Tag Archives: Appeasement

The root cause of Islamic extremism is…..Islam!

View image on Twitter

This is the much tweeted note from Maajid Nawaz, self avowedly an ex-extremist, who now advises David Cameron on tackling extremism.

Note the core of the message – that a distinction MUST be drawn between Islam and Islamism. The former being a religion ‘much like any other’, and the latter being that evil -ism which is leading thousands of Muslims to join ISIS or take innocent infidel lives in some other way as ‘Lone Wolves’ around the world.

Yet – there is no such distinction between Islam and Islamism in reality – despite what our Muslim friends at Quilliam would like us to believe. Muslims who decide to blow people up do so for Islam – because they follow in the prophet Muhammad’s ‘teachings’ that:

Quran (3:151)“Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority”.

Quran (4:74)“Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.”

Note that the martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter.  These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah.  This is the theological basis for today’s suicide bombers.

By relying on Muslim apologists for Islam, such as Maajid Nawaz, the PM is still kowtowing to Islam. This argument masks the truth that the cause of ‘extremism’ and ‘Jihad’ is simply Islam – NOT some imaginary new doctrine called ‘Islamism’.  The terror threat we face, the battle we fight is against Muslims who decide to read the core texts of Islam literally – NOT with some new-fangled group of ‘Islamists’.

The disctinction is completely dishonest – Muslims have been behaving just like ISIS since the days of Muhammad – where the Muslim ‘prophet’ led looting expeditions and ordered massacres of Jews. Muslims have been conquering vast swathes of land through the sword ever since. The last Muslim Caliphate before ISIS only died in 1922 – the Ottoman Empire.

The threat we face today is not a new threat – Islam has been intolerant, hateful and violent since inception. What is however new is that we are now funding this terror by buying Arab oil and allowing Muslim hate preachers and foreign Muslims with no desire to integrate to live and behave like 7th Century Arabs in the West.

The Prime Minister needs to face up to the fact – criticism of Islam is not akin to Nazi-era Jew hate – this ‘far-right’ threat he talks of in his speech is in fact Islam. There is criticism of Islam itself, which Muslims like Nawaz would like to set up as ‘bigotry’ – yet whilst some bacon may be thrown at a Mosque by some misguided ‘extreme’ critics of Islam, it is not we who criticise Islam who are advocating ‘Death to Jews and Homosexuals‘. It is Muslims who do that.

It is because Muslims are the threat that Westerners now cannot holiday in Muslim nations like Tunisia for fear of being gunned down – by Muslims. It is Muslims who chose to gun down cartoonists and Jews in Paris and Copenhagen this very year. It was Muslims who killed thousands on 9/11 and 7/7.  It is quite clearly Muslims behaving like Nazis today in eradicating all ‘infidels’ in ISIS controlled areas, and it was Muslims who persecuted Jews so much after the establishment of Israel that they had to move to Israel and there are now barely any Jews living in Muslim lands.

It was Muslims who established an Empire in India and forcibly converted Hindus and Buddhists, eventually leading to the establishment of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh. It is Muslims deciding to act on Islamic hatred which are being arrested at the rate of one a day for threatening all of us – including Jews.

Anyone who tries to compare criticism of Islam with the far-right and Nazism therefore is completely fraudulent – critics of Islam are found amongst Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs and Atheists of all races. The fact that Islam makes Muslims behave badly does not make extremists of those of us who are brave enough to say so. We who criticise Islam risk death – because Muslims do not take kindly to criticism – which is why ex-Muslim Ayaan Hirsi-Ali needs constant protection for speaking out about her old faith.

Islam receives special protection as a religion – but its principles and values are so inherently counter to our own in the West that this status should be revisited. Its history is of conquest, brutality and war, oppression of women and non-believers, death to gays and apostates. This is why Muslim nations fare so badly today – apart from selling oil there is little productive coming from them as Islam is rigidly imposed, 50% of the population are not allowed to work and teaching centres around Islamic texts only. Boko Haram in Nigeria has as a central paradigm to destroy Western Education as being counter to Islam. Pakistan had Malala Yousafzai the young student shot in the head for the ‘sin’ of being female and going to school.

There are serious problems in the whole of Islam – which Muslims have to resolve by themselves. The idea that when they come to our nations in the West to live immediately all these intolerances and prejudices magically vanish is complete madness. Clearly, as time and again we hear how young Muslims are ‘radicalised’ in Mosques, at University and at home – we see an underworld of Islam far removed from the fluffy and modern vision apologists of Islam like Nawaz would present. Islam has not changed for 1400 years – merely the methods chosen by Muslims to establish Muslim power have changed. This is why there are several towns in the UK which are mostly Muslim – which non-Muslims flee from.

My friend who was abused for over 20 years by Muslim men and is too afraid to tell the police because her family have been threatened knows this all too well. Ex-Muslims who are routinely threatened and ostracised by their own communities know this too. It is time David Cameron made it his business to know it. And he won’t do so by listening to Muslims, as any honest appraisal of the threat to our nation’s security must look at Islam’s history of violent conquest and the violence within its core texts. This is what inspires Muslims to Jihad – not a mis-reading of Islam but a reading that is too close. They are not mistaken about their faith – they are simply too correct.

David Cameron would do far better to listen to those of us calling for stronger action against ISLAM as a whole than to Muslim apologists who may talk the good talk but ultimately are trying to let Islam off the hook. For how can Islam be peace when there are countless unambiguous exhortations to violence like this one:

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

Certainly, not all Muslims join ISIS – but if all Muslims are not like ISIS it is because some are good people inherently – and either ignore the violence exhorted by Islam or are unaware of it.  For if Muslims took the orders of their religion literally they WOULD all be like ISIS. So do not judge Islam by the actions of the nice, secular Muslims you know – they are only able to be so by ignoring the hundreds of calls to violence, hatred and intolerance in Islam’s core texts. The fact that the acts of Islamic terrorists are literally a daily event worldwide means we do not always join the dots – these are all Muslims who have read the SAME books as any other Muslim – they are not mad or ‘radicalised’ – they are simply good followers of Muhammad who was himself a warlord with 11 wives and who looted caravans and had sex with his slaves.

That is why ‘Lone Wolf’ attacks are so frequent and unstoppable – ANY Muslim can decide to take Islam literally – because that is what they are MEANT to do, as good Muslims.

I started the petition to demand David Cameron Examines Islam specifically because he is not addressing the core motivation for all the hatred and violence committed by Muslims. Islam instructs Muslims to hate all infidels – and since this is still a Christian nation, perhaps David Cameron ought to consider what that instruction means in terms of our national security, let alone good old community cohesion.

Quran (4:76)“Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…”

Quran (4:95)“Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home). Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward ” 

This passage criticizes “peaceful” Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah’s eyes.

Quran (8:39)“And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah” 

This post was first published on examine-islam.org –

http://examine-islam.org/2015/07/the-root-cause-of-islamic-extremism-is-islam/

Read more:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-extremism-speech-read-the-transcript-in-full-10401948.html

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/isis.is.islam.and.islam.is.isis.and.its.plotting.to.rule.entire.world.nun.warns/59484.htm

http://examine-islam.org/2015/04/bomb-indian-businesses-and-kill-jews/

http://examine-islam.org/information-links/violence-in-islamic-texts/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3168139/David-Cameron-speech-tackling-extremism.html

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/07/david-cameron-has-given-his-best-speech-yet-on-tackling-islamic-extremism/

http://www.meforum.org/916/cair-islamists-fooling-the-establishment

“Would [Jihadi] John have loathed the kuffar quite so much had he actually had the chance to sit next to one of us in double maths? You’re not allowed to ask that, I’m afraid. It’s Islamophobic.” – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11753615/At-last-the-Prime-Minister-is-listening-to-me-on-Muslim-integration.html

Action:

http://www.gofundme.com/childexploitation

http://examine-islam.org/why-our-leaders-must-now-examine-islam/

Advertisements

Raising Funds to Help Survivors of Muslim Rape Gangs

Today I met a victim, a survivor, of a Muslim child raping gang. She has suffered the most appalling sexual and physical abuse and needs Therapy desperately just to cope. Please donate and share widely to make sure she can pay for it on an ongoing basis, and to start to help her and others like her to get over the emotional and physical harm and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder they experience.

These girls have been groomed for sex from as early as primary school. Their families have been threatened and they have been sold between men to abuse in the most vile ways. Too ashamed they often do not tell anyone until the psychological damage runs deep. They self harm and lose the ability to protect themselves from further damage. The police, care staff, teachers and doctors have failed them – writing them off rather than seeking to help and heal them.

They often have to continue living in the same town as the men who raped and sold them – and receive no help from the authorities who turned a blind eye for so long to their despair.

This is the true story of the girl I met today. She is surviving, but the therapy course the NHS awarded her has now run out. She tried just this week to end her life as she can see no way out without this essential care and support.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/05/pamela-geller-wnd-u-k-rape-jihadis-this-is-ok-in-our-culture

Please help by donating and by sharing this campaign with everyone you know. Make them see why if we do not help these girls – nobody else will.

http://www.gofundme.com/childexploitationYoung-girl-sitting-on-dark-stairs

Why do Muslims hate non-Muslims?

O God, destroy the infidels and polytheists, thine enemies, the enemies of the religion. O God, make their children orphans, and defile their abodes, and cause their feet to slip, and give them and their families, and their households and their women and their children and their relations by marriage and their brothers and their friends and their possessions and their race and their wealth and their lands as booty to the Muslims.”

from: 19th Century curse Cairo’s school children were taught to recite at home time.

“Are you Muslim or Christian? We don’t want to kill Muslims.” That’s what the Islamic terrorists reportedly told their innocent prey during a murderous shooting spree last Saturday in Khobar, Saudi Arabia, that left at least 17 civilians dead in the initial assault. [1] How are we to interpret such repeated acts of terrorism, targeting non-Muslims? Perhaps the most influential contemporary doyen lecturing to us about “Islamic fundamentalism” has asserted, in multiple writings since 1990 [2], the following: fundamentalism and its accompanying “Muslim rage” derive exclusively from a steady decline in the geopolitical power of Muslim states, evidenced, most dramatically, by the official dissolution of the Ottoman Caliphate after World War I, and the creation of the State of Israel after World War II. Despite his erudition, this doyen appears unwilling to examine an obvious alternative explanation for the etiology and persistence of Muslim animus toward non-Muslims- what Muslim children, for generations, have been taught to think about the infidel “other,” regardless of the geopolitical circumstances.

E. W. Lane wrote an informative firsthand account of life in Egypt, particularly Cairo and Luxor, composed after several years of residence there (first in 1825-1828, then in 1833-1835). James Aldridge in his study Cairo (1969) called Lane’s account “the most truthful and detailed account in English of how Egyptians lived and behaved.” [3] Egyptian Muslims, Lane explains, regarded “persons of every other faith as the children of perdition; and such, the Muslim is early taught to despise…I am credibly informed that children in Egypt are often taught at school, a regular set of curses to denounce upon the persons and property of Christians, Jews, and all other unbelievers in the religion of Mohammad.” [4] Lane, who had perfect command of Arabic and went on to write a colossal Arabic-English lexicon, translated the prayer below from a contemporary 19th century Arabic text. It contains curses on non-Muslims, “which the Muslim youths in many of the schools in Cairo recite, before they return to their homes, every day of their attendance.” [5] One typical curse is:

I seek refuge with God from Satan the accursed. In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful. O God, aid El-Islam, and exalt the word of truth, and the faith, by the preservation of thy servant and the son of thy servant, the Sultan of the two continents (Europe and Asia), and the Khakan (Emperor or monarch) of the two seas [the Mediterranean and Black Seas], the Sultan, son of the Sultan (Mahmood) Khan (the reigning Sultan when this prayer was composed). O God, assist him, and assist his armies, and all the forces of the Muslims: O Lord of the beings of the whole world. O God, destroy the infidels and polytheists, thine enemies, the enemies of the religion. O God, make their children orphans, and defile their abodes, and cause their feet to slip, and give them and their families, and their households and their women and their children and their relations by marriage and their brothers and their friends and their possessions and their race and their wealth and their lands as booty to the Muslims. O Lord of the beings of the whole world. [6] (Emphasis added.)

Not surprisingly then, Lane describes how the Jews, for example, were “often…jostled in the streets of Cairo, and sometimes beaten merely for passing on the right hand of a Muslim…(The Jews) scarcely dare ever to utter a word of abuse when reviled or beaten unjustly by the meanest Arab or Turk; for many a Jew has been put to death upon a false and malicious accusation of uttering disrespectful words against the Qur’an or the Prophet. It is common to hear an Arab abuse his jaded ass, and, after applying to him various opprobrious epithets, end by calling the beast a Jew.” [7]

Over five decades later, in Tunis, 1888, the following personal account reveals further evidence of the visceral abhorrence and hostility inculcated in Muslim children, specifically, toward non-Muslims: “(The Jew) can be seen to bow down with his whole body to a Muslim child and permit him the traditional privilege of striking him in the face, a gesture that can prove of the gravest consequence. Indeed, the present writer has received such blows. In such matters the offenders act with complete impunity, for this has been the custom from time immemorial.” [8] (Emphasis added.)

Mary Boyce, Professor Emeritus of Iranian Studies and a pre-eminent scholar of Zoroastrianism, spent a 12-month sabbatical in 1963-64 living in the Zoroastrian community of Iran (mostly in Sharifabad, on the northern Yazdi plain). During a lecture series given at Oxford in 1975, [9] she noted how the Iranian ancestors of the Zoroastrians had a devoted working relationship (i.e., herding livestock) with dogs when they lived a nomadic existence on the Asian steppes. This sustained contact evolved over generations such that dogs became “a part in (Zoroastrian) religious beliefs and practices…which in due course became a part of the heritage of Zoroastrianism.” [10] Boyce then provided an historical overview of the deliberate, wanton cruelty of Muslims and their children towards dogs in Iran, including a personal eyewitness account:

In Sharifabad the dogs distinguished clearly between Moslem and Zoroastrian, and were prepared to go…full of hope, into a crowded Zoroastrian assembly, or to fall asleep trustfully in a Zoroastrian lane, but would flee as before Satan from a group of Moslem boys… The evidence points…to Moslem hostility to these animals having been deliberately fostered in the first place in Iran, as a point of opposition to the old (pre-Islamic jihad conquest) faith (i.e., Zoroastrianism) there. Certainly in the Yazdi area…Moslems found a double satisfaction in tormenting dogs, since they were thereby both afflicting an unclean creature and causing distress to the infidel who cherished him. There are grim…stories from the time (i.e., into the latter half of the 19th century) when the annual poll-tax (jizya) was exacted, of the tax gatherer tying a Zoroastrian and a dog together, and flogging both alternately until the money was somehow forthcoming, or death released them. I myself was spared any worse sight than that of a young Moslem girl…standing over a litter of two-week old puppies, and suddenly kicking one as hard as she could with her shod foot. The puppy screamed with pain, but at my angry intervention she merely said blankly, ‘But it’s unclean.’ In Sharifabad I was told by distressed Zoroastrian children of worse things: a litter of puppies cut to pieces with a spade-edge, and a dog’s head laid open with the same implement; and occasionally the air was made hideous with the cries of some tormented animal. Such wanton cruelties on the Moslems’ part added not a little to the tension between the communities. [11]

Sorour Soroudi, an Iranian Jewish woman and academic, whose family left Iran in 1970, published this recollection:

I still remember the rhyme Muslim children used to chant when they saw an Armenian in the streets, ‘Armeni, Armeni-dog, sweeper of hell are you!’ ” [12]

A decade later, anti-infidel discrimination intensified and became state sanctioned policy with the ascent of the Khomeini-lead Shi’ite theocracy in Iran. [13] Professor Eliz Sanasarian provides one particularly disturbing example of these policies, reflecting the hateful indoctrination of young adult candidates for national teacher training programs. Affirming as objective, factual history the hadith [14] account of Muhammad’s supposed poisoning by a Jewish woman from ancient Khaibar, Sanasarian notes, “Even worse, the subject became one of the questions in the ideological test for the Teachers’ Training College where students were given a multiple-choice question in order to identify the instigator of the martyrdom of the Prophet Muhammad, the ‘correct’ answer being ‘a Jewess.’” [15]

The ongoing proliferation of Saudi Arabian-sponsored educational programs rife with bigotry against non-Muslims has been well documented. A recent comprehensive report provided unambiguous examples of these hatemongering teaching materials, accompanied by this triumphal pronouncement from a Saudi royal family publication: “The cost of King Fahd’s efforts in this field has been astronomical, amounting to many billions of Saudi riyals. In terms of Islamic institutions, the result is some 210 Islamic centers wholly or partly financed by Saudi Arabia, more than 1,500 mosques and 2,002 colleges and almost 2,000 schools for educating Muslim children in non-Islamic countries in Europe, North and South America, Australia, and Asia.” [16]

Vilification of non-Muslims has been intrinsic to the religious education of Muslim children and young adults for centuries, an ignoble (and continuing) tradition that long antedates the modern or even pre-modern Muslim “fundamentalist” revival movements. We must acknowledge this reality and begin to think and act beyond the well-intentioned but limited constructs of even our most respected doyens. Perhaps it would be wise to heed the sober advice of this courageous madrassa dropout and secular Muslim “apostate” Ibn Warraq:

First, we who live in the free West and enjoy freedom of expression and scientific inquiry should encourage a rational look at Islam, should encourage Koranic criticism. Only Koranic criticism can help Muslims to look at their Holy Scripture in a more rational and objective way, and prevent young Muslims from being fanaticized by the Koran’s less tolerant verses… We can encourage rationality by secular education. This will mean the closing of religious madrassas where young children from poor families learn only the Koran by heart, learn the doctrine of Jihad – learn , in short, to be fanatics… My priority would be the wholesale rewriting of school texts, which at present preach intolerance of non-Muslims, particularly Jews. One hopes that education will encourage critical thinking and rationality. Again to encourage pluralism, I should like to see the glories of pre-Islamic history taught to all children. The banning of all religious education in state schools as is the case in France where there is a clear constitutional separation of state and religion is not realistic for the moment in Islamic countries. The best we can hope for is the teaching of Comparative Religion, which we hope will eventually lead to a lessening of fanatical fevers, as Islam is seen as but another set of beliefs amongst a host of faiths. [17]

Until Warraq’s recommendations are heeded, we can look forward to an endless jihad.

This article is reproduced from myislam.dk.

Endnotes:

1. Reuters, “Gunmen hunted “infidel” Westerners”
Sun May 30, 2004 06:30 AM ET, http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=520188§ion=news

2. i.e., Bernard Lewis, for example, in 1990 http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/90sep/rage.htm http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/90sep/rage2.htm; November/December 1998 “License to Kill: Usama bin Ladin’s Declaration of Jihad”, Foreign Affairs;

2002 http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2002/01/lewis.htm;

2003 http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2003/05/lewis.htm

3. Quoted by J.M. White, in his introduction to, Lane, E.W. An Account of the Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians, New York, 1973, p. v.

4. Lane, E.W. Modern Egyptians, p. 276.

5. Lane, E.W. Modern Egyptians, p. 575.

6. Lane, E.W. Modern Egyptians, p. 575.

7. Lane, E.W. Modern Egyptians, pp. 554-555.

8. Fellah. “The Situation of the Jews in Tunis, September 1888.”, Ha-Asif (The Harvest) [Hebrew] 6 (Warsaw, 1889), English translation in, Bat Ye’or, The Dhimmi – Jews and Christians Under Islam, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1985, p. 376.

9. Boyce, Mary. A Persian Stronghold of Zoroastrianism (based on the Ratanbai Katrak lectures, 1975), 1977, Oxford.

10. Boyce, M. A Persian Stronghold, p. 139.

11. Boyce, M. A Persian Stronghold, pp. 141-142.

12. Soroudi, Sorour. “The Concept of Jewish Impurity and its Reflection in Persian and Judeo-Persian Traditions” Irano-Judaica 1994, Vol. III, p. 155 (footnote 33):

13. See Tabandeh, Sultanhussein. A Muslim Commentary on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, translated by F.J. Goulding, London, 1970, pp. 17-19. Tabandeh was a Sufi Shi’ite ideologue whose writings had a profound influence on Ayatollah Khomeini’s discriminatory policies towards non-Muslims in Iran, as discussed in Sanasarian, Eliz. Religious Minorities in Iran, Cambridge, 2000, pp. 24-27.

14 Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 47, Number 786: Narrated Anas bin Malik: “A Jewess brought a poisoned (cooked) sheep for the Prophet who ate from it. She was brought to the Prophet and he was asked, ‘Shall we kill her?’ He said, ‘No.’ I continued to see the effect of the poison on the palate of the mouth of Allah’s Apostle.”

15 Sanasarian, E. Religious Minorities in Iran, p. 111.

16 Stalinsky, Steven. “Preliminary Overview. – Saudi Arabia’s Education System: Curriculum, Spreading Saudi Education to the World and the Official Saudi Position on Education Policy,” Middle East Media Research Institute, December 20, 2002.

17 Warraq, Ibn. “A True Islamic Reformation,” FrontPageMagazine.com, May 19, 2003


Andrew G. Bostom, MD, MS, is an Associate Professor of Medicine at Brown University Medical School.
He is the author of:
The Legacy of Jihad, Prometheus Books (2005),
The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism, Prometheus Books (2008),
Sharia Versus Freedom. The Legacy of Islamic Totalitarianism, Prometheus Books (2012),
The Mufti’s Islamic Jew Hatred. What the Nazis Learned From the ‘Muslim Pope’, Bravura Books (2013), and
Iran’s Final Solution for Israel. The Legacy of Jihad and Shi’ite Islamic Jew-Hatred in Iran, Bravura Books (2014).

The Problem with Reforming Islam – Dr. Ulrich von Hutten

The Problem with Reforming Islam

Dr. Ulrich von Hutten

During recent times Islam has become the focus of various writers and groups. The reason of course is that migrants and asylum seekers coming into Europe not only want to adhere to their religion but in many instances want to replace local law with Shariah law. The latter results primarily form active efforts by Imams and other Islamic community leaders to retain control over Islamic adherents. The counter argument is that Immigrants need to adjust to the culture of the country they wish to live in. No one says you have to forfeit your personal religious belief, but one cannot transpose Mid-Eastern or Southwest-Asian belief systems onto a European society which has developed its own customs over 2 millennia. One either adapts or relocates to a place where the customs are more agreeable to the Islamic migrant.

Against this stands yet another perspective. That Western Society could indeed co-exist with Islam. The hope is that Islam will undergo some kind of reformation or that there are variants of Islam that are less violent. Neither of these is remotely possible, and for the same reasons. To begin with Islam is an all or nothing religion, one cannot pick and choose what one wishes to accept and practice. To even begin a discussion of reform would admit that Mohammed was not infallible, that he was not the last and greatest prophet as his teachings were better suited for a medieval time of conquest and consolidation. There are passages in the Qur’an that demand violent action. To turn one’s back on those strictures would be to admit that the Prophet was wrong or that those strictures no longer apply in the modern world. In either case it states unequivocally that Mohammed was not the Prophet he and his adherents claimed him to be.

In the final analysis Islam cannot undergo a reformation to a more peaceful religion unless its leaders are willing to admit that the Qur’an was created one paragraph at the time to support the ongoing conquest of Arab tribes and to consolidate Mohamed’s control over those tribes. After Mohammed’s death the Qur’an continued to provide a convenient rationalization for the brutal subjugation of peoples whose countries they overran after Islamic leaders embarked on a treacherous path of conquest and colonization. Only in Cordoba did the breakaway Caliphate moderate its application of the Qur’an. Only there did they allow Jews and Christians to live unmolested after paying a tax. If one believes in the orthodoxy of the Qur’an Cordoba was an apostate state since it did not follow the letter of the Islamic law.

One of the greatest problems with the Qur’an is its lack of consistency. To try and reform Islam would require that inconsistencies be reconciled. Again, this would beg the question of how Mohammed, the last and greatest Prophet would write down such glaring non sequiturs if he were divinely inspired as an all knowing God, who knows the past, present, and future, would have no need to edit previous “inspirations.” An all knowing God would, as he did, in the case of Moses unequivocally state what he considers appropriate behavior to be. The fact that the Qur’an is full of glaring non sequiturs speaks against it

being of divine origin, but speaks more to the fact that it was amended to deal with the failure to bring about converts during Islamic expansion. It speaks to the frustrations and anger experienced by a man who deluded himself into believing that he was indeed God’s messenger and that those he conquered would passionately embrace him and his theology. Succeeding generations continue to be affected by the frustrations, hallucinations, and emotional distress felt by Mohammed as religious leaders continue to pick and choose part and parcel of the Qur’an to maintain their hold on Islamic society. Now with the diaspora of Islamic refugees and immigrants Islam has become a clear and present danger to Western Society.

As I stated at the outset, Islam cannot be reformed. To attempt to do so would be to challenge the very foundation of Islam, to admit that Mohammed was not divinely inspired, but by the demons in his mind instead. To quote Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 1 As told by Aisha (the mother of the faithful believers):

Al-Harith bin Hisham asked God’s Apostle “O God’s Apostle! How is the Divine Inspiration revealed to you? God’s Apostle replied, “Sometimes it is (revealed) like he ringing of a bell, this form of Inspiration is the hardest of all and then this state passes off after I have grasped what is inspired. Sometimes the Angel comes in the form of a man and talks to me and I grasp whatever he says.” ‘Aisha added: Verily I saw the Prophet being inspired Divinely on a very cold day and noticed the Sweat dropping from his forehead (as the Inspiration was over).

As my intellectual brother Johannes Reuchlin recently stated anyone who hears bells in his head is usually diagnosed with Schizophrenia while Hyperhidrosis caused by a malfunction in the nervous system can be associated with mental stress. How do you reform the ramblings of an emotionally disturbed person? You don’t! Your simply point out that these are the musings of an incoherent mind.

Check out our new campaign site – http://www.examine-islam.org/about – join up for updates by subscribing to our newsletter. We will launch soon.

Islamic Human Rights Council – a Joke that’s hard to swallow

I reprint this article by Douglas Murray because of the ire it has provoked in me – the though that Rowan Williams supports this ridiculous group and that more than that the Charity Commission grants it Charitable Status is intolerable. Read on –
Douglas_Murray

A new low: Charlie Hebdo’s murdered staff receive an ‘Islamophobe of the Year’ award

The IHRC gave their international ‘Islamophobe of the Year’ award to the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo (Photo: Damien Meyer/AFP/Getty)

The IHRC gave their international ‘Islamophobe of the Year’ award to the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo (Photo: Damien Meyer/AFP/Getty)

I have always treated the ‘Islamophobe of the Year’ event with the scorn it deserves. Not least because each year this fantasy prize for a fantasy concept is run by a British Khomeinist organisation laughably named the ‘Islamic Human Rights Commission.’  The nominees include anybody opposed to the agenda of Islamic extremists, including Muslims.  Of course each year, whilst laughing at it, those of us who are regular nominees also regard it as being to our great good fortune that the IHRC is a British charity operating in the United Kingdom rather than an Islamic charity operating in an Islamic country.  If the latter were the case then rather than laughing at the IHRC every year, those of us who it annually attacks would be hanging from cranes.

However, readers will perhaps excuse me if the laughter is slightly quieter this year.  The first reason is that the ‘Islamophobe of the Year’ award seems to be gaining ‘mainstream’ ground.  This year the awards were not only endorsed by Islamic extremists on the one hand and pseudo-academics like Arun Kundnani on the other, but also by a number of more prominent public figures including the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams and former Telegraph journalist Peter Oborne.

Once again I made the shortlist but missed out on the main award.  However the UK award for ‘Islamophobe of the Year’ did go to Maajid Nawaz.  It would be hard to invent a better display of the agenda of the IHRC and the people involved with it.  Because of course Maajid has devoted his life to, and risks his life by, attacking the extremists within the Islamic faith – his faith.  The IHRC and their supporters seem to have much in common with fundamentalist and extremist Muslims, in that both are deeply irritated by the few brave Muslims like Nawaz.  Indeed they hate him even more than they hate people like me.  Readers will have to guess what variety of Islamic group might choose to attack liberal Muslims, what this says about their agenda and what it tells us about the intelligence of the people who support them.

But there is another reason why my laughter is lessened this year. Although I am assured that the laughter at the IHRC’s ‘ceremony’ in London on Saturday was as raucous as ever, this weekend the IHRC gave their international ‘Islamophobe of the Year’ award to the left-wing French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.  This might be thought laughable in any other circumstances.  The IHRC, one should remember, is a registered British charity.  But of course it is not very funny, because only two months ago another group of people who thought Charlie Hebdo is ‘Islamophobic’ went into the magazine’s offices and gunned down their journalists and cartoonists.  This is the way the pattern works now – the Islamic terrorists break through the front door with Kalashnikovs and then a whole network of fellow travellers try to sneak in through the back door and explain why the cartoonists and journalists might have had it coming.

Of course the IHRC and their supporters like to pretend that Muslims in Europe are being ‘otherised’ in the manner of Jews in Nazi Germany.  But nothing could be further from the truth.  Not just because it was concentration camps rather than ‘othering’ which was the main issue in Germany in the middle of the last century.  But also because Muslims in Europe enjoy full equal rights – far more so than in any Islamic country in the world today or ever.  If there are any negative feelings towards elements of the Muslim community it is towards the extremists.  And why shouldn’t people hate those who blow up trains and buses, crash planes into buildings, shoot at free speech seminars and synagogues and target Christians, Hindus, Jews and liberal Muslims around the world?  If that ire does end up being more widely and less discerningly directed then it will be precisely because a growing number of non-Muslims begin to notice that Muslim communities seem capable not only of producing the sort of people willing to slaughter journalists and cartoonists but also of then providing a multitude of pseudo-moderate organisations which compare the victims of Islamist violence – rather than the perpetrators – to Nazis.

I hope the IHRC and their supporters had an amusing time at their awards ceremony at the weekend, laughing as they smeared and mocked dead journalists.  To my mind it provides a good reminder of what the civilised world is up against, abroad and at home.

Reprinted from The Spectator – http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/

Trevor Phillips sees the light on political correctness

“…the modern secular sin of being a racist (or an anti-Semite or an Islamophobe, its religious cousins) is by far the worst crime of which you can be accused.”

Trevor Phillips, ex-proponent of multiculturalism in New Labour’s Britain.

Trevor Phillips was New Labour’s multiculturalism tsar as Chairman for the Commission for Racial Equality from 2003. In 2005 he came to the realisation that the ‘dream’ of multiculturalism (encouraging immigrants to keep their own cultures from ‘back home’) was backfiring, and rather than helping integration it was creating segregation. This would have been obvious to anyone on the right of politics from inception, one would think, and yet evidently Phillips was censured by Theresa May for this statement at the time. Ten years on, and surely only the most obdurate of the loony Left can maintain that multiculturalism has worked.

“The perverse and unintended consequences of our drive to instil respect for diversity is that our political and media classes have become terrified of discussing racial or religious differences.

Our desperation to avoid offence is itself beginning to stand in the way of progress. And all too often the losers are minority Britons.

These ‘brave’ comments by Phillips are welcome – though as he says himself he was for a time the apogee of political correctness. It is good he has come around, and that his comments are finally bringing this most important of issues into the media. But it is remarkable, and indicative of the media’s continuing fear of ‘bigotry’ that ONLY a black man can say these things today and be listened to. ONLY a black man can tell the truth and be listened to by those in authority- that is racist in itself – inverse-racism yes, but racism nevertheless – it is the colour of Phillips’ skin which makes his MESSAGE palatable to the media.

“We all know why these things cannot be said. The long shadow of slavery and the Holocaust rightly makes us anxious about the kind of slack thinking that led to the dehumanising of entire populations.

Yet should history prevent us from understanding the differences between us — especially if those insights might improve life for everyone?”

Phillips rightly puts his finger on the button above in stating the Holocaust and slavery are shadows which cast darkness to this day – and stop media and politicians from speaking or hearing the truth for fear of unleashing a pogrom of racist aggression. Yet surely again, this is doing everyone a disservice – for it is not WE who shine a light on the violence and intolerance of others who are to be feared – it is those that will close their minds, stop public debate and allow evils to be perpetrated for fear of sounding ‘racist’ or ‘Islamophobic’;

“Ann Cryer, the first MP to blow the whistle on the street grooming scandal, in her Keighley constituency, now says she discovered that others in her local party had been aware of it for years, but neither the police nor social services would take her complaints seriously.

She says she found it difficult to raise the issue without being called a racist. In the end she went public, because ‘if you pretend it’s not happening, as many people in Rotherham did, then you go down the road of condoning it.”

Local councils and social workers are NOTORIOUSLY politically correct – and this is what has allowed the biggest evil to be done on our shores against girls by grown men WITH IMPUNITY for years. The fact is that even today, the media are focusing on the ‘Jihadi brides’ unduly, when there are yet more revelations of Muslim rape gangs emerging from new cities. Muslim rape gangs have been and probably still are affecting far more girls, girls who didn’t set out to plan and organise their own abuse, and who didn’t know what kind of men they were getting involved with. In the case of the ‘jihadi brides’ these girls would have had countless opportunities to see the true evil of Isis in the media, and countless chances to choose a different path. Yet they willingly went, stealing money to fund their journey to what they knew was a mass murdering cult of evil. WHY the media and police choose to focus on these girls as ‘victims’ completely in contrast to the way the thousands of girls ABUSED BY MUSLIM MEN IN THE UK have been treated – is sickening.

Phillips is only just touching the heart of the matter in his article, which is likely due to the persistence of his PC/Left mentality, for in truth MUCH more action is needed to remove the obstacles to telling the TRUTH of those in authority. Yet it is still good to hear, at last, someone saying this and being respected for it – unlike Nigel Farage who is made to seem like an oddball for his honesty.

That means we’re all going to have to become more ready to offend each other. If we do, we might — in time — begin to see each other in our true colours. And surely that’s what the aim of changing Britain’s attitudes to race was all about.

Of course, Phillips is also confusing race and religion and origins – for in fact of course Poles are not a different race to white Britons, but a different culture and nationality. I think the entire conversation centring on race has run its course in fact. It is the CULTURE of different groups which means they do or do not fit in, which either dooms them to failure in the West or aids their progress. Phillips touches on this where he points out that Jewish households tend to be wealthier on average, and that what he terms ‘Asian’ kids fare better at school than white kids from a working class background. It is the culture of these children which helps them achieve, or stems their successes. So if an Indian family integrates well into a community and teaches their children to fit in and to love education, that will set up their children for success.

Successive studies have shown that children from Muslim backgrounds fare the worst of any group of children in the UK in terms of GCSE performance:

Similarly, as Phillips points out;

“.. while many clever young Muslim women head for the top medical schools, a handful are boarding planes to become the brides of Isis fighters. We learn from his former headteacher that Jihadi John had attended a school where more than 70 per cent of the pupils were, like him, Muslims.”

Phillips skirts around the issue – but Islam is known for preparing children to become adults who can expect less prosperity and success. This is shown in Muslim majority nations which form the top portion of the list of most illiterate and poorest nations (especially if we remove the prosperity from oil which was happenstance rather than a product of labour or invention).

“The planet’s poorest countries include Ethiopia, Sierra Leone, Afghanistan, Cambodia, Somalia, Nigeria, Pakistan and Mozambique. At least six of the poorest of the poor are countries with a Muslim majority.

Fact: Of the 1.4 billion Muslims 800 million are illiterate (6 out of 10 Muslims cannot read). In Christendom, adult literacy rate stands at 78 percent.”

(Dr Farruk Saleem)

 It is not too difficult to presuppose from the evidence of their failure in their ‘home’ nations, that the pattern of failure and lack of prosperity will be repeated when Muslims emigrate to the West, and so it has been. The clear reason is that Islam has for centuries oppressed believers and forced them to prioritise prayer, observance, ritual and reward in the afterlife over education, betterment, invention, modernity and progress. It is no good blaming the ‘evil West’ for this problem – these are sovereign nations, which run their own affairs (and even benefit disproportionately from Western aid money). Western ‘oppression’ has not caused this – rather Sharia theocratic regimes and observance to a backwards belief system has.

None of this would be much of a problem really, if it didn’t mean two things:

1 – We in the West fund these dissolute nations and peoples disproportionately (over 50% of Muslim men in the UK do not work and are in receipt of benefits for all their needs).

2 – Muslims are disproportionately perpetrators of terror attacks against us in the West as well as violence against their own people.

So we are effectively paying for the privilege of hosting and supporting potential terrorists. For, isn’t it much easier to plot terror attacks when one lives entirely on the benevolence of the welfare state? This is the real issue we must tackle – and though Phillips has touched upon it, much more needs to be done before the truth is finally stated by those in authority over us – the media and politicians so in thrall to the fraud of ‘Islamophobia’.

Read the article by Trevor Phillips here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2996235/At-man-dares-tell-truth-race-Ex-race-tsar-says-silencing-debate-devastating-harm-Britain.html#ixzz3UY9fGUYQ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
A fascinating and HONEST take on the poverty and dependence of the Arab Muslim world – http://marthavanderpol.com/2015/02/02/wonderful-arab-man-tells-it-like-it-is/

Is the UN fit for Purpose – Anne Marie Waters

I’m re-blogging this excellent article from annemariewaters.org – an excellent source of considered and honest opinion on all aspects of Islam.

UN Watch, a Geneva-based NGO which monitors the activities of the United Nations, reported at the end of 2013 what it felt were the ten worst decisions of the UN throughout that year. All ten are worth a look, but what stands out like a sore thumb is the aggressive promotion of Islamist states (and the resulting sanitisation and legitimisation of sharia), along with the not un-related harassment of Israel.
Of particular interest are the activities of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC). UN Watch mentions Mr Richard Falk, a UNHRC investigator, who it said had blamed the Boston Marathon bombing on “the American global domination project” and “Tel Aviv”, and was later praised for doing so by council members.
Also in 2013, the UN’s human rights body elected Mauritania as its vice-president. In a statement from UN Watch in September, Karoline Ronning stated that “nowhere is slavery so systematically practiced as in Mauritania, a country that is an elected member of this Human Rights Council.” She added “According to Abidine Merzough, a man born in Mauritania as a slave, and who is now the European coordinator of an anti-slavery NGO, sharia is used to justify this system.”
Other countries elected to the UNHRC in 2013 include China and Russia, but perhaps the most controversial election winner of the year was the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. It is well known that Saudi Arabia is one of the world’s most oppressive states, particularly for women, and is a nation where apostasy, blasphemy, adultery, and homosexuality all carry the death penalty. You can read Amnesty International’s most recent report on Saudi Arabia’s human rights record here.

In 1948, the UN’s General Assembly (the main deliberative body of the organisation) adopted the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. This document was initiated to represent the first global expression of rights to which all human beings are entitled. Though not enjoying the legal status of a treaty in its own right, the Declaration was partly intended to define the words “fundamental freedoms” and “human rights” in the UN Charter, which was legally binding on all signatories. Of utmost significance in the UN Declaration was the notion of the universality of human rights – for how else could we recognise and protect our common humanity?
Needless to say, some Islamists took issue with such a notion. Saudi Arabia refused to ratify the Declaration at the time, claiming that it violated sharia law. Criticisms continued over subsequent decades and in 1982 (not long after the Islamic Revolution) an Iranian representative Said Rajaie-Khorassani described the Declaration as “a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition” which could not be implemented by Muslims without transgressing sharia.

A notable criticism of the Declaration from within the West came from Faisal Kutty, who founded the Canadian Muslim Civil Liberties Association in 1994. Kutty’s remarkable comment got right to the heart of the matter – he said “A strong argument can be made that the current formulation of international human rights constitutes a cultural structure in which western society finds itself easily at home … It is important to acknowledge and appreciate that other societies may have equally valid alternative conceptions of human rights.”
Kutty argues, and the UN seems to concur, that societies such as those of Iran or Saudi Arabia, where citizens face execution for pursuing religious or philosophical freedom (apostasy carries the death penalty in both countries), are of equal validity in terms of human rights, as states that guarantee religious freedom for their citizens.
The problem of course is that the UN has fallen victim to the dangerous and deeply racist ideology of relativism. Relativism purports that concepts such as rights and freedoms vary in character across societies and cultures. They do not. Freedom for example has only one meaning. How one chooses to utilise freedom can of course differ, but that fact does not change its simple definition. Freedom refers to the right of a human being to organise their lives as they wish, with limits only to protect others. It has the same meaning everywhere in the world, and it is desired everywhere in world; freedom is human, it is not cultural.
In depicting freedom as a Western concept, as Islamists demand and the UN appears to sanction, fighters for freedom within Islamic countries are increasingly disempowered. Islamists routinely accuse human rights campaigners in Islamic states of pushing a Western agenda, and the UN is providing a buttress.
While relativising universal concepts and aiding the passage of blasphemy laws (proposed by countries that punish it with death), the United Nations is simultaneously engaged in a relentless quest to punish any potential breach of human rights laws by the tiny state of Israel. The United Nations passed 21 resolutions critical of Israel in 2013, compared to only 4 for the rest of the world combined.

Now, since the start of the recent Middle East conflict, the UN (as well as the Western media) has focussed its criticisms almost exclusively on Israel. In late July, the UNHRC passed a resolution to set up a new Commission of Inquiry on Israeli “war crimes”. UN Watch argued that the inquiry “encourages Hamas to continue killing Israelis with deadly rockets and terror tunnels”. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, agreed with UN Watch and said that the decision “sends a message to Hamas that the use of human shields is an effective strategy”.
Whether Israel’s response to the rocket attacks of Hamas is proportionate or justified is a matter of opinion. What is not a matter of opinion however is what Israel is actually facing; religious genocide. The Jewish state is confronting an enemy that quite openly calls for the death of all Jews. The UN, and the Western media, do not appear to consider this point relevant, and you certainly won’t hear it referred to on the BBC.
The Hamas Charter, its founding document, is a festival of Jew-hatred and it is hard not to conclude therefore that Israel is under attack simply because it is a place of safety for Jews – and because Jews top the jihadi hitlist. Just last month, Hamas confirmed again that their “doctrine in fighting you (Jews) is that we will totally exterminate you” and will “not leave a single one alive”.
Given its tendency to promote some of the world’s worst human rights abusers, and its relentless pursuit of the only democracy in the Middle East, it is clear to me, as it must be to many, that the UN is not only unfit to uphold global human rights, but instead represents a serious and growing threat to those rights, and their retention.

By Anne Marie Waters, 2015

Too afraid to sound like a ‘bigot’ to name the true threat

This fascinating take on Islam and the Western fear of sounding like ‘bigots’ by naming the problem of Islam, rather choosing to ascribe it to lone wolf attacks or spurious ‘Islamism’ – despite what all the Jihadis tell us – they are doing it for Islam!

 

This article is horrific – but when the West is considering what to do about Isis – it is essential reading (unfortunately) – not one for kids.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/dawn-perlmutter/isis-meth-heads-tweeking-in-the-name-of-islam/