Published on Oct 13, 2014 by The Flipside with Michael Loftus
Some people have a deep animosity toward immigrants, but I am not one of them. I do not like nor dislike immigrants; for me they are just strangers who live in my country. And my attitude toward them is conditioned by just one simple criteria: if they make my life and my country better- or worse. On the other hand, immigrants who come to my country do not come out of some deep love for the nation or culture. They come for money and for a better life for themselves and their families. So we are even, and nobody owes anything to anyone else- which is, in most cases, the best pattern of any relationship.
Money and a better life are quite an incentive. Those who think immigrants, especially immigrants from Muslim countries, come because they admire Western democracy should take a look at the situation in Germany.
Data taken from: Citizen Times: “Turks in Germany 2012″:
According to the study of the Interior Ministry, in 2009, Germany was home to around 4.3 million Muslims, which equates to a population share of 5.2%. Of them, the largest group consists of just under 2.7 million people of Turkish descent. A recent poll by Information GmbH has investigated what these Turkish immigrants think about Germany and Germans.
Attitudes Toward Germany
Regarding the respondents’ attitudes toward Germany and Germans, at least in terms of the stated desire for integration, 95% of the Turks in Germany find it important to preserve their Turkish culture in Germany, and 87% (2010: 83%) think that Germans ought to be more considerate of the particular circumstances of the Turks. For crying out loud, why in the world should 80 million Germans who created Germany be “more considerate of the particular circumstances” of some 2.7 million Turks?
Read more at Cherson and Molschky
Jihad Watch, By Robert Spencer:
By “people” he probably means Muslims, since the Qur’an says: “And never is it for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake” (4:92). Otherwise he is claiming that these misunderstanders of Islam misunderstand Qur’anic verses such as these:
2:191-193: “And slay them wherever you come upon them, and expel them from where they expelled you; persecution is more grievous than slaying. But fight them not by the Holy Mosque until they should fight you there; then, if they fight you, slay them — such is the recompense of unbelievers, but if they give over, surely Allah is All-forgiving, All-compassionate. Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah’s; then if they give over, there shall be no enmity save for evildoers.”
4:89: “They wish that you should disbelieve as they disbelieve, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of Allah; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper.”
5:33: “This is the recompense of those who fight against Allah and His Messenger, and hasten about the earth, to do corruption there: they shall be slaughtered, or crucified, or their hands and feet shall alternately be struck off; or they shall be banished from the land. That is a degradation for them in this world; and in the world to come awaits them a mighty chastisement.”
8:12: “When thy Lord was revealing to the angels, ‘I am with you; so confirm the believers. I shall cast into the unbelievers’ hearts terror; so smite above the necks, and smite every finger of them!’”
8:60: “Make ready for them whatever force and strings of horses you can, to terrify thereby the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides them that you know not; Allah knows them. And whatsoever you expend in the way of Allah shall be repaid you in full; you will not be wronged.”
9:5: “Then, when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayer, and pay the alms, then let them go their way; Allah is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.”
9:29: “Fight those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day and do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden — such men as practise not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book — until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled.”
9:111: “Allah has bought from the believers their selves and their possessions against the gift of Paradise; they fight in the way of Allah; they kill, and are killed; that is a promise binding upon Allah in the Torah, and the Gospel, and the Koran; and who fulfils his covenant truer than Allah? So rejoice in the bargain you have made with Him; that is the mighty triumph.”
9:123: “O believers, fight the unbelievers who are near to you; and let them find in you a harshness; and know that Allah is with the godfearing.”
47:4: “When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks, then, when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds; then set them free, either by grace or ransom, till the war lays down its loads. So it shall be; and if Allah had willed, He would have avenged Himself upon them; but that He may try some of you by means of others. And those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will not send their works astray.”
And not just the Qur’an. They’re also misunderstanding the authoritative sources in Sunni Islam, the schools of Sunni jurisprudence (madhahib):
Shafi’i school: A Shafi’i manual of Islamic law that was certified in 1991 by the clerics at Al-Azhar University, one of the leading authorities in the Islamic world, as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy, stipulates about jihad that “the caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians…until they become Muslim or pay the non-Muslim poll tax.” It adds a comment by Sheikh Nuh ‘Ali Salman, a Jordanian expert on Islamic jurisprudence: the caliph wages this war only “provided that he has first invited [Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians] to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya)…while remaining in their ancestral religions.” (‘Umdat al-Salik, o9.8).
Of course, there is no caliph today, and hence the oft-repeated claim that Osama et al are waging jihad illegitimately, as no state authority has authorized their jihad. But they explain their actions in terms of defensive jihad, which needs no state authority to call it, and becomes “obligatory for everyone” (‘Umdat al-Salik, o9.3) if a Muslim land is attacked. The end of the defensive jihad, however, is not peaceful coexistence with non-Muslims as equals: ‘Umdat al-Salik specifies that the warfare against non-Muslims must continue until “the final descent of Jesus.” After that, “nothing but Islam will be accepted from them, for taking the poll tax is only effective until Jesus’ descent” (o9.8).
Hanafi school: A Hanafi manual of Islamic law repeats the same injunctions. It insists that people must be called to embrace Islam before being fought, “because the Prophet so instructed his commanders, directing them to call the infidels to the faith.” It emphasizes that jihad must not be waged for economic gain, but solely for religious reasons: from the call to Islam “the people will hence perceive that they are attacked for the sake of religion, and not for the sake of taking their property, or making slaves of their children, and on this consideration it is possible that they may be induced to agree to the call, in order to save themselves from the troubles of war.”
However, “if the infidels, upon receiving the call, neither consent to it nor agree to pay capitation tax [jizya], it is then incumbent on the Muslims to call upon God for assistance, and to make war upon them, because God is the assistant of those who serve Him, and the destroyer of His enemies, the infidels, and it is necessary to implore His aid upon every occasion; the Prophet, moreover, commands us so to do.” (Al-Hidayah, II.140)
Maliki school: Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), a pioneering historian and philosopher, was also a Maliki legal theorist. In his renowned Muqaddimah, the first work of historical theory, he notes that “in the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.” In Islam, the person in charge of religious affairs is concerned with “power politics,” because Islam is “under obligation to gain power over other nations.”
Hanbali school: The great medieval theorist of what is commonly known today as radical or fundamentalist Islam, Ibn Taymiyya (Taqi al-Din Ahmad Ibn Taymiyya, 1263-1328), was a Hanbali jurist. He directed that “since lawful warfare is essentially jihad and since its aim is that the religion is God’s entirely and God’s word is uppermost, therefore according to all Muslims, those who stand in the way of this aim must be fought.”
By Paul Wilkinson:
There is an ongoing ruthless de-Christianisation of British society by the elitists advocating multiculturalism and hell-bent on destroying their own culture, identity and heritage, while desperately not wanting to ‘offend’ anybody else’s feelings or beliefs. However this aggressive ‘secularism’ is not just an attack on Christianity, but an assault on the Judeo-Christian values that makes our society what it is.
Multiculturalists have been stripping the nation of a spiritual soul and suppressing Christianity, the religion of the majority. This leaves a vacuum that actively encourages other religions to flourish, which would be fine in and of itself, but the predator of Islam needs no invitation to mount an attack. The only followers of a non-Christian faith intent on eliminating Christmas in their adopted country are Muslims.
According to the 2011 census, ‘officially’ 59% of people in England and Wales identify themselves as being Christian, 25.1% stated no religion, 4.8% are Muslim and the remaining 11.1% account for all other religions and categories combined. Multiculturalists may repeat the “all cultures are equal mantra,” but this ideology turns British culture on its head because it implies that 4.8% of the population in the UK that follow Islam are ‘equal’ with the 95.2% non-Muslim population and the host culture that Islam despises!
This theory is a misnomer because multiculturalism and Islam cannot be promoted together. Islam by its very nature is supremacist, rejects anything that is not Islamic and is fundamentally against multiculturalism. Yet this irrational self-loathing and suicidal political correctness that no one asked for has been forced upon us.
Read more at Cherson and Molschky
Love may be in the air, but it is not allowed in the world of Islam. Several recent cases of public kissing and hugging have caused such a stir, one would think something truly tragic must be happening. But no, it is nothing more than a string of cases where people just want to be friendly.
Modesty and morality are fantastic traits to have, but the Islamic religious police have become so overzealous, what is called a “conservative culture” by the mainstream media, is really a stifling civilization fixated on suppressing any and every demonstration of love. This is apparently out of fear of contaminating their otherwise sparkling clean, healthy and moral society. Right? After all, rapes, tortures, honor killings, child marriages, female genital mutilation, slavery and constant human rights abuses in general, all point to a “moral and modest” society. Well, this is morality in a Muslim world.
Immorality in a Muslim world is kissing or hugging in public. Two Moroccan teenagers were recently arrested for kissing outside their high school and posting the photo on Facebook. A third boy was also arrested for taking the photo. Why were they all arrested? For being a danger to social order. No public kissing allowed in this Muslim society.
Though not all Moroccans are on board with such harsh rules. Dozens have protested in the form of a “kiss-in,” many taking pictures of their kisses and posting them on Twitter.
This is reminiscent of the kiss which took place in Turkey several months ago. A couple was caught on CCTV at the metro station kissing in protest of a new morality campaign put forth by the authorities in Ankara. On the loud speaker, kissing couples on the subway were getting reprimanded for not following the moral rules imposed by the transit authority, who had banned such public displays of affection. This in turn infuriated the Turkish public, and around 200 young people held a kissing protest, just as the Moroccans did after their controversial kissing episode.
Then the morality police arrived with their own counter-protest, the morality police of course being hardcore knife-carrying Islamists, screaming “Allahu Akbar” and forcing themselves in between the kissing couples. One young man was stabbed as a result because somehow kissing “deserves” the punishment of stabbing. Imagine wreaking such havoc with a simple kiss?
In an unrelated case over the summer, British teenager Dwayne Ward was stabbed while on vacation in Turkey for kissing a local girl in a bar. As a result he was hit over the head, stabbed 19 times, stripped naked and left for dead. The doctor who saved him said the 17 year-old was lucky to be alive.
Read more at Cherson and Molschky
An important message from Citizen Warrior:
A group calling themselves “White Roses” created a video to inform non-Muslims about Islam. It’s called Three Things About Islam. You can view it on YouTube or click here to see it on Citizen Warrior.
White Roses is headquartered in Sweden. The name “White Roses” is based on a student resistance group “Die weiße Rose” in Nazi Germany. The group became known for an anonymous leaflet campaign, from June 1942 until February 1943, which called for active opposition to Adolf Hitler’s regime.
A spokeswoman for White Roses told me, “We see a parallel here concerning the protection of free speech. As you posted today, freedom of speech is getting more and more limited. The intention in choosing this name is to make a point that there will be groups opposing the doctrine of the state and speaking their mind.”
We’re honored to say the video was inspired, in part, by three Citizen Warrior articles:
We’ve given White Roses the Citizen Warrior Hero Awardbecause they are doing exactly what needs to be done — what we should all be doing: Sharing with non-Muslims key information about Islam, making it interesting and easy to hear, keeping it non-partisan, focusing on Sharia and not on Muslims, keeping it clean and not staining it with racism or hatred, and in this case, putting it in a form that is easily shareable by others.
I’ve posted the video on a new site I’m building. The purpose of the new site is to help us reach people who might be put off by anything that smacks of Islam-bashing. I suggest you use that site to share the video with those friends and family who don’t yet know much about Islam. Here’s the video on that site: Three Things About Islam Video.
One last thing: The video presents information you already know, but its “target market” is people who don’t know very much, so it’s a good tool we can use to share with them. I hope you use it.
Also see CJR’s recommended Webinars and Videos page
By Paul Wilkinson:
Britain has numerous so-called ‘moderate’ Muslims aka self-righteous ‘media-whores’, who carve a living from shamelessly denying all the nasty things clearly written in the Qur’an. They publically espouse equal rights and state how they are against any form of discrimination, yet on the other hand are all religious zealots who follow the Qur’an to the letter and worship the Prophet Muhammad and his teachings.
Many Brits do not have a great knowledge of Islam; certainly the overwhelming majority have not read the Qur’an and rely on the media for ‘enlightenment’. Qur’an inspired violence, terrorism and civil wars are on the news daily, but self-appointed spokesmen will feed off the public’s ignorance and tell the largely gullible audience this is all a contradiction to the real, ‘true Islam’.
At the other end of the spectrum are ‘hate preachers’ who are really being honest like Anjem Choudary, Abu Hamza and Abu Qatada, who at times may be portrayed as ‘pantomime villains’, but the media does not tell us that they are simply obeying the Qur’an’s commands which do incite hatred and violence.
Hence the reason why Robert Spencer and Pam Geller were banned from entering Britain, because they would have challenged these ‘moderates’ and told the uncomfortable truth about what the Qur’an actually says. This is not what the multiculturalists in the media want you to hear… Not to mention the fact that Muslims would have been violent- remember, “Islam is peace”!
There is no Islamic caliphate anymore (thankfully), but having no ‘Pope-like’ leader gives rise to all these ‘spokesmen’ who claim they speak for 99% of Muslims. However they are ‘stealth jihadists’ who want to spread undiluted Islam, but their tactics are tailored differently and so do not publically admit to this. The only ‘moderate’ trait is by not personally partaking in or publically condemning violence, and misleading people by making Islam not appear extreme.
Other than in the public sphere many of these moderates are all essentially ‘nobodies’ and only have value due to the exposure they get from the media, like the BBC putting them on television most Sunday mornings. They effectively have carte blanche as they are totally unchallenged by the politically correct media and certainly never have Islamic scripture quoted at them. Their modus operandi is the ‘non-violent form of Jihad’, as Jon MC explains:
“Jihad by the tongue (jihad bil lisan) and/or jihad by the pen (jihad bil qallam). This might sound like simple proslytisation, but in essence Islam recognises any method including lying or dissimulation (Taqiyya/Muda’rat, Kitman, Tawriya and Tayseer) to ‘spread Islam’ to win converts, or gain acceptance for Islam within a host society, or disguising elements of Islam (hence the ‘Islam is a religion of peace’ statement). It also includes attempting to silence criticism by labelling critics as ‘racists’, ‘fascists’ or ‘Islamophobes’ or any verbal/written means to promote/defend Islam and/or silence opposition and critics.”
Read more at Cherson and Molschky
The Qur’an commands Muslims to violently subjugate unbelievers. Muhammad commands Muslims to violently subjugate unbelievers. Yet politicians and the media continue to assure us that Islam is peaceful, tolerant, and harmless.
My Preface to the paperbound 2008 edition of The Legacy of Jihad, written in late 2007, included this observation:
During mid-November, 2007, a grim milestone was recorded in the macabre tally being kept assiduously in cyberspace by [The Religion of Peace (TROP) website]: the 10,000th attack by jihad terrorists resulting in some 60,000 dead and 90,000 injured since the cataclysmic acts of jihad terrorism on September 11, 2001.
[TROP] does not include combat-related statistics, and he acknowledges that the death toll may increase in the days and months following any given attack (as victims die from their injuries), and this rarely gets reported. His tally also excludes the genocide in Darfur committed by the Islamic government in Sudan, and their marauding jihadist militias (the Janjaweed), whose murderous ravages the UN estimated last year had resulted in some 400,000 dead, and 2 million displaced.
[TROP] identified three episodes of such continuous, mind numbing jihadist carnage which had perhaps unsettled him most: Nadimarg, India (3/23/03), dozens of Hindu villagers roused out of their beds and machine-gunned by Lashkar-e-Toiba; Beslan, Russia (9/3/04), some 350 people slaughtered by jihadists—half of them children; Malatya, Turkey (4/18/07), three Christian Bible distributors bound, tortured for hours, then gruesomely murdered by men who acted explicitly in the name of Islam.
Just under six years later, the rate of carnage having escalated, that gruesometally as of September 10, 2013, was 21,564 attacks. During the recently completed week of August 31 through September 6, 2013, alone, there were 49 jihad terror attacks, including 6 “jihad martyrdom” homicide bombings, resulting in 309 deaths, and 610 critical injuries. Those figures for the entire month of August, 2013, were 260 jihad terror attacks occurring in 25 countries (directed against votaries of 4 non-Muslim “infidel” religions, and also including sectarian Islamic violence between Muslims), causing 161 deaths, and 3412 critical injuries.
The consensus view of orthodox Islamic jurisprudence regarding jihad, since its formulation during the 8th and 9th centuries, through the current era, is that non-Muslims peacefully going about their lives—from the Khaybar farmers whom Muhammad ordered attacked in 628, to those sitting in the World Trade Center on 9/11/01—are “muba’a”, licit, in the Dar al Harb, lands not yet vanquished by jihad war. As described by the great 20th century scholar of Islamic Law, Joseph Schacht,
A non-Muslim who is not protected by a treaty is called harbi, ‘”n a state of war,” “enemy alien”; his life and property are completely unprotected by law…
And these innocent non-combatants can be killed, and have always been killed, with impunity simply by virtue of being “harbis” during endless razzias and or full scale jihad campaigns that have occurred continuously since the time of Muhammad, through the present. This is the crux of the specific institutionalized religio-political ideology, i.e., jihad, which makes Islamdom’s borders, innards, and the further reaches of today’s jihadists, “bloody,” to paraphrase the late Samuel Huntington, across the globe.
Julien Benda in his classic 1928 La Trahison de Clercs (The Treason of the Intellectuals) decried with prophetic accuracy how the abandonment of objective truth abetted totalitarian ideologies, which lead to the cataclysmic destruction of World War II. La Trahison de Clercs of our time remains the nearly complete failure of Western intellectuals to study, understand, and acknowledge the heinous consequences of the living Islamic institution of jihad war.
The following was originally published in The English Review:
Most folks chill out on Saturday nights; shopping at malls, dining out, or catching a movie at a multiplex. That is most folks. A group calling itself Counter Jihadists Coalition of Southern California spend Saturday nights at a booth in the busy Third Street Promenade in Santa Monica engaging in what I call anti-Da’wah — countering the call to Islam.
They endeavor to get the word out about what is inside the Qur’an, the Hadith, Mohammed’s exemplary bio, and the ever-reliable guide to Islamic doctrine and Sharia, The Reliance of the Traveller. They number among their group some members of the West Coast branch of The United West. They even have a Coptic Christian member who can translate Arabic spoken by Muslim passersby who either walk by muttering or engage the doughty band.
Last Saturday evening marked the culmination of Ramadan with the Feast of Eid al-Fitr. So the group set up their booth laden with pamphlets and related materials elucidating the totalitarian creed that lies within the Islamic doctrine — a creed that denigrates all unbelievers and denies civil and human rights for women, those who leave Islam by choice, gays, and, of course, The People of the Book (Christians and Jews).
As Ramadan had ended the group prepared a poster from a recent score card of violence that occurred in the Ummah and elsewhere during Ramadan that they downloaded from the Religion of Peace website, The Ramadan Bombathon Scorecard for 2013. The Religion of Peace website notes:
TheReligionofPeace.com has been reporting on the number of people killed and injured in the name of religion throughout the month of Ramadan, which just ended. Here are the totals for 2013. All but one were carried out by Muslims, and that one didn’t result in any deaths or injuries.
Tell your Muslim friends you are happy Ramadan is over along with the yearly spike in Islamic terror attacks around the world.
What follows is a report from one of the leaders of the Counter Jihad Coalition, Steve Amundson:
Scenes from a Saturday Night at a Pedestrian Mall in Santa Monica
The Third Street Promenade in Santa Monica, CA, is one of the busiest pedestrian malls in Southern California. Hundreds of tourists and locals stroll the mall to shop, watch the street performers, and to take in the ethnic and cultural variety that makes Santa Monica so vibrant.
A group of activists called the Counter Jihad Coalition is also there to inform the public about the many ways Islamic ideology threatens the American way of life. We are armed only with a collection of illustrated brochures addressing as poignantly as possible the major concerns about Islamic ideology. Here is a list of some of the most popular brochures:
Islam in a Nut-Shell (which you can see here)
The Muslim Brotherhood
The Three Stages of Jihad
Are you a Muslim Born in a Foreign Country? (Containing challenging questions for Muslims who have never experienced freedom of speech and thought)
Women who marry into Islam may have to abandon all rights
An African-American Muslim is a Slave to a Racist Ideology
Is it “Un-Christian” to speak out about Islam?
There is no excuse for domestic violence, except Islamic Sharia Law
We attract visitors to our information table by posting large graphic signs about recent Islamic outrages — like the Boston Marathon bombing or the daylight beheading of Lee Rigby by Quran-quoting terrorists. Last Saturday, we used a 3’ by 4’ blow-up of the 2013 Ramadan Bombathon Scorecard published by http://www.thereligionofpeace.com.
This poster with the smiling jihadi holding an automatic got lots of attention. Passersby were signing up for the local American Congress for Truth (ACT), complementing us for speaking out, and (Muslims, of course) complaining how we have misunderstood their ideology. Having an Arabic-speaking Copt Christian and a woman on our team went a long way to diffusing the usual red-herrings dragged across our message.
As we engage the public, we are learning a number of things that other anti-Islamic activists must take into consideration:
1) Most non-Muslims are woefully uninformed about Islam to the point that many could not determine if we were for or against Islam.
2) CAIR and other Islamist propaganda organizations have been relatively successful in convincing American non-Muslims that Islam is a “religion” protected by the First Amendment instead of a political ideology operating under the cover of religious protection.
3) Muslims are terrified at even touching anti-Islamic fact sheets or looking at selected verses of the Quran in English translations provided by mosques and other Muslim sources.
4) Muslims are obsessed with displaying their Islamic “gang symbols” in public to show that “we are here and you have to accept us.”
No we don’t. Tolerance of the intolerant is cultural suicide.
By David Solway:
As I’ve written on several previous occasions, there exists a sect of reformist Muslims who believe that the Koran has been grievously misread by cavilers and doubters who are convinced that Islam is not a religion of peace, but a violent and imperialistic faith intent on world conquest. The passages in the Koran—and the environing literature as well—that give rise to the animosity of nit-pickers and quibblers, the enlightened Muslims claim, require to be re-interpreted so that their temperate and merciful essence can be made plain to all. Embarking on the process of re-interpretation can be a salutary and liberating task, one that we spurn at the peril of darkest ignorance and counter-productive rancor. Eventually the detractors of Islam may realize that they have failed to grasp the beauty, elegance and rhetoric of conciliation that animate the holy texts and be moved to make amends for their anti-Islamic vitriol and stubborn recidivism.
To consider only a few salient instances of controversial passages that have been consistently misapprehended.
Koran 2:191, speaking of infidels who do not accept the word of the Prophet, commands us to “kill them wherever you may find them.” Here we must be particularly alert, subtle and astute, for killing the unbelievers does not mean to slay them bodily, but to kill them with kindness, in other words, to shower the candy of life upon them, to reward them with prestigious appointments and lavish emoluments, to bow before them in the streets and welcome them into the homes of the devout, to address them with profound respect, to decorate them with titles and ply them with accolades—until, bedazzled by the nobility and magnanimity of Islam, they are ready to convert.
Similarly, in Koran 2:216, where we read that “fighting is prescribed” for the faithful, we are to understand that the battle is enjoined to vanquish the evil impulse in Muslim and non-Muslim alike, until universal harmony and jubilation dominate the world. This is the true meaning and purpose of the Caliphate.
When Allah warns in Koran 3:56, with regard to those who reject the faith, “I will punish them with terrible agony,” the supreme Lord does not propose insupportable physical torment but, rather, the moral suffering that comes from the recognition of apostasy or denial, which can only strengthen the fibre of a mortified conscience.
Koran 5:33 informs us that “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement.” Admittedly, this is hard verse to fathom; however, as is often the Prophet’s wont, he is not targeting body parts but engaging in graphic allegory to impress upon both believers and unbelievers the self-torture they will feel, smitten by their higher selves, should they curse the Almighty.
In the same way, Koran 8:12, which reads: “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them,” is not meant to be taken literally. The true meaning is: browbeat them tactfully and lightly slap their wrists if they persist in their folly and continue to rebuff your acts of philanthropic munificence. This is the Islamic version of tough love.
Read more at Front Page
Shortly after the savage beheading on May 22, 2013 of a British soldier in London, the Oxford Union society held a debate on the motion: THIS HOUSE BELIEVES ISLAM IS A RELIGION OF PEACE. The motion was carried with a Yes vote of 286 against a No vote of 168.
Update Sep. 6, 2014: The videos I had originally posted here have since been made private. The following is the full debate. (H/T Muslim Issue where summaries of each speaker’s positions are given)
Published on Apr 25, 2014 by SSSurvivoRRR
Robert Spencer, perhaps one of the most adept at debating Islam, gives an excellent rebuttal to Mehdi Hasan’s speech here: Mehdi Hasan tries, fails to prove that Islam is a peaceful religion
A little less than every five hours, somewhere around the world a Muslim is carrying out a fatal jihadist attack.
These are not the regular beatings and vandalism against Christians, Hindus and Buddhists but religion-oriented attacks in which someone dies at the hand of a member of the”religion of peace.”
A website called “The Religion of Peace” has listed more than 20,000 such fatal attacks since Sept. 11, 2001.
As of today, the total was 20,022. The 20,000th came a few days ago when a Jewish woman was cut in pieces in Iran by religious radicals “intent on expanding a mosque.”
Some 1,800 deadly Muslim terror attacks happen each year, amounting to about 150 a month and five a day.
The purpose of the website, according to operator Glen Roberts, a pseudonym, is to put the level of violence being inflicted by Muslims in perspective.
“I started watching [the Council on American-Islamic Relations] in the months after 9/11,” said Roberts, “and I was astonished by the self-absorption. Each day people are maimed and killed explicitly in the name of Islam while this organization complains about headscarves and hurt feelings.
“I thought,” he said, “that maybe if I started documenting the violence, it would inspire a sense of moral perspective on their part.
“I was wrong, of course.”
He said he monitors acts of Muslim violence from a range of news sources that are reliable, when “it can be reasonably inferred that the perpetrator was motivated to some degree by their Islamic faith.”
“I do not post anything that I believe to be false,” he said. ” … This is not to say that mistakes haven’t been made, but they are unintentional and relatively rare.”
Fatal attacks that are reported to him only are posted when they can be verified with a reference to a news sources that he would consider reliable.
He said while he’s not been able to convince Muslims that their faith is violent, he hopes others take notice.
“Critics seem to assume that I’m trying to convince others that they are in mortal danger or that Muslims are bad people because they are Muslim. This is not true, of course,” he told WND.
“The evidence presented by TheReligionofPeace.com is meant to drive home the message that Islam is not like other religion,” he said. “It is openly supremacist and more vulnerable to violent interpretations. When one religion inspires over 1,500 faith-motivated acts of violence each year while other religions contribute practically none, then it should be obvious that there are unique problems – and it should be OK to say so.”
He wrote that Islam continues to be “an open threat” to Western liberal values, including freedom of conscience.
“There is already pressure against free speech rights, particularly in Europe. We should be highly concerned about the logical path of the current trend regardless of whether or not the full consequences of Muslim immigration and deference to the increasing volume of Muslim demand will be experienced in our lifetime,” he said.
“Judging by the one-way flow of immigration, even Muslims find Islamic countries less livable. What sense does it make to continue importing and catering to an ideology that doesn’t work elsewhere – particularly when Islamic immigrants as a group are the most notoriously resistant to integration and acceptance of Western values?”
He said Muslims in the West who say that Islam is a religion of peace are generally sincere.
“They want to believe that their religion is superior, which wouldn’t be the case if it brought violence instead of peace,” he said. “Therefore, they convince themselves and others that Islam is really just the Judeo-Christian value system an Arabic vocabulary.”
He said the “far less pleasant reality is that those who want to believe in ‘peaceful Islam’ have a lot more of Islam to ignore than do the jihadis.”
Roberts wrote: “On a week in which two suicide bombers slaughtered over 54 Christian and Druze and Sunni extremists massacred nearly 200 Shiites in Iraq, TROP recorded our 20,000th Islamic terror attack since 9/11. It happened to be the stabbing and dismemberment of a Jewish woman in her Iranian home by religious radicals intent on expanding a mosque.”
A UPI report explained the Jewish woman was stabbed to death and her family blamed her death on a religious motivation.
The victim, identified in the report as just Tuba N., was attacked allegedly by her Muslim neighbors after they had been trying to drive her family from their home and confiscate the property.
“Thugs broke into her home, tied up her two sisters who were living with her, and repeatedly stabbed her to death,” said the report.
A list of headlines on the site was equally thought-provoking. The site listed a musician in Mali who was ordered into silence on the threat of having her tongue cut out, a teen in India who was found with chains around his hands and feet who claimed he had been chained after trying to leave a Muslim madrassa.
Then there was the Australian stabbed for “insulting the prophet,” advocacy for child marriages, the massacre of 10 Christians, a 15-year-old killed for dating a boy, a tailor now dead for making “inappropriate” women’s clothes and a gang-rape and murder.
The site explains the Quran has at least 109 verses that “call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule.”
“Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding.”
The site continues: “Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Quran.”
One verse, for example, states, “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah.”
The site says there are 10 reasons Islam is not a “religion of peace.” One is the thousands of terror acts committed in the name of Islam, while acts committed in the names of other religions have been minimal. More people are killed by Muslim terrorists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition. The daily Muslim terror toll is more than the Ku Klux Klan killed in 50 years.
Read more at WND
Published on Oct 12, 2012 by Eric Allen Bell
10/10/2012 Eric Allen Bell on Israel National Radio, discusses some of the possible consequences of telling the truth about the so-called “Religion of Peace”. Taped from a safe house in the United States, this discussion with Josh Hasten looks at how Political Islam is making bold moves to enforce its blasphemy laws on the unbeliever – and how the Obama Administration operates like a fox guarding the hen house – allowing a Hamas front group (CAIR) to dictate domestic policy while using appeasement as its foreign policy.