EXCLUSIVE: Interview With Prominent ‘Ex-Muslim’ Activist Hazem Farraj, Part II

Daily Wire, by Frank Camp, July 24, 2017:

In part one of my interview with Hazem Farraj, the ex-Muslim spoke about his conversion story, the concept of “real” Islam as it relates to ISIS, and how the West has been deceived by Islamist propaganda. In part II, Farraj continues to talk about the blindness of the West, as well as what makes Islam so uniquely violent.

How The West Was Won (Continued)

Farraj continued to detail how westerners are deceived by Islamic propaganda:

“How do the ignorant, western, non-spiritual, and non-philosophical folks get lied to? They’ll have a guy on the news, and he’ll say: ‘Osama bin Laden doesn’t represent us; he represents the Wahhabi.’ All that is saying is that Osama bin Laden is a Muslim who follows the teachings of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab.”

“Apologists will say ‘Osama bin laden wasn’t a Muslim, he was a Wahhabi Muslim.’ In our western, Judeo-Christian thinking, we treat it as though it’s akin to different denominations. It’s not.”

This lack of understanding is incredibly dangerous, according to Farraj:

“If we don’t look at Islam for what it is, a political ideology no different than Nazism, we can’t get to the root of it. The only difference is that Hitler wasn’t declared a prophet.”

The Islamic State, Mohammad, & Abrogation

“Whenever you study world religions or cults, you’ll hear about a thing called circumstantial revelation. This is when a faith leader will create a scapegoat, a way out of responsibility, usually at the 11th hour. Similarly, the law of abrogation is an Islamic principle in which new revelations that come from Mohammad’s mouth overwrite previous revelations,” noted Farraj.

“The only way Mohammad could reconcile the peaceful Meccan verses with the more violent Medinan verses was to have circumstantial revelations. By the time he was in Medina, he was such an amazing figure that he could get away with it.”

“People who claim that Islam is peace are reading the Meccan verses, which are outdated and nullified. It’s the equivalent of the way Christian’s see the Old Testament.”

Citing chapter 2, verse 106 of the Quran, which states: “Whatever message we abrogate or cause to be forgotten, we bring one better than it or one like it. Knowest thou not that Allah is possessor of power over all things?” Farraj claimed that because of the law of abrogation, “ISIS is aware that what they are doing is completely sanctioned.”

“Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS, has a doctorate in Islamic Sharia. He knows exactly what he’s doing.”

“Christians say ‘What would Jesus do?’ Well, what would Mohammad do? Before Mohammad died, in the most chronological Surah that he revealed – which would be the most pure message he could give – what did he say? Did he say: ‘Love your neighbor?’ No. Did he tell them to take care of the poor and innocent? No. He said: ‘Go and fight.’ Chapter nine, one of the bloodiest chapters in the Quran. Surah 9:5 is known as the verse of the sword.”

Intellectual honesty is paramount if the West is to tackle the real issue with any success, said Farraj. Without that, delusion can and will dominate:

“To create a culture that facilitates this lie is detrimental to American foreign policy. Part of the reason the Middle East is burning right now is because we haven’t done the hard work of self-reflection. And it’s not racist to question religious beliefs; it’s not racist to question ideas.”

Further, he noted: “The idea that the Islamic State’s loss of territory means success is nonsense. It’s the ideology. So if ISIS is gone, we have Al-Nusra; if Al-Nusra is gone, we have Hamas. The list goes on and on, and all because we don’t want to deal with the monster.”

Going Forward

“The only way to dismantle the bad guys is to secularize the governments of the Middle East,” said Farraj. “We don’t promote state religion in the U.S. government, yet we promoted Nouri al-Maliki in Iraq. We need to secularize middle eastern governments; we need to export the ideas and values that make America incredible. Some ideas are better than others, and American values are better than Sharia.”

“We need a counter-information war in the Middle East,” he added. “We need to make it look so sexy to be completely human rights oriented, and we need to make the other guys look crazy. Unfortunately, the regimes over there can muzzle that effort. We should look at the Sharia-infused ‘Cairo Declaration,’ which was supposed to offer another version of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR). We need the United Nations, and specifically the OIC, to abandon any and all tribal culture based on shame or honor and commit to the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights as the standard.”

How It All Collapses

“There’s a group in America called Quranist Muslims. They say they don’t follow the life of Mohammad; they don’t follow the Hadith; they only follow the Quran. But the Quran is littered with amazingly violent things. If you remove those things, there is no identity for the Islamic culture. That’s how you dismantle the radicalism. You repeatedly show the legitimacy of the law of abrogation historically and contextually. You talk about it again and again.”

Final Thoughts

At the end of my interview with Farraj, I opened the floor so that he could offer up whatever he wanted. He concluded with a consequential message:

“If I could say one thing to Americans, it would be to not stop this struggle with radical Islam. We live in an historical moment that we will read about in history books. We are experiencing a clash of civilizations, and may the best ideas and values win.”

“Americans need not cower from what made them great. At the end of the day, people like myself flock to America because of what it stands for. It would be a disaster to see that we are upon a crossroads of history and we don’t follow it through.”

Check out Hazem Farraj’s YouTube channel here, and follow him on Facebook and Twitter for more information.

For a primer on Farraj’s content, here’s one video in a must-watch series in which the ex-Muslim explores Islam and the Quran:

***

Playlist “I.S. Islam”

The New ‘Uncle Toms’: Islamists and Leftists Target Reformists and Ex-Muslims With Racial Epithet

Breitbart, by Raheem Kassam, June 21, 2017:

Imagine growing up ­being told everything about who you are as a person is wrong. That it doesn’t conform to what is expected of you simply because of how you were born.

When it comes to LGBT issues, the political left is so thoroughly in tune with such predicaments.

But they’re also the primary abusers of another set of people who are surrounded by hatred and bigotry just for being them: reformist, or ex-Muslims.

Harriet Beecher Stowe’s novel, Uncle Tom’s Cabin, dealt with the issue for blacks in the United States. That book was published in 1852, and according to African-American culture magazine The Root:

Today nobody wants to be called an Uncle Tom, but 150 years ago, it was a compliment… Uncle Tom is a martyr, not a sell-out. His devotion to his fellow slaves is so unshakable that he sacrifices a chance for freedom and, ultimately, his life to help them.

It’s now 2017 – a “current year” factoid always thrown in our face by progressives – and the forcefulness by which the political left and fundamentalist Muslims utilise the phrases “house Muslim” or “uncle Tom” to shame those who don’t conform is not just abundant, it is growing.

I have a pretty thick skin. I hear these things every day. I feel ashamed, not of who I am, but of my fellow human beings who find it appropriate to race-shame someone, or religion-shame them.

I’m told every day, perhaps even several times a day, that I’m a “coconut”, or I hear sardonic expressions of how “proud my parents must be” of me. It’s fine, I can take it. When it comes from Muslims I put this down to envy. The green-eyed monster and the green, Arab-clad flags co-ordinate well together.

But I recall vividly an incident from my early days in politics.

I was so excited to be trotting around the House of Commons with a Labour Party friend of mine I had met at the Sports and Social bar (more commonly referred to as the Sports and Socialist). We had a few beers, and went for a walk around the Parliamentary estate. I guess I was 23 years old at the time.

In a moment of unguardedness, my new friend turned to me in the hallway and said something to the effect of, “You know, Raheem. You should be one of us”.

Flattered, for a moment, I thought, “Wow this guy’s trying to recruit me because he sees talent”. But he continued, before I could say anything.

“Yeah, you’re brown. Your parents are immigrants. You should be one of us”.

I was stunned. Offended, even. And that’s pretty hard to achieve.

The idea I should vote a certain way, or think in a certain manner, simply because of the colour of my skin or the religion my great, great, grandparents happened to convert to.

He later apologised, of course, realising the error. Perhaps we can blame it on the beer.

But there is undoubtedly an ingrained bigotry on the political left, shored up by Muslim fundamentalists who want to shame people like me into acting a certain way.

I have been accused of being a traitor to my race, but more worryingly, a betrayer of Islam.

I suspect those who accuse me of the latter know precisely what they are doing. They know what the punishment for apostasy is.

When the Iranian Human Rights Commission – an organisation about as oxymoronic in name as the Senate Intelligence Committee – decided to appoint me ‘Islamophobe of the Year’ in 2014, they knew they were putting a target on my head.

By the by, this is the same group the BBC and the UK government fawned to following the attack near Finsbury Park mosque in June 2017.

Never mind, I thought. Instead, I owned it, splashing it across the pages of Breitbart London.

But for people of weaker will; perhaps those who grew up not reading Christopher Hitchens’s Letters to a Young Contrarian, or for those who are reliant on their families for housing, or child support, or even for those who are simply ill-prepared, this assault on identity can be devastating, especially when it is endorsed by leading figures.

London’s Muslim mayor Sadiq Khan told the Iranian state-backed Press TV in 2009: “The point is, you can’t just pick and choose who who you speak to. You can’t just speak to Uncle Toms. You can’t just speak to people who will say what you want them to hear.”

The Muslim Public Affairs Council (UK) even published an article as recently as 2016 endorsing the epithet. It stated:

Calling another Muslim an ‘Uncle Tom’ is not racist, it is a political statement, but to paint it as a racist title is a classic Uncle Tom tactic.

In short, ‘Uncle Tom’ refers to an individual who is slavishly and excessively subservient to authority figures, particularly a black or brown person who behaves in a subservient manner to white people; or any person perceived to be complicit in the oppression of their own group.

Ms. Beecher Stowe is no doubt turning in her grave.

Zain, an ex-Muslim in the United Kingdom who spoke to me anonymously (how could he not?) said:

“I’ve been called a fake, told that I never was a Muslim, that I’m a traitor, I have had a person call me an Uncle Tom. I feel really sad. When my parents came into this country they fought hard to exercise their religion. I feel sad that they then decide I cannot exercise my freedom and leave Islam. That’s what angers me the most. I don’t hate them, but I am angry.

“How dare they try and kill someone who leaves Islam? Three of my friends were almost murdered. One lady left Islam and her husband stabbed her. He went to prison but asked for a transfer to an Iranian jail and the government granted his request. As soon as he got there he was released.

“If we don’t stand up and challenge our community and say this is happening… the outsiders need to know this stuff exists.. they will keep on deluding the outsiders that there’s no issues there”.

Zain has never even met his brother, who his parents had after he left Islam and was shunned.

Read more

Raheem Kassam is the author of the forthcoming book No Go Zones: How Sharia is Spreading in America, and Editor in Chief of Breitbart London. You can sign up for book updates here, and follow Raheem on Twitter and Facebook

India’s Ex-Muslims: Shedding Traditional Islam for Science

First Post, by Tufail Ahmad, November 10, 2016:

India is witnessing the emergence of a movement of ‘ex-Muslims’. Troubled by the involvement of Muslims in suicide bombings in primarily Muslim countries like Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Pakistan, helped by the availability of alternative interpretations of Islam on the internet, and driven by a questioning mind, Muslim youths in India are gradually leaving Islam. Such youths — both men and women, and well educated — are typically in their twenties and thirties and describe themselves as ex-Muslims, atheists or cultural Muslims. They network through social media, Facebook and WhatsApp, often use anonymous Ids, and are based in towns across India.

Sultan Shahin, editor of the reformist website NewageIslam.com, says that there is no organised movement of ex-Muslims in India like it is in Western countries such as Britain, but some Muslims called him to inquire about real Islam. “I have spoken to 3-4 Muslims who have left five-time prayers. A lawyer in Delhi even convinced his father to leave Islam,” Shahin says, adding that many such youths browse anti-Islam websites and accept the jihadi discourse as real Islam.

“I see individuals coming up [on social media] and we know each other. I can say that I am one of them,” says Nadia Nongzai, speaking of ex-Muslims. Nadia, who is based in Shillong and holds a B Tech in computer science and a Master’s degree in economics, comes from a practicing Muslim family. “In school, I could not believe that the god [Allah] who is so great will not have a sense of fair play and will send all non-Muslim kids of my school to hell,” she says, questioning the Islamic teachings that non-Muslims will not enter heaven. She does not hesitate in describing herself an ex-Muslim. Asked if this could pose a security threat to her, she says she doesn’t hide her identity and adds: “I am trained in martial arts.”

Sazi Suber (name changed) was born in Saudi Arabia and raised there by his parents till 10. His mother, who converted from Christianity to Islam and returned to Christianity later, brought him back to Mangalore, where he was sent to a madrassa. Sazi now holds a BE in computer science and is working on an app for comic books. “When I came to India, I found dogs cute and lovable. My mother told me that playing with dogs is haram [forbidden by Islam],” he says about the first clash of viewpoint he had regarding Islam. In Islam, dogs are seen as unpious and Muslims are forbidden to keep them as pets.

Two years after coming to India, Sazi was attending a congregation in Mangalore where an Islamic cleric was telling Muslims on a loudspeaker to not accept water and food from non-Muslim homes. This came as a shock to him and he couldn’t reconcile with this idea. “It was like telling me to hate my mom who was a Christian. No child can accept this,” he says about the cleric’s announcement. It fuelled his questioning of Islam. “I started reading science. Islam appeared as a shock. The logical conclusion led me to think: this was not right,” Sazi, now an atheist and 27 years old, says, adding that he also began questioning as to why only Muslims were involved in suicide bombings.

Ashiq (nickname) is an electronics engineer based in Thiruvananthapuram. “I used to go to a madrassa. I read books from the library about science. I used to ask my teachers: Who created god? But the teachers wouldn’t respond to my questions,” he says, adding that they would instead say: “You are guided by Satan. They would call me Satan’s shadow.” Ashiq’s most piercing question to his madrassa teachers was: since a day can last six months in countries near the North Pole, when should Muslims break their day-long fast? The madrassa teachers did not have knowledge of geography. “The clerics beat me up for asking this,” he says.

“My friends would call me son of Satan. They wouldn’t play cricket with me. I was isolated. Only my mother was there to talk to me,” Ashiq says. He was also taught not to accept food from non-Muslims. “The clerics threw me out of class when I questioned them why they teach: Do not accept food from Hindus,” he says. Later, his mother advised him to somehow complete his studies and not ask questions because they will declare you a kafir (infidel). “For the next year, I did not ask any question,” he says. Now, he is 29 years old and has joined Facebook and WhatsApp groups to encourage scientific temper among Muslim youths. “We ask basic questions: Where did we come from? How was the earth born?”

Ali Muntazar, 27 years old and based in Kolkata, comes from a family of clerics. His grandfather and father were Islamic scholars. He does not practice Islam and uses terms like “revolutionist” and baghawti (treasonous) to describe himself. He doesn’t offer prayers on Eid or any other day and eats openly during Ramzan. Asked if he has run into trouble over this, he says: “I was nearly beaten up. But in India there is democracy; that is why I was saved.” He says he had a questioning mind since childhood, but his father’s friends, who were clerics, could not answer his queries satisfactorily. Ali Muntazar was troubled by the fact that the life of his khala (mother’s sister) was destroyed by triple talaq, the practice whereby a husband divorces his wife by uttering talaq (divorce) three times. He is bitter: “The first victims of Islam’s atank [terror] are Muslims themselves.”

Bohra Muslims are a sect of Shia Islam. A number of Bohra Muslim youths are leaving Islam at the level of ideas, though it is not easy for them to not be part of the strongly-mandated practices. A Bengaluru-based Bohra Muslim, who wishes to remain anonymous, says: “The Bohra community has a strong policy of ex-communication, which can have a strong negative bearing on their daily life and business. But within the community, there is a growing disquiet about the role of Syedna [the leader].” He adds, “Culturally, I am more of a Bohra rather than a Muslim. But I wouldn’t describe myself as ex-Muslim. I am not bothered personally, but I am afraid of repercussions for my parents, my business partner and our business.”

D Zafar, who is doing a PhD on religious fanaticism in English literature and lives in Moradabad, has performed Hajj, the annual pilgrimage to Mecca. In his quest for knowledge, he read three translations of the Quran and has now left Islam. Local Islamic clerics could not answer his questions, and instead would threaten him: awam mein hamara ek byan tum ko murtad qarar kardega aur tum ko shahr chhorna padega (Our one statement declaring you apostate will force you to leave the city). Once the local mosque imam was about to publish his photograph declaring him murtad (apostate), which had to be resolved through political influence.

“We stopped talking about it [Islam]. We used to get messages that you could not teach Islam, but if you want to teach English, it is fine,” Zafar says, adding he was told by Islamic clerics: kafiron se door raha karo (maintain distance from kafirs). Later, he joined some three-night camps of the Tablighi Jamaat, a revivalist group, but some rival doctrinal groups persuaded him against this. Zafar’s basic point of difference was this: “The entire Quran does not mandate five-times namaz [prayer]. Some Muslims even offer only 3-time prayers.” He notes that there is no uniformity in prayers because there are 20 types of prayers among 200 doctrinal sects in Islam.

Major Rashid Khan, who has retired from military service, comes from an orthodox family that prayed five times and observed Ramzan. “When I entered college, I started thinking about Islam and the Quran. I realised that we were not allowed to ask questions about religion,” he says, adding that his intellectual thinking departed from Islam on the issue that the moon was split at Prophet Muhammad’s hint and also over the issue of the killing of over 700 Jews of Banu Quraiza tribe, who had surrendered before the prophet. He left Islam and was scolded by his father; his elder brothers stopped talking to him. “My brothers did so because they think Muslims can have no business with those who reject Islam,” he says.

Major Khan brought up his children in a free atmosphere. “When my children were around 8-10 years, I started explaining to them what definitions of god exist in different communities. I told my children: you are free to decide; I will never force you to accept any religion. I also brought Islamic teachers to teach them the Quran,” says he, adding that children as young as 3-4 are taken to madrassa and that there is a need to ban madrassas because they teach hatred of other religions through such concepts as kafirs. His children have evolved their own thinking away from Islam.

Arif Mohammad, a student of engineering in Bhopal, comes from a family of practicing Muslims. “I believe in Karma rather than god,” he says, adding: “Consciously or unconsciously, I began questioning Islam after Class 12 but there was curiosity about religions right from childhood.” Arif Muhammad describes himself as Indian and not as Indian Muslim. “I have noticed about 50 Muslims [on social media] who have left Islam but they cannot openly talk about Islam,” he says adding that some of these youths have left Islam because they do not want to become part of terrorism. “These Muslim youths prefer their cultural identity over their Islamic identity. “

Arif Mohammad also notes that in order to avoid security issues cultural Muslims like him choose their friends wisely because some friends do become violent. “Social media has helped such Muslims to connect with each other and to realise that there are people like us on the planet,” he says, adding that such Muslims are connected via Facebook pages of Iranian Atheists, Afghan Atheists and so on. He notes that there are many Muslims like him in Bhopal, Jabalpur and other cities. Regarding the movement of ex-Muslims, he says that it cannot emerge as a formal movement without a leader. This point is also shared by Ali Muntazar who stresses the need for a platform for ex-Muslims.

The stories of the above-named people are not isolated. It is indeed a trend that Muslim youths are leaving Islam in towns across India, but most of those interviewed here observed that there is also a rival trend of Muslims becoming more religious than they used to be. A few points that emerge about those who are leaving Islam: They live in fear of local Islamic clerics, they become isolated in their local neighbourhoods, their stories bring out the fact that questioning minds are not acceptable to Islam, there is a teaching of hate against non-Muslims by Islamic scholars and virtually every Islamic cleric considers himself as the ruler of Muslims. However, given the critical thinking emerging through these former Muslims, there is an urgent need for a platform for them where they can join hands, network and discuss Islam, more so since Islam is engaged in an eternal conflict with the identity of India as a civilisation.

***

Here are a couple of videos by ex-Muslims recently posted by Bill Warner on his Facebook page. Ex-Muslims are very well versed in the evils of Islamic doctrine.

***

Al-Azhar, the foremost institution in Sunni Islam, refuses to declare the Islamic State apostate

Jihad Watch, by Robert Spencer, April 16, 2017:

In June 2009 at al-Azhar, Barack Obama said: “For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning.”

In October 2001, right after 9/11, the New York Times called Al-Azhar “the revered mosque, the distinguished university, the leading voice of the Sunni Muslim establishment.” It quoted a Muslim cleric: “Al Azhar is the only institution in the world that has learned the moderate Islam and taught it in a moderate way without fanaticism, and without abiding by the teachings of a school that promotes rigidity or violence.”

So why doesn’t al-Azhar declare the Islamic State apostate? Non-Muslim authorities all over the West assume that the vast majority of Muslims reject and abhor the understanding of Islam taught by the Islamic State. Why doesn’t the foremost institution in Sunni Islam validate that assumption? Because they know that what the Islamic State is doing has ample justification in Islamic texts and teachings. The beheadings (Qur’an 47:4); the subjugation of Christians as dhimmis (Qur’an 9:29) or the massacre of Christians who refused to submit (Qur’an 9:5); the sexual enslavement of infidel women (Qur’an 4:3, 4:24, 23:1-6, 33:50, 70:30) — it’s all there.

“Why does Egypt’s largest Muslim beacon, Al-Azhar, refuse to declare IS ‘apostate’?,” by Taha Saker, Egypt Independent, April 14, 2017:

After the Islamic State (IS) militant group declared its responsibility for Palm Sunday’s deadly attacks that targeted two Coptic churches in Egypt’s Delta and Alexandria city, several media figures and organizations launched severe attack against Egypt’s largest religious institution, Al-Azhar University, considering its teachings as fostering religious extremism.

Through these outlets, Al-Azhar is now facing the backlash of taking part in supporting the IS-affiliated members through its insistance [sic] to refuse considering the IS group as ‘apostates’ and through maintaining some extremist teachings in the syllabuses that are taught to its students.

The backlash criticized the educational syllabuses that are being currently taught in Al-Azhar institution that include teachings from some prominent clerics. These teachings directly incite the brutal killing of anyone who does not follow Islam or who had been deemed to be an ‘infidel’.

The criticism, released from those figures and other media outlets, accused the aforementioned teachings of Al-Azhar by increasingly contributing to generate numerous members affiliated to IS.

Moreover, Al-Azhar’s teaching are perceived by some as the main platform that legitimizes the killing and slaughtering which are currently being practiced by IS group in different parts of the world, in the name of Islamic (Sharia) law….

CAIR’s Shibly Defends Islamic Apostasy Death Laws

Africa Security, April 16, 2017

CAIR’s Hassan Shibly is the ‘Boy Terrorist’ because the UAE declared CAIR a terrorist organization and a Federal Judge declared CAIR an un-indicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorist funding trial in US History.

This video exposes the duplicity of Hassan Shibly, CAIR, and most importantly the true insidious nature of Islamic apostasy laws.

Hassan Shibly after hearing the gut wrenching story of how a young Dr. Masood was nearly killed by his parents and neighbors for converting from Islam to Christianity was handed a softball question by Mr. Kornman.

Hassan Shibly had the opportunity to condemn the Islamic apostasy laws that have brought much pain and suffering to millions over the last 1400 years. Instead, Mr. Shibly chose to imply that Dr. Masood was a liar and confirmed this by running away from Dr. Masood rather than engaging him in honest dialogue for the world to see.

I have heard Hassan Shibly and many other followers of Islam tell Western audiences that Islam is a religion of peace because the Qur’an says there is no compulsion in religion.

In an Egyptian TV interview Yusuf al-Qaradawi, one of the most respected leaders in Sunni Islam said, ” If they had gotten rid of the apostasy punishment, Islam wouldn’t exist today. Islam would have ended since the death of the prophet, peace be upon him. Opposing apostasy is what kept Islam to this day.”

It is these very same Islamic apostasy laws that hold Islam together through fear.

If the apostate is not killed for his apostasy, it is likely his/her family will disown them severing every familial and business lifeline the individual has ever known inside their community.

The fear of death for apostasy is a very strong motivator to keep the the followers of Islam in line to this day.

It is time for people of conscience to publicly condemn Islamic apostasy laws.

Codified Islamic texts, Umdat al-Salik aka Reliance Of The Traveller page 595 has Ijma or Consensus among Islamic scholars states, “Leaving Islam is the ugliest form of unbelief (kufr) and the worst…When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.”

o8.4 Reliance of the Traveller, p. 596 states, “There is no indemnity for killing an apostate, or any expiation, since it is killing someone who deserves to die.”

o8.4 says that there is no punishment for any Muslim who kills an apostate because that is killing someone who deserves to die.

If a Muslim leaves Islam it falls on that apostates family to kill the offender. If the family does not uphold their honor and kill the apostate then the responsibility falls on the immediate family, cousins, and then the community at large.

According to Islamic law there is no time limit for the execution order to be carried out, by anyone.

Now that you know the context of Islamic Apostasy Laws it becomes easier to understand why Hassan Shibly behaved as he did in this video.

Hassan Shibly and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) understand the severity and importance of Islamic apostasy laws, causing Mr. Shibly to ‘run away’ from talking with Dr. Masood on camera.

Islamic apostasy laws are Not compatible with our man made laws.

This is why Hassan Shibly’s gut reaction was to deny Dr. Masood’s story and requiring “verification”. Yet with Dr. Masood being no less than 20 feet from where this video was filmed, Mr. Shibly’s only safe play was to run away rather than confront and defend Islamic apostasy laws by engaging one on one with a man who nearly lost his life because of those same Islamic apostasy laws.

When I called Shibly a liar to his face he had two options. Most men would turn around and deny the charge of being called a liar with righteous indignation defending his honor, or run away.

Hassan Shibly, in this video, is the perfect object lesson of how a Muslim leader acts when being put in the position of having to defend his own words and the draconian Islamic apostasy laws.

Dr. Masood is 100% right when he says at 2:54 that the true nature of Islamic apostasy laws, “…paints not a good picture in the Western mind.”

It is time for individuals living in the West to condemn Islamic Apostasy Laws. More importantly, it is time for devout Muslims of conscience to render these archaic and horrific apostasy laws to the dustbin of history where they belong.

This topic is so important it doesn’t matter if you are liberal, conservative, communist, marxist, or even an anarchist – Islamic apostasy laws apply to each equally.

I hate to tell all you non-Muslims out there this but – Islamic Law is applicable to you as well especially when it comes to Islamic blasphemy laws.

God Bless America and God Bless Our Troops.

CAIR Smears and Tries to Silence an IPT Fellow

IPT News
March 30, 2017

Using misleading claims and engaging in rank hypocrisy, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is waging a campaign to silence an Investigative Project on Terrorism senior fellow.

CAIR issued a news release Wednesday announcing its efforts to pressure the United States Air Force Special Operations School (USAFSOS) into dropping Patrick Dunleavy as an instructor in “The Dynamics of International Terrorism” course. Dunleavy, who served as deputy inspector general for New York State’s Department of Corrections, focuses on prison radicalization.

It’s a topic he learned about first hand, including work on “Operation Hades,” an investigation into radical Islamist recruitment both in and out of prison.

CAIR’s release, however, ignored Dunleavy’s long record of accomplishment which includes serving as a consultant for the FBI and the International Association of Chiefs of Police on the National Data Exchange Program. He also has been a featured speaker at the United States Army’s Counter Terrorism Conference.

Instead, CAIR described a letter it sent to U.S. Air Force Special Operations Commander, Lieutenant General Marshall B. Webb, demanding Dunleavy be dropped from future programs. It cited three statements CAIR sees as “Islamophobic”:

1) “To Americans [morality] means individual liberty, equal rights for men and women, religious freedom, free speech, etc. But these are contrary to the moral code of Islam.” 2) “The concept of ‘friendship,’ . . .is a relationship based on at least some degree of shared moral and political ideals. By that standard no Muslim nation is a friend of the U.S.” and 3) “To many Muslim parents, visions of violence and death are indeed the ‘better future.'”

All three come from a 2011 article Dunleavy co-authored with Peter Gadiel, whose son James was killed in the World Trade Center on 9/11. As we’ll show, none of these statements is Islamophobic, as each is rooted in Quranic verses or is exhibited by disturbing numbers of Muslims throughout the world.

CAIR’s credibility should be considered first.

This is an organization deemed persona non grata by the FBI in 2008, based upon evidence agents uncovered which prove that CAIR was created as part of a Muslim Brotherhood-run Hamas support network in the United States. In addition to internal documents which place CAIR under the umbrella of the Muslim Brotherhood’s “Palestine Committee,” CAIR co-founder Nihad Awad – the only executive director in the organization’s 23 year existence – is on the Palestine Committee’s telephone list. He also participated in a secret 1993 gathering of Hamas supporters in America who debated ways to “derail” the fledgling, U.S.-brokered Oslo Accords that at the time offered hope for a peaceful settlement to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Palestine Committee members could not accept a deal that recognized Israel’s right to exist and felt politically threatened by the elevation of the secular Palestine Liberation Organization to run a newly autonomous Palestinian Authority. Participants were encouraged not to mention Hamas by name. Rather, they were instructed to flip the spelling of the name, and talk about “Samah.” As this FBI translation shows, Awad dutifully followed these instructions.

In addition, CAIR not only defends people caught supporting terrorists, it often lauds them. Among many examples, it defended Palestinian Islamic Jihad board member Sami Al-Arian for years even after his conviction for supporting the terrorist group, and in 2014, chose to honor his family with a “Promoting Justice Award.”

It continues to laud convicted Palestinian bomber Rasmieh Odeh, who was responsible for a 1969 Jerusalem bombing that killed two college students.

This is the organization that finds Dunleavy unacceptable.

Officials already have reviewed all of Dunleavy’s USAFSOS presentations and told him that they found nothing offensive, and there have been no complaints from the students who attended courses for the past five years.

It’s worth noting that CAIR relies on one five-year-old article as the basis for its complaint. Potomac Books published Dunleavy’s The Fertile Soil of Jihad in 2011 and he is frequently published by the IPT and elsewhere. The absence of any truly bigoted statements is telling.

So is CAIR’s hypocrisy. Its website features a page devoted to debunking what it calls “Misinformation and Conspiracy Theories About CAIR.” (See the IPT’s analysis of CAIR’s false claims here.) On that “misinformation” page, CAIR whines twice about “guilt by association,” including a response to the number of CAIR officials who were implicated in terrorism-related cases.

Yet, the only other reason CAIR cites to disqualify him from the Air Force training is the fact that he’s an IPT senior fellow and CAIR does not like the IPT. It’s easy to understand why. We’ve done more to expose its history and highlight the radical views of its top officials and its opposition to law enforcement counter-terrorism efforts than anyone else.

But, again, Dunleavy has written more than two dozen articles for the IPT. CAIR cited none in arguing he “does not fit the U.S. military’s standards for a subject-matter expert” working with the dreadfully “Islamophobic” IPT.

The example CAIR does cite, as mentioned above, utterly fails to make CAIR’s case. First is the statement, “To Americans [morality] means individual liberty, equal rights for men and women, religious freedom, free speech, etc. But these are contrary to the moral code of Islam.”

That could sound bad. But looking at the world today, and the treatment of women, gays and other minorities living in majority-Muslim nations, individual liberty and equal rights are sorely missing. Right now, a Twitter hashtag is calling for the death of a Pakistani blogger named Ayaz Nizami. Nizami, an atheist, was among three people arrested last week and charged with blasphemy. #HangAyazNizami trended on Twitter in Pakistan afterward.

Polling indicates a shocking number of Muslims agree that death is the appropriate punishment for apostasy. In 2013, the Pew Research Center found 88 percent support among Egypt’s Muslims and among 62 percent of Pakistanis. Majority support also exists in Malaysia, Jordan and inside the Palestinian territories. More than a third of young British Muslims agreed.

No other religion today carries such risks for those who leave. Even Scientology stops at merely disconnecting people from their families when someone leaves the church.

Both Iran and the Islamic State execute homosexuals.

Meanwhile, most American mosques still segregate men and women during prayer, often sending the women into sparse and cramped back areas and side rooms. American clerics like Yasir Qadhi advocate a Saudi Arabian lifestyle for American Muslim women. Stay home and tend to your husbands, he preached. They “should not work, because their role is as wives and mothers.”

“You please your husband,” Qadhi said. “And in return your husband will give you the far more difficult things to do of earning money and doing this and that.”

This is a Muslim American cleric prominent enough to warrant an 8,500 word New York Times profile, preaching his view of Islam’s moral code in the 21st century.

There are Muslim reformers who want to change this mindset, and advocate for genuine equality for women and minorities. CAIR, like other Islamist groups, has refused to endorse their agenda and generally pretends they do not exist.

The second Dunleavy statement CAIR singles out: “The concept of ‘friendship,’ . . .is a relationship based on at least some degree of shared moral and political ideals. By that standard no Muslim nation is a friend of the U.S.”

In the Quran, verse 5:51 instructs Muslims not to “take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are [in fact] allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you – then indeed, he is [one] of them. Indeed, Allah guides not the wrongdoing people. Verse 9:30 calls on Allah to “destroy” Jews and Christians.

Finally, CAIR takes issue with his 2011 statement that, “To many Muslim parents, visions of violence and death are indeed the ‘better future.'”

This is certainly true among a disturbing number of Palestinians. Parents of Palestinians killed attempting to carry out terrorist attacks against Israelis speak of their pride. It is routine for deadly attacks to be celebrated with people handing out sweets on Palestinian streets. Hamas media for years has indoctrinated children into jihad, using everything from training camps to plays and video productions showing young children pretending to be in combat. Hamas television even “martyred” a Mickey Mouse rip-off, and then sent a puppet bumblebee “to continue the path of Islam, of heroism, of martyrdom and of the mujahideen.”

CAIR has never condemned this indoctrination, and on a broader level, its officials refuse to condemn Hamas by name. In fact, they take great umbrage at the suggestion this is something worth doing.

But the organization does find time to smear a veteran law enforcement official and expert on radicalization because it does not agree with his message. It does not appear that the tactic will work in Dunleavy’s case. But it’s time for law enforcement officials, the military and the media to follow the FBI’s lead and recognize CAIR for what it is and simply dismiss such baseless attacks out of hand.

Nonie Darwish: Wholly Different — Why I Chose Biblical Values Over Islamic Values

The Geller Report, by Nonie Darwish, March 8, 2017:

Many in the West assume that the Islamic threat is only in the form of terrorism, and if only ISIS is destroyed, then the real peaceful Islam will emerge ready to coexist in harmony with Western and Biblical values. That is false. The West is building its entire policy regarding Islam on a false premise. And that is why I have written my fourth book, Wholly Different: Why I Chose Biblical Values Over Islamic Values: to lay out the full scope of the threat of Islam to Western civilization.

After I moved to the US 38 years ago, I discovered that Islamic values are totally opposite to Biblical/Western values. The first Muslim sermon I heard when I visited a mosque in the US in 1979 was on how we, Muslims, must never assimilate in America. I felt that this dangerous advice was paving the way to divide America into the “house of Islam” and the non-Muslim “house of war.” I stopped going to the mosque and lived without a faith for 17 years in America.

But after I started hearing Biblical values in churches and synagogues, I discovered why Islam is afraid of assimilation. If Muslims assimilate in the West, Islam will cease to exist, and that is because its values are opposite in everything about life, human rights, family, and government.

The Original Culture Clash

The original culture clash, or clash of civilization, between Muslims and Bible believers did not start between Europe and the Islamic Middle East. It first erupted inside the Middle East, in the 7th century, when Muhammad led a ferocious bloody rebellion in the Arabian Peninsula against “the people of the book” — Jews and Christians, their values and what they stood for. In a nutshell, Islam came 600 years after Christ, not to confirm the Bible, but to discredit it. Islam was a bloody rebellion against the Bible and its values. All of the Ten Commandments were in fact violated by Muhammad for the sake of making Islam rule supreme.

The Jews and Christians of the Middle East lost the first culture clash, and were forced to submit to Islam and live in humiliation under sharia as dhimmis. Christianity and many Jews were pushed further back Northwest towards Europe. Gradually Europe were left alone holding the banner of the Bible after the Christian Byzantine Empire was decimated by Islam. That was when a second culture clash started between Islam and the Bible, Europe and the Middle East.

These are facts of history that Teddy Roosevelt warned us of when he said that if we do not fight we will lose to Islam, the same way the People of the Book in the Middle East lost to Islam in the seventh century: “Christianity is not the creed of Asia and Africa at this moment solely because the seventh century Christians of Asia and Africa had trained themselves not to fight, whereas the Moslems were trained to fight. Christianity was saved in Europe solely because the peoples of Europe fought. If the peoples of Europe in the seventh and eighth centuries, and on up to and including the seventeenth century, had not possessed a military equal with, and gradually a growing superiority over the Mohammedans who invaded Europe, Europe would at this moment be Mohammedan and the Christian religion would be exterminated….”

Western Biblical theologians believe that the Bible, both the Old and New Testaments, brought an ethics revolution to the world. Islam came to rebel against such a revolution with a counter-revolution that was uniquely Muhammadan.

Everything that Jews and Christian held dear to their heart, Islam sets out to destroy. Below are some of the differences between Biblical and Islamic values mentioned in the book:

  • We are all sinners vs. They are all sinners.
  • Life is sacred vs. Death is worship.
  • Jesus died for us vs. We must die for Allah.
  • Jesus came to save us vs. We must save Muhammad’s  reputation.
  • Judge the sin, not the sinner vs. Judge the sinner not the sin.
  • God the redeemer vs. Allah the Humiliator.
  • Confession of Sin vs. Concealment of Sin.
  • At war with the Devil vs. At war with flesh and blood, the enemies of Allah.
  • Truth will set you Free vs. Lying and slander are an obligation.
  • Changing oneself vs Changing others.
  • Self-Control vs. Controlling others.
  • Vengeance is the Lord’s vs. Vengeance is prescribed to Muslims.
  • Love your enemies vs. Hate Allah’s Enemies (non-Muslims).
  • Work Ethics vs. Wealth through conquest.
  • Kingdom of God is not of this world vs. Allah and the Islamic State are one.

Nonie Darwish is the author of “Wholly Different; Why I chose Biblical Values Over Islamic Values”

Also see: