ springs from a ‘hadith which was not included in any of the 6 canonical hadith collections and has been rejected as a fabrication.’(Durie 2010 p 65)

Dr Durie’s ‘Response to: "A Common Word" clearly explains how we misunderstand the meaning of Islamic text and the real intentions of Muslims who cloak their aims in words we find soothing (Durie 2008).

Beat not ‘chastise’
We all know koran sura 4.34 where permission is given to beat women. Mohammad in the hadith not only hit his own child bride hard in the chest (*Muslim Book 4, Number 2127 ) but also revoked any statements against beating by telling men they could now beat their wives (*Abu-Dawud Book 11, Number 2141 and 2142) . Even in his final speech -- the one which says to treat women with kindness because they are ‘prisoners’ or ‘domestic animals’ he also says to BEAT them if they disobey (*Tirmidhi 104, Ibn Ishaq P 651, Tabari, vol.9, pp.112-114)!
Despite this efforts are made, relying on our ignorance of Arabic, to pretend the text really means simply ‘chastise’ which we take as a verbal rebuke or ‘separate from.’ This is of course a lie to sell Islam in the west.

Such pressure seems to be behind Yusuf Ali's translation of iḍribūhunna as 'chastise them' in a passage from Sura 4:34 discussing how to maintain marital harmony. Although Yusuf Ali's footnote explains that what is meant is 'mild corporal punishment' (of the wife), the English word chastise can mean either 'punish by beating' or 'scold' (i.e. a verbal rebuke). This ambiguity does not exist in the Arabic: the Arabic root ḍ-r-b simply means 'beat, strike, hit'. (Durie Part A 2011,)

The ‘Arabic expression just says beat or hit.’ The word chastise sometimes used in place of beat can imply for US just ‘a verbal rebuke which is not at all what the Arabic says’.(Durie 2010 p 62)

The word ‘daraba’ (d-r-b) is the root verb involved in the critical section of 4.34 namely - وَاضْرِبُوهُنَّ, wa-id.ribo –hunna. According to the Hans Wehr Dictionary, daraba means –beat, strike, hit, hurt, wound, shoot, shell, bombard etc and any effort to make it something else fails as this is the form used in 4.34. Hence the true meaning as used across Arab speakers for 1400 years in Islam is ‘beat, hit’...ie the ‘wa’ means ‘and’, the ‘idribo’ is the command form, 3rd person plural, masculine ‘beat’, and the ‘hun’ is a feminine ‘them.’ Hence, ‘and beat them.’ (thanks B, Circe 2009 where an attempt was made to claim it meant separate from and Spencer 2007) There is no lightly etc.

Clitoridectomy, falsely translated
In 1981 Sheikh Gad al-Haq of al-azhar University a supreme authority on sunni Islam, issued a fatwa stating that circumcision of girls was a religious obligation. (Durie 2010 p 63)

In Reliance of the Traveller, a classical manual of Islamic sacred law in Arabic with facing English text, commentary and appendices edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller (1994) re 'circumcision' we find the Arabic actually says

Law e4.3 p59
"Circumcision is obligatory (for every male and female) by cutting off the piece of skin on the glans of the penis of the male,
but circumcision of the female is by cutting out the clitoris (bazr in Arabic)- (this is called HufaaD or khufaadh –female circumcision). " (p59)(Shafi'i Law) (Durie 2010, p 64; answering-Islam.org, several articles on clitoridectomy on this site by Circe)
(A: Hanbalis hold that circumcision of women is not obligatory but sunna, while Hanafis consider it a mere courtesy to the husband.)"
The English version falsely translates bazr as 'prepuce ' of the clitoris!! This is an addition by the translator.

The Arabic word bazr does not mean "prepuce of the clitoris", it means the clitoris itself (cf. the entry in the Arabic-English Dictionary). The deceptive translation by Nuh Hah Mim Keller which claims the ‘prepuce’ of the clitoris hides the true Arabic instructions which require excising the clitoris. This is made for Western consumption and obscures the Shafi’i law, given by ‘Umdat al-Salik, that circumcision of girls by excision of the clitoris is mandatory. This particular form of female circumcision is widely practiced in Egypt, where the Shafi’i school of Sunni law is followed and has spread around the world with Islam.

Mohammad himself endorsed the practice by telling a clitoris-cutter to continue (*Abu-Dawud Book 41, No. 525). Several hadith refer to the circumcised male organ and the circumcised female organ suggesting it was a common practice amongst Mohammad’s group( articles by Circe on clitoridectomy or FGM this site).

Tawaffa translated as DIE/ died EXCEPT when applied to Isa (false Jesus)

The normal Arabic word ‘he died’ is twaffa. It is used many times in the Qur’an: 2:234, 2:240; 3:193; 4:15, 4:97; 6:60, 6:61; 7:37, 7:126; 8:50; 10:46, 10:104; 12:101; 13:40; 16:28, 16:32, 16:70; 19:15; 19:33, 22:5; 39:39-42 (multiple references); 40:67, 40:77; 47:27 and translated as …died/die.
Note 19:15 refers supposedly to John (Yahua) while 19:33 refers to Isa/fake Jesus with a virtually identical phrase eg

*Koran 19.33 Peace on me (him) the day I (he) was born, and the day I (he) die, and the day I (he) shall be raised alive!

Amazingly in the case of Jesus/Isa, when allah took him directly from earth into paradise, twaffa is said to mean “make you sleep”or “take or gather thee” or “terminate the period of your stay” in various translations of 3.55 or “take you to myself” in 5:117 (see two translations below).

*Koran 3.55 And when Allah said: O Isa, I am going to make you sleep and raise you to Myself and purify you of those who disbelieve and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve to the day of resurrection; then to Me shall be your return, so l will decide between you concerning that in which you differed.

*Koran 5.117 PICKTHAL: .....I was a witness of them while I dwelt among them, and when Thou tookest me up Thou wast the Watcher over them. Thou art Witness over all things.

SHAKIR: .....I was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but when Thou didst cause me to die, Thou wert the watcher over them, and Thou art witness of all things. (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/005.qmt.html)

The text in 3.55 is more accurately, literally translated as “Behold! Allah said: O Jesus! I will cause thee to die and raise thee to Myself and clear thee..”
In K5.117 it becomes ‘you caused me to die’ NOT you took me up!

Why should the same word have a different meaning only in relation to Isa/fake Jesus? Are ‘translators’ trying to hide the fact that even the koran says Isa/fake Jesus DIED and was then RISEN or taken to paradise confirming Christian text??
Many Muslim koran commentators allowed for a real death and resurrection of Isa/fake Jesus as a legitimate interpretation of the koranic text (thanks B see Circe 2008)

Mohammad is dead in the ground and doesn’t know what will become of himself (*Koran 46.9) so why follow Mohammad rather than Isa who is favoured, risen and with allah waiting to return to earth again to slaughter all the Christians so the only religion will be Islam? (Isa is clearly NOT the Christian Jesus who didn't kill anyone and would not destroy his followers)

*Abu Dawud Book37, Number 4310: Narrated AbuHurayrah: The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus (peace_be_upon_him). He will descend (to the earth). ......... He will fight the people for the cause of Islam. He will break the cross, kill swine, and abolish jizyah. Allah will perish all religions except Islam. He will destroy the Antichrist and will live on the earth for forty years and then he will die. The Muslims will pray over him.

Words that cannot be translated at all.
In the koran that’s so clear for all to understand, there is text that cannot be translated at all because no-one knows what the text means and attached to this text in sura after sura we find this absurd comment –
‘these letters are one of the miracles of the koran and none but allah (alone) knows their meaning’

It would seem that no Muslim has asked why allah would send down untranslatable, incomprehensible gibberish no human can understand! Out of 114 suras, 29 begin with gibberish of some kind as verse 1 while sura 42 has gibberish as its first and second verse. eg---
*Alif-Lam-Mim in Sura 2 verse 1; Sura 3 verse 1; Sura 29 verse 1 ; Sura 30 verse 1; Sura 31 verse 1 ; Sura 32 verse 1
* Alif-Lam-Mim-Sad in Sura 7 verse 1
* Alif-Lam-Ra in Sura 10 verse 1 (start); Sura 11 verse 1 (start) while Sura 12 verse 1 also adds ‘these are the verses of the CLEAR book.’ Also in Sura 14 verse 1 (start) and Sura 15 verse 1 which adds ‘These are the verses of the book and a PLAIN Koran.’
* Alif–Lam-Mim-Ra in Sura 13 verse 1 (start)
* Kaf-Ha-Ya-‘Ain-Sad in Sura 19 verse 1
* Ta-Ha in Sura 20 verse 1
* Ta-Sin-Mim in Sura 26 verse 1 and Sura 28 verse 1
* Ta-Sin in Sura 27 verse 1 which adds ‘These are the verses of the koran and (it is) a book (that makes things) CLEAR.’
* Ya-Sin in Sura 36 verse 1
* Sad in Sura 38 verse 1 (start)
* Ha. Mim or Ha-Mim in Sura 40 verse 1 ; Sura 41 verse 1; Sura 42 verse 1 ; Sura 43 verse 1; Sura 44 verse 1; Sura 45 verse 1; Sura 46 verse 1
*‘Ain-Sin-Qaf in Sura 42 verse 2 – (see verse 1 above –both verses accompanied by ‘these letters are one of the miracles of the koran and none but allah (alone) knows their meaning’
* Qaf in Sura 50 verse 1
* Nun in Sura 68 verse 1 (start)

Excuse me if I have missed one but isn’t this insane! There are other untranslatable words.

Remember the text you are reading may be a deliberate mistranslation or an inadequate or deficient translation that simply FAILS to convey the real meaning behind the (classical) Arabic text and this tricks us into a false sense of security while the real horror and threat of Islam is hidden. We do NOT understand the deadly danger to our freedom that Islam really is and are tricked with words that mean different things to us and them (eg ‘peace’) and by lies and dissimulation.

Despite the fact that I had read Islamic text (koran , hadith, sira, books of law) many times I found it tremendously helpful to attend classes by Dr Durie and BP (Arabic speaker who lived 25 years in the Arab/Islamic world) as they gave me insights only people deeply familiar with Arabic and Islam can give and I thank them for their past and no doubt future help.

References:

1) Circe ‘Mohammad hit child wife Aisha hard’ 2009
2) Circe; ‘Jesus vs. Isa Part1’ - 26-12-08
3) Durie, Mark. 2011 ‘On the Difficulty of Reading the Quran, Part A: from the Amman Letter to Yusuf Ali’
Sunday, April 24. http//markdurie.com
4) Durie, Mark. 2011 ‘On the Difficulty of Reading the Quran, Part B: Fighting and Killing’
Sunday, April 24. http//markdurie.com
5) Durie, Mark. ‘The third choice: Islam, dhimmitude and freedom.’ Ingram Book Group. 2010.
6) Durie, Mark. ‘Response to: "A Common Word" Saturday, 09 February 2008
7) Spencer, Robert: Dartmouth Muslim student spreads falsehoods about Qur'an, Spencer: October 30, 2007
8) Warraq, Ibn. ‘Why I am not a Muslim’. Prometheus Books 1995.

*Al-Misri, Ahmad ibn Naqib; Reliance of the Traveler: A classic manual of Islamic sacred law. In Arabic with facing English Text, commentary and appendices edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller amana publications Maryland USA 1994
*Ishaq, Ibn: Sirat Rusulallah by Ibn Ishaq Translated by A. Guillaume. Fifteenth Impression, 2001 Published by Oxford University Press, Karachi, Pakistan. .
*http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/
* The Noble Quran: endowment for allah’s sake from the custodian of the two holy mosques......King Fahd Complex. Supplied free from the government of Saudi Arabia.
*ALIM CDrom for Tirmidi

Why Left wings and Liberals are Pro-Islamic?

2011-06-12T13:24:00.001-05:00

In all of the western countries, It is appeared that the left wing politician and liberal peoples are Pro-Islamic. They label the peoples who criticize Islam as Far right, Nazi, Racist, Bigot or Islamophobic . The main stream media is dominated by leftist. So, there is no honest discussion in media about Islam.
Many peoples are puzzled about this phenomena. I have also think much about this phenomena that the people who supposed to be the most freedom lover is actually supporting the most repressive ideology of human history. Why? I think the reasons are-

1. Prejudice: They think that if some bad thing happened between minority and majority people, minority people are always victim and the majority people are victimizer. Almost all of the time, this type of thought worked. In history, we have seen, minority Jews was abused by majority Christian. We saw minority gay and trans-gendered people suffered from majority straight people. We saw minority black people had abused by majority white people. Experiencing this types of numerous events where minority is abused by majority, they generalized the idea that, if some thing bad happen between minority and majority, it is always the majority who is the culprit. As Muslims are still the minority in the country where the liberal lives, they can not imagine that the minority Muslim could be the actual abuser and the non-Muslim are the victim.

2. Common enemy: The leftist people love the Marxist totalitarian Ideology. They hate the American capitalistic system. Islam is also a totalitarian Ideology. Like leftist, Muslims also hate America. Both of them have a common enemy, America. So the leftist people feel closer to Muslims and support Islam to defeat American capitalistic system.

3. Fear of Christianity: The western civilization grows from separation of church and state. Many years in history, people had been suffered by the powerful political influence of Christian church. After many years of hard and long struggle people of the western country have been liberated from the political influence of church and got democratic secular state. Though the western countries are secular but still majority of the people believe in Christianity. So, the liberal think that they need constant Christian basing to keep the influence of Christianity at check to preserved the secularity of the state. So, they think that it is a good idea to grow enemy of Christan faith to weaken Christian influence. For this purposes, they see Islam is an excellent candidate to oppose Christianity.

I think these are the main reason of the leftist and liberal to be Pro-Islamic. But The sad think is that, ones Islam become majority or more powerful, the leftist liberal will be the first to be persecuted by Muslims. It can be easily seen in the Muslim majority countries.

Freedom from Religion: A Muslimah's Testimony of Leaving Islam

2011-06-11T13:11:00.000-05:00

A Muslimah's fine testimony of leaving Islam. She has also started an excellent blog, "Freedom to Choose". Islam is crumbling fast. Islam's end is within sight.

I was born to Muslim parents. A mother who had been very religious all her life, and a father who had become zealously religious (coming from a relatively liberal background) after his marriage to that woman.

As with every child born to Muslim parents, the adhan was recited into my ears and thus it was decided. My religion, my deen, was to be Islam, Islam was what I was supposed to be holding true till the day I die. Allah was the one whom I was supposed to be worshiping till my last breath.

Growing up, I was learning to read the Quran in Arabic, Allah’s language, I was learning to pray, fast and do everything Allah’s Prophet Muhammad taught the Muslim ummah to do. I loved the look on my mother’s face every time I recited a new surah for her, every time she was praised for bringing up a good Muslim girl. At the age of 12, I told my parents I wanted to observe hijab. They were so proud of me, everyone was. I was told Allah was pleased with me and that made me very happy at that time. To please my creator so he would save me from hellfire, the scariest thing I’d ever heard of, that was my goal.

Like any other child I was curious and I had many doubts and questions. My mother used to read to me stories of prophets: Adam, Nuh, Ibrahim, Yusuf, Musa, Isa and all the others. It was these stories that created first doubts in me back then. Why, for example, did Allah create Satan if He knew what he was going to do? Why did Allah have to test Ibrahim? Didn’t Allah see the future? Didn’t Allah himself determine the future? And how about us? Has Allah also determined which of us go to Heaven and which of us go to Hell? How was this life a test, if the result is what Allah wants it to be and is in fact predestined from the very start?Every time I asked I got the same answer: Islam is blind faith, Islam demands blind faith Allah doesn’t want you to question (5:101). Besides, Allah knows best.

So the questions were left unanswered and I was forced to bury them, because Allah apparently didn’t want me to think about them. There was one question I didn’t ask, I somehow understood it was controversial and I kept it to myself. Though I couldn’t help wondering, what if we have the wrong God? What if Allah wasn’t God, what if it was Krishna or Jesus or some other God unheard of? What then?

Whenever I thought of this, I felt guilt, shame and disgust towards myself. I asked Allah to forgive me for having such thoughts and guide me, I tried doing every thing I could to please Allah, so that he’d be pleased and let me into Paradise. It became an obsession.At 15 I had read the Quran several times in Arabic, but I felt the need to read it in a language I understood. I felt it imperative to understand what Allah was commanding mankind to do in His final book. So I took to reading the Quran in English.

At first I was fascinated, thrilled even by Allah’s words, but that died out soon enough. As I read on, I was surprised to find absurd, illogical stories, barbaric laws and more misogyny than I had ever come across. All those questions I had as a child and many more began to race through my head and I repeated to myself the same sentence my mother told me as a child: Allah knows best.

No I didn’t think a man should be permitted to hit his wife or even have more than one wife, to control them and ‘use’ them whenever and however he wanted to.

No I didn’t think a woman’s testimony was worth half of a man’s, or that men were better than women or that her period was dirty, an illness.
But it didn’t matter what I thought, this was what the Creator of the Universe had decided and this is how it was suppose to be. So once again I buried my doubts and continued reading.

Around this time I heard of EDMD – Everybody Draw Muhammad Day - on Facebook. I had never been more outraged. These people were mocking Prophet Muhammad, the noblest man to ever walk the surface of the Earth, the man Allah Himself chose as His Messenger, the best among the best of mankind. And these people, these ignorant people wanted to mock and disgrace this great man?

EDMD was something of a reality check for me. Up until now I assumed everyone in the world either belonged to one the Abrahamic religions or was a Hindu, those were the only religions I had seen. And as a good Muslim would, I hated them. I hated the Jews and Christians because they were enemies of Allah, of the Prophet and of the Ummah, constantly conspiring to destroy us. I hated the Hindus because they associated partners with Allah.

But on EDMD I found that not only people had myriads of very different religious ideas, but also that there were people who didn’t worship any god, or even said god didn’t exist at all. Atheists. I thought they were crazy, absurd for saying that the Universe wasn’t created. Where did it come from then? At that time, they were another group of people for me to hate. Another group of people who denied the true religion, Islam and had strange ideas I’d never heard of.

I was there, defending Islam, conveying its meaning to these delusional people, whose ideas came from Allah knows where. Here I was forced to confront the doubts and questions I pushed at the back of my closet, that I didn’t want to think about and so much more.

I heard of things about the Muslim Ummah I was unaware of. How Theo Van Gogh was brutally killed in the middle of the street by a Muslim for making a movie critical of Islam. How people were killed in Islamic countries for converting to other religions. How homosexuals were executed in public and so much more that Muslims never spoke of. All we cried about is how the West was destroying our countries and killing our people or how the Jews were torturing the Palestinians or how the Hindus discriminated against us in India but we never, ever spoke about how so many Muslims were being killed by Muslims themselves, how Muslims were killing non Muslims in so many places. All of that just didn’t matter. It was only important when we were victimized by someone else. That’s all we cared about.

I was questioned about Prophet Muhammad’s lifestyle. The man I held to be the perfect example to follow didn’t seem so perfect anymore. His marriage to 9 year old Aisha when he was 53 (it doesn’t matter if it was a custom then, Muhammad was supposed to the ultimate example for all times), his massacre of the Banu Qurayza tribe, his multiple wives and concubines and they way he “acquired” them. The robberies, rape and murders his men carried on by his command disgusted me. I was ashamed of looking up to this man but I was also afraid of admitting it. So I found myself trying to justify all of it and the more I tried, the more I realized I didn’t think it was right.

I decided to read the Quran again and not shut my thought process this time. When I did, I felt like the whole religion was falling apart. I found the story of the cow in Surah Baqra absolutely ridiculous, the story of Solomon and his talking ants silly to the maximum, the story of the elephants in Surah Feel absurd. None of it made sense. I was afraid to admit it to myself, but it was becoming undeniable. So I prayed to Allah to help me out of it. I thought He was testing me and I asked for help. But none came. Slowly I did admit that I didn’t agree with what the Quran had to say, I didn’t agree with Allah’s law and His Prophet’s teachings. I began viewing the Quran critically and now became bold enough to point out errors, in grammar; Allah is very confused when it comes to using pronouns.

I started to question the very core premises of Islam: for example, Allah’s hell clearly didn’t seem to be a form of justice, but a threatened eternal, unlimited, brutal punishment for a limited “crimes” committed in a limited and short lifetime, the gravest of which was disbelief, the most heinous deed a person could do, in the eyes of Allah. Forget genocide, child rape, atrocious things like that – disbelief and/or shirk is what Allah cares about the most.

Allah’s dislike of, hatred even, for women, His own creation, and constant discrimination against them, was another thing that repulsed me. His constant calls for war against those who “deny” Him when He doesn’t bother to provide any meaningful proof of His existence … I could continue on and on and on.

I began studying the origins of Islam and it did seem very blatantly man made, created by Muhammad to control the Arabs and make them dance to his tunes.

Islam’s obsession with controlling every single thing, from how you position your feet while you pray, to how you clean yourself after defecating, to how men grow their beards, to how one should position himself while sleeping, to literally making regulations about passing gas, all this small-minded pettiness pointed towards an origin in a mind of an obsessive man, a petty control-freak, hardly a God who created the whole Universe. It seemed to me that such a majestic creator of something so vast would not be weirdly fixated on one tiny planet in one corner of a Galaxy and bothered to send “guidance” only to a single, geographically firmly constrained region of this tiny planet, the Middle Eastern deserts. An impotent God, because not only did He fail to protect the books He supposedly sent earlier but also the “final” book He swore to protect. It isn’t true that the Quran is in its original from, the way Muhammad apparently ‘revealed’ it, one needs to do very little research to realize that, but Muslims choose to ignore that and rant about how their perfect book is “unchanged” and “perfect”. As if it meant anything at all to begin with.

Islam isn’t divine, Allah isn’t a god and Muhammad was a liar, it took me a while to realize that but I did. It is not rocket science, all you need is a little rational thinking and honesty, it is difficult to let go of something you’ve been holding to be true for as long as you can remember but it doesn’t feel good to believe a lie and it can be a great relief to finally let go of ghastly and primitive desert superstitions.

Great LIES of ISLAM

2011-06-10T17:39:00.001-05:00

Freedom of speech is just a dream in many countries of the world and the OIC is using its muscle at the UN to criminalize criticism of Islam as people wake up to the real and present threat that Islam poses to western democracies. Muslims view the Quran with awe and believe that there exists an exact copy in Heaven written on stone tablets, in Arabic, of course. Writing books that are critical of the Quran can be a dangerous business as Salman Rushdie discovered with his “Satanic Verses”. Even making a film exposing verses from the Quran can prove deadly as Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh found out. The Reliance of the Traveller, the classic book of Islamic law, calls for people who criticise Allah or his prophet to be killed. So what is there to hide in Islam? Why must there be no critiquing of Islam’s Holy book?

Let us hear from the sixth Imam of Shia Jafar Sadiq who said:

“One who exposes something from our religion is like one who intentionally kills us”.

And also this:

“You belong to a religion that whoever conceals it Allah will honour him, and whoever reveals it, Allah will disgrace him”

Of course, Imam Sadiq was explaining about the doctrine of Kithman, or lying by omission.

Why does Allah not want the truth to come out about Islam? Is it because Allah is not God?

From early times then, Muslims have been warned to not reveal the truth about Islam.

In this article we examine how the construction of Islam is based on lies and deceit and show how through lies, Islam claims to be the replacement for Christianity and the final revelation from God.

Lies, Lies and more Lies

The Quran is supposed to be the perfect word of God but it doesn’t take long to uncover a myriad of lies, historical inaccuracies, fables stolen from Jewish literature and nonsensical statements.

Consider the following for example:

In Sura 41:9-12 Allah claims to have made our planet Earth first and after that the sun and other stars. This is clearly untrue as we know the Earth is about 4.5 billion years old and the Universe about 13.7 billion;
Sura 78:6-7 declares that Allah put mountains on Earth to stabilize it and stop it from shaking, but mountains are the result of instability as tectonic plates collide or volcanoes erupt;
In Sura 28:9 we are told that Pharaoh’s wife discovered Moses in the river yet clearly from history it was the daughter of Pharaoh who took Moses from the river;
Confusing geneology, Sura 19:28 claims Mary the mother of Jesus was the sister of Aaron and Sura 3:35 claims Mary’s mother was married to Imran, the father of Aaron. Moses and Aaron lived about 1400 years before Mary and so Sura 19:28 is absurd;
Sura 5:116 suggests that Christians worship Mary as one part of the Holy Trinity, however there is nothing in the canon of Christian literature which places Mary in the Trinity;
Meanwhile Sura 21:51-71 presents a Jewish fable from the second century based on a transcription error made by a Hebrew scribe Jonathan Ben Uziel, He wrote the word “or” meaning fire instead of “ur” the place where Abraham came from. Hence the story had Abraham coming out of a fire;
In a classic case of rewriting history, Sura 37:99-113 relates the story of how God asks Abraham to sacrifice his son to test his loyalty to God. Unlike the Genesis account in chapters 21-22 where Abraham sends Hagar and Ishmael away after Isaac is born, the Quran claims that Isaac was only born after Abraham was asked to sacrifice his son Ishmael. This rewriting is an attempt to lift up Ishmael above Isaac in importance.

From these few examples we can only conclude that if the Quran is the perfect word of Allah then Allah is not the creator God who would not make such elementary mistakes. Of course, any criticism of Allah, the Quran or the prophet can be life threatening.

And the LIES get bigger – Heaven is a brothel for men

The Quran goes into elaborate detail to describe how paradise contains ‘damsels with swelling bosoms..virgins of an equal age’. [Sura 52:21] to dark eyed houris we will wed them [Sura 52:17-24] .everyone will have two spouses [Muslim 6793]. However Allah allots 72 virgins for the martyrs like Osama bin Laden.
Jesus of course, stated that in Heaven people will be like angels and not marry. [Matthew 22:30] If only Osama could return and speak to all the mujahadeen and tell them that there are no virgins in store for them. How many innocent lives could be spared if Muslims understood they were being lied to?

And the LIES get bigger – Mohammed was the greatest man who ever lived

In what can be described only as breathtaking, Mohammed is described in the Quran as the best man who has lived and an example that every Muslim should emulate.

“Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah”. [Sura 33:21]

If you examine the life of Mohammed from the many texts available, you can only deduce:

He was a warlord who acquired booty, women and power through endless campaigns against neighbouring villages;
He personally took part in beheading Jews;
He tortured Kinana, the leader of the Khaybar Jews for treasure, then had him beheaded;
He then raped Kinana’s young wife Safiyya that same night and passed women around as booty;
He treated captives as slaves and people of the book as second class citizens;
He had a poetess murdered because he did not like her poetry;
He maintained women are deficient in intelligence and are the property of a man;
He stoned women to death for adultery, even though Jesus had banned the practice;
He married a six year old girl named Aisha and consummated the union when she was only nine years old. This has consigned a similar fate to millions of young Muslim girls ever since;
He encouraged his followers to fondle young girls which today is considered paedophilia;
He gouged out men’s eyes, cut of hands and feet as punishment for minor offences;
He enshrined slavery in Islam and over 100 million in Africa alone were victims of Islamic slavery.
He condoned four wives for men and unlimited concubines;
He allowed a man to divorce his wife in a trivial manner;
His teachings have led to a rape epidemic in western countries as Muslim men receive no penalty under Sharia law for raping an unbelieving woman;
He taught his followers to break the Ten Commandments of Moses even though he acknowledged Moses as a prophet.

Mohammed could well be the worst example of mankind ever.

And the LIES get bigger – Isa was Jesus

Supporting the canon of the New Testament are about 30,000 source documents which provide broad agreement on primary details about the life of Jesus. Jesus is revealed as a man of peace who taught people to obey the Law and the Ten Commandments of Moses. He always claimed he was fulfilling God’s plan for mankind which concluded with his crucifixion, death and resurrection. Jesus taught a message of peace:-

Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the Earth
Blessed are the merciful for they shall receive mercy
Blessed are the peacemakers for they will be called the children of God
The second greatest commandment is to love your neighbour
Those who take up a sword will die by the sword.

Jesus said he would return to the mount of Olives whence he left.

However, Isa will appear in Damascus and will pray behind the Mahdi, the Caliph of Islam. Isa will destroy Christianity, “break crosses”, and kill Christians who are called pigs.

“Allah's Apostle said, "By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, son of Mary (Jesus) will shortly descend amongst you people (Muslims) as a just ruler and will break the Cross and kill the pig and abolish the Jizya”. [Bukhari vol 3.book 34.no. 425]

The lie here is that Isa is not Jesus but is really the great false prophet of Revelation 13:11 who supports the Antichrist and looks like a lamb (Jesus) but talks like a dragon. He will kill those who don’t worship Satan just as Isa will kill Christians who don’t worship Allah. Isa is not Jesus.

The Mother of all LIES – Allah is God

The lie which dwarfs all others because of the ramifications is that Muslims worship the same God as Jews and Christians.

“And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our Allah and your Allah is One, and to Him do we submit”. [Sura 29:46]

And from the Tafsir of ibn Kathir:

"We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you; our God and your God is One, and to Him we have submitted.')

There is no doubt here. The Quran is saying that Allah is the same God as Jews and Christians worship. Consider all the benefits which flow from this claim:

The Quran must then be the final revelation from God and replaces the Bible
Islam must be an Abrahamic faith like Judaism and Christianity
Jesus (Isa) was misinterpreted in the Bible so the Quran corrects the situation
Sharia Law must replace the Ten Commandments
Arabs become God’s favourite people and the Jews are to be despised and slaughtered
Christianity is false and must also be destroyed.

This one outrageous claim ties Islam to Christianity’s coattails and gives it a free ride and a licence to override all previous teachings. It is Allah’s masterstroke!

TEN Reasons why Allah is not God

For those people who study both Islam and the Bible, it is clearly obvious that Allah of Islam is not YHWH, the God of the Bible and the creator God.

We shall present just ten reasons which provide an elegant sufficiency to prove that Allah is not God.

1. The Name of God

Muslims say they believe in the prophet Moses (Musa) yet they do not recognize or acknowledge the unique name that God gave to Moses.

When Moses encountered the burning bush at Mount Horeb, he was told that the name of God was YHWH forever. [Exodus 3:14-15] Jesus used the first person of YHWH when he said “I AM”. [John 8:58] The Quran makes no mention of the special name for God and uses Allah which means “the God”. There were 360 idols in the Kaaba during Mohammed’s time called Allah. Allah is just a generic name for “the God”.

The names for God can’t be reconciled. Allah is not God.

2. God’s Laws for mankind

Moses received the Ten Commandments on two stone tablets from God on the mountain top. These commandments are the basis for laws recognized by both Jew and Christian. In fact, Jesus stated that : “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law. I have come to fulfil, and until heaven and earth pass away, not one stroke of a letter will pass from the Law”. [Matthew 5:17-18] Sharia Law which is based on the Quran and Mohammed completely rejects the Ten Commandments and Mohammed broke most of the commandments on a regular basis.

If you follow Sharia law you will certainly break the Ten Commandments and this denies the teaching of Jesus. Jesus went further and said that whoever breaks the law and teaches others to do the same is considered “the least in Heaven”. [Matthew 5:19] That makes Mohammed the least in Heaven.

Allah’s laws are contradictory to God’s laws. Allah is not God.

3. God’s Plan for Mankind

God revealed his plan for mankind through his prophets, starting with Psalm 2 about 1,000BC where he revealed the begotten son, and in Psalm 22 he revealed details of the crucifixion that Jesus would endure and then in Isaiah 48 he revealed the Holy Trinity about 700BC.

God announces a begotten Son; Allah denies a begotten Son

“You are my Son: today I have begotten you. I will make the nations your heritage and the ends of the earth your possession”. [Psalm 2:7-8]

But 1600 years later, the Quran denies what is written in the Psalms.

“He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth. How can He have children when He has no wife? He created all things and He is the All-Knower of everything”. [Sura 6.101]

So here Allah denies what God has stated.

God announces the Holy Trinity; Allah denies the Holy Trinity

God’s eternally begotten Son is part of the Trinity.

“From the time it came to be, I have been there, and now the Lord God has sent me and His Spirit”. [Isaiah 48:16] Here is God the Father, Jesus the Son and the Holy Spirit as spoken by the prophet Isaiah.

Yet from Sura 5:73, the Quran denounces the Trinity.

“They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah”.

God announces the crucifixion; Allah denies the crucifixion

The virgin birth [Isaiah 7:14] and birth in Bethlehem [Mica 5:2] foretold Jesus appearance. Details of the crucifixion were given in Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53, the betrayal for 30 pieces of silver in Zechariah 11 and that the sun would go down at noon was in Amos 8:9. However Allah denies all this in Sura 4:157.

“That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them”.

God announces the sonship and describes the crucifixion about 1000BC and announces the Holy Trinity about 700BC, but Allah denies each element of God’s plan. Allah is not God.

4. God demands separation of church and state

From Abraham to Moses to Jesus, there was a strict separation of church and state. Abraham was served with wine by High Priest Melchizedek. [Genesis 14] Moses was served by High Priest Aaron and Jesus acted as the High Priest and served his disciples with wine. [Matthew 26:26-29] There is a story in 1 Samuel 13 where king Saul performed priestly duties and God removed his kingship because of this. God demanded separation of church and state. Jesus also said to “give to Caesar what is Caesar’s” enforcing the separation of church and state. Islam demands totalitarianism and also has banned wine.

God demands separation of church and state while Allah demands totalitarianism. Allah is not God.

5. God’s Holy city is Jerusalem

Jerusalem is the Holy city of God and Jerusalem is mentioned in the Torah over 660 times and in the New Testament 154 times. The book of Revelation in chapter 21 states that a new Jerusalem will arrive indicating that Jerusalem is God’s Holy city forever. Mecca is not mentioned once by name in the Bible.

Mecca is the Holy city of Allah and Jerusalem is not mentioned once by name in the Quran.
God and Allah claim two different Holy cities that can never be reconciled. Allah is not God.

6. The Dome of the Rock

In 637AD when caliph Umar captured Jerusalem he told Bishop Sophronius that they would build a shrine to Allah’s prophet on the Holy mountain. Sophronius understood a prophecy of Daniel which called this an abomination that desolates. The prophecy starts in 583BC, the 23rd year of Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, when the last group of 745 people were taken to Babylon, and so the regular burnt offerings ceased. [Jeremiah 52:30] Now the scope of this prophecy is 1290 years of 360 days or 1271 solar years. Coming forward from 583BC by 1271 years we come to 688AD. Caliph Abdul Malik built the Dome of the Rock between 685 and 691AD, so 688AD is the midpoint of the building program.

So the shrine to Allah’s prophet is called an Abomination that Desolates by God.
Mohammed is not mentioned even once in the Bible and Jesus said that only false prophets would come after him. That makes Mohammed a false prophet. Allah is not God.

7. The Fate of Mecca

Even though Mecca is not mentioned by name in the Bible, it is referred to in allegorical language as the harlot city and the whore of Babylon in Revelation 17 & 18. Babylon the mother of whores and abominations is drunk with the blood of the saints and the witnesses to Jesus [Revelation 17:5-6]. Mecca is the spiritual head of Islam and in her name millions of Jews and Christians have been slaughtered after cries of “Allahu Akbar”, and the slaughter continues today. Mecca and Medina (Yathrib) are the two most Holy sites in Islam, yet strangely in Islamic eschatology, both are destroyed. Consider now the two relevant prophecies.

“The final battle will be waged by faithful Muslims coming on the backs of horses...carrying black banners. They will stand on the east side of the Jordan river and will wage war that the Earth has never seen before. The true Messiah who is the Islamic Mahdi...will defeat Europe...will lead this army of Seljuks. He will preside over the world from Jerusalem because Mecca would have been destroyed.” [Yawm Al-Ghadab, Safar Alhwaly]

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: The flourishing state of Jerusalem will be when Yathrib is in ruins, the ruined state of Yathrib will be when the great war comes, the outbreak of the great war will be at the conquest of Constantinople and the conquest of Constantinople when the Dajjal (Antichrist) comes forth. He (the Prophet) struck his thigh or his shoulder with his hand and said: This is as true as you are here or as you are sitting (meaning Mu'adh ibn Jabal)”. [Sunan of Abu Dawud Book 37, Number 4281: Narrated Mu'adh ibn Jabal]

God hates Mecca and will destroy it. Allah can’t stop the destruction of his holy city. Allah is not God.

8. God’s enemies are Allah’s supporters

There are numerous places in the Bible where God names the nations who will fight against him and with the Antichrist. In the famous seventy weeks prophecy, it is the people of the Antichrist who destroy the temple in 70AD. The soldiers of the Roman legion X Fretensis under General Titus were from Turkey, Syria, Jordan and Arabia. These nations today whose people destroyed the second temple in 70AD are Islamic. In Psalm 83, Isaiah 13-24 and Ezekiel 28-32 and 38, the nations named as following the Antichrist are Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Sudan and Libya.

The Bible is consistent in naming Islamic countries where people follow Allah as the followers of the Antichrist.
Allah is not God.

9. God created mankind as equals, Allah didn’t

The Bible states clearly that all equal in God’s eyes, but this is not true with Allah.

Allah describes a hierarchy for mankind.

Arab male Muslims are the best of people (and Arabic is the language in Heaven)

White male Muslims are next in importance
Black male Muslims are next
Women Muslims are the lowest order of the believers
Non Muslims or infidels are the vilest of creatures. [Sura 8:55]

God states all people are equal, Allah does not agree. Allah is not God.

10. God hates what Allah allows

The Bible states clearly in the book of Proverbs 6:17-19 the six things that God hates.

Haughty eyes
A lying tongue
Hands that shed innocent blood
A heart that devises wicked plans
Feet that hurry to run to evil
A lying witness who testifies falsely.

God hates haughty eyes but Allah gives Muslims haughty eyes by telling them they are the best of people and unbelievers are the vilest of people;

God hates a lying tongue, but Allah allows Muslims to lie in Sura 16.106;

God hates hands that shed innocent blood yet Allah demands the killing of unbelievers, apostates, homosexuals, and even Muslims who don’t follow the true faith;

God hates a heart that devises wicked plans yet Allah approves of Muslims who want to destroy Israel, blow up infrastructure and plan to undermine western democracies through lying and deceit;

God hates feet that hurry to run to evil but Allah approves of Muslims who murder poets and filmmakers and try to kill people who draw cartoons about Mohammed;

God hates a lying witness yet Allah demands that a Muslim lies to protect or advance the cause of Islam.
From these six things that God hates, we see clearly that Allah is not God.

We have presented just ten reasons why Allah is not God. There are many more but these are sufficient to prove without a doubt that Allah is not God and Islam is based on a monumental lie.

And the Lies keep coming

In an article in the Sydney Morning Herald on 28th May 2011, Aaron Cook explains how Christians in Sydney will have their core beliefs challenged by provocative advertisements due to appear on billboards and buses in the next month. The ads, paid for by an Islamic group called MyPeace, will carry slogans such as ''Jesus: a prophet of Islam'', ''Holy Quran: the final testament'' and ''Muhammad: mercy to mankind''

The organiser of MyPeace, Diaa Mohamed, said the campaign was intended to educate non-Muslims about Islam. He said Jesus was a prophet of Islam, who was to come before Muhammad.
Once again, lies from Islam, as it is abundantly clear that Jesus was not only the final prophet, he was the fulfillment of prophecy. Jesus stated clearly that only false prophets would come after him.

CONCLUSION

Our western societies were founded on Judeo-Christian values which uphold truth and integrity, yet with the influx of Muslims who follow Islam, these core values are being turned upside down.

Lying and dishonesty are replacing truth and integrity.

The most common lies from Islam include:

Islam is one of the great monotheistic religions of the world
Islam is an Abrahamic faith like Judaism and Christianity
Islam is a religion of peace
Isa was Jesus and a prophet of Islam
Mohammed was the greatest man who ever lived
Allah is God.

These lies allow Muslims to be accepted into western democratic countries and to force Halal food onto us by telling us that Allah is God to the Christian and Jew.
To preserve our democracy, our freedoms and our preference for truth over lying, we need to speak out and expose the lies behind Islam.

At the very least we should:

STOP building Mosques
STOP Muslim immigration
STOP the introduction of SHARIA Finance
STOP SHARIA Law in any form
STOP the spread of HALAL food

Please write or contact your Senator and let them know.

REFERENCES

Isa is not Jesus ; Jesus vs Isa – Part 1

The Dome of the Rock controversy

So who is Allah?

Bus Ads in Sydney “Jesus was a prophet of Islam”

Muslim Woman Seeks to Revitalize the Institution of Sex-Slavery

2011-06-09T13:08:00.000-05:00

Last week witnessed popular Muslim preacher Abu Ishaq al-Huwaini boast about how Islam allows Muslims to buy and sell conquered infidel women, so that "When I want a sex-slave, I go to the market and pick whichever female I desire and buy her."

This week's depraved anachronism comes from a Muslim woman---political activist and former parliamentary candidate for Kuwait's government, Salwa al-Mutairi: She, too, seeks to "revitalize the institution of sex-slavery."

A brief English summary appeared in the Kuwait Times (nothing, of course, in the MSM):

Muslim men who fear being seduced or tempted into immoral behavior by the beauty of their female servants, or even of those servants "casting spells" on them, would be better to purchase women from an "enslaved maid" agency for sexual purposes. She [Mutairi] suggested that special offices could be set up to provide concubines in the same way as domestic staff recruitment agencies currently provide housemaids. "We want our youth to be protected from adultery," said al-Mutairi, suggesting that these maids could be brought as prisoners of war in war-stricken nations like Chechnya to be sold on later to devout merchants.

Salwa Al-Mutairi

The Arabic news website, Al Arabiya, has the sordid details, including a video of Mutairi addressing the topic of sex-slavery. I summarize and translate various excerpts below (note: I am not making any of this up).

The Kuwaiti activist begins by insisting that "it's of course true" that "the prophet of Islam legitimized sex-slavery." She recounts how when she was in Mecca, Islam's holiest city, she asked various sheikhs and muftis (learned, authoritative Muslims) about the legality of sex-slavery according to Sharia: they all confirmed it to be perfectly legal; Kuwaiti ulema further pointed out that extra "virile" men--Western synonymous include "lecherous," "perverted," "lust-driven"--would do well to purchase sex-slaves to sate their appetites without sinning.

Here's a particularly interesting excerpt from her taped speech on the rules governing sex-slaves:

A Muslim state must [first] attack a Christian state--sorry, I mean any non-Muslim state--and they [the women, the future sex-slaves] must be captives of the raid [i.e., jihad]. Is this forbidden? Not at all; according to Islam, sex slaves are not at all forbidden. Quite the contrary, the rules regulating sex-slaves differ from those for free women [i.e., Muslim women]: the latter's body must be covered entirely, except for her face and hands, whereas the sex-slave is kept naked from the bellybutton on up--she is different from the free woman; the free woman has to be married properly to her husband, but the sex-slave--he just buys her and that's that. So the sex-slave is different from the free woman.

She went on to offer concrete suggestions: "For example, in the Chechnyan war, of course there are female Russian captives. So go and buy those and sell them here in Kuwait; better that than for the men to engage in forbidden sexual relations. I don't see any problem in this, no problem at all."

Mutairi suggests sex-slaves be at least 15 years-old.

She further justified the institution of sex-slavery by evoking 8^th century caliph, Harun Rashid--a name some may recall from bedtime stories out of the Thousand and One Nights; a name some may be surprised to discover politically active Muslims modeling their lives after:

"And the greatest example we have is Harun al-Rashid: when he died, he had 2,000 sex slaves--so it's okay, nothing wrong with it."

Her rationale is apparently guided by a sense of efficiency, a desire for the good of society: legalizing sex-slaves ultimately helps prevent Muslim men from sinning with Muslim women, and thus transgressing Allah's laws; sex-slaves provide a convenient, Sharia-compliant way of satiating their libidinous urges.

This approach has universal precedents. For example, in the West, some seek to legalize marijuana, arguing that many will use it anyway, and shouldn't be punished for it by the law. In the Muslim world, we have those who seek to legalize sex-slavery, arguing that many men can't get enough women, and shouldn't be punished for it by Allah.

Such are the "nuanced" differences between the Western mindset (based on reason and universal rights) and the Sharia mindset (based on the commands of a 7^th century Arabian warlord).

Mutairi concluded by piously supplicating Allah: "Oh I truly wish this for Kuwait, Allah willing--Oh Lord, Lord, you are bountiful."

While she waits, Mutairi can take solace in the fact that, if sex-slavery is not institutionalized in Kuwait, it thrives in the black markets of the Muslim world, where non-Muslim girls, especially Christians, are routinely abducted, enslaved, and forced into lives of unspeakable degradation.

The Coming of the Mahdi

2011-06-06T12:49:00.000-05:00

The world is presently at its most wicked. It is beyond human help. It requires only a nudge to implode and prepare for the divine ruler, the Saheb-ul-Zaman (the Mahdi, the Lord of the Age) to come and set it aright. It is the sacred duty and privilege of every Muslim to do all he can to hasten the death of the old world and the birth of the global Islamic Ummah. Thus goes the thinking of Iran's ruling mullahs and their hand-picked president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

It seems like the old millennialism thinking. The belief in supernatural intervention to set the world aright is scriptural to major religions, including Islam. The Jews have been earnestly supplicating the Lord for the Messiah to come; the Christians are impatiently awaiting the second coming of Christ; and, the Zoroastrians are convinced that Saoshayant is the one who shall come, defeat the trouble-making Ahriman -- Satan -- and make the creatures again pure. But this time around, a group of believers with tremendous resources are intent upon forcing the issue, making the conditions so dire that they leave the reluctant Saheb-ul-Zaman no choice but to appear and assume his universal reign.

Up to this point millennialism was a belief and a hope. No one ever aspired to or had the means of making the anticipated events come about. The matter was in the hands of God. The Muslims' perennial prayer recited every day, posted in mosques and even on bumpers of vehicles has been, "O, Saheb-ul-Zaman, hasten your coming." The prayer for the advent, thus far, has been limited to passive supplications of the faithful.

It is a well-established fact that beliefs are potent impetus to action. If you believe your home is about to be burglarized, you secure the house and take other precautions. If you, under the influence of drugs, believe that a bug is burrowing into your skin, you may take a knife to your own body and try to dig the imaginary bug out.

Hence, it is shortsighted to dismiss the mullahs as a bunch of lunatics who are out of touch with reality and that they have no intention of doing catastrophic mischief to compel the Mahdi's coming -- maybe some arming of the Iraqi Shiites, a little support for Hezb'allah in Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine -- but no, no major idiocy. After all, they are rational people and in touch with reality. Any large-scale troublemaking spells their doom as well. Thus goes the rationalization -- the greatest risky tranquilizer of the mind.

Rationalization, compounded by complacency and denial, can be deadly, particularly when the adversaries have different realities. To the fanatic mullahs ruling Iran, Sahaeb-ul-Zaman is an absolute reality and his promised advent is irrevocably ordained. This is their reality and their belief and they have every intention of leading their life according to them.

It is foolish for non-Muslims to dismiss the mullahs and the likes of the Taliban as a bunch of fringe lunatics who are going to go away simply by wishing it. The Islamist reality is that non-Muslims are the ones who deserve to be done away with; they are the ones who have refused to submit to the summons of Allah for much too long; and, it is time for the faithful to get rid of them. This makes for a lopsided contest. The non-Muslims are passively wishing that nightmarish surge of Islamism is only a temporary fringe phenomenon doomed to die on its own, while the other side is marshaling its huge destructive power to accomplish its aim by eradicating non-Muslims.

The cabal of fanatical mullahs ruling Iran has lost its patience, not only with the unbelievers, but also with the Mahdi as well. They aim to force his arrival. The mullahs believe they have the means to make it impossible for the Mahdi to tarry any longer by causing unprecedented death and destruction -- conditions deemed essential for his coming. The world must hit the very bottom, before the savior of the world comes to the rescue, so they firmly believe.

The question is: What does prudence demand? Clearly wishing the problem to go away is not a very effective solution in the same way that wishing for the Saheb-ul-Zaman to come has not been. Reasoning and negotiating with the mullahs and their ilk hold very little, if any, lasting promise. There are always the easy ways of denial and appeasement. We are very good at both practices. No, the Muslims have been around for ages. They make some trouble from time to time. But they really are not all that bad and dangerous. We'll get along. If we have to, we'll even let them live by the Sharia -- their stone-age laws -- in our midst. We'll be reasonable and they will come around. We'll just have to get along. So goes the line.

One problem: The other side doesn't think this way. The Islamofascists don't believe in the notion of live and let live." They believe that the earth is Allah's and it has been sullied by the heathens, the unbelievers and the kafir for far too long. Now that they have the means, they aim to make the world to their design and bring about the final solution -- a nasty reminder of not too long ago Nazism.

Is this alarmist, or even hatemongering? You don't believe Muslims can be that intolerant and hostile toward non-Muslims and that they'll never go to the extremes? You know Muslims personally in your neighborhood or your workplace and they are nice people? The nice Muslims you personally know are presently small minorities in alien lands. They have to be nice, and they may indeed be nice. Yet, when the main force of Islam surges forward, these nice folks will either have to join it or be swept aside like the rest of the resisters.

The concern is not with individual Muslims who live as solid citizens in democratic societies. They may have developed a taste for the freedom democracy bestows or have simply learned to tolerate it. Our concern is with the gathering Islamic storm from the heart of Islamdom. To truly appreciate Islam, you must experience firsthand Islam in power. Take a quick trip to the lands of the Muslims and find out for yourself how horribly they treat the non-Muslims, even the "People of the book," Jews and Christians. Try to have a Bible study group or build a church in Saudi Arabia and discover the benevolence of Islamic rule.

I urgently call on President Obama and the Secretary of State Clinton to redirect the U.S. foreign policy in line with our nation's lofty ideals and principles. I urge the Administration to proclaim its unequivocal support for the Iranian people and back that claim with concrete effective peaceful actions. It is the best investment that the U.S. can make to attract the powerful nation of Iran as vital ally and concurrently refrain from foolishly undermining its present sole friend, Israel. Recall that it was Iranian people's massive magnificent movement against the re-election of the fraud Ahmadinejad that inspired the Arab Spring.

The world is a laboratory where the experiment with Islam shows irrefutable results. To the extent that Islam rules any society, that society is stagnant, backward thinking, repressive and violent. The Islamic Republic of Iran represents the cutting edge for the newly petrodollar-invigorated Islam. It is determined to complete its task of ending the world of "Dar-ul-Harb" -- the non-Muslim world to be warred upon -- and establishing the "Dar-ul-Solh," or "Dar-ul-Salam" -- the Muslim world of the Ummah under the rule of the Mahdi. If achieving this aim hinges on the conflagration of cataclysmic nuclear World War, the mullahs are happy to make it happen.

Slavery in the Tribulation? Muslim cleric proposes it as solution to economic woes

2011-06-04T15:37:00.001-05:00

Slavery in the Tribulation? Muslim cleric proposes it as solution to economic woes

I've always been puzzled by a verse in Revelation. LOL, more than one verse, but this one really gets me. At the fall of Babylon, we see in the threefold woes that are uttered, that a healthy economy in luxuries had been ongoing. Far from the economy being dead, as many suppose, it traded in all the world's luxuries as if nothing untoward was happening. The rich still exist but the poor comprise most of the world. We also know that the economy is massively different, being under the control of one man, the Beast (antichrist) as revealed in Revelation 13. But the rich still buy things. We know from Revelation 6 that many are not rich but are really are devastatingly poor, unable to even afford more than a loaf of bread which equals a whole day's pay. For the rich, they keep on keeping on with their consumerism of ridiculously luxurious items. Except for one particular luxury item in the verse at the end:

Revelation 18: 9-13

Threefold Woe Over Babylon’s Fall

“When the kings of the earth who committed adultery with her and shared her luxury see the smoke of her burning, they will weep and mourn over her. 10 Terrified at her torment, they will stand far off and cry:

“‘Woe! Woe to you, great city,

you mighty city of Babylon!

In one hour your doom has come!’

“The merchants of the earth will weep and mourn over her because no one buys their cargoes anymore— cargoes of gold, silver, precious stones and pearls; fine linen, purple, silk and scarlet cloth; every sort of citron wood, and articles of every kind made of ivory, costly wood, bronze, iron and marble; cargoes of cinnamon and spice, of incense, myrrh and frankincense, of wine and olive oil, of fine flour and wheat; cattle and sheep; horses and carriages; and human beings sold as slaves."

I could not understand how this could be, though I believe it totally because God's word is inerrant. But I had thought slavery was pretty much stamped out. There is indentured servitude in informal form, and children sold as sex slaves. But organized slavery today, though it exists is the smallest number than it ever has been in history, is rare. 12-27 million people are purported to be slaves today. Most are debt slaves, largely in South Asia, who are under debt bondage incurred by lenders, sometimes even for generations, according to Wikipedia. But then again, I don't know why I am surprised that slavery as indicated in the Revelation verse would not be a going boom to the economy. It is the natural end to the philosophy of Darwin, and simply an extension of abortion and euthanasia. There is no regard for life if you adhere to those philosophies or engage in those activities. Life means nothing. Further, the bible tells us that life will mean less than nothing:

"Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. (Mark 13:12)

"But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them." (2 Timothy 3:1-5)

Jesus said, "Because lawlessness is increased, most people's love will grow cold." (Matthew 24:12). Lawlessness here in this verse translated from the Greek is 'sin' or total and complete disregard for God's laws. People who totally dismiss God will be more liable to disregard the soul of the person inhabiting the body, and just kill it. Or sell it. It's an "it," not a person. Then today I read this:

Egyptian Cleric: Poverty Can be Solved by Selling Humans ‘Like Groceries’

"Over the past week, a video has surfaced featuring prominent Egyptian cleric Salafi Shaykh Abi-Ishaq al-Huwayni. In a translation posted by Al Mutarjim on his blog Translating Jihad, al-Huwayni is quoted as advocating jihad (he says it’s “a real pleasure”) and encouraging listeners to ease financial problems through the capture and sale of human beings (he says they can be sold “like groceries”)."

Here is a translation from the video which is at the link. Sounds like he has thought long and hard about this. I mean, he has a mini-economy in people going on there in that twisted head of his:

Here’s the translation in copy form:

"We are in the era of jihad. The era of jihad has come over us, and jihad in the path of Allah is a pleasure. It is a real pleasure. The companions (of the Prophet) used to compete to (perform jihad). The poverty that we’re in—is it not due to our abandonment of jihad? But if we could conduct one, two, or three jihadist operations every year, many people throughout the earth would become Muslims. And whoever rejected this da’wa, or stood in our way, we would fight against him and take him prisoner, and confiscate his wealth, his children, and his women—all of this means money. Every mujahid who returned from jihad, his pockets would be full. He would return with 3 or 4 slaves, 3 or 4 women, and 3 or 4 children. Multiply each head by 300 dirhams, or 300 dinar, and you have a good amount of profit. If he were to go to the West and work on a commercial deal, he would not make that much money. Whenever things became difficult (financially), he could take the head (i.e. the prisoner) and sell it, and ease his (financial) crisis. He would sell it like groceries. Of those who are–" and the video is abruptly cut off.

I am writing about that verse for the first time, and inevitably the Spirit gives deeper understanding each time I read it. But for now, we take at face value that there will be an economy in human commerce in the Tribulation. Slavery. Dead ahead.

Islamic Barbarism: Muslim Girl Stoned to Death for Participating in Beauty Contest

2011-05-31T12:46:00.000-05:00

A 19 year old Muslim girl, Katya Koren, was stoned to death under ‘Sharia law’ after taking part in a beauty contest in Ukraine. They found her dead in a village near her home in the Crimea region-Ukraine.

Her friends said she was a fashionable girl, and participated in a beauty contest. Her body was buried in a wooded forest, and found a week after her death.

Police opened an investigation into her murder. The claims are about three Muslim youths who killed her believing they were justified under Islam.

One of them is a 16-year-old Bihal Gaziev. He is under arrest. He had told the police that she violated Sahria laws. This young man had no regrets about her death because she did not abide by Islamic law.

Source: Daily Mail, UK.

Obama is the Greatest Terrorist

2011-05-28T12:26:00.000-05:00

So claimed Muslim protesters in London during Obama's visit to the UK. Radical cleric Anjem Choudhery said: Obama has made himself a "legitimate target" for attack by Muslim for killing Osama bin Laden. He demanded that Obama be dragged before a Sharia Court over his role in the war in Afghanistan.

NEVER FORGET 9/11 and Those who Danced in the Streets

Remembering 9/11 Ten Years on

Will Islam Kill Multiculturalism, the Greatest Experiment of Human History?

The Audacity of Muslims in the USA

An Islamic Strategy - HOW TO USE AMERICA versus AMERICA

What if the Muslims win the 3rd World War (their Global Jihad)?

* For those uninitiated, PBUH expands to Perpetual Battle Upon Hagarism (Islam) - founded by the mass-murderer and pedophile pretender prophet Mohammed-ibn-Abdallah (Yimach Shmo - May his name and memory be obliterated).

Osama Bin Laden Is Dead but the Threat of Islam Lives On

Constitutions of Islamic Countries: From Contradiction to Practical Discriminations and Inequities

The Constitutions of Islamic Countries: A Critical analysis

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

Why We are Losing the War against Encroaching Islam and Terrorism

Women’s Worth in Islam

Women are inferior to men:

Women are worth half of man:

Women are sex slaves:

Women are Toys:

Women are Weak:

Women are a Tilth for Men to Cultivate:

Women are Like Devils

Woman are Evil Omen:

Men May Marry up to Four Women”

Violence Against Women”

The Afterlife of Women:

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

Real Islam is Nothing Like What I Thought It Was

On the Question of God and Punishments in Afterlife

Money That Mattered “the Prophet of Profit” Most

Is Reformation of Islam Possible?

Tariq Ramadan and Cultural Jihad

Sacred Ramadan: The Month of Jihad

Honor killing in Pakistan: Father Kills Six Daughters for Having Boyfriends

Enlightening My Father about the Real Islam and the Fatal Consequence

Islam Set to Become the Dominant Primer of Future Extremist Violence by Non-Muslims?

Prophet Muhammad was an Apostate of Islam

Ramadan: When Time No Longer Mattered

How the Establishment of a Palestinian State Would Affect the Life of Arabs in Palestine

Courageous Australian Political Advisor Sacked for Speaking the Truth about Islam

White House infiltrated by Muslim Brotherhood

It is not Islamaphobic

There are no “Palestinian people” and never has been

The Truth About the Palestinian People

The History of the Region

A Few Forgotten Facts

The Modern Day Conflict

There Was Never A Country Called Palestine

The Ten Commandments of Arab Lies

THE JEWISH SITUATIONbyLarry Miller

Islam Commands Honour Killing Woman Stoned to Death

Islam Will Be Destroyed in 20 Years

Muslim and Proud! What Are Muslims Proud of?

RADICAL ISLAM - The Number One “ ZOMBIE PARASITE.”

Islam’s text is sugar coated in translation:

Why Left wings and Liberals are Pro-Islamic?

Freedom from Religion: A Muslimah's Testimony of Leaving Islam

Great LIES of ISLAM

Muslim Woman Seeks to Revitalize the Institution of Sex-Slavery

The Coming of the Mahdi

Slavery in the Tribulation? Muslim cleric proposes it as solution to economic woes

Islamic Barbarism: Muslim Girl Stoned to Death for Participating in Beauty Contest

Obama is the Greatest Terrorist

THE JEWISH SITUATION
by
Larry Miller