The Heart of Darkness

 

jihad-m-36771By Justin O. Smith:

Islam is violent and repressive, and it is the “heart of darkness” at the center of the Islamic State’s inspiration and motivation, despite Barack Obama’s assertions in September 10th’s address to the nation that the Islamic State “is not Islamic” and that “no religion condones the killing of innocents.” Violence is an integral part of Islamic doctrine, following the example set by its prophet Mohammed, and in the name of Islam and Allah, Muslims have been murdering innocents, since 656 AD.

Six hundred years after Mohammed, one of Islam’s most respected scholars, Ibn Khuldan wrote ‘Muqaddimah’ (Introduction to History), which explained: “In the Muslim community, the holy war is religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and [the obligation to] convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or force.”

Like most good Muslims, Khaldun’s inspiration came from ‘The Verse of the Sword’, Sura 9:5, “revealed” towards the end of Mohammed’s life, as well as similar themes previous to Sura 9:

Sura 9:5__ “…kill the Mushrikun (unbelievers) wherever you find them … But if they repent and perform As-Salat/ Iqamat-as-Salat [the Islamic ritual prayers], then leave their way free…” Also Sura 9:33__ “It is He [Allah] Who has sent His Messenger [Mohammed] with guidance and the religion of truth [Islam], to make it superior over all religions…”

The Hindu Kush, seventy-five thousand square miles between Afghanistan and Pakistan, was populated by Hindus until approximately 1000 AD and the Muslim invasions. An estimated 60 million Hindus were murdered by Muslims over a thousand year reign, and Hindu Kush is the Muslim name for the region. It means “Hindu Killer”.

Now today, the majority of the Muslim community worldwide, including the U.S., does not completely frown on their “holy warriors” in the Islamic State, Al Qaeda, Jaamat e-Islami and any other terror group one cares to mention, for fear of being called heretics or apostates themselves. The murderous “holy warriors” are following a literal interpretation of Koranic scripture, without omissions, innovation or revision. By contrast, heretical views deviate from doctrine.

The 2013 PEW Poll of the Muslim World shows that the majority of Muslims, in several countries, support the death penalty for Muslims who leave Islam, including Malaysia (58%), Egypt (88%), Jordan (83%), Afghanistan (79%), Gaza and the West Bank (62%) and Pakistan (75%); in 2006, a poll for ‘The Sunday Telegraph’ found 40% of British Muslims wanted Sharia Law in the UK and 20% supported the 7/7 bombers. And alarmingly, in 2011 nineteen percent of American Muslims stated they viewed Al Qaeda favorably, while a new poll shows 16% of the French population view the Islamic State favorably.

Are you beginning to see a pattern here?

Logical minded Americans were not fooled by the big lie Obama delivered before the United Nations on September 24th, when he spoke of Islam’s “great tradition that stands for … the dignity of life, not murder”. Americans see a significant number of Muslims still support Sharia Law, slavery, rape and Islamic inspired violence and murder in this 21st century, and rather than “a religion of peace”, Islam always has been and always will be an ideology of violence and conquest.

Don’t get me wrong. I am thankful for the many Muslims who simply adhere to the first early peaceful verses of the Koran, but let’s not allow that to dissuade us from seeing and revealing the fact that Islam was propagated through violence, staying with Mohammed’s teachings, and it is still utilizing violence today. This can clearly be seen by examining the teachings of Islam, the daily news reports and practically any good, scholarly history book.

One problem in Islamic tradition, affirmed by many scholars, is the doctrine of abrogation, which states that later revelation to Mohammed supersedes prior revelation. And the Koranic verses ordering Muslims to fight and slay infidels, Christians and Jews came after those admonishing Muslims to live with non-believers in peace and without religious compulsion.

As Obama spoke before the UN, he called on the Islamic nations and their leaders to address the spread of “extremism”, full well knowing that he was speaking to the very advocates of Wahabbist fundamentalism, other Islamic orthodoxies and proponents of inflexible, intolerant Islamic scholars, the likes of Sayyid Qutb. Saudi Arabia and Qatar, for example, have supported terrorism and financed the spread of Wahabbism and Qutb’s Islamic philosophy globally, including in America, for decades.

And now Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, the United Emirates and several others, who helped create, train and fund the Islamic State, are screaming for the U.S. and the West to end the vicious advance of the Islamic State. They look to destroy the Islamic State, only because they can no longer control its self-appointed “caliph”, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who has announced his intentions to take Mecca and Medina; so, it is fear of losing their power and their regimes that motivates them, not any disagreement with the Islamic State’s implementation of jihad and the violent doctrines of Islam.

What about the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Hezbollah, which means “the party of Allah”, and Hamas, which means “Islamic Resistance Movement”? Does Obama deem these Islamic entities “not Islamic” too?

As Obama appealed to young Muslims to follow their “great tradition [Islam] that stands for education … innovation, not destruction”, he must have intentionally forgotten some of the other traditions of Islam. The recent spate of beheadings of Westerners by the Islamic State is only the old made new again, and although horrible beyond belief, they actually pale in comparison to the heinous atrocities committed in the name of Allah across the centuries. Three thousand Catholic nuns were raped at the Church of St Sophia during the sacking of Constantinople in 1453, and many other women and children were simply torn to pieces.

Hadith 107:13_ It was shown the Prophet said, “Allah wrote everything we need to know about Ihsan [kindness] so if you kill, perfect your killing and if you slaughter, perfect your slaughter, perfect your slaughter and sharpen your blade and comfort your sacrifice.”

Koran 8:12 “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.”

Millions of devout fundamentalist orthodox Muslims, devout in the manner of Osama bin Laden_ Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, are making preparations and have already been waging a divinely endorsed war against Europe, America and Israel. And, rather than continue against all reason and, in the light of Islam’s sacred texts, to propagate the lie that “Islam is peace”, which is placing America within a quagmire of reoccurring expansionist jihad, this administration and future administrations must cut all funding to all Islamic nations and acknowledge that “extremism” and violence are the basis of Islam, if America is to win the future war against Islam.

A Nigerian Prince Called Islam

By Daniel Greenfield:

Say that you get a tempting offer from a Nigerian prince and decide to invest some money in helping him transfer his vast fortune from Burkina Faso or Dubai over to the bank across the street. The seemingly simple task of bringing over the 18 million dollars left to him by his father hits some snags which require you to put in more and more of your own money.

Eventually you have invested more than you ever would have ever done up front just trying to protect the money that you already sank into Prince Hussein Ngobo’s scheme. And to protect your self-esteem, you go on believing that no matter what Prince Ngobo does, he is credible and sincere. Any failings in the interaction are either your fault or the fault of some third party. Anyone who tells you otherwise must be a Ngobophobe.

Now imagine that Prince Ngobo’s real name is Islam.

prince charles muslimThat is where Western elites find themselves now. They invested heavily in the illusion of a compatible Islamic civilization. Those investments, whether in Islamic immigration, Islamic democracy or peace with Islam have turned toxic, but dropping those investments is as out of the question as writing off Prince Ngobo as a con artist and walking away feeling like a fool.

Western elites, who fancy themselves more intelligent and more enlightened than the wise men and prophets of every religion, and who base their entire right to rule on that intelligence and enlightenment, are not in the habit of admitting that they have been played for fools.

The Arab Springers who predicted that the Muslim uprisings would bring a new age of secularism, freedom and an end to the violence between Islam and the West; are busy writing up new checks.

It’s not insanity; it’s the term that rhymes with a certain river in Egypt. The Brotherhood’s victory discredited the Arab Spring, which discredits the bid for Arab Democracy, which discredits the compatibility of Islam and the folks on Fifth Avenue. Follow the river back along its course and suddenly the Clash of Civilizations becomes an undeniable fact. It’s easier to give up and let the river of denial carry you further along until, five years from now, you find yourself explaining why Al-Qaeda ruling Libya is actually a good thing for everyone.

Read more at Sultan Knish

How ISIS Radicalizes Young Muslims

By David Wood:

Politicians, the media, and many Muslim organizations report that ISIS (the Islamic State) is violating the commands of Allah and Muhammad. Yet many Muslims from various countries are traveling to Syria and Iraq to join ISIS and wage jihad. Why are so many young Muslims convinced that Islam commands them to fight non-Muslims and hypocrites?

 

Here are all of the sources quoted in the video (in order):

I. TWO VIEWS OF THE ISLAMIC STATE

President Barack Obama—“Now let’s make two things clear: ISIL is not ‘Islamic.’ No religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of ISIL’s victims have been Muslim. And ISIL is certainly not a state. . . . ISIL is a terrorist organization, pure and simple. And it has no vision other than the slaughter of all who stand in its way.” (Source)

Maajid Nawaz—“We Muslims must admit there are challenging Koranic passages that require reinterpretation today. Let us use existing tools of exegesis, such as specificity, restriction, abrogation and metaphor. Vacuous literalism as an interpretive method must be abandoned. It is bankrupt. Only by rejecting vacuous literalism are we able to condemn, in principle, ISIS-style slavery, beheading, lashing, amputation and other medieval practices forever (all of which are in the Quran). This is a struggle within Islam. Reformers either win, and get religion-neutral politics, or lose, and get ISIL-style theocracy.” (Source)

II. ON THE CLARITY OF THE QUR’AN

Qur’an 6:114—Shall I seek for a judge other than Allah, when He it is Who has sent down to you the Book fully explained?

Qur’an 11:1—This is a Book, whose verses have been made firm and free from imperfection and then they have been expounded in detail.

Qur’an 12:1—These are verses of the clear Book.

Qur’an 16:89—And We have sent down to thee the Book explaining all things . . .

Qur’an 24:46—Certainly We have revealed clear communications, and Allah guides whom He pleases to the right way.

Qur’an 27:1—These are verses of the Qur’an—a book that makes (things) clear.

Qur’an 41:3—A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail . . .

Qur’an 57:9—He it is who sends down clear communications upon His servant, that he may bring you forth from utter darkness into light.

III. ON SUBMISSION TO ALLAH AND MUHAMMAD

Qur’an 33:36—It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decreed a matter, that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed in a plain error.

Qur’an 4:65—But no, by your Lord, they can have no Faith, until they make you (O Muhammad) judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept (them) with full submission.

Qur’an 33:21—Certainly you have in the Apostle of Allah an excellent exemplar for him who hopes in Allah and the latter day and remembers Allah much.

IV. MUHAMMAD’S EXAMPLE AND TEACHINGS

Sahih al-Bukhari 2797—The Prophet said, . . . “By Him in Whose Hands my soul is! I would love to be martyred in Allah’s Cause and then come back to life and then get martyred, and then come back to life again and then get martyred and then come back to life again and then get martyred.”

Sahih Bukhari 2795—The Prophet said, “Nobody who dies and finds good from Allah (in the Hereafter) would wish to come back to this world, even if he were given the whole world and whatever is in it, except the martyr who, on seeing the superiority of martyrdom, would like to come back to the world and get killed again (in Allah’s cause).”

Sahih al-Bukhari 2785—A man came to Allah’s Messenger and said, “Guide me to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward).” He replied, “I do not find such a deed.”

Sahih Bukhari 2796—The Prophet said, “A single endeavor (of fighting) in Allah’s cause in the afternoon or in the forenoon is better than all the world and whatever is in it.”

Sunan An-Nasa’i 3099—The Prophet said: “Whoever dies without having fought or having thought of fighting, he dies on one of the branches of hypocrisy.”

Sunan Ibn Majah 2763—The Messenger of Allah said: “Whoever meets Allah with no mark on him (as a result of fighting) in His cause, he will meet Him with a deficiency.”

Sahih Muslim 33—The Messenger of Allah said: “I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.”

Sahih al-Bukhari 6922—Allah’s Messenger said, “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, kill him.”

Sunan Ibn Majah 2535—The Messenger of Allah said: “Whoever changes his religion, execute him.”

Al-Muwatta of Imam Malik 36.18.15—The Messenger of Allah said, “If someone changes his religion—then strike off his head!”

Read more at Answering Muslims

Why I Do Not Hate Muslims

eric-allan-bell-720x340Faith Freedom, BY · SEPTEMBER 25, 2014:

The mandate of Islam is to force the world to submit to Islam.  Our leaders tell us that Islam means peace. But lying about something does not make it so.  Islam means submission. Islam opposes free speech, free thought and human rights.

Sharia Law is the codification of the Quran.  The Quran is the holy book in Islam.  Sharia mandates the stoning of women for adultery or being raped, it requires the amputation of limbs for theft, the hanging of homosexuals and death to anyone who dares to leave Islam.  Islam is the religion of approximately 1.5 billion people on the planet at this time.  According to the Pew Forum, when polled the majority of Muslims believe that it is at least sometimes okay to kill innocent civilians in the name of Islam.

US President, Barack Hussein Obama has said, in response to the continuous killing of civilians in the name of Islam that, “No faith teaches this”.  However, Quran 9:5 says to Muslims, with regard to the unbeliever, to “kill them wherever you find them”.  Obama can lie to himself, he can lie to appease and he can lie to those who place their trust in him.  But facts don’t lie.

Fortunately, most Muslims do not actually follow the Quran.  This might be due in part to the fact that about 2/3 of Muslims cannot read or write.  Or maybe they are just humane enough not to harm someone just because their holy book says to do so, on page after page after page. Although the Quran, in chapter 4, commands a man to beat his wife, most Muslim men do not. However, still a significant percentage do.

Religion is an attempt to institutionalize one’s relationship with the Divine. However, when one reads the Quran it is clear that most of the passages do not deal with Allah, the god of Islam. Rather the book is obsessed with its own author, the prophet Muhammad. It is also very preoccupied with what to do with the unbeliever, how to enforce rules and how to engage in warfare. There is a strong argument to be made that Islam is first and foremost a tyrannical political system, then a brutal legal system with some religious overtones here and there.

Millions of Muslims have taken to the streets, over the years, to protest against Israel. And yet their silence in protesting against Islamic terrorist organizations, such as ISIS, Hamas, Hezbollah and Al Qaeda has been something like a tumbleweed blowing in the breeze to the sound of crickets. Millions of Muslims have protested against images drawn of their prophet or words of criticism against their belief system. They demand respect for their doctrine while often offering extreme intolerance for other belief systems.

In Islam murder is not the worst offense, but rather insulting Islam is the worst of all sins. The Quran warns against critical thinking and warns the believer not to take the unbeliever as their friend. In Islam a woman is worth half of a man, her inheritance is just half and her testimony in an Islamic court is worth only half of a man’s testimony.

Today ISIS, who prefers to be called “The Islamic State” is spreading their religious doctrine through violent warfare. And the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, tells us that “there is nothing Islamic about the Islamic State” even though the way that Islam was first spread is nearly identical to how ISIS behaves, as it follows the commands of the Quran without compromise.

So what does this all mean?  Should we all start hating Muslims now? Should the free world deliver it’s value system upon the Islamic world using missiles? Should we repeat the holocaust of the 20th Century and dehumanize an entire group of people? Herein lies a problem that gets to the core of why human beings are stuck. We seem to only know how to solve problems in such a way that creates more problems.

If I were to hate Muslims then I would be confusing a belief system with a human being. History has shown us that confusing human beings with belief systems is a violent cycle which repeats itself. The truth is that nearly every one of us is the product of conditioning – the conditioning of our parents, of our culture of the society we are born into. Most of us have been given multiple opportunities to take a step back, to snap out of it, or at least to question whether what was put inside our head is something we want to keep there. But instead we tend to prefer to keep our blinders on. And this is not a problem that is unique to Muslims.

I do not excuse those who would follow the Quran literally. But I am often puzzled by my own tendency to not tolerate their intolerance, to hate their hatefulness, to fear their fear mongering.

Islam will outlive me.  I can fight it.  I can even define myself as someone who fights and it and make a career out of this. And yet the world will go on being the world, a place where life eats life and tribes go to war. We can fight or we can enlighten and there is a time for both.

No one suffers more under Islam than its followers. The enemy of Islam is information. And we are living in the Information Age. Hatred will rot you from the inside. Compassion will open up your heart and knowledge will set you free.

I do not buy the belief system called Islam. But I don’t buy the cover story of those who try to define themselves by it either. We are all strangers in a strange land, passing through forms and impressions, looking towards – and running away from the question – Who am I?

Stop Denying the Obvious: Islam is a Problem

WildersGatestone Institute, by Geert Wilders:

To defeat IS we should do more than just bomb its strongholds in the Middle East; we should no longer turn a blind eye to the violent nature of Islam. We should demand that those who settle in our countries cast aside values incompatible with ours. There is a huge problem — also in our countries – cause by the violent exhortations of Islam. Only when we face this truth will we be able to win this war we are in.

Although the majority of Muslims are moderate, thousands of innocent civilians all over the West have fallen victim to terrorists inspired by Islam. IS has announced that every citizen of the West is a target.

70% of Dutch Muslims consider the religious rules of Islam more important than the secular laws of the country where they are living.  Survey, December 2013,  by Prof. Ruud Koopmans, Humbolt University, Berlin

A military alliance, led by the United States, is currently bombing the forces of the Islamic State [IS] in Iraq and Syria. Many European nations, such as the United Kingdom, France, the Netherlands and others, are participating in this offensive. IS, however, is not just a threat to the Middle East, but also to our own countries. The presence in IS’s ranks of hundreds of Muslims born in the West, carrying Western passports, is a huge domestic security risk. Whether we like it or not, war has also come to our streets.

And whether we like it or not, Islam has everything to do with it. “No religion condones the killing of innocents,” President Obama recently said. David Cameron added about the IS terrorists: “They claim to do this in the name of Islam, that is nonsense, Islam is a religion of peace. They are not Muslims, they are monsters.”

The sad thing is that, while they are, indeed, monsters, they are also Muslims. No matter what Obama and Cameron say, IS and other terrorist groups draw inspiration from Koranic verses, such as sura 47:4: “When ye meet the unbelievers, smite at their necks and when ye have caused a bloodbath among them bind a bond firmly on them.”

Although the majority of Muslims are moderate, thousands of innocent civilians all over the West have fallen victim to terrorists inspired by Islam. On 9/11, 2001, Mohamed Atta and his accomplices flew planes into New York’s twin towers. In March 2004, Jamal Zougam, a Moroccan-born Spanish citizen, and his friends bombed four commuter trains in Madrid. In November 2004, Mohammed Bouyeri, a Dutchman of Moroccan origin, slit the throat of Islam critic Theo van Gogh in Amsterdam. In July 2005, Hasib Hussain and three other homegrown British suicide killers assassinated 52 civilians on the London public transport system. In March 2012, Mohammed Merah, a Frenchman of Algerian descent, mowed down a rabbi and three children in front of a school in Toulouse. In April 2013, the Chechen brothers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, killed three onlookers at the Boston marathon with pressure cooker bombs. In May 2013, Michael Adebolayo, a British citizen of Nigerian descent, decapitated soldier Lee Rigby in the streets of London. Last May, Mehdi Nemmouche, a French citizen of Algerian origin, murdered four people at the Jewish Museum in Brussels.

Atta, Zougam, Bouyeri, Hussain, Merah, Tsarnaev, Adebolayo, Nemmouche, they were all Muslims, most of them carrying Western passports. It is dangerous to deny a reality because it is discomforting. Bombing IS in Syria and Iraq, while refusing to see the problems at home, will have disastrous consequences.

There is much discussion about the support among Muslim populations in the West for IS and similar organizations waging jihad and aiming to impose Islamic Sharia law on our societies. A survey conducted by ICM Research last July found that 16% of all inhabitants of France and 7% of the inhabitants of the United Kingdom have a favorable view of IS. In May 2013, a survey by Ahmed Ait Moha of Motivaction, an Amsterdam research institute, found that 73% of Dutch Muslims regard Dutch Muslims who fight in Syria as heroes, compared to only 3% of indigenous Dutch. Last December, a survey by Prof. Ruud Koopmans at Humboldt University in Berlin revealed that over 45% of German Muslims and 70% of Dutch Muslims consider the religious rules of Islam to be more important than the secular laws of the country where they are living.

Every day, I can feel the cold shadow of Islam. Next November, it will be exactly ten years that I have been living under permanent police protection. Wherever I go, armed policemen go with me to protect me against Islamic groups who have vowed to assassinate me because they disagree with my opinion that Islam is not a religion of peace. Today, ten years later, IS has announced that every citizen of the West is a target.

To defeat IS we should do more than just bomb its strongholds in the Middle East; we should no longer turn a blind eye to the violent nature of Islam.  We should demand that those who settle in our countries cast aside values incompatible with ours.

Last week, I proposed in the Dutch Parliament that we ask an oath of all people from Islamic countries who wish to be members of our society. In the oath they have to explicitly distance themselves from Sharia law and the violent verses in the Koran. Those who do not want to take the oath are no longer welcome. They should leave our country at once. This measure forces us to see the reality which Obama, Cameron and other Western leaders refuse to see: there is a huge problem – also in our countries – caused by the violent exhortations of Islam.

Only when we face this truth, we will be able to win the war we are in.

Geert Wilders MP is the leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV) in the Netherlands. In a recent poll the PVV is currently the largest Dutch party. Mr. Wilders is the author of Marked for Death: Islam’s War Against the West and Me (Regnery, Washington DC).

Also see:

Bill Warner Announces CSPI International

Published on Sep 22, 2014 by CSPI International

JOIN US!
info@politicalislam.eu

Visit Bill Warner’s Website, Facebook and YouTube Channel 

Islamic State – Do We Believe Obama or Mohammed?

Political Islam, by Bill Warner:

We’re at the time in history when ISIS, also called Islamic State or ISIL, has cut off the head of someone in the media. And it was so atrocious that many chose to speak out against it and one of them was Obama.

Here’s what Obama says about Islamic State, “They’ve rampaged across cities and villages killing innocents. They abduct women and children, subject them to torture and rape and slavery. They’ve murdered Moslems, both Sunni and Shia, by the thousands. They target Christians and religious minorities, driving them from their homes, murdering them because they practice a different religion. ISIL speaks for no religion.”

Well, really what Obama’s saying here is Islamic State is not Islamic. That’s really what he’s saying briefly. But, you know it’s not up to Obama to tell us what Islam is. Islam is defined by Mohammed and Allah.

Now, let’s see what happened in the Sira, the life of Mohammed, his official biography, about all these points and let’s start with of all things, rape. On the occasion of Khaybar, once the Jews had been crushed, Mohammed put forth new orders as to how sex would be had with captured women. They were not to be had sex with when they’re having their period, nor if they’re pregnant.So here we have Mohammed giving orders on how to have sex with captives. This is called rape. It is pure Mohammed.

Now, what about the issue of torture. Well, on the same event, once he crushed the Jews at Khaybar, he knew they had buried treasure and so he questioned the chieftain. “Where’s the money? Where’s the gold? Where’s the silver?” And he wouldn’t tell him. So, Mohammed ordered the chieftain staked out on the ground and a small fire built on his chest. Still he would not speak. And so they unstaked him and took him to a man who had lost a brother in the fight against the Jews at Khaybar and he beheaded the Jewish chieftain.

So, here in one event we have torture, we have Jew hatred and we have beheading. All of these are pure Islam.

Now, let’s deal with sex slaves. From the lot of the women, Mohammed had chosen three to give as gifts of pleasure to his chief lieutenants. He gave one to Umar, gave one to Ali and one to Uthman. Oddly enough, Umar passed his sex slave on to his son. So, sex slavery is pure Mohammed.

Now, what about slavery? I’m going to read you a list of things that Mohammed was involved in with slavery. All of these come from the Sira. And by the way, all of these references can be found on politicalislam.com. He was involved in every aspect of slavery. He had Kafir men killed so their women could be made slaves. He gave away slaves for gifts. He owned many slaves, many of them black. He stood by while others beat slaves. He shared the pleasure of forced sex with women conquests. He captured slaves and wholesaled them and retailed them for the profit of jihad. His favorite sexual partner was a sex slave, a Christian woman, who bore him a son. He got slaves as gifts. His pulpit was made by a slave. He ate meals prepared by slaves. His robes were repaired by slaves. And he approved of having sex with your slaves. And if a slave didn’t obey his master he would not go to paradise. Well, that’s pretty clear about the slavery, an issue in Islam.

Now, let’s deal with the last thing, killing Christians. Mohammed had two records in dealing with Christians in Arabia. One was he was kind to them and listened to them. But, once he had crushed the pagans and once he had crushed the Jews, he then turned his attention to the Christians. He sent Khalid, also known as The Sword of Allah, to the fort of a Christian ruler and when the ruler and his brother rode out they killed one and captured the other and subjugated the Christian tribe, made them obey the Sharia and pay the jizyah.

Let me be very clear, Mohammed was a pagan killer, a Jew killer and a Christian killer. Now, let’s go back to what started this off. Who is to determine what Islam is, Obama? No. Mohammed tells us what Islam is and we need to listen to Mohammed and we can ignore Mr. Obama.

Thank you.

THE ANCIENT WAR BETWEEN THE JUDEO-CHRISTIAN WEST AND ISLAM

Steuben_-_Bataille_de_PoitiersBreitbart, By JAMES P. PINKERTON:

Note from Senior Management: Jim Pinkerton outlines the central issues in the 1500-year struggle between competing cultural visions several years ago in this article, which first appeared in The American Conservative.

In one of the great epics of Western literature, the hero, confronted by numerous and powerful enemies, temporarily gives in to weakness and self-pity. “I wish,” he sighs, “none of this had happened.” The hero’s wise adviser responds, “So do all who live to see such times, but that is not for them to decide.” The old man continues, “There are other forces at work in this world … besides the will of evil.” Some events, he adds, are “meant” to be, “And that is an encouraging thought.”

Indeed it is. Perhaps, today, we are meant to live in these times. Perhaps right here, right now, we are meant to be tested. Maybe we are meant to have faith that other forces are at work in this world, that we are meant to rediscover our strength and our survival skills.

And so the question: can we, the people of the West, be brought to failure despite our enormous cultural and spiritual legacy? Three thousand years of history look down upon us: does this generation wish to be remembered for not having had the strength to look danger squarely in the eye? For having failed to harness our latent strength in our own defense?

With apologies to the frankenfood-fearers and polar bear-sentimentalizers, the biggest danger we face is the Clash of Civilizations, especially as we rub against the “bloody borders” of Islam.

What if, in the coming century, we lose that clash—and the source of our civilization? What if Muslims take over Europe? What if “Eurabia” indeed comes to pass? Would Islamic invaders demolish the Vatican, as the Taliban dynamited Afghanistan’s Buddhas of Bamyan in 2001? Or would they settle merely for stripping the great cathedrals of Europe of all their Christian adornment, rendering them into mosques? And what if the surviving non-Muslim population of Europe is reduced to subservient “dhimmitude”?

It could happen. Many think it will. In July 2004, Princeton historian Bernard Lewis told Germany’s Die Welt that Europe would be Islamic by the end of this century, “at the very latest.” Other observers, too, have spoken out: Melanie Phillips in ;Londonistan, Bruce Bawer in While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within, and Mark Steyn in America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It. Admittedly, these writers share a mostly neoconservative perspective, but such can’t be said for Patrick Buchanan, author of the book that out-Spenglers Spengler, The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization.

On the other side of the great divide, militant Muslims are feeling the wind at their backs. Last November, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, leader of al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia, released an audiotape in which he vowed, “We will not rest from our jihad until we are under the olive trees of the Roman Empire”—which is to say, much of Europe. This August, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, traveling to Afghanistan, declared, “There is no way for salvation of mankind but rule of Islam over mankind.” To be sure, there’s no shortage of Christians who speak this way, but none of them are currently heads of state.

If demography is the author of destiny, then the danger of Europe falling within dar al-Islamis real. And in addition to the teeming Muslim lumpen already within the gates, plenty more are coming. According to United Nations data, the population of the Arab world will increase from 321 million in 2004 to 598 million in 2050. Are those swarming masses really going to hang back in Egypt and Yemen when Europe beckons? And of course, over the horizon, just past Araby, abide the Muslim multitudes of Central Asia and Africa, where tens of millions more would love to make the secular hajj to, say, Rome or Berlin.

In other words, if present trends continue, the green flag of Islam—bearing the shahada, the declaration of faith, “There is no god but God; Muhammad is the Messenger of God”—could be fluttering above Athens and Rotterdam in the lifespan of a youngster today. If so, then the glory of Europe as the hub of Greco-Roman and Christian civilization would be extinguished forever.

If this Muslimization befalls Europe, the consequences would be catastrophic for Americans as well. Although some neoconservatives, bitter at Old European “surrender monkeys,” might be quietly pleased at the prospect, the fact is that a Salafist Surge into the heart of Europe—destroying the civilization that bequeathed to us Aesop and Aristotle, Voltaire and the Victorians—would be a psychic wound that would never heal, not across the great sward of America, not even in the carpeted think-warrens of the American Enterprise Institute. A dolorous bell would toll for all of us, scattered as we might be in the European Diaspora.

Read the rest of the article here.

Three Choices and the Bitter Harvest of Denial: How Western denial about Islam has fueled Genocide in the Middle East

 

Published on Sep 14, 2014 by Q Society of Australia Inc:

Dr Durie speaks at the Q Society event in Melbourne together with Clare Lopez on the evening of 2 September 2014. His topic “Three Choices and the Bitter Harvest of Denial: How Western denial about Islam has fueled Genocide in the Middle East.”

Not many non-Muslim Australian scholars understand Islam and the underlying motivation of radical Muslims like Dr Durie. Q Society hopes this very timely and in-depth analysis will help many Australians to better respond to the challenges we face.

Make sure to view the Q&A section for valuable advise how to help those still caught up in Islamophilia.

The full videos of the four experts who did the analysis of the Islamic State propaganda release

isis-video-hed-2014-652x330Vlad Tepes, Sep. 12, 2014:

Here are the full videos by Christian Zeitz, Robert Spencer, Bill Warner and David Wood. Those who saw the official release and feel they would like more, may enjoy this more comprehensive set of analysis by these scholars.

 

 

 

 

And of course, the actual video these were all filmed to create:

The Real Islam:

 

Liberal Atheist Comedian RIPS Those Who Say ISIS Not Islamic And Ends Up Defending Christians More Than Christians Do

13768_212635287296_62507427296_3140806_4959418_n_400x400Shoebat, by Ben Barrack:

Don’t look now but far left-wing liberal comedian Bill Maher, who has gone to great lengths to support Barack Obama may have just slapped down the president’s core message in the latter’s recent speech about ISIS. That message was that ISIS does not represent Islam. Maher blew that notion up and just kept going.

Maher is a vile left-wing atheist but he is also extremely critical of Islam. In fact, he insists that Islam is much worse than Christianity, which is where he really wanders off the liberal plantation; that’s something you just don’t do.

There are several things to watch in the video below of his exchange with Charlie Rose on the subject. Rose quickly finds himself confronted with the conundrum of having to acquiesce to a fellow liberal who attacks a paradigm liberals are supposed to be in solidarity with – one that says Islam is a religion of peace. Right out of the gate, Maher essentially challenges Rose to admit he’s religious. Rose’s reaction tells you all you need to know.

It’s worth noting that while Maher insists that “all religions are bad”, he does something that most Christians won’t do. He says the problem is not with ‘radical Islam’ but with Islam itself. Rose just can’t process that coming from a far left liberal. Maher shockingly contrasts Islam with Christianity and ultimately ends up actually defending Christians more than many Christians do. In particular, compare what Maher says below with what Catholic Cardinal Theodore McCarrick did (see this post).

Yes, God does work in mysterious ways.

If you watch for no other reason, do so just to see Rose’s face display the extreme levels of cognitive dissonance going on behind his forehead. Liberals have a script they must follow. Everything must fit in a box just so and when a fellow liberal like Maher blows that up and actually shows more courage than the Christian right on a particular issue, Rose just can’t compute and visibly short circuits:

9/11 and Jihad Terror: A Legacy of Over 13 Centuries—Not 13 Years

ISIL O TWILIGHT ZONE 2014 911
By Andrew Bostom:

I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy)

—Islam’s prophet Muhammad, as recorded in the most important collection of Muhammad’s “traditions,” Sahih Bukhari,Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220

ISIL (the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) is not Islamic

Barack Obama, September 10, 2014

**

There is just one historically relevant meaning of jihad despite the surfeit of contemporary apologetics. Dr. Tina Magaard—a Sorbonne-trained linguist specializing in textual analysis—published detailed research findings in 2005 (summarized in 2007) comparing the foundational texts of ten major religions. Magaard concluded from her hard data-driven analyses:

The texts in Islam distinguish themselves from the texts of other religions by encouraging violence and aggression against people with other religious beliefs to a larger degree [emphasis added]. There are also straightforward calls for terror. This has long been a taboo in the research into Islam, but it is a fact that we need to deal with.

For example, in her 2007 essay “Fjendebilleder og voldsforestillinger i islamiske grundtekster” [“Images of enemies and conceptions of violence in Islamic core scriptures”], Magaard observed,

There are 36 references in the Koran to expressions derived from the root qa-ta-la, which indicates fighting, killing or being killed. The expressions derived from the root ja-ha-da, which the word jihad stems from, are more ambiguous since they mean “to struggle” or “to make an effort” rather than killing. Yet almost all of the references derived from this root are found in stories that leave no room for doubt regarding the violent nature of this struggle. Only a single ja-ha-da reference (29:6) explicitly presents the struggle as an inner, spiritual phenomenon, not as an outwardly (usually military) phenomenon. But this sole reference does not carry much weight against the more than 50 references to actual armed struggle in the Koran, and even more in the Hadith.

Consistent with Magaard’s textual analysis, the independent study of Australian linguist and renowned Arabic to English translator, Paul Stenhouse, claimed the root of the word jihad appears forty times in the Koran. With four exceptions, Stenhouse maintained, all the other thirty-six usages in the Koran, and in subsequent Islamic understanding to both Muslim luminaries—the greatest jurists and scholars of classical Islam—and to ordinary people, meant and means, as described by the seminal Arabic lexicographer, E. W. Lane: “He fought, warred or waged war against unbelievers and the like.” A concordant modern Muslim definition, relevant to both contemporary jihadism and its shock troop “mujahideen” [holy warriors; see just below], was provided at the “Fourth International Conference of the Academy of Islamic Research,” at Al Azhar University— in 1968, by Muhammad al-Sobki:

[T]he words Al Jihad, Al Mojahadah, or even “striving against enemies” are equivalents and they do not mean especially fighting with the atheists . . . they mean fighting in the general sense.

Data for 2012 from the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) were released December 19, 2013. Gary LaFree, START director and professor of criminology and criminal justice at the University of Maryland, highlighted the report’s most salient finding: the “incredible growth” in jihad terror attacks perpetrated by “al-Qaeda affiliates.” START identified the six most lethal jihad terror groups affiliated with Al-Qaeda, and the death tolls these organizations had inflicted during 2012, as follows: the Taliban (more than 2,500 fatalities), Boko Haram (more than 1,200 fatalities), al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (more than 960 fatalities), Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan (more than 950 fatalities), al-Qaeda in Iraq (more than 930 fatalities) and al-Shabaab (more than 700 fatalities). These attacks, as the START report acknowledged, were intrinsic to a broader phenomenon—the emergence of jihad terrorism emanating from the Middle East, South Asia, and North Africa, as the predominant form of global terrorism, since the 1990s.

Another macabre tally—updated almost daily—is being kept assiduously in cyberspace: the number of attacks committed by jihad terrorists since the cataclysmic acts of jihad terrorism on September 11, 2001. This grisly compilation is if anything a conservative estimate of jihad-related carnage— murder and severe morbidity—because it doesn’t include combat-related statistics per se, or the death toll increases during the days or months after any given attack (as victims die from their injuries). As of September 11, 2014, this grim count is approaching 24,000.

Read more

Andrew G. Bostom is the author of The Legacy of Jihad(Prometheus, 2005) and The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism ” (Prometheus, November, 2008)

You can contact Dr. Bostom at info[@]andrewbostom.org

The Real Islam

Published on Sep 11, 2014 by Ban Koran

Obama and many other apologists for Islam tell us that the Islamic State, ISIS, has nothing to do with Islam. Five experts challenge that statement.
The original video by Islamic State can be seen:
http://grid.pjmedia.com/?cmd=view-sho…

9/12/14 Update:

Vlad Tepes has posted the full videos by Christian Zeitz, Robert Spencer, Bill Warner and David Wood HERE

ISIS Is Not Islamic?

by Daniel Pipes
Sep 10, 2014
Cross-posted from National Review Online, The Corner

In a televised address this evening, President Barack Obama outlined his ideas on how to defeat the Islamic State. Along the way, he declared the organization variously known as ISIS or ISIL to be “not Islamic.”

In making this preposterous claim, Obama joins his two immediate predecessors in pronouncing on what is not Islamic. Bill Clinton called the Taliban treatment of women and children “a terrible perversion of Islam.” George W. Bush deemed that 9/11 and other acts of violence against innocents “violate the fundamental tenets of the Islamic faith.”

Word magic permits Obama to turn ISIS into a "not Islamic" organization.

Word magic permits Obama to turn ISIS into a “not Islamic” organization.

Indeed, Obama compounds his predecessors’ errors and goes further: Clinton and Bush merely described certain actions (treatment of women and children, acts of violence against innocents) as un-Islamic, but Obama has dared to declare an entire organization (and quasi-state) to be “not Islamic.”None of the three has any basis for such assertions. To state the obvious: as non-Muslims and politicians, rather than Muslims and scholars, they are in no position to declare what is Islamic and what is not. As Bernard Lewis, a leading American authority of Islam, notes: “it is surely presumptuous for those who are not Muslims to say what is orthodox and what is heretical in Islam.” (That Obama was born and raised a Muslim has no relevance here, for he left the faith and cannot pronounce on it.)

The only good thing about this idiocy? At least it’s better than the formulation by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (known as CAIR) which has the nerve to call ISIS “anti-Islamic.”

In the end, though, neither U.S. presidents nor Islamist apologists fool people. Anyone with eyes and ears realizes that ISIS, like the Taliban and Al-Qaeda before it, is 100 percent Islamic. And most Westerners, as indicated by detailed polling in Europe, do have eyes and ears. Over time, they are increasingly relying on common sense to conclude that ISIS is indeed profoundly Islamic. (September 10, 2014)

Also see: