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

Accept Islamic Terror as the New Normal?

Gatestone Institute, by Nonie Darwish, June 4, 2017:

  • “The use of terror under this doctrine [Targhib wal tarhib, “luring and terrorizing”] is a legitimate sharia obligation.” — Salman Al Awda, mainstream Muslim sheikh, on the Al Jazeera television show “Sharia and Life”.
  • Part of the tarhib or “terrorizing” side of this doctrine is to make a cruel example of those who do not comply with the requirements of Islam. That is the reason Muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, and entities such as ISIS, intentionally hold ceremonial public beheadings, floggings, and amputation of limbs.
  • Islamic jihad has always counted on people in conquered lands eventually to yield, give up and accept terrorism as part of life, similar to natural disasters, earthquakes and floods.

After terror attacks, we often hear from Western media and politicians that we must accept terrorist attacks as the “new normal.”

For Western citizens, this phrase is dangerous.

Islam’s doctrine of jihad, expansion and dawah (Islamic outreach, proselytizing) rely heavily on the use of both terror and luring. Targhib wal tarhib is an Islamic doctrine that means “seducing (luring) and terrorizing” as a tool for dawah, to conquer nations and force citizens to submit to Islamic law, sharia. It amounts to manipulating the instinctive parts of the human brain with extreme opposing pressures of pleasure and pain — rewarding, then severely punishing — to brainwash people into complying with Islam.

Most ordinary Muslims are not even aware of this doctrine, but Islamic books have been written about it. Mainstream Muslim sheikhs such as Salman Al Awda have discussed it on Al Jazeera TV. On a show called “Sharia and Life,” Al Awda recommended using extremes “to exaggerate… reward and punishment, morally and materially… in both directions”. “The use of terror under this doctrine,”‘ he said, “is a legitimate sharia obligation.”

People in the West think of terror as something that Islamic jihadists inflict on non-Muslims, and it is. But terror is also the mechanism for ensuring compliance within Islam. Under Islamic law, jihadists who evade performing jihad are to be killed. Terror is thus the threat that keeps jihadists on their missions, and that make ordinary Muslims obey sharia.

An online course for recruiting jihadists contains this description:

“Individual Dawa depends on eliciting emotional responses from recruits (and building a personal relationship). Abu ‘Amr’s approach illustrates a recruitment concept called al-targhib wa’l-tarhib, which is a carrot-and-stick technique of extolling the benefits of action while explaining the frightening costs of inaction. The concept was introduced in the Qur’an and is discussed by many Islamic thinkers exploring the best way to call people to Islam (several scholars, for example, have written books titled al-targhib wa’l-tarhib). According to Abu ‘Amr, recruiters should apply the concept throughout the recruitment process, but emphasize the benefits of action early in the process and the costs of inaction later.”

In other words, recruiters of jihadists should start by emphasizing the “good stuff” first, the “lure” — the future glory, supremacy and fulfillment of every lustful wish, such as virgins in heaven. Later, they should threaten the recruits with “terror” and shame — the consequence if they fail to participate in jihad.

Part of the tarhib or “terrorizing” side of this doctrine is to make a cruel example of those who do not comply with the requirements of Islam. That is the reason Muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, and entities such as ISIS, intentionally hold ceremonial public beheadings, floggings, and amputation of limbs. Countries such as Egypt, Jordan, and Turkey are more discrete, but they tolerate and support honor killings; killing apostates; beating women and children, and torture and murder in their jails. The doctrine of targhib and tarhib is alive and well, not just in Islamic theocracies but also in the so-called “moderate” Muslim countries.

Islam has been using these “pleasure and pain” brainwashing techniques, and cruel and unusual punishment, from its inception and until today. While the Bible — the Western Judeo-Christian tradition — is in harmony with, and nurtures, kindness in human nature, Islam does the opposite: it uses the human instincts for self-preservation and survival to break the people’s will and brainwash them into slavish obedience.

Like the majority of Muslims, I never heard of this foundational Islamic doctrine when I was growing up in Egypt, but have felt the impact of this doctrine on my life — in every aspect of Islamic culture; in Islamic preaching, in my Islamic family relations; in how Islamic governments operate and how people of authority, in general, treat the people under them.

The Islamic doctrine of “lure and terror” has produced a culture of toxic extremes: distrust and fear, pride and shame, permission to lie (“taqiyya“), and rejecting taking responsibility for one’s actions.

Having lived most of my life under Islam, I am sad to say that people the West calls “moderate Muslims” are frequently, in fact, citizens who have learned to live with and accept terror as normal. For centuries, many have made excuses for terror, condemned victims of terror, remained silent or equivocal, and have even compromised with the terrorists to survive. The Islamic culture in which I lived looked the other way when women were beaten. When girls were honor-murdered, the question was “what did she do?” instead of “how could that be?” When Christians were killed and persecuted, many blamed the Christians for their own persecution at the hands of Muslims. The normal Islamic response to terror became: “None of my business.”

And now the Islamic doctrine of Targhib wal Tarhib, has moved to the West and aims at changing Western humanistic culture. It would replace respect for human rights, caring for one’s neighbor and the values of freedom and peace, with the values of bondage, terror, tyranny and fear.

Islamic jihad has always counted on people in conquered lands eventually to yield, give up and accept terrorism as part of life, similar to natural disasters, earthquakes and floods.

It did not take long for the Islamic doctrine of Targhib wal Tarhib to work on the psyche of Western leaders and media, who are now telling us to live with it as the “new normal.” Islam counts on turning everyone into “moderate” Muslims who will eventually look the other way when terror happens to the person next to you.

The new normal? Police help survivors of the terrorist attack on London Bridge, June 4, 2017. (Photo by Carl Court/Getty Images)

Nonie Darwish, born and raised in Egypt, is the author of “Wholly Different; Why I chose Biblical Values Over Islamic Values.”

***

***

Former Muslim Nonie Darwish’s Crusade Against Islam

Religious Freedom Coalition, by Andrew Harrod, PhD., April 24, 2017:

“Islamic values will take any society to Hell,” bluntly concludes Egyptian-American Muslim convert to Christianity Nonie Darwish in her recent book Wholly Different:  Why I Chose Biblical Values over Islamic Values.  With her usual engaging style, she critiques on the basis of personal experience crucial differences between Islamic and Biblical worldviews while analyzing Islam’s dangers for Judeo-Christian influenced civilization.

Comparing her 30 years in Egypt with her life after immigrating to the United States in 1978, Darwish notes recent efforts to replace the term “Judeo-Christian” with “Abrahamic.  In particular, “Muslims in the West are desperately trying to convince everyone here that Islam, Judaism, and Christianity are all basically one and the same Abrahamic faith,” an “intentional lie, the opposite of everything preached in mosques.”  Rather, “Islam was created six hundred years after Christianity not to affirm the Bible, but to discredit it; not to co-exist with ‘the people of the book’—Jews and Christians—but to replace them.”  For various practical desires, Islam’s prophet Muhammad created a “new, specifically Arab religion” and “built Islam on a foundation of lies,” including the Quran’s “abomination.”

Darwish sharply contrasts decidedly distinct Biblical and Islamic understandings of God.  “Muslims relate to Allah, as a far and distant God, angry, vengeful, and eager to punish.”  By contrast, “[w]hen I became Christian and heard for the first time that we human beings were made in the image of God, I wept.  I was in awe at the honor, after being given shame and little value under Islam.”

“It is unfortunate that many Americans take Biblical values for granted, assuming that kindness, honesty, and joy are the norm,” Darwish warns, whereas reality belies multicultural illusions of global moral uniformity.  “Biblical values are the product of the Bible, and they cannot be preserved separate from the Bible” even as “[m]any Americans today fear that Biblical values are eroding, and I share their fears.”  Especially the Golden Rule “is totally alien to Islam.  Nothing like love and tolerance to other human beings just because they are human exists in Islam.”

Christian refugee mothers desperately need diapers for their babies – Please help

Darwish writes that Islam “claims to be a religion, but is really a totalitarian political ideology.”  Furthermore, “[b]y making jihad the single most sacred act of worship, Muhammad made Islam an expansionist genocidal ideology.”  Islam’s canons, the

Koran and hadith collections are predominantly books about rejecting the other—other religions, cultures, and ways of life.  Islamic supremacy is taught on every page of the Koran, where Muslims are commanded never to stop until Islam dominates and destroys all other religions.

“Life under sharia is traumatic,” Darwish recalls from her personal experience as an Islamic insider in Egypt.  “Oppression permeates every level of Islamic society; from the head of state to the street sweeper.”  Accordingly, “I have no childhood memories of being happy or being around happy people.”

Among other harms to domestic tranquility, Darwish writes that the “disparity between men’s and women’s sexual lives under Islam is obscene and offensive.”  “Islamic laws promote the sadistic repression of women” such that a “Muslim little boy is brought up to regard women who are not covered as sluts who are asking for it.”  By contrast, a “Muslim man, married or unmarried, who understands all the games and loopholes that sharia allows to men will have no problem having sex as often as he wishes.”  Muhammad additionally proclaimed an “obscenely lustful Islamic Paradise” as an otherworldly “lure to recruit jihadists.”

Darwish’s contrast between Biblical and Islamic family values is correspondingly clear:

While the Bible fosters loving, happy family life grounded in the mutual fidelity between one man and one woman, Islam demands faithfulness only from the woman—on pain of death—and fosters family strife, with up to four wives (plus sex slaves) competing for the man’s attention.

Darwish attributes other distortions of the human spirit to Islam; for example, she was “amazed at the lack of initiative and drive in the Muslim population.”  Yet given Islam’s approval of plunder seized in jihad, “why would a Muslim man who is continually hammered with the values of jihad be interested in positive hard work for the betterment of society.”  “Islam deprives Muslims of so much” in other ways; “I now look at my dog and wonder how did I live half my life in Egypt without ever experiencing this unique special relationship between a human being and a dog.”

Darwish’s personal experience makes her amazed that “Western policies in the Middle East are based on the hypothesis that Muslims are just like everybody else and want the same things in life.”  “The slogan ‘Islam is a religion of peace’ was specifically created for Western consumption—I never heard that expression in all my decades living in the Middle East.”  “[T]here are moderate Muslims, but there are no moderate Islamic scriptures to support what they claim,” rather, these Muslim are “importing Biblical values to Islam.”

Darwish’s answer to Islam emphasizes that the “number one enemy of Islam is the truth.  And that has made the Bible itself the biggest threat to Islam.”  “The reason freedom of religion is banned under Islam and by Islamic states is that Islam has no confidence it would survive in free competition with Christianity.”  “Muslims’ typical response to questioning of Islam has always been to be offended, get angry, issue death fatwas, riot, and commit acts of terror.”  Such dangers mean that the “happy Muslim is the Muslim who is content not to want to know” about objections to his faith.  Meanwhile, per doctrines like taqiyya, “[d]eception in defense of Islam and its goals is big business for Islamic organizations and lobbying groups in the West.”

Darwish’s Christian convert zeal against Islam will surely shock many, but her book unflinchingly welcomes debate.  “My fear of Islam is not a phobia.  I am afraid for good reason.”  Her powerful personal testimony will challenge opponents; “I am evolving from a morally confused woman under Islamic enslavement into the kind of woman God intended me to be.”

Andrew E. Harrod is a researcher and writer who holds a PhD from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and a JD from George Washington University Law School. He is a fellow with the Lawfare Project, an organization combating the misuse of human rights law against Western societies. He can be followed on twitter at @AEHarrod.

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:

On Defining Religion

(Image source: Brent Payne/Flickr)

(Image source: Brent Payne/Flickr)

Gatestone Institute, by Nonie Darwish, February 12, 2017:

  • What the West does not understand is that Islam admits that government control is central to Islam and that Muslims must, sooner or later, demand to live under an Islamic government.
  • The majority of the world does not understand that much of the American media is in a propaganda war against the Trump administration simply because he names Islamic jihad and would prefer to see a strong and prosperous America as a world leader rather than to see a dictatorship — secular or theocratic — as a world leader.
  • Islam claims to be an Abrahamic religion, but in fact Islam came to the world 600 years after Christ, not to affirm the Bible but to discredit it; not to co-exist with “the people of the book” — Jews and Christians — but to replace them, after accusing them of intentionally falsifying the Bible.
  • Islam was created as a rebellion against the Bible and its values, and it relies on government enforcement to do so.
  • Political and legal (sharia) Islam is much more than a religion. Is the First Amendment a suicide pact?

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) said that President Donald Trump’s 90-day ban on immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries is “a religiously based ban,” and “if they can ban Muslims, why can’t they ban Mormons.” This has become the position of the Democratic Party and the mainstream media, which has influenced not only the American public but has convinced the majority of the world that America is “bad.” How can we blame the world, and even a good segment of American citizens, for hating America when such disingenuous and misleading claims are aired to the world from US officials and broadcast by American television channels?

The majority of the world does not understand that much of the American media is in a propaganda war against the Trump Administration simply because he names Islamic jihad and would prefer to see a strong and prosperous America as a world leader, rather than to see a dictatorship — secular or theocratic — as a world leader. He ran as a Republican; meanwhile, Democrats and the mainstream media refuse to engage in respectful and legitimate debate on the most vital threat to Western civilization in the twenty-first century: Islam. Truth has become irrelevant; people seem to prefer a political game of tug-of-war to sway public opinion against the Trump Administration, and, presumably, to elect Democrats forever. That is how the system is set up.

Political discussions on television have become extremely frustrating; they have turned into shouting matches and name-calling at the least informative levels. Television hosts often become instigators and participants in the shouting matches. The thinking is apparently that the louder they get, the more attractive the program will be. Meanwhile everyone is talking at once; the viewer cannot hear anyone, so the program could not be more boring.

Under the US Constitution, freedom of religion is protected. and Islam has been welcomed inside the West on that basis as one of the three Abrahamic religions. According to Western values and the Western understanding of the word, “religion” is supposed to be a personal relationship with God, where free will is of utmost importance; the believer has authority only over himself or herself when it comes to religious laws or punishing sins (such as leaving the religion or committing adultery) — quite different from criminal laws intended to protect society. Western values also allow followers of a religion the freedom to proselytize, but never by resorting to government enforcement.

Bottom line, the Western definition of religion is in harmony with the Biblical values of the human rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that all human beings are created equal under the law. It is considered a basic Western value to view God, family and country as a top priority.

Now let us compare these values to Islamic values:

  1. Muslim citizens have the right to punish other citizens with humiliating, severe, cruel and unusual punishments such as death, flogging and amputation, for sinning against Allah, the Quran or Islam. Those “crimes” include leaving Islam, being a homosexual, or committing adultery. And if the Islamic government does not enforce such punishments, any Muslim on the street has the right to apply the punishment against another Muslim and not be prosecuted. That is why apostates, such as myself, cannot visit any Muslim county; the fear is not only from Islamic governments but from anyone on the street.
  2. Being a Muslim is not a personal relationship with God, as it is under the Bible, but is enforced by the state at birth. When a child is born in Egypt to a Muslim father, the birth certificate is stamped “Muslim” and all government-issued documents as well. A child must learn Islamic studies in school and practice Islam throughout his life. In Egypt, the twin sons of a Christian divorced mother were forced to take Islamic studies and become Muslim just because their originally-Christian father converted to Islam. Today, in Egypt, I am still considered Muslim and such a status could never change if I ever lived there again.
  3. Islamic law and leaders rely on government enforcement — under penalty of death — to keep Muslims within Islam and to convert the minority Christian population into Islam. Islamic sharia law, obliges Islamic states to enforce religious law, and if the Muslim head of state refuses to follow religious law, sharia permits the public to use force to remove the head of state from office.
  4. Islam claims to be an Abrahamic religion, but in fact Islam came to the world 600 years after Christ, not to affirm the Bible but to discredit it; not to co-exist with “the people of the book,” Jews and Christians, but to replace them — after accusing them of intentionally falsifying the Bible. Islam was created as a rebellion against the Bible and its values, and relies on government enforcement to do so.

The tenets above are just a few of the differences in values between Islam, the Bible and the Western concept of religion. What the West does not understand is that Islam admits that government control is central to Islam, and Muslims must demand to live under an Islamic government sooner or later. That might explain the reason for the eternal violence in nearly all Muslim countries, between government being in the hands of a religious theocracy or of the military. Islam, as it is practiced today, has violated all Western definitions of religion and values.

Political and legal (sharia) Islam is much more than a religion. Is the First Amendment a suicide pact?

Nonie Darwish, born and raised in Egypt, is the author of “Wholly Different; Why I chose Biblical Values over Islamic Values.”

New Year Speech to the Muslim World

Gatestone Institute, by Nonie Darwish, January 1, 2017:

  • By Western standards, military rule is shunned as an oppressive form of government, but in the Islamic world it is the only buffer of protection from the tyranny of total sharia law that must be enforced by Islamic theocracies, such as those of Iran and Saudi Arabia.
  • The days of sacrificing the safety and security of citizens of the West for the sake of multiculturalism, are over. In order for multiculturalism to work, it must be a two-way street between people that share common values of respect of each other’s culture. Unfortunately, the West did not get that from Islam.
  • It really does not matter what is “true Islam”. That is something the Muslim world needs to deal with internally; it does not serve us in the West to try to evaluate what is “true Islam” and what is not.
  • Your religious leaders, whose salaries are paid by Islamic governments, stand before your media cameras and call on Muslims to stab, slam trucks, kill, rape and humiliate the kafir [non-Muslim] Jews, Christians and Pagans.
  • Islamic governments and terror groups are two peas in a pod, working together for the same goal: enforcing Allah’s law, sharia, on the world. It is no secret that a Muslim head of state must rule by sharia and must conduct jihad against non-Muslims. Sharia law commands Muslim citizens to remove, by rebellion or assassination, any Muslim leader who does not abide by sharia and support jihadists.
  • As of today, the West must hold Islamic governments responsible for jihadist actions of their own terrorist citizens. Nothing happens in Muslim countries without the knowledge of their governments. If a Muslim government has no control of its citizens, it should be considered a rogue nation.
  • Bringing in unvetted refugees from Syria and Iraq is not an act of compassion, but gross negligence. Western governments have failed their citizens for too long in that respect and that will end today.
  • After all, why should cultures that loathe the West seek to live in the West? As President-elect Trump said, why should America — or any country — not allow in only immigrants who love us and who respect our laws and way of life?
  • Our doors will be reopened to citizens from Islamic nations only when Islamic governments prove to the world that they have fundamentally changed, that they have ended once and for all their obsessive jihadist propaganda and hate education prevalent in the Muslim world.
  • Until then, all kinds of visas from such troubled areas will be suspended, except for the few who would be properly vetted. Such actions will surely expedite the reformation of Islam and Islamic education in Muslim nations who are desperate to give us their excess unhappy population.

Obama’s first major speech after his election in 2008 was to the Muslim world in Cairo. His speech did not deal with the harsh realities of Islam and its impact on world peace. No Muslim authority shook Obama’s hand promising change, a new relationship with the West based on mutual respect, or a reflection on what went wrong on 9/11, even if they were not directly responsible for it. No Arab leader publicly announced an end to the Islamic jihadist and anti-Western hate education and Arab media propaganda. Instead, the Muslim world got an apology from Obama.

After Obama left Cairo, the Muslim Brotherhood was empowered, and military rulers weakened and brought down one after another. By Western standards, military rule is shunned as an oppressive form of government, but in the Islamic world it is the only buffer of protection from the tyranny of total sharia that must be enforced by Islamic theocracies, such as those of Iran and Saudi Arabia. The Muslim Brotherhood and then ISIS quickly filled the vacuum and the Muslim world is now on fire.

Obama’s first major presidential speech, on June 4, 2009, was to the Muslim world in Cairo. His speech did not deal with the harsh realities of Islam and its impact on world peace. No Muslim authority shook Obama’s hand promising change, a new relationship with the West based on mutual respect, or a reflection on what went wrong on 9/11. (Image source: White House)

A huge storm of Islamic darkness, spilling over and sweeping across our planet, headed towards the West. Let us never allow our freedoms, built by generations of Americans, be lost to fear and terror. It is time for the West to unite and send a firm message to the Muslim World — a message that should have been sent by Obama back in 2009.

With the election of President-elect Donald J. Trump, citizens of the West have renewed their hope to make America again the leader of the free world and human rights for all, as should be. Trump hopefully will rally leaders of the free world to give a firm message to the Muslim world:

The days of sacrificing the safety and security of citizens of the West for the sake of multiculturalism, are over. In order for multiculturalism to work, it must be a Two-Way Street between peoples that share common values of respect of each other’s culture. Unfortunately, the West did not get that from Islam. America, Europe and Australia have been the safe haven of people from all over the world — different nationalities, religions and races. We love the Muslim people as we love all people but our love to people of the world should never supersede our number one duty, which is to protect of our citizens, our freedoms, our way of life, and yes, our Biblical-based, Judeo-Christian values.

Today the Middle East is on fire, overrun and ravaged by terrorists and extremists who have no respect for their own governments or law and order. Groups such as ISIS and others brought back ancient barbarity that humanity had mistakenly thought it had transcended. We keep hearing that this has nothing to do with Islam and that Islamic terrorists are just a small number of misguided Muslims who misinterpret true peaceful Islam.

But now it is our turn to tell you what is on our mind: It really does not matter what is true Islam and what is not. When a terrorist plows through a crowd with a truck aiming to kill, the last thing anyone cares to hear is whether “the driver was a true Muslim or not”. That is something the Muslim world needs to deal with internally; it does not serve us in the West to try to evaluate what is “true Islam” and what is not.

Middle Eastern governments-run schools still teach hate propaganda against the West, Jews and Christians. They still teach their children lies such as that Yasser Arafat died from poisoning by Jews. They still teach in their public schools that jihad is a holy war against non-Muslims; that killing apostates and honor killing of girls is a duty under Islamic law and those who do it will not be prosecuted, but will be rewarded with virgins by Allah. Muslim Imams spread their hatred and incitement right under the noses of the so-called moderate Muslim leaders, on your government-run television screens. Your religious leaders, whose salaries are paid by Islamic governments, stand before your media cameras and call on Muslims to stab, slam trucks, kill, rape and humiliate the kafir [non-Muslim], Jews, Christians and Pagans.

We have done enough appeasing and looking the other way when it comes to the dirty little secret that no one wants to admit: that Islamic governments and terror groups are two peas in a pod, working together for the same goal: enforcing Allah’s law, sharia, on the world. It is no secret that a Muslim head of state must rule by sharia and must conduct jihad against non-Muslims. Sharia law commands Muslim citizens to remove, by rebellion or assassination, any Muslim leader who does not abide by sharia and support jihadists. The world understands the plight of Islamic leaders who must fulfill their sharia obligation before their Islamists, otherwise they are “toast.” Solving this problem is not the responsibility of the West, but it is a major problem that the Muslim world must address in the open and deal with.

While Muslim people and governments develop the courage openly to settle their issues over their jihad duty, the unholy alliance game played by Islamic governments and terror groups must be exposed for what it is, and emphatically rejected. The West cannot afford to participate in such a dishonest game anymore.

As of today, the West must hold Islamic governments responsible for jihadist actions of their own terrorist citizens. Nothing happens in Muslim countries without the knowledge of their governments. If a Muslim government has no control of its citizens, it should be considered a rogue nation. Islamic nations that continue to breed terrorists in their media, schools and mosques and then act innocent of the crime must be held accountable. Muslims themselves have no tolerance for one Western cartoonist who offended them with a cartoon of Muhammad. Instead of saying that this cartoonist does not represent all Western nations, the Muslim public rioted, burned and killed several Westerners and their embassies in retaliation for the actions of one, over a cartoon. That is from the same nations that flooded the world with terrorists that use airplanes, guns, explosives, knives and even trucks to kill non-Muslims. Muslims need to live by the saying “If your house is of glass, do not throw rocks at others.”

Any Western nation that does not protect its own citizens first and foremost should be a pariah among civilized nations. Bringing in unvetted refugees from Syria and Iraq is not an act of compassion, but gross negligence. Western governments have failed their citizens for too long in that respect and that will end today.

It would be insane for Western governments not to use extraordinary measures for self-preservation. The doors of immigration to Muslim citizens from nations overrun by terror will be closed. After all, why should cultures that loathe the West seek to live in the West? As President-elect Trump said, why should America — or any country — not allow in only immigrants who love us and who respect our laws and way of life?

Absorbing refugees from terror run Syria is not only bad for the West, but also for Syria. If we take the moderate Muslims out of Syria, then who will be left to fight ISIS and rebuild the country?

Our doors will be reopened to citizens from Islamic nations only when the war on Islamic terrorism is won and when Islamic governments prove to the world that they have fundamentally changed, that they have ended once and for all their obsessive jihadist propaganda and hate education prevalent in the Muslim world. Until then, all kinds of visas from such troubled areas will be suspended, except for the few who would be properly vetted. Such actions will surely expedite the reformation of Islam and Islamic education in Muslim nations who are desperate to give us their excess unhappy population.

We are looking forward to the day when moderate Muslims will be able to take control of their governments, their educational systems, and their law and order, so the Western world could resume mutual constructive relations based on friendship and respect. The whole world is looking forward to that day and praying for a peaceful Middle East. The ball is now in the Muslim world’s court.

Nonie Darwish, born and raised in Egypt, is the author of “Wholly Different; Why I chose Biblical Values over Islamic Values.”

Panel Discussion at the “Can Islam Co-exist With the West” Conference

American Freedom Alliance sponsored conference in Los Angeles, “Islam and Western Civilization: Can they Coexist?”

“Islam in the Culture” Panel

Bosch Fawstin is an American cartoonist who won Pamela Geller’s “Draw Muhammad” event in Garland, Texas May 3, 2015 that experienced a Muslim terror attack that resulted in local police killing the two attackers. A self-proclaimed “recovered Muslim”, he was born into a Muslim family and raised in the faith before leaving it in his teens, becoming an atheist. He discussed how mainstream comic books are propaganda tools for Islam. 

Fawstin says, “We’ve gone from kicking the enemy’s ass to kissing it.” (truthrevolt.org)

***

Nonie Darwish is an Egyptian-American human rights activist and critic of Islam, senior Fellow at the Center For Security Policy and president of Former Muslims United and Arabs For Israel. Activist Carol Washington gave a nice description of Nonie’s talk on Facebook, “Others explain Islamic Doctrine with citations; Nonie Darwish offers a window to the Islamic nightmare.This is a beautiful description of Biblical Values and where Islam and the koran get it all backward and wrong with a vengeance.”

***

Trevor Loudon, author of “The Enemies Within – Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress” gives his dire warning for the upcoming US elections.

***

Morton Klein is a German-born American economist, statistician, and pro-Israeli activist.  He is the president of the Zionist Organization of America.  Conference attendee Douglas V. Gibbs said Klein’s rousing speech had people on their feet.  “He pulled no punches, telling it like it is about Islam.”

***

 Lt Col (ret) Roy White, Chairman of Truth in Texas Textbooks Coalition, gives an eye opening presentation on how Islamist organizations are affecting American public schools and textbooks.