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

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 SHIT were dancing in the Streets.

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

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

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.

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

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

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).

It is not Islamaphobic

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

Islam Commands Honour Killing Woman Stoned to Death

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

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.

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 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/

Islam’s text is sugar coated in translation:

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?

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.

Great LIES of ISLAM

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:

1. 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;
2. 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;
3. 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;
4. 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;
5. 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;
6. 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;
7. 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:

1. He was a warlord who acquired booty, women and power through endless campaigns against neighbouring villages;
2. He personally took part in beheading Jews;
3. He tortured Kinana, the leader of the Khaybar Jews for treasure, then had him beheaded;
4. He then raped Kinana’s young wife Safiyya that same night and passed women around as booty;
5. He treated captives as slaves and people of the book as second class citizens;
6. He had a poetess murdered because he did not like her poetry;
7. He maintained women are deficient in intelligence and are the property of a man;
8. He stoned women to death for adultery, even though Jesus had banned the practice;
9. 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;
10. He encouraged his followers to fondle young girls which today is considered paedophilia;
11. He gouged out men’s eyes, cut of hands and feet as punishment for minor offences;
12. He enshrined slavery in Islam and over 100 million in Africa alone were victims of Islamic slavery.
13. He condoned four wives for men and unlimited concubines;
14. He allowed a man to divorce his wife in a trivial manner;
15. 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;
16. 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:-

1. Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the Earth
2. Blessed are the merciful for they shall receive mercy
3. Blessed are the peacemakers for they will be called the children of God
4. The second greatest commandment is to love your neighbour
5. 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:

1. The Quran must then be the final revelation from God and replaces the Bible
2. Islam must be an Abrahamic faith like Judaism and Christianity
3. Jesus (Isa) was misinterpreted in the Bible so the Quran corrects the situation
4. Sharia Law must replace the Ten Commandments
5. Arabs become God’s favourite people and the Jews are to be despised and slaughtered
6. 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:

1. Islam is one of the great monotheistic religions of the world
2. Islam is an Abrahamic faith like Judaism and Christianity
3. Islam is a religion of peace
4. Isa was Jesus and a prophet of Islam
5. Mohammed was the greatest man who ever lived
6. 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”