Archive for Boku Haram

Islamic Totalitarianism

Posted in MIDDLE-EAST POLITICS, ONLINE DEBATE with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on March 19, 2017 by drjgelb

I came across this brief video today by Rebel Media’s excellent Faith Goldy and I added the following comment that I’d like my readers to note:

https://youtu.be/92uqEwzjh2g

With respect, Islamic Totalitarianism is not new. Islam has been totalitarian since its inception 1400yrs ago. Sharia is prototypically totalitarian, a rigid & brutal system of laws & regulations covering every aspect of life from cradle to grave, including the arenas of personal, politics, religion, relationships, warfare, sexuality, gender, education, life & death. Far from being confined to the last 100yrs, Islamic Totalitarianism characterised the Ottoman Empire throughout its reign, from 1299AD – 1924AD when it was dissolved by Ataturk. In 1928, Hassan Al-Banna founded the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and its charter that dedicated the MB to the re-establishment of the Islamic Caliphate & its global spread. Since 1928, the MB has formed Jihadist organisations such as al-Qaeda, Boko Haram & ISIS to name but a few, to disrupt secular Muslim majority nations with a view to creating Islamic theocracies in their place & to extend their reach to the rest of the world until a single Islamic global government loyal only to Allah is established. Such an entity has no room for non-Muslim faiths and conversion to Islam at the point of the sword is their intended strategy. The religious authorisation for this course of action is clearly laid out in the Trilogy of Islamic Sacred Texts, namely the Qur’an, Hadiths & Sunna. Furthermore, the prime arbiter of Sunni Islamic Jurisprudence, Al-Azhar University in Cairo (est. 692AD), has given its intellectual & religious academic nod to Jihadists and their Global Caliphate goals, despite Egyptian President al-Sisi’s pleas for reform of Islam’s totalitarian precepts. Colonel Eran Lerman is correct in pointing out the totalitarian aims of modern Jihadism but these aims do not differ from those of Islam throughout its existence. In my opinion, the fact that Islam’s supremacist & imperialist goals have remained so fixed for 1400yrs, is an indication of its lack of capacity to evolve and to develop a modern outlook & sensibility more suitable to global co-existence and peace and renders Islam the mortal enemy of all peace loving people everywhere. Like Communism, Nazism & all totalitarian ideologies, Islam seeks to subjugate those who do not share its beliefs & to make their lives hell on earth. For this reason, Islam should be seen as a regressive, 7th century anachronism that must be pressured to reform or if not, eliminated from amongst the more enlightened ideologies of the 21st century.

Advertisements

“JIHADIS ARE JUST FOLLOWING THE EXAMPLE OF MUHAMMAD” – DANISH PROFESSOR

Posted in MIDDLE-EAST POLITICS with tags , , , , , , , , , on April 5, 2015 by drjgelb

Tina MagaardFor three years, a Danish linguist, Tina Magaard, analyzed the basic texts of ten religions. Her conclusion is that the texts of Islam stand out by encouraging terrorism and violence more than those of other religions.

Now Tina Magaard speaks out again. Translated by Nicolai Sennels, via 10News.dk:

Tina Magaard has great knowledge about Islam, both personally and academically. She believes that Danish experts in Islam fail to disclose what is in Islam’s holy scriptures, and the extent to which extremism draws its ammunition from these scriptures.…

She studied Arabic and read both the Qur’an and the hadiths. Here she recognized many of the repressive tendencies she had experienced [in her travels in Muslim countries].

“What is striking is not in itself that one can find murderous passages in the Islamic texts, as such passages can also be found in other religions. But it is striking how much space these passages take up in the Islamic texts, and how much they focus on an us-and-them logic in which infidels and apostates are characterized as dirty, rotten, criminal, hypocritical and dangerous. It it also striking how much these texts demand that the reader fight the infidels, both with words and with the sword. In many passages, Muhammad plays a central role as one who encourages the use of violence, whether it comes to stonings, beheadings, acts of war or execution of critics and poets.”

Tina Magaard finds it particularly objectionable that so many Islamic scholars in her opinion knowingly fail to disclose these facts, and use their positions of power to create specific standards for what you can say. Often, they also blame Danish racism rather than objectively stating that extremists actually find justifications for using violence and threats in Islam’s holy scriptures.…

Asked whether after Krudttønden (the terror attack in Copenhagen, February 2015) and the attack on Charlie Hebdo it is desirable for future harmony and coexistence to stop drawing Muhammad, Tina Magaards answers unequivocally:

“The only thing we get out of saying that we must not draw Muhammad is that there will be more religiously motivated restrictions on our freedoms. Rather, we must take the bull by the horns and question whether Muhammad did the right thing when he, for example, ordered his critics murdered. This is the discussion we need to have with European Muslims.”

The most thought-provoking thing, according to Tina Magaard, is that it is so difficult to find an imam who dares or wants to criticize the aspects of Islam which contradict liberal freedoms…

“Instead, you get a chitchat like: ‘It is not relevant to discuss this in Denmark now,’ or ‘this is a misunderstanding.’ But they refuse to criticise the concrete passages that terrorists use to justify their actions,” Magaard says.

STAGGERING IGNORANCE BLINDING A COMPLACENT WEST TO THE ALL TOO VISIBLE ISLAMIC THREAT

Posted in MIDDLE-EAST POLITICS with tags , , , , , , , , on April 5, 2015 by drjgelb

death iran

Three years ago I embarked on a quest with my mate Peter, to learn all we could about Islam BEFORE demonstrating credibility destroying ignorance in our various online comments and opinions. Neither of us wanted to be dismissed with the label of Islamophobe or told that we were taking Islamic scripture “out of context”. We have shared resources, literature, Islamic source materials, translated sermons, hundreds of subtitled videos of Islamic clerics, academics and jurists, read the works of famed Islamic commentators – past and present, found and digested hundreds of magazines, journals and newspapers written in English for Diaspora Muslims, attended lectures by visiting experts, listened to the words of former Muslims, former terrorists and Muslim leaders, spoken with reformist Muslim friends and kept abreast of all the political machinations involving Islam’s relations with the West, particularly the U.S., Britain and Australia, where we live. Being atheists and rationalists with science based educations, neither of us carried conflicting religious beliefs that might cloud our assessment of Islam’s fundamental aims and underpinnings.

Of the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims, 800,000 are illiterate and their knowledge of Islam is entirely based on the spoken word of family, community, religious leaders, etc. Of the 800,000 literate Muslims, a large number do not speak or understand Arabic, an impediment to a deep understanding of Islam, according to Qur’an scholars. A very large proportion of the global Muslim population, have only a very superficial understanding of Islamic scripture, commentary and law and are extremely vulnerable to manipulation, misinformation and self-serving, shallow or frankly false information regarding their religion.

When these facts are combined with the permission to deceive in the service of Islam using four distinct, named forms of deception that is unique to Islam, the religion becomes an highly effective form of propaganda, perfectly placed in adherents’ lives to bind them to the faith for life with guaranteed compliance with Islamic observance, law, political goals and social structure. Why is Islam so intent on living up to the meaning of its name…….”to submit”? Why is submission central to Islam and why is Islam so uniquely focused on becoming the one world religion, by whatever means possible?

Islamic Scholars and Clerics are universally obsessed with avoiding an open, honest discussion or debate about the ethical basis of Islam, its aims, the tasks that must be completed in order to allow Judgement Day to even be possible and the role of violent struggle and warfare as integral to the achievement of Islam’s central goals. The more knowledge one gains of the founder of Islam, Muhammad, the more understanding one gains of why this religion is fundamentally different to the other main world faiths. Of one fact you can be certain, Islam is NOT a “religion of peace” and Muhammad was definitely not an average man. 

Regarded by Muslims as “the perfect man” in every way, from how he ate and dressed to his morals and ethics, the reality is that Muhammad’s life was characterised by behaviour indicative of severe psychopathy. Despite a myriad of excuses offered by Islamic apologists, Muhammad’s actions in the area of matrimony and sex offer proof of his total disregard for the lives and rights of other human beings. He displayed narcissism and egocentrism on a grand scale and used violence or threats of violence and death to control his followers. The violence he perpetrated and mandated as required for punishment for any protest or non-compliance, was extraordinarily depraved and is probably best known in our lifetimes in the depravity of ISIS, the NAZIS, STALIN & other TYRANTS and DICTATORS.

Muhammad had 11 wives and many concubines. His favourite wife was 6yrs old when betrothed to the 55yr old Muhammad and this marriage was consummated when his bride was aged 9yrs. Another of his wives was once his daughter-in-law. His lust for her led him to exile his adopted son and prohibit all future adoption under Islamic Law so that his theft of her could never be challenged. Another wife was a married mother & member of a neighbouring Jewish tribe. To satisfy his depraved lust, Muhammad murdered all the men of the tribe, over 900 Jewish men and did away with her children. He took her as his wife and consummated his marriage to her, on the same day as he murdered her husband and children. See links for full information. Apart from his love-life, Muhammad spread Islam by the sword, leading his soldiers in constant aggressive wars against neighbouring peoples evermore distant from his home, until Islam had been established over an amazingly large area. 

By promising his followers an afterlife of perpetual sexual pleasure in return for martyrdom, Muhammad preached a religion that prefers death over life, where ensuring a good death has become far more important than living a good life. To ensure that such an horrific philosophy would survive the millennia unchallenged, Muhammad named Science and Maths as “Satanic”immediately leading to a cessation of scientific progress in the Muslim World that would continue to beggar Islamic nations, were it not for their oil reserves.

If all this was not enough, Muhammad ensured that the source scripture of Islam, the Qur’an, claimed to be of Divine Origin, was almost incomprehensible, with later chapters abrogating earlier ones on similar themes and the entire work ordered not by chronology but by number of words per chapter. The final chapters e.g.. Sura 9, are increasingly vicious, violent, murderous and depraved. They call for death to all Infidels who fail to convert to Islam or accept 2nd class  but protected status in return for the payment of a special tax. The Arab nations once had 1million Jewish residents, all of whom were forced to flee under the Ottomans, because of violent discrimination and genocidal actions.

Islam prohibits reform under penalty of death and leaving Islam provides one a death sentence too. Apart from the Qur’an, Muhammad’s Commentaries and some from his disciples (Hadiths) are viewed as central planks of the religion that must be followed. In more recent times, certain highly regarded scholars have seen their works on Islamic Law gain widespread acceptance and devotion……eg. The Reliance of the Traveller, which provides the detailed context that underpins Islamic Law. The Al Azhar University in Cairo, established in 962 AD, remains today as the centre of islamic jurisprudence for all for schools of Sunni islamic legal thought. It is this institution that Egypt’s President has called upon to begin the process of reforming Islam and bringing Islamic violent subjugation of the rest of the world, to a halt! Halting the Islamic quest for the elimination of all non-Muslims, especially the Jews, will require a fundamental shift in Islamic thought and tradition.

To complicate matters, Muhammad’s succession was anything but smooth and the disputes that arose led to the split between Sunni and Shia versions of Islam, each with its own disputed line of succession that Muslims have been killing each other over for centuries. Since Muhammad’s emergence, Islam has been responsible for the death of 275,000,000 people, mainly Muslims. It has been the most murderous entity in the entire history of Humanity.

A great deal more could be written and I encourage everyone to read, read and read some more to gain a thorough understanding of Islam and its motivations, goals and aims. Islam mandates conquest and conversion of the entire population of the world. That’s the bottom line!! For that reason, deliberately refusing to call Islamic Extremism, Islamic, is working for the enemy……..an enemy that hates non-Muslims and wants the whole planet to be Muslim. Barak Obama understands this all very very well. He has chosen to defend Islam and to deceive Americans. When he ceased Qur’anic studies at age 12yrs, he was top of his class. He grew up in those early years, learning Jew Hatred and the underpinnings of violence. His hatred of Netanyahu is born of jew Hatred, especially of a brave, decorated Jewish commando with several Ivy League U.S. degrees to his name……a genius and an Israeli War Hero…….leaving Obama as unable to hold his own in Netanyahu”s company. Obama’s nastiness is simple ENVY!

It is Israel that is so much maligned. Recent commentary on a NYT article on Israel was so shockingly, horribly vicious and based on a grossly ignorant historical knowledge base. NYT should be ashamed of its readers’ ignorance of readily available historical facts and should seek to educate the public consuming their product. Huge gaps exist in Americans’ understanding of Iran and its leadership. Make no mistake, Obama and Kerry’s frantic obsession with getting an Iran deal, has led to the formulation of a terribly anti-Israel deal that will indeed threaten Israel’s very survival……no doubt! But let me be clear: Obama et al do not give a damn if Israel and the Jews cease to exist. Every move in the last 7yrs tells Jews that he is quite willing to see Israel destroyed. American Jews have still to fully wake…..there is not much time left to be complacent! I’ll publish this now. Please come back in 24hrs for great links to teach you everything you need to know about Islam but were afraid to ask!!

THOSE WHO FAIL TO HEED THE LESSONS OF HISTORY ARE DOOMED TO REPEAT IT!

Posted in MIDDLE-EAST POLITICS with tags , , , , , , , , , , on September 27, 2014 by drjgelb

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Quotations_on_Islam_from_Notable_Non-Muslims#cite_note-138

QUOTATIONS ON ISLAM:

SEE WEBSITE FOR REFERENCES

Abu Bakr Muhammad al-Razi

Muhammad ibn Zakariyā Rāzī (865 – 925 AD) was a Persian physician, alchemist, chemist, philosopher, and scholar.

If the people of this religion [Islam] are asked about the proof for the soundness of their religion, they flare up, get angry and spill the blood of whoever confronts them with this question. They forbid rational speculation, and strive to kill their adversaries. This is why truth became thoroughly silenced and concealed.[3]
You claim that the evidentiary miracle is present and available, namely, the Koran. You say: “Whoever denies it, let him produce a similar one.” Indeed, we shall produce a thousand similar, from the works of rhetoricians, eloquent speakers and valiant poets, which are more appropriately phrased and state the issues more succinctly. They convey the meaning better and their rhymed prose is in better meter. … By God what you say astonishes us! You are talking about a work which recounts ancient myths, and which at the same time is full of contradictions and does not contain any useful information or explanation. Then you say: “Produce something like it”?![3]

Adolf Hitler[edit]

Adolf Hitler (1889 – 1945) was an Austrian-born German politician and the leader of the National Socialist German Workers Party, commonly known as the Nazi Party.

You see, it’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion [Islam] too would have been more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?[4]
I can imagine people being enthusiastic about the paradise of Mohammed, but as for the insipid paradise of the Christians! In your lifetime, you used to hear the music of Richard Wagner. After your death, it will be nothing but hallelujahs, the waving of palms, children of an age for the feeding bottle, and hoary old men. The man of the isles pays homage to the forces of nature. But Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery. A n***** with his taboos is crushingly superior to the human being who seriously believes in transubstantiation.[5]
Had Charles Martel not been victorious at Poitiers -already, you see, the world had already fallen into the hands of the Jews, so gutless a thing Christianity! -then we should in all probability have been converted to Mohammedanism [Islam], that cult which glorifies the heroism and which opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world. Christianity alone prevented them from doing so.[6]
The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death. A slow death has something comforting about it. The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advances of science… The instructions of a hygienic nature that most religions gave, contributed to the foundation of organized communities. The precepts ordering people to wash, to avoid certain drinks, to fast at appointed dates, to take exercise, to rise with the sun, to climb to the top of the minaret — all these were obligations invented by intelligent people. The exhortation to fight courageously is also self-explanatory. Observe, by the way, that, as a corollary, the Moslem was promised a paradise peopled with sensual girls, where wine flowed in streams — a real earthly paradise. The Christians, on the other hand, declare themselves satisfied if after their death they are allowed to sing hallelujahs! …Christianity, of course, has reached the peak of absurdity in this respect. And that’s why one day its structure will collapse. Science has already impregnated humanity. Consequently, the more Christianity clings to its dogmas, the quicker it will decline.![7]

Alexis de Tocqueville[edit]

Alexis-Charles-Henri Clérel de Tocqueville (1805 – 1859) was a French political thinker and historian best known for his Democracy in America and The Old Regime and the Revolution.

I studied the Quran a great deal. I came away from that study with the conviction that by and large there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Muhammad. As far as I can see, it is the principal cause of the decadence so visible today in the Muslim world and, though less absurd than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in my opinion more to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism itself.[8]
Muhammad professed to derive from Heaven, and he has inserted in the Koran, not only a body of religious doctrines, but political maxims, civil and criminal laws, and theories of science. The gospel, on the contrary, only speaks of the general relations of men to God and to each other – beyond which it inculcates and imposes no point of faith. This alone, besides a thousand other reasons, would suffice to prove that the former of these religions will never long predominate in a cultivated and democratic age, whilst the latter is destined to retain its sway at these as at all other periods.[9]

André Servier[edit]

André Servier was an historian who lived in French Algeria at the beginning of the 20th century.

Islam was not a torch, as has been claimed, but an extinguisher. Conceived in a barbarous brain for the use of a barbarous people, it was – and it remains – incapable of adapting itself to civilization. Wherever it has dominated, it has broken the impulse towards progress and checked the evolution of society.[10]
Islam is Christianity adapted to Arab mentality, or, more exactly, it is all that the unimaginative brain of a Bedouin, obstinately faithful to ancestral practices, has been able to assimilate of the Christian doctrines. Lacking the gift of imagination, the Bedouin copies, and in copying he distorts the original. Thus Musulman law is only the Roman Code revised and corrected by Arabs; in the same way Musulman science is nothing but Greek science interpreted by the Arab brain; and again, Musulman architecture is merely a distorted imitation of the Byzantine style.[10]
The deadening influence of Islam is well demonstrated by the way in which the Musulman comports himself at different stages of his life. In his early childhood, when the religion has not as yet impregnated his brain, he shows a very lively intelligence and remarkably open mind, accessible to ideas of every kind; but, in proportion as he grows up, and as, through the system of his education, Islam lays hold of him and envelops him, his brain seems to shut up, his judgment to become atrophied, and his intelligence to be stricken by paralysis and irremediable degeneration.[10]
Islam is by no means a negligible element in the destiny of humanity. The mass of three hundred million believers is growing daily, because in most Musulman countries the birth-rate exceeds the death-rate, and also because the religious propaganda is constantly gaining new adherents among tribes still in a state of barbarism.[10]
To sum up: the Arab has borrowed everything from other nations, literature, art, science, and even his religious ideas. He has passed it all through the sieve of his own narrow mind, and being incapable of rising to high philosophic conceptions, he has distorted, mutilated and desiccated everything. This destructive influence explains the decadence of Musulman nations and their powerlessness to break away from barbarism…[10]
Islam is a doctrine of death, inasmuch as the spiritual not being separated from the temporal, and every manifestation of activity being subjected to dogmatic law, it formally forbids any change, any evolution, any progress. It condemns all believers to live, to think, and to act as lived, thought and acted the Musulmans of the second century of the Hegira [8th century A.D.], when the law of Islam and its interpretation were definitely fixed.
. . .
In the history of the nations, Islam, a secretion of the Arab brain, has never been an element of civilization, but on the contrary has acted as an extinguisher upon its flickering light. Individuals under Arab rule have only been able to contribute to the advance of civilization in so far as they did not conform to the Musulman dogma, but they relapsed into Arab barbarism as soon as they were obliged to make a complete submission to these dogmas.
. . .

Islamized nations, who have not succeeded in freeing themselves from Musulman tutelage, have been stricken with intellectual paralysis and decadence. They will only escape as they succeed in withdrawing themselves from the control of Musulman law.[10]

Angela Carter[edit]

Angela Carter (1940 – 1992) was an English novelist and journalist. In 2008, The Times ranked Carter tenth in their list of “The 50 greatest British writers since 1945”. In 2012, Nights at the Circus was selected as the best ever winner of the James Tait Black Memorial Prize.

The kind of power mothers have is enormous. Take the skyline of Istanbul—enormous breasts, pathetic little willies, a final revenge on Islam. I was so scared I had to crouch in the bottom of the boat when I saw it.[11]

Anthony Flew[edit]

Antony Garrard Newton Flew (1923 – 2010) was a British philosopher. He was also known for the development of the no true Scotsman fallacy.

I would never regard Islam with anything but horror and fear because it is fundamentally committed to conquering the world for Islam… it is, I think, best described in a Marxian way as the uniting and justifying ideology of Arab imperialism. Between the New Testament and the Qur’an there is (as it is customary to say when making such comparisons) no comparison. Whereas markets can be found for books on reading the Bible as literature, to read the Qur’an is a penance rather than a pleasure. There is no order or development in its subject matter…. The Prophet, though gifted in the arts of persuasion and clearly a considerable military leader, was both doubtfully literate and certainly ill-informed about the contents of the Old Testament and about several matters of which God, if not even the least informed of the Prophet’s contemporaries, must have been cognizant… one thing I’ll say in this comparison is that, for goodness sake, Jesus is an enormously attractive charismatic figure, which the Prophet of Islam most emphatically is not.[12]
The Koran calls for belief and consequent obedience. It is, surely, calculated to inspire fear, indeed abject terror, rather than love.[13]

Apostolos Euangelou Vacalopoulos[edit]

The Revolution of 1821 is no more than the last great phase of the resistance of the Greeks to Ottoman domination; it was a relentless, undeclared war, which had begun already in the first years of servitude. The brutality of an autocratic regime, which was characterized by economic spoliation, intellectual decay and cultural retrogression, was sure to provoke opposition. Restrictions of all kinds, unlawful taxation, forced labor, persecutions, violence, imprisonment, death, abductions of girls and boys and their confinement to Turkish harems, and various deeds of wantonness and lust, along with numerous less offensive excesses – all these were a constant challenge to the instinct of survival and they defied every sense of human decency. The Greeks bitterly resented all insults and humiliations, and their anguish and frustration pushed them into the arms of rebellion. There was no exaggeration in the statement made by one of the beys if Arta, when he sought to explain the ferocity of the struggle. He said: ‘We have wronged the rayas [dhimmis] (i.e. our Christian subjects) and destroyed both their wealth and honor; they became desperate and took up arms. This is just the beginning and will finally lead to the destruction of our empire.’ The sufferings of the Greeks under Ottoman rule were therefore the basic cause of the insurrection; a psychological incentive was provided by the very nature of the circumstances[14]
At the beginning of the eleventh century, the Seljuk Turks forced their way into Armenia and there crushed the armies of several petty Armenian states. No fewer than forty thousand souls fled before the organized pillage of the Seljuk host to the western part of Asia Minor. From the middle of the eleventh century, and especially after the battle of Malazgirt [Manzikurt] (1071), the Seljuks spread throughout the whole Asia Minor peninsula, leaving error, panic and destruction in their wake. Byzantine, Turkish and other contemporary sources are unanimous in their agreement on the extent of havoc wrought an the protracted anguish of the local population…[The Greek chronicler] Kydones described the fate of the Christian peoples of Asia Minor thus:‘The entire region which sustained us, from the Hellespont eastwards to the mountains of Armenia, has been snatched away. They [the Turks] have razed cities, pillaged churches, opened graves, and filled everything with blood and corpses…Alas, too, they have even abused Christian bodies. And having taken away their entire wealth they have now taken away their freedom, reducing them to the merest shadows of slaves. And with such dregs of energy as remain in these unfortunate people, they are forced to be the servitors of the Turk’s personal comforts.’

“From the time the Ottoman Turks first set foot in Thrace under Suleiman, son of Orchan, the Empire rapidly disintegrated….From the very beginning of the Turkish onslaught under Suleiman, the Turks tried to consolidate their position by the forcible imposition of Islam. [The Ottoman historian] Sukrullah [maintained] those who refused to accept the Moslem faith were slaughtered and their families enslaved. ‘Where there were bells’, writes the same author, ‘Suleiman broke them up and cast them onto fires. Where there are churches he destroyed them or converted them into mosques. Thus, in place of bells there were now muezzins. Wherever Christian infidels were still found, vassalage was imposed upon their rulers. At least in public they could no longer say ‘kyrie eleison’ but rather “There is no God but Allah; and where once their prayers had been addressed to Christ, they were now to ‘Mohammed, the prophet of Allah.’[15]

Arthur Jeffery[edit]

Arthur Jeffery (1892 – 1959) was an Australian professor of Semitic languages first at the School of Oriental Studies in Cairo, and from 1938 until his death jointly at Columbia University and Union Theological Seminary in New York City. He is the author of extensive historical studies of Middle Eastern manuscripts.

The early Arabic sources quite plainly and frankly describe the expeditions as military expeditions, and it would never have occurred to anyone at that day to interpret them as anything else…. To the folk of his day there would thus be nothing strange in Muhammad, as the head of the community of those who served Allah, taking the sword to extend the kingdom of Allah, and taking measures to insure the subjection of all who lived within the borders of what he made the kingdom of Allah.[16]

Arthur Schopenhauer[edit]

Arthur Schopenhauer (1788 – 1860) was an influencial German philosopher, known for his pessimism and philosophical clarity.

Temples and churches, pagodas and mosques, in all countries and ages, in their splendor and spaciousness, testify to man’s need for metaphysics, a need strong and ineradicable, which follows close on the physical. … Sometimes it lets inself be satisfied with clumsy fables and fairy-tales. If only they are imprinted early enough, they are for man adequate explanations of his existence and supports for his morality. Consider the Koran, for example; this wretched book was sufficient to start a world-religion, to satisfy the metaphysical need of countless millions for twelve hundred years, to become the basis of their morality and of a remarkable contempt for death, and also to inspire them to bloody wars and the most extensive conquests. In this book we find the saddest and poorest form of theism. Much may be lost in translation, but I have not been able to discover in it one single idea of value.[17]

Bhavishya Purana[edit]

The Bhavishya Purana is one of the eighteen major Hindu Puranas. It is written in Sanskrit and attributed to Rishi Vyasa, the compiler of the Vedas.

Suta Goswami said: After hearing the king’s prayers, Lord Shiva said: … There was a mystic demon named Tripura (Tripurasura), whom I have already burnt to ashes, he has come again by the order of Bali. He has no origin but he achieved a benediction from me. His name is Mahamada (Muhammad) and his deeds are like that of a ghost. Therefore, O king, you should not go to this land of the evil ghost. By my mercy your intelligence will be purified. Hearing this the king came back to his country and Mahamada (Muhammad) came with them to the bank of the river Sindhu. He was expert in expanding illusion, so he said to the king very pleasingly: O great king, your god has become my servant. Just see, as he eats my remnants, so I will show you. The king became surprised when he saw this just before them. Then in anger Kalidasa rebuked Mahamada (Muhammad) “O rascal, you have created an illusion to bewilder the king, I will kill you, you are the lowest…”

That city is known as their site of pilgrimage, a place which was Madina or free from intoxication. Having a form of a ghost (Bhuta), the expert illusionist Mahamada (Muhammad) appeared at night in front of king Bhojaraja and said: O king, your religion is of course known as the best religion among all. Still I am going to establish a terrible and demoniac religion by the order of the Lord . The symptoms of my followers will be that they first of all will cut their genitals, have no shikha, but having beard, be wicked, make noise loudly and eat everything. They should eat animals without performing any rituals. This is my opinion. They will perform purificatory act with the musala or a pestle as you purify your things with kusha. Therefore, they will be known as musalman, the corrupters of religion. Thus the demoniac religion will be founded by me. After having heard all this the king came back to his palace and that ghost (Muhammad) went back to his place.[18]

Benedict XVI[edit]

Pope Benedict XVI (born Joseph Alois Ratzinger on April 16, 1927) is Pope Emeritus of the Catholic Church, having served as Pope from 2005 to 2013.

Islam has a total organization of life that is completely different from ours; it embraces simply everything,…There is a very marked subordination of woman to man; there is a very tightly knit criminal law, indeed, a law regulating all areas of life, that is opposed to our modern ideas about society. One has to have a clear understanding that it is not simply a denomination that can be included in the free realm of a pluralistic society.[19]

Bernard Lewis[edit]

Bernard Lewis, FBA (born May 31, 1916) is a British-American scholar in Oriental studies, and political commentator. He is the Cleveland E. Dodge Professor Emeritus of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University. He specializes in the history of Islam and the interaction between Islam and the West, and is especially famous in academic circles for his works on the history of the Ottoman Empire.

The golden age of equal rights [in Spain] was a myth, and belief in it was a result, more than a cause, of Jewish sympathy for Islam. The myth was invented by Jews in nineteenth-century Europe as a reproach to Christians.[20]
There was a time when scholars and other writers in communist eastern Europe relied on writers and publishers in the free West to speak the truth about their history, their culture, and their predicament. Today it is those who told the truth, no those who concealed or denied it, who are respected and welcomed in these countries. Historians in free countries have a moral and professional obligation no to shrink the difficult issues and subjects that some people would place under a sort of taboo; not to submit to voluntary censorship, but to deal with these matters fairly, honestly, without apologetics, without polemic, and, of course, competently. Those who enjoy freedom have a moral obligation to use that freedom for those who do not possess it. We live in a time when great efforts have been made, and continue to be made to falsify the record of the part and to make history a tool of propaganda; when governments, religious movements, political parties, and sectional groups of every kind are busy rewriting history as they would wish it to have been, as they would like their followers to believe that it was. All this is very dangerous indeed, to ourselves and to others, however we may define otherness – dangerous to our common humanity. Because, make no mistake, those who are unwilling to confront the past will be unable to understand the present and unfit to face the future.[21]
During the first formative centuries of its existence, Christianity was separated from and indeed antagonistic to the state, with which it only later became involved. From the lifetime of its founder, Islam was the state, and the identity of religion and government is indelibly stamped on the memories and awareness of the faithful from their own sacred writings, history, and experience.[22]
…it is the duty of those who have accepted them [Allah’s word and message] to strive unceasingly to convert or at least to subjugate those who have not. This obligation is without limit of time or space. It must continue until the whole world has either accepted the Islamic faith or submitted to the power of the Islamic state.[23]

Bertrand Russell[edit]

Bertrand Arthur William Russell (1872 – 1970) was a British philosopher, logician, mathematician, historian, socialist, pacifist, and social critic, who is considered to be one of the founders of analytic philosophy.

Bolshevism combines the characteristics of the French Revolution with those of the rise of Islam… Those who accept Bolshevism become impervious to scientific evidence, and commit intellectual suicide. Even if all the doctrines of Bolshevism were true, this would still be the case, since no unbiased examination of them is tolerated…Among religions, Bolshevism is to be reckoned with Mohammedanism rather than with Christianity and Buddhism. Christianity and Buddhism are primarily personal religions, with mystical doctrines and a love of contemplation. Mohammedanism and Bolshevism are practical, social, unspiritual, concerned to win the empire of the world.[24]
Rivalry is a much stronger motive. Over and over again in Mohammedan history, dynasties have come to grief because the sons of a sultan by different mothers could not agree, and in the resulting civil war universal ruin resulted… The world would be a happier place than it is if acquisitiveness were always stronger than rivalry. But in fact, a great many men will cheerfully face impoverishment if they can thereby secure complete ruin for their rivals.[25]
Immediately after his death the conquests began, and they proceeded with rapidity… Westward expansion (except in Sicily and Southern Italy) was brought to a standstill by the defeat of the Mohammedans at the battle of Tours in 732, just one hundred years after the death of the Prophet… It was the duty of the faithful to conquer as much of the world as possible for Islam… The first conquests of the Arabs began as mere raids for plunder, and only turned into permanent occupation after experience has shown the weakness of the enemy… The Arabs, although they conquered a great part of the world in the name of a new religion were not a very religious race; the motive of their conquests was plunder and wealth rather than religion.[26]
The beliefs appropriate to the impulse of aggression may be seen in Bernhardi, or in the early Mohammedan conquerors, or, in full perfection, in the Book of Joshua. There is first of all a conviction of the superior excellence of one’s own group, a certainty that they are in some sense the chosen people. This justifies the feeling that only the good and evil of one’s own group is of real importance, and that the rest of the world is to be regarded merely as material for the triumph or salvation of the higher race. In modern politics this attitude is embodied in imperialism.[27]

Bill Maher[edit]

William “Bill” Maher, Jr. (born January 20, 1956) is an American stand-up comedian, television host, political commentator, author and actor. Maher currently ranks number 38 on Comedy Central’s 100 greatest stand-ups of all time, and has a Hollywood Walk of Fame star.

There’s only one faith, for example, that kills you or wants to kill you if you draw a bad cartoon of the prophet. There’s only one faith that kills you or wants to kill you if you renounce the faith… obviously, most Muslim people are not terrorists. But ask most Muslim people in the world, if you insult the prophet, do you have what’s coming to you? It’s more than just a fringe element.[28]
I do agree that there are other groups that pose a terroristic threat to this country [USA]… I would say that the threat from radicalized Muslims is a unique and greater threat. It is the greatest threat… It’s been going on for a thousand years, this problem with Islam and the West. We’re dealing with a culture that is in its medieval era. It [Islam] comes from a hate-filled holy book, the Quran, which is taken very literally by its people. They are trying to get nuclear weapons. I don’t think Tim McVeigh would ever have tried to get a nuclear weapon because I think right-wing nuts, they think they love this country and they are not trying to destroy this country, they want to get it away from the people they see as hijacking it. That’s different than Muslim extremists who want to destroy it. And also it is a culture of suicide bombing, which is hard to deter from people who want to kill themselves.[29]
All this talk of people who burn the Koran and nothing about the people who reacted in such a stupid way. We are always blaming the victim and not holding them — not most Muslims, but at least a large part of Muslim culture that doesn’t condemn their people… There is one religion in the world that kills you when you disagree with them and they say ‘look, we are a religion of peace and if you disagree we’ll f**king cut your head off, and nobody calls them on it — there are very few people that will call them on it. It’s like if Dad is a violent drunk and beats his kids, you don’t blame the kid because he set Dad off. You blame Dad because he’s a violent drunk.[30]
When South Park got threatened last week by Islamists … it served or should serve, as a reminder to all of us that our culture isn’t just different than one that makes death threats to cartoonists, it’s better. Because when I make a joke about the Pope, he doesn’t send one of the Swiss Guards in their striped pantaloons to stick a pike in my ass. When I make a Jewish joke, Rabbis may kvetch about it, but they don’t pull out a scimitar and threaten an adult circumcision. … it should in fairness be noted, that in speaking of Muslims, we realize that of course the vast majority are law abiding, loving people, who just want to be left alone to subjugate their women in peace. … but the western world needs to make it clear, some things about our culture are not negotiable, and can’t change, and one of them is freedom of speech. Separation of church and state is another, not negotiable. Women are allowed to work here and you can’t beat them, not negotiable. This is how we roll. And this is why our system is better.[31]

Blaise Pascal[edit]

Blaise Pascal (1623 – 1662) was a French mathematician, physicist, inventor, writer and Catholic philosopher.

Mahomet established a religion by putting his enemies to death; Jesus Christ by commanding his followers to lay down their lives

Carey Cash[edit]

Rev. Carey Cash is a US Navy chaplain currently assigned to Camp David, the U.S. presidential retreat. He is often referred to as “President Obama’s pastor”.

[Islam] from its very birth has used the edge of the sword as a means to convert or conquer those with different religious convictions.[32]
Sadly, grace is often absent in Islam, which is based upon binding religious law, requiring strenuous adherence to every tenet of the ‘Five Pillars of Allah’… A religion that emerges from the soil of strict adherence to law as a means of gaining God’s favour will always tend toward extreme selfsacrifice.[32]

Carl Jung[edit]

Carl Gustav Jung (1875 – 1961) was the Swiss founder of analytical psychology. He created some of the best known psychological concepts and his work has been influential in psychiatry and in the study of religion, literature, and related fields.

We do not know whether Hitler is going to found a new Islam. He is already on the way; he is like Muhammad. The emotion in Germany is Islamic; warlike and Islamic. They are all drunk with a wild god.[33]

Charles-Louis Montesquieu[edit]

Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu (1689 – 1755), was a French social commentator and political thinker.

It is a misfortune to human nature, when religion is given by a conqueror. The Mahometan religion, which speaks only by the sword, acts still upon men with that destructive spirit with which it was founded.[34]

Christopher Hitchens[edit]

Christopher Eric Hitchens (1949 – 2011) was an English-American author and journalist. His books, essays, and journalistic career have spanned more than four decades, making him a public intellectual, and a staple of talk shows and lecture circuits. He has been a columnist and literary critic at The Atlantic, Vanity Fair, Slate, World Affairs, The Nation, Free Inquiry, and a variety of other media outlets.

Islam in its origins is just as shady and approximate as those from which it took its borrowings. It makes immense claims for itself, invokes prostrate submission or “surrender” as a maxim to its adherents, and demands deference and respect from nonbelievers into the bargain. There is nothing—absolutely nothing—in its teachings that can even begin to justify such arrogance and presumption.[35]
If the Qur’an was the word of God, it had been dictated on a very bad day.[36]
“Some of what people are saying in this mosque controversy is very similar to what German media was saying about Jews in the 1920s and 1930s,” Imam Abdullah Antepli, Muslim chaplain at Duke University, told the New York Times. Yes, we all recall the Jewish suicide bombers of that period, as we recall the Jewish yells for holy war, the Jewish demands for the veiling of women and the stoning of homosexuals, and the Jewish burning of newspapers that published cartoons they did not like. What is needed from the supporters of this very confident faith is more self-criticism and less self-pity and self-righteousness.[37]

Christopher Marlowe[edit]

Christopher Marlowe (1564 – 1593) was an English poet and translator of the Elizabethan era, who also rivalled Shakespeare as the most powerful dramatist of the Elizabethan period.

Tamburlaine: Now, Casane, where’s the Turkish Alcoran,And all the heaps of superstitious books Found in the temples of that Mahomet Whom I have thought a god? they shall be burnt.

Usumcasane: Here they are, my lord.

Tamburlaine: Well said! let there be a fire presently.

[They light a fire.]

In vain, I see, men worship Mahomet: My sword hath sent millions of Turks to hell, Slew all his priests, his kinsmen, and his friends, And yet I live untouch’d by Mahomet. There is a God, full of revenging wrath, }From whom the thunder and the lightning breaks, Whose scourge I am, and him will I obey. So, Casane; fling them in the fire.—

[They burn the books.]

Now, Mahomet, if thou have any power, Come down thyself and work a miracle: Thou art not worthy to be worshipped That suffer’st flames of fire to burn the writ Wherein the sum of thy religion rests: Why send’st thou not a furious whirlwind down, To blow thy Alcoran up to thy throne, Where men report thou sitt’st by God himself? Or vengeance on the head of Tamburlaine That shakes his sword against thy majesty, And spurns the abstracts of thy foolish laws?— Well, soldiers, Mahomet remains in hell; He cannot hear the voice of Tamburlaine: Seek out another godhead to adore; The God that sits in heaven, if any god,

For he is God alone, and none but he.

Dante Alighieri[edit]

Dante Alighieri (1265 – 1321), also known as “the Supreme Poet”, was an Italian poet. His Divine Comedy is often considered the greatest literary work ever composed in the Italian language and a masterpiece of world literature. Below is Dante’s description of Muhammad and Ali in Hell.

And one his limb transpierced, and one lopped off, should show, it would be nothing to compare with the disgusting mode of the ninth Bolgia. A cask by losing centre-piece or cant was never shattered so, as I saw one rent from the chin to where one breaketh wind. Between his legs were hanging down his entrails; his heart was visible, and the dismal sack that maketh excrement of what is eaten. While I was all absorbed in seeing him, he looked at me, and opened with his hands his bosom, saying: “See now how I rend me; How mutilated, see, is Mahomet; in front of me doth Ali weeping go, cleft in the face from forelock unto chin; and all the others whom thou here beholdest, disseminators of scandal and of schism while living were, and therefore are cleft thus.[38]

David Cook[edit]

David B. Cook is a religious scholar and author from Rice University in Houston with a focus on Islamic history and Muslim apocalyptic literature.

There is no lack of evidence concerning the Muslim practice of jihad. The classical and modern works on the subject are voluminous, and they are documented by an examination of Muslim actions as recorded by historians. There can be no reasonable doubt that jihad is a major theme running through the entirety of Muslim civilization and is at least one of the major factors in the astounding success of the faith of Islam.[39]
In reading Muslim literature — both contemporary and classical — one can see that the evidence for the primacy of spiritual jihad is negligible. Today it is certain that no Muslim, writing in a non-Western language (such as Arabic, Persian, Urdu), would ever make claims that jihad is primarily nonviolent or has been superseded by the spiritual jihad. Such claims are made solely by Western scholars, primarily those who study Sufism and/or work in interfaith dialogue, and by Muslim apologists who are trying to present Islam in the most innocuous manner possible.[40]
…after surveying the evidence from classical until contemporary times, one must conclude that today’s jihad movements are as legitimate as any that have ever existed in classical Islam… In short, although the actions of many of these groups may disgust many Muslims, as far as their conduct of jihad, they fall within the limits set by classical and contemporary Muslim law.[41]

David Hume[edit]

David Hume (1711 – 1776) was a Scottish philosopher and historian, regarded as one of the most important figures in the history of Western philosophy and the Scottish Enlightenment.

The admirers and followers of the Alcoran insist on the excellent moral precepts interspersed through that wild and absurd performance. But it is to be supposed, that the Arabic words, which correspond to the English, equity, justice, temperance, meekness, charity were such as, from the constant use of that tongue, must always be taken in a good sense; and it would have argued the greatest ignorance, not of morals, but of language, to have mentioned them with any epithets, besides those of applause and approbation. But would we know, whether the pretended prophet had really attained a just sentiment of morals? Let us attend to his narration; and we shall soon find, that he bestows praise on such instances of treachery, inhumanity, cruelty, revenge, bigotry, as are utterly incompatible with civilized society. No steady rule of right seems there to be attended to; and every action is blamed or praised, so far only as it is beneficial or hurtful to the true believers.[42]

David Samuel Margoliouth[edit]

David Samuel Margoliouth (1858 – 1940) was an orientalist who was described as a brilliant editor and translator of Arabic works. He was briefly active as a priest in the Church of England. He was Laudian Professor of Arabic at the University of Oxford from 1889 to 1937.

In order to gain his ends he [Muhammad] recoils from no expedient, and he approves of similar unscrupulousness on the part of his adherents, when exercised in his interest. He profits to the utmost from the chivalry of the Meccans, but rarely requites it with the like. He organizes assassinations and wholesale massacres.

His career as tyrant of Medina is that of a robber chief, whose political economy consists in securing and dividing plunder … He is himself an unbridled libertine and encourages the same passion in his followers. For whatever he does he is prepared to plead the express authorization of the deity. It is, however, impossible to find any doctrine which he is not prepared to abandon in order to secure a political end…This is a disagreeable picture for the founder of a religion, and it cannot be pleaded that it is a picture drawn by an enemy…[43][44]

Dayanand Saraswati[edit]

Maharishi Dayanand Saraswati (1824-1883) was an Indian Sage who is considered to be the most important Hindu religious leader of his time.

Having thus given a cursory view of the Quran, I lay it before the sensible persons with the purpose that they should know what kind of book the Quran is. If they ask me, I have no hesitation to say that it can not be the work either of God or of a learned man, nor can it be a book of knowledge. Here its very vital defect has been exposed with the object that the people may not waste their life falling into its imposition… The Quran is the result of ignorance, the source of animalization of human being, a fruitful cause of destroying peace, an incentive to war, a propagator of hostility among men and a promoter of suffering in society. As to defect of repetition, the Quran is its store.[45]

Doctrina Jacobi[edit]

The Doctrina Jacobi (or ‘Teaching of Jacob’), is a 7th century Greek Christian polemical tract written sometime between 634-640 AD. The text provides one of the earliest external accounts of Islam.

When the candidatus was killed by the Saracens, I was at Caesarea and I set off by boat to Sykamina. People were saying “the candidatus has been killed,” and we Jews were overjoyed. And they were saying that the prophet had appeared, coming with the Saracens, and that he was proclaiming the advent of the anointed one, the Christ who was to come. I, having arrived at Sykamina, stopped by a certain old man well-versed in scriptures, and I said to him: “What can you tell me about the prophet who has appeared with the Saracens?” He replied, groaning deeply: “He is false, for the prophets do not come armed with a sword. Truly they are works of anarchy being committed today and I fear that the first Christ to come, whom the Christians worship, was the one sent by God and we instead are preparing to receive the Antichrist. Indeed, Isaiah said that the Jews would retain a perverted and hardened heart until all the earth should be devastated. But you go, master Abraham, and find out about the prophet who has appeared.” So I, Abraham, inquired and heard from those who had met him that there was no truth to be found in the so-called prophet, only the shedding of men’s blood. He says also that he has the keys of paradise, which is incredible.[46]

Edward Freeman[edit]

Edward Augustus Freeman (1823 – 1892) was an English historian, architectural artist, liberal politician during the late-19th-century heyday of William Gladstone, and a one-time candidate for Parliament.

[Islam] is essentially an obstructive, intolerant system, supplying just sufficient good to stand in the way of greater good. It has consecrated despotism; it has consecrated polygamy; it has consecrated slavery. It has declared war against every other creed; it has claimed to be at least dominant in every land… When it ceases to have an enemy to contend against, it sinks into sluggish stupidity… It must have an enemy; if cut off, like Persia, from conflict with the infidel, it finds its substitute in sectarian hatred of brother Moslems… By [only] slightly reforming, it has perpetuated and sanctified all the evils of the eastern world. It has, by its aggressive tenets, brought them into more direct antagonism with the creed and civilization of the west.[47]

Edward Gibbon[edit]

Edward Gibbon (1737 – 1794) was an English historian and Member of Parliament. His most important work, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, is known for the quality and irony of its prose, its use of primary sources.

In the spirit of enthusiasm or vanity, the prophet [Muhammad] rests the truth of his mission on the merit of his book; audaciously challenges both men and angels to imitate the beauties of a single page; and presumes to assert that God alone could dictate this incomparable performance. This argument is most powerfully addressed to a devout Arabian, whose mind is attuned to faith and rapture; whose ear is delighted by the music of sounds; and whose ignorance is incapable of comparing the productions of human genius… If the composition of the Koran exceed the faculties of a man to what superior intelligence should we ascribe the Iliad of Homer, or the Philippics of Demosthenes?[48]
Al Jannabi (Gagmer, tom. iii. p. 487) records his own testimony that he surpassed all men in conjugal vigour; and Abulfeda mentions the exclamation of Ali, who washed his body after his death, “O propheta, certe penis tuus cælum versus erectus est” [“O prophet, thy penis is erect unto the sky!”] (in Vit. Mohammed. p. 140).[49]
Instead of a perpetual and perfect measure of the divine will, the fragments of the Koran were produced at the discretion of Mahomet; each revelation is suited to the emergencies of his policy or passion; and all contradiction is removed by the saving maxim, that any text of Scripture is abrogated or modified by any subsequent passage.[48]

Edward William Lane[edit]

Edward William Lane (1801 — 1876) was a British Orientalist, translator and lexicographer. Lane’s Arabic-English Lexicon remains the world’s most revered and scholarly dictionary of the Arabic language.

The tax that is taken from the free non-Muslim subjects of a Muslim government whereby they ratify the compact that assures them protection, as though it were compensation for not being slain[50]

Emeka Ojukwu[edit]

Emeka Ojukwu (1933 – 2011) was the only president of the short lived Republic of Biafra.

The Biafran struggle is, on another plane, a resistance to the Arab-Muslim expansionism which has menaced and ravaged the African continent for twelve centuries. As early as the first quarter of the seventh century, the Arabs, a people from the Near-East, evolved Islam not just as a religion but as a cover for their insatiable territorial ambitions. By the tenth century they had overrun and occupied, among other places, Egypt and North Africa. Had they stopped there, we would not today be faced with the wicked and unholy collusion we are fighting against. On the contrary, they cast their hungry and envious eyes across the Sahara on to the land of the Negroes.Our Biafran ancestors remained immune from the Islamic contagion. From the middle years of the last century Christianity was established in our land. In this way we came to be a predominantly Christian people. We came to stand out as a non-Muslim island in a raging Islamic sea. Throughout the period of the ill-fated Nigerian experiment, the Muslims hoped to infiltrate Biafra by peaceful means and quiet propaganda, but failed. Then the late Ahmadu Bello, the Sarduana of Sokoto tried, by political and economic blackmail and terrorism, to convert Biafrans settled in Northern Nigeria to Islam. His hope was that these Biafrans on dispersion would then carry Islam to Biafra, and by so doing give the religion political control of the area. The crises which agitated the so-called independent Nigeria from 1962 gave these aggressive proselytisers the chance to try converting us by force.

It is now evident why the fanatic Arab-Muslim states like Algeria, Egypt and the Sudan have come out openly and massively to support and aid Nigeria in her present war of genocide against us. These states see militant Arabism as a powerful instrument for attaining power in the world.

Biafra is one of the few African states untainted by Islam. Therefore, to militant Arabism, Biafra is a stumbling block to their plan for controlling the whole continent. This control is fast becoming manifest in the Organisation of African Unity. On the question of the Middle East, the Sudanese crisis, in the war between Nigeria and Biafra, militant Arabism has succeeded in imposing its point of view through blackmail and bluster. It has threatened African leaders and governments with inciting their Muslim minorities to rebellion if the governments adopted an independent line on these questions. In this way an O.A.U that has not felt itself able to discuss the genocide in the Sudan and Biafra, an O.A.U. that has again and again advertised its ineptitude as a peace-maker, has rushed into open condemnation of Israel over the Middle East dispute. Indeed in recent times, by its performance, the O.A.U. might well be an Organisation of Arab Unity.[51]

Frank Miller[edit]

Frank Miller (born January 27, 1957) is an American comic book artist, writer and film director. He is often regarded as one of the greatest comic artists of all time.

We’re constantly told all cultures are equal, and every belief system is as good as the next. And generally that America was to be known for its flaws rather than its virtues. When you think about what Americans accomplished, building these amazing cities, and all the good its done in the world, it’s kind of disheartening to hear so much hatred of America, not just from abroad, but internally… For some reason, nobody seems to be talking about who we’re up against, and the sixth century barbarism that they actually represent. These people saw people’s heads off. They enslave women, they genitally mutilate their daughters, they do not behave by any cultural norms that are sensible to us. I’m speaking into a microphone that never could have been a product of their culture, and I’m living in a city where three thousand of my neighbors were killed by thieves of airplanes they never could have built.[52][53]

Frank Zappa[edit]

Frank Vincent Zappa (1940 – 1993) was a critically acclaimed musician, songwriter, composer, recording engineer, record producer, and film director. He was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and received the Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award.

Let’s say we have to make some ‘show of force.’ The most common scenarios involve small guerilla or terrorist groups. Nuclear retaliation? It has been suggested by others that Aerosol Pork Grenades would be a better deterrent — Islamic martyrs are denied entrance to heaven if they show up at the gate smelling like a pig. Denial of The Big Payoff removes a certain cachet from acts of voluntary self-destruction.[54]

Gene Simmons[edit]

Gene Simmons (born August 25, 1949) is an American rock bass guitarist, singer-songwriter, record producer, entrepreneur and actor. He is the bass guitarist/co-lead vocalist of the legendary rock band Kiss.

This is a vile culture and if you think for a second that it’s willing to just live in the sands of God’s armpit, you’ve got another thing coming… They want to come and live right where you live and they think that you’re evil. Extremism believes that it’s okay to strap bombs onto your children and send them to paradise and whatever else and to behead people… Your dog, however, can walk side by side, your dog is allowed to have its own dog house… You can send your dog to school to learn tricks, sit, beg, do all that stuff – none of the women have that advantage.[55]

George Bernard Shaw[edit]

George Bernard Shaw (1856 – 1950) was an Irish playwright and a co-founder of the London School of Economics. He is the only person to have been awarded both a Nobel Prize for Literature (1925) and an Oscar (1938).

Islam is very different, being ferociously intolerant. What I may call Manifold Monotheism becomes in the minds of very simple folk an absurdly polytheistic idolatry, just as European peasants not only worship Saints and the Virgin as Gods, but will fight fanatically for their faith in the ugly little black doll who is the Virgin of their own Church against the black doll of the next village. When the Arabs had run this sort of idolatry to such extremes [that] they did this without black dolls and worshipped any stone that looked funny, Mahomet rose up at the risk of his life and insulted the stones shockingly, declaring that there is only one God, Allah, the glorious, the great… And there was to be no nonsense about toleration. You accepted Allah or you had your throat cut by someone who did accept him, and who went to Paradise for having sent you to Hell.[56]

George S. Patton[edit]

George Smith Patton, Jr. (1885 – 1945 AD) was a United States Army officer most famous for his leadership commanding corps and armies as a general in World War II.

To me it seems certain that the fatalistic teachings of Muhammad and the utter degradation of women is the outstanding cause for the arrested development of the Arab. He is exactly as he was around the year 700, while we have kept on developing.[57]

G. H. Bousquet[edit]

G. H. Bousquet was a great 20th century scholar of Islamic law.

Islam first came before the world as a doubly totalitarian system. It claimed to impose itself on the whole world and it claimed also, by the divinely appointed Muhammadan law, by the principles of the fiqh, to regulate down to the smallest details the whole life of the Islamic community and of every individual believer. … [T]he study of Muhammadan law (dry and forbidding though it may appear to those who confine themselves to the indispensable study of the fiqh) is of great importance to the world today.[58]

Gerd Puin[edit]

Gerd Rüdiger Puin (born 1940) is a German scholar and one of the world’s leading authorities on Qur’anic historical orthography, the study and scholarly interpretation of ancient manuscripts. He is also specialist in Arabic paleography. He was a lecturer based at Saarland University, in Saarbrücken Germany.

The Qur’an claims for itself that it is ‘mubeen,’ or clear, but if you just look at it, you will see that every fifth sentence or so simply doesn’t make sense. Many Muslims will tell you otherwise, but the fact is that a fifth of the Qur’an is just incomprehensible. This is what has caused the traditional anxiety regarding translation. If the Qur’an is not comprehensible, if it can’t even be understood in Arabic, then it’s not translatable into any language. That is why Muslims are afraid.

G. K. Chesterton[edit]

Gilbert Keith Chesterton (1874 – 1936) was an English writer. His prolific and diverse output included philosophy, ontology, poetry, play writing, journalism, public lecturing and debating, biography, Christian apologetics, fantasy and detective fiction.

There is in Islam a paradox which is perhaps a permanent menace. The great creed born in the desert creates a kind of ecstasy of the very emptiness of its own land, and even, one may say, out of the emptiness of its own theology… A void is made in the heart of Islam which has to be filled up again and again by a mere repetition of the revolution that founded it. There are no sacraments; the only thing that can happen is a sort of apocalypse, as unique as the end of the world; so the apocalypse can only be repeated and the world end again and again. There are no priests; and yet this equality can only breed a multitude if lawless prophets almost as numerous as priests. The very dogma that there is only one Mahomet produces an endless procession of Mahomets.[59]

Haran Gawaitha[edit]

The Haran Gawaitha is a Mandaean text written during the 7th to 9th century and contains some of the earliest non-Muslim references to Muhammad.

I will tell you, (O ye) priests who live in the Arab age, (of that which occurred) before the Son-of-Slaughter, the Arab, went out and prophesied as a prophet in the world so that they performed circumcision like Jews and changed sayings – for he is the most degraded of false prophets. Mars accompanieth him because he is the Seal of prophets of the Lie, (although) the Messiah will appear after him at the end of the age! I will inform you, Nasoraeans, that before the Son-of-Slaughter, the Arab, emerged and was called prophet in the world and Mars descended with him, he drew the sword and converted people to himself by the sword
. . .
And so a Hardabaean (Sasanian) dynasty ruled for three hun- dred and sixty years , and then the Son of Slaughter, the Arab, set up as king, went forth and took a people to himself and performed circumcision. (Even then), after this had happened and these events had taken place, sixty banners (still) remained and pertained to me in Baghdad. Then he took the sword and put to the sword from the city of Damascus unto Bit Dubar, which is called Bdin . He governed it all and ruled over the lord of the hill-country of the Persians who are called Hardbaeans and took away sovereignty from them.

Then, when this had taken place, in time there came (one) Anus’, called the son of Danqa, from the uplands of the Arsaiia [from (to?) the city of Baghdad bis’us’ kings of the planting of Artabanus, and brought in his own, belonging to Muhammad son of ‘Abdallah son-of-Slaughter, the Arab…[60]

Jacques Ellul[edit]

Jacques Ellul (1912 – 1994) was a French philosopher, law professor, sociologist, lay theologian, and Christian anarchist.

In a major encyclopedia, one reads phrases such as: “Islam expanded in the eighth or ninth centuries …”; “This or that country passed into Muslim hands…” But care is taken not to say how Islam expanded, howcountries “passed into [Muslim] hands.” .. Indeed, it would seem as if events happened by themselves, through a miraculous or amicable operation… Regarding this expansion, little is said about jihad. And yet it all happened through war!
…the jihad is an institution. and not an event, that is to say it is a part of the normal functioning of the Muslim world… The conquered populations change status (they become dhimmis), and the shari’a tends to be put into effect integrally, overthrowing the former law of the country. The conquered territories do not simply change “owners.”[61]

Joe A[edit]

Joe A is a British pornography producer notable for his focus on the “Indian” or “Asian” niche market.

Many of the [South Asian] girls I meet are interested in working with me [in porn] but are worried about their family finding out. The strangest thing is, most of my models have been Muslims, who are the strictest of all.[62]

John Adams[edit]

John Adams (1735 – 1826) was an American Founding Father and the second President of the United States (1797–1801). The following is taken from the preface of the Qur’an owned by him:

This book is a long conference of God, the angels, and Mahomet, which that false prophet very grossly invented; sometimes he introduceth God, who speaketh to him, and teacheth him his law, then an angel, among the prophets, and frequently maketh God to speak in the plural. … Thou wilt wonder that such absurdities have infected the best part of the world, and wilt avouch, that the knowledge of what is contained in this book, will render that law contemptible …[63]

John Calvin[edit]

John Calvin (1509 – 1564) was an influential French theologian and pastor during the Protestant Reformation, and a principal figure in the development of Calvinism. Originally trained as a humanist lawyer, he broke from the Roman Catholic Church around 1530.

For even if many men once boasted that they worshipped the Supreme Majesty, the Maker of heaven and earth, yet because they had no Mediator it was not possible for them truly to taste God’s mercy, and thus be persuaded that he was their Father. Accordingly, because they did not hold Christ as their Head, they possessed only a fleeting knowledge of God. From this it also came about that they at last lapsed into crass and foul superstitions and betrayed their own ignorance. So today the [Muslim] Turks, although they proclaim at the top of their lungs that the Creator of heaven and earth is God, still, while repudiating Christ, substitute an idol in place of the true God.[64]

John R. Newman[edit]

John R. Newman is an historian of religions who specializes in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism. His research focuses on the Vajrayana Buddhist Kalachakra Tantra (“Wheel of Time system of mysticism”) tradition.

We may summarize the Kalacakra tantra’s perception of Islamic beliefs and practices as follows: from the Buddhist point of view Islam is demonic and perverse, a perfect anti-religion which is the antithesis of Buddhism.[65]

John Quincy Adams[edit]

John Quincy Adams (1767 – 1848) was the sixth President of the United States. He was also an American diplomat and served in both the Senate and House of Representatives.

…he [Muhammad] declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind…The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God.[66]
In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar [i.e., Muhammad], the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth. Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE [Adam’s capital letters]….Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant…While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men.[67]
As the essential principle of his faith is the subjugation of others by the sword; it is only by force, that his false doctrines can be dispelled, and his power annihilated. They [The Russians] have been from time immemorial, in a state of almost perpetual war with the Tatars, and with their successors, the Ottoman conquerors of Constantinople. It were an idle waste of time to trace the causes of each renewal of hostilities, during a succession of several centuries. The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force. Of Mahometan good faith, we have had memorable examples ourselves. When our gallant [Stephen] Decatur ref had chastised the pirate of Algiers, till he was ready to renounce his claim of tribute from the United States, he signed a treaty to that effect: but the treaty was drawn up in the Arabic language, as well as in our own; and our negotiators, unacquainted with the language of the Koran, signed the copies of the treaty, in both languages, not imagining that there was any difference between them. Within a year the Dey demands, under penalty of the renewal of the war, an indemnity in money for the frigate taken by Decatur; our Consul demands the foundation of this pretension; and the Arabic copy of the treaty, signed by himself is produced, with an article stipulating the indemnity, foisted into it, in direct opposition to the treaty as it had been concluded. The arrival of Chauncey, with a squadron before Algiers, silenced the fraudulent claim of the Dey, and he signed a new treaty in which it was abandoned; but he disdained to conceal his intentions; my power, said he, has been wrested from my hands; draw ye the treaty at your pleasure, and I will sign it; but beware of the moment, when I shall recover my power, for with that moment, your treaty shall be waste paper. He avowed what they always practised, and would without scruple have practised himself. Such is the spirit, which governs the hearts of men, to whom treachery and violence are taught as principles of religion.[68]
Had it been possible for a sincere and honest peace to be maintained between the Osmanli and his christian neighbors, then would have been the time to establish it in good faith. But the treaty was no sooner made than broken. It never was carried into effect by the Turkish government.[69]
[From the Ottoman Reis Effendi, to his Russian counterparts] ‘The present friendly letter has been composed and sent, to acquaint your excel­lency. with the circumstance; when you shall learn, on receipt of it, that the Sublime Porte has at all times; no other desire or wish than to preserve peace, and good understanding ; and that the event in question has been brought about, entirely by the act of the said minister, we hope that you will endeavor, do every occasion, to fulfil the duties of friendship.’ But precisely at the time when this mild, and candid, and gently expostulary epistle was despatched for St. Petersburg, another state paper was issued, addressed by the Sultan to his own subjects-this was the Hatti Sheriff of the 20th of December, sent to the Pashas of all the provinces, calling on all the faithful Mussulmen of the empire to come forth and ‘fight for their religion, and their country, against the infidel despisers of the Prophet. The comparison of these two documents with each other, will afford the most perfect illustration of the Ottoman faith, as well as of their temper towards Russia.The Hatti Sheriff commenced with the following admirable com­mentary upon the friendly profession, which introduced the letter to count Nesselrode. ‘It is well known (said the Sultan) to almost every person, that if the Mussulmen naturally hate the infidels, the infidels, on then part, are the enemies of the Mussulmen : that Russia, more espe­cially, bears a particular hatred to Islamism, and that she is the principal enemy of the Sublime Porte.’

This appeal to the natural hatred of the Mussulmen towards the infidels, is in just accordance with the precepts of the Koran. The document does not attempt to disguise it, nor even pretend that the enmity of those whom it styles the infidels, is any other than the ne­cessary consequence of the hatred borne by the Mussulmen to them—the paragraph itself, is a forcible example of the contrasted character of the two religions. The funda­mental doctrine of the christian religion, is the extirpation of hatred from the human heart. It forbids the exercise of it, even towards enemies. There is no denomina­tion of christians, which denies or misunderstands this doctrine. All understand it alike—all acknow­ledge its obligations ; and however imperfectly, in the purposes of Divine Providence, its efficacy has been shown in the practice of christians, it has not been wholly inoperative upon them. Its effect has been upon the manners of nations. It has mitigated the horrors of war – it has softened the features of slavery – it has humanized the intercourse of social life. The unqualified acknowledgement of a duty does not, indeed, suffice to insure its performance. Hatred is yet a passion, but too powerful upon the hearts of christians. Yet they cannot indulge it, except by the sacrifice of their principles, and the conscious violation of their duties. No state paper from a Christian hand, could, without trampling the precepts of its Lord and Master, have commenced by an open proclamation of hatred to any portion of the human race. The Ottoman lays it down as the foundation of his discourse.[70]

If ever insurrection was holy in the eyes of God, such was that of the Greeks against their Mahometan oppressors. Yet for six long years, they were suffered to be overwhelmed by the whole mass of the Ottoman power; cheered only by the sympathies of all the civilized world, but without a finger raised to sustain or relieve them by the Christian governments of Europe; while the sword of extermination, instinct with the spirit of the Koran, was passing in merciless horror over the classical regions of Greece, the birth-place of philosophy, of poetry, of eloquence, of all the arts that embellish, and all the sciences that dignify the human character. The monarchs of Austria, of France, and England, inflexibly persisted in seeing in the Greeks, only revolted subjects against a lawful sovereign. The ferocious Turk eagerly seized upon this absurd concession, and while sweeping with his besom of destruction over the Grecian provinces, answered every insinuation of interest in behalf of that suffering people, by assertions of the unqualified rights of sovereignty, and by triumphantly retorting upon the legitimates of Europe, the consequences naturally flowing from their own perverted maxims.”[71]
This pretended discovery of a plot between Russia and the Greeks, is introduced, to preface an exulting reference to the unhallowed butchery of the Greek Patriarch and Priests, on Easter day of 1822, at Constantinople, and to the merciless desolation of Greece, which it calls ‘doing justice by the sword’ to a great number of rebels of the Morea, of Negropont, of Acarnania, Missolonghi, Athens, and other parts of the continent.The document acknowledges, that although during several years, considerable forces, both naval and military, had been sent against the Greeks, they had not succeeded in suppressing the insurrection.[72]

John Wesley[edit]

John Wesley (1703 – 1791), was a theologian and founder of the English Methodist movement.

Let us now calmly and impartially consider what manner of men the Mahometans in general are.6. An ingenious writer, who a few years ago published a pompous translation of the Koran, takes great pains to give us a very favourable opinion both of Mahomet and his followers. But he cannot wash the Ethiop white. After all, men who have but a moderate share of reason, cannot but observe in his Koran, even as polished by Mr. Sale, the most gross and impious absurdities. To cite particulars is not now my business. It may suffice to observe in general, that human understanding must be debased to an inconceivable degree, in those who can swallow such absurdities as divinely revealed. And yet we know the Mahometans not only condemn all who cannot swallow them to everlasting fire; not only appropriate to themselves the title of Mussulman or True Believers: but even anathematise with the utmost bitterness, and adjudge to eternal destruction, all their brethren of the sect of Mi, all who contend for a figurative interpretation of them.

That these men then have no knowledge or love of God is undeniably manifest, not only from their gross, horrible notions of him, but from their not loving their brethren. But they have not always so weighty a cause to hate and murder one another, as difference of opinion. Mahometans will butcher each other by thousands, without so plausible a plea as this. Why is it that such numbers of Turks and Persians have stabbed one another in cool blood ? Truly, because they differ in the manner of dressing their head. The Ottoman vehemently maintains, (for he has unquestionable tradition on his side) that a Mussulman should wear a round turban. Whereas the Persian insists upon his liberty of conscience, and will wear it picked before. So, for this wonderful reason, when a more plausible one is wanting, they beat out each other’s brains from generation to generation.

It is not therefore strange, that ever since the religion of Mahomet appeared in the world, the espousers of it, particularly those under the Turkish emperor, have been as wolves and tigers to all other nations ; rending and tearing all that fell into their merciless paws, and grinding them with their iron teeth: that numberless cities are rased from the foundation, and only their name remaining : that many countries which were once as the garden of God, are. now a desolate wilderness; and that so many once numerous and powerful nations are vanished away from the earth ! Such was, and is at this day, the rage, the fury, the revenge, of these destroyers of humankind![73]

Jonathan Edwards[edit]

Jonathan Edwards (1703 – 1758) was a preacher, theologian, and missionary to Native Americans. Edwards “is widely acknowledged to be America’s most important and original philosophical theologian,” and one of America’s greatest intellectuals.

By the false prophet [in Revelation 16:13], is sometimes meant the Pope and his clergy; but here an eye seems to be had to Mahomet, whom his followers call the great prophet of God.[74]

Louis Bertrand[edit]

Louis Bertrand (1866 – 1941) was a French novelist, historian and essayist. He was the third member elected to occupy seat 4 of the Académie française in 1925.

Arabs have never invented anything except Islam… they have made absolutely no addition to the ancient heritage of Greco-Latin civilization.

It is only a superficial knowledge that has been able to accept without critical examination the belief current among Christians during the Middle Ages, which attributed to Islam the Greek science and philosophy of which Christianity had no longer any knowledge. In the centuries that have followed, the Sectarian spirit has found it to be to its interest to confirm and propagate this error. In its hatred of Christianity it has had to give Islam the honour of what was the invention, and, if we may so express it, the personal property of our intellectual ancestors.[10]

On the influence of Islam on Christian Europe:

The worst characteristic which the Spaniards acquired was the parasitism of the Arabs and the nomad Africans: the custom of living off one’s neighbour’s territory, the raid raised to the level of an institution, marauding and brigandage recognized as the sole means of existence for the man-at-arms. In the same way they went to win their bread in Moorish territory, so the Spaniards later went to win gold and territory in Mexico and Peru.They were to introduce there, too, the barbarous, summary practices of the Arabs: putting everything to fire and sword, cutting down fruit-trees, razing crops, devastating whole districts to starve out the enemy and bring them to terms; making slaves everywhere, condemning the population of the conquered countries to forced labour. All these detestable ways the conquistadores learnt from the Arabs.

For several centuries slavery maintained itself in Christian Spain, as in the Islamic lands. Very certainly, also, it was to the Arabs that the Spaniards owed the intransigence of their fanaticism, the pretension to be, if not the chosen of God, at least the most Catholic nation of Christendom. Philip II, like Abd er Rahman or El Mansour, was Defender of the Faith.

Finally, it was not without contagion that the Spaniards lived for centuries in contact with a race of men who crucified their enemies and gloried in piling up thousands of severed heads by way of trophies. The cruelty of the Arabs and the Berbers also founded a school in the Peninsula. The ferocity of the emirs and the caliphs who killed their brothers or their sons with their own hands was to be handed on to Pedro the Cruel and Henry of Trastamare, those stranglers under canvas, no better than common assassins.[75]

Maimonides[edit]

Moses ben-Maimon called Maimonides (1135 – 1204) was a preeminent medieval Jewish philosopher and one of the greatest Torah scholars and physicians of the Middle Ages.

After arose the Madman [Muhammad] who emulated his precursor [Jesus], since he paved the way for him. But he added the further objective of procuring rule and submission and he invented what is well known [Islam].[76]
Let Ye understand, my brothers, the Holy One Blessed HE through the trap created by our iniquities cast us amongst this nation, the people of Ishmael [Muslim Arabs] whose oppressiveness is firmly upon us and they connive to do us wrong and despicably downgrade us as the Almighty decreed against us (Deuteronomy 32:31, “Your enemies shall judge you”).
There never came against Israel a more antagonistic nation. They oppress us with the most oppressive measures to lessen our number, reduce us, and make us as despicable as they themselves are. King David, may he rest in peace, saw through Divine Inspiration all the calamities that were destined to come upon Israel. Nevertheless [even though he saw all the other troubles], he still began to shout out and lament in the name of the whole nation against the oppression that would be occasioned by the Ishmaelites. David said, “Woe is me, that I sojourn in Mesech, that I dwell in the tents of Kedar!” [Psalms 120:5].

Notice how David emphasizes “Kedar” out of all the other Children of Ishmael. This is because that Mad Man [Muhammad] came from Kedar according to what has been published concerning his geneaology.[77]

Manuel II Palaiologos[edit]

Manuel II Palaiologos or Palaeologus (1350 – 1425) was the Byzantine emperor from 1391 to 1425.

Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.[78]

Mark Twain[edit]

Samuel Langhorne Clemens (1835 – 1910), well known by his pen name Mark Twain, was an American author and humorist. Twain is noted for his novels Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, which has been called “the Great American Novel”, and The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. He is extensively quoted, and was a friend to presidents, artists, industrialists, and European royalty.

That is a simple rule, and easy to remember. When I, a thoughtful and unblessed Presbyterian, examine the Koran, I know that beyond any question every Mohammedan is insane; not in all things, but in religious matters.[79]

Michael Cook[edit]

Michael Cook (born in 1940) is the Cleveland E. Dodge Professor of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University. He is widely considered “among the most outstanding scholars on the history of Islam”, and is the author of several classic works on Muhammad and early Islamic theology.

Shortly after 9/11, there was a book published called How Did This Happen? that included an essay by Karen Armstrong in which she said a world religion has been hijacked by this band of fanatics. I don’t buy that for a minute.[80]

Michael H. Hart[edit]

Michael H. Hart (born April 28, 1932 in New York City) is a Jewish American astrophysicist who has also written three books on history and controversial articles on a variety of subjects. Muhammad’s success as a warlord and conqueror were one of Hart’s biggest reasons for placing him as the most influential person in history.

Muhammad (unlike Jesus) was a secular as well as a religious leader. In fact, as the driving force behind the Arab conquests, he may well rank as the most influential political leader of all time. Of many important historical events, one might say that they were inevitable and would have occurred even without the particular political leader who guided them. For example, the South American colonies would probably have won their independence from Spain even if Simon Bolivar had never lived. But this cannot be said of the Arab conquests. Nothing similar had occurred before Muhammad, and there is no reason to believe that the conquests would have been achieved without him. The only comparable conquests in human history are those of the Mongols in the thirteenth century, which were primarily due to the influence of Genghis Khan.[81]

Muhammad Sven Kalisch[edit]

Muhammad Sven Kalisch is a Professor at Münster University, one of Germany’s oldest and most respected universities. In 2004 he went on to become Germany’s first ever professor of Islamic theology.

I said to myself: You’ve dealt with Christianity and Judaism but what about your own religion? Can you take it for granted that Muhammad existed? … The more I read, the historical person at the root of the whole thing became more and more improbable.[82]
With regard to the historical existence of Muhammad … I consider my position simply as a continuation of the most recent research results. It appears so spectacular only because it has been said by a Muslim … Most Western scientists turn down such an hypotheses out of respect for Islam or because they are afraid of the reactions of their Muslim friends or because they think it is speculative nonsense… My position with regard to the historical existence of Muhammad is that I believe neither his existence nor his non-existence can be proven. I, however, lean towards the non-existence but I don’t think it can be proven. It is my impression that, unless there are some sensational archeological discoveries — an Islamic “Qumran” or “Nag Hammadi” — the question of Muhammad’s existence will probably never be finally clarified.[83]

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk[edit]

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (1881 – 1938) was a Turkish army officer, revolutionary statesman, writer, and founder of the Republic of Turkey as well as its first president.

Turks were a great nation even before they adopted Islam. This religion did not help the Arabs, Iranians, Egyptians and others to unite with Turks to form a nation. Conversely, it weakened the Turks’ national relations; it numbed Turkish national feelings and enthusiasm. This was natural, because Mohammedanism was based on Arab nationalism above all nationalities.[84]
For nearly five hundred years, these rules and theories of an Arab Shaikh and the interpretations of generations of lazy and good-for-nothing priests have decided the civil and criminal law of Turkey. They have decided the form of the Constitution, the details of the lives of each Turk, his food, his hours of rising and sleeping the shape of his clothes, the routine of the midwife who produced his children, what he learned in his schools, his customs, his thoughts-even his most intimate habits. Islam – this theology of an immoral Arab – is a dead thing. Possibly it might have suited tribes in the desert. It is no good for modern, progressive state. God’s revelation! There is no God! These are only the chains by which the priests and bad rulers bound the people down. A ruler who needs religion is a weakling. No weaklings should rule.[85]
Our life here is truly hellish. Fortunately, my soldiers are very brave and tougher than the enemy. What is more, their private beliefs make it easier to carry out orders which send them to their death. They see only two supernatural outcomes: victory for the faith or martyrdom. Do you know what the second means? It is to go straight to heaven. There, the houris, God’s most beautiful women, will meet them and will satisfy their desires for all eternity. What great happiness![86]

Omar Khayyám[edit]

Omar Khayyám (1048 – 1131 AD), was a Persian polymath, mathematician, philosopher, astronomer, physician, and poet. He wrote treatises on mechanics, geography, and music.

Allah, perchance, the secret word might spell;
If Allah be, He keeps His secret well;
What He hath hidden, who shall hope to find?
Shall God His secret to a maggot tell?

The Koran! well, come put me to the test—
Lovely old book in hideous error drest—
Believe me, I can quote the Koran too,
The unbeliever knows his Koran best.

And do you think that unto such as you,
A maggot-minded, starved, fanatic crew,
God gave the secret, and denied it me?—
Well, well, what matters it! believe that too.[87]

Oriana Fallaci[edit]

Oriana Fallaci (1929 – 2006) was an Italian journalist, author, and political interviewer. A former partisan during World War II, she had a long and successful journalistic career, interviewing many internationally known leaders and celebrities.

Europe is no longer Europe, it is Eurabia, a colony of Islam, where the Islamic invasion does not proceed only in a physical sense, but also in a mental and cultural sense… I am an atheist, and if an atheist and a pope think the same things, there must be something true. There must be some human truth that is beyond religion… I am disgusted by the anti-Semitism of many Italians, of many Europeans… Look at the school system of the West today. Students do not know history! They don’t know who Churchill was! In Italy, they don’t even know who Cavour was!… Servility to the invaders has poisoned democracy, with obvious consequences for the freedom of thought, and for the concept itself of liberty… State-run television stations contribute to the resurgent anti-Semitism, crying only over Palestinian deaths while playing down Israeli deaths, glossing over them in unwilling tones… The increased presence of Muslims in Italy and in Europe is directly proportional to our loss of freedom… The Muslims refuse our culture and try to impose their culture on us. I reject them, and this is not only my duty toward my culture-it is toward my values, my principles, my civilization… The struggle for freedom does not include the submission to a religion which, like the Muslim religion, wants to annihilate other religions… The West reveals a hatred of itself, which is strange and can only be considered pathological; it now sees only what is deplorable and destructive… These charlatans care about the Palestinians as much as I care about the charlatans. That is not at all… When I was given the news, I laughed. The trial is nothing else but a demonstration that everything I’ve written is true… President Bush has said, ‘We refuse to live in fear.’ Beautiful sentence, very beautiful. I loved it! But inexact, Mr. President, because the West does live in fear. People are afraid to speak against the Islamic world. Afraid to offend, and to be punished for offending, the sons of Allah. You can insult the Christians, the Buddhists, the Hindus, the Jews. You can slander the Catholics, you can spit on the Madonna and Jesus Christ. But, woe betide the citizen who pronounces a word against the Islamic religion.[88]
The problem is that the solution does not depend upon the death of Osama bin Laden. Because the Osama bin Ladens are too many, by now: as cloned as the sheep of our research laboratories. In fact, the best trained and the more intelligent do not stay in the Muslim countries… They stay in our own countries, in our cities, our universities, our business companies. They have excellent bonds with our churches, our banks, our televisions, our radios, our newspapers, our publishers, our academic organizations, our unions, our political parties. Worse, they live in the heart of a society that hosts them without questioning their differences, without checking their bad intentions, without penalizing their sullen fanaticism.[88]
To make you cry I’ll tell you about the twelve young impure men I saw executed at Dacca at the end of the Bangladesh war. They executed them on the field of Dacca stadium, with bayonet blows to the torso or abdomen, in the presence of twenty thousand faithful who applauded in the name of God from the bleachers. They thundered “Allah akbar, Allah akbar.” Yes, I know: the ancient Romans, those ancient Romans of whom my culture is so proud, entertained themselves in the Coliseum by watching the deaths of Christians fed to the lions. I know, I know: in every country of Europe the Christians, those Christians whose contribution to the History of Thought I recognize despite my atheism, entertained themselves by watching the burning of heretics. But a lot of time has passed since then, we have become a little more civilized, and even the sons of Allah ought to have figured out by now that certain things are just not done. After the twelve impure young men they killed a little boy who had thrown himself at the executioners to save his brother who had been condemned to death. They smashed his head with their combat boots. And if you don’t believe it, well, reread my report or the reports of the French and German journalists who, horrified as I was, were there with me. Or better: look at the photographs that one of them took. Anyway this isn’t even what I want to underline. It’s that, at the conclusion of the slaughter, the twenty thousand faithful (many of whom were women) left the bleachers and went down on the field. Not as a disorganized mob, no. In an orderly manner, with solemnity. They slowly formed a line and, again in the name of God, walked over the cadavers. All the while thundering Allah–akbar, Allah–akbar. They destroyed them like the Twin Towers of New York. They reduced them to a bleeding carpet of smashed bones.[89]
I am not speaking, obviously, to the laughing hyenas who enjoy seeing images of the wreckage and snicker good–it–serves–the–Americans–right. I am speaking to those who, though not stupid or evil, are wallowing in prudence and doubt. And to them I say: “Wake up, people. Wake up!!” Intimidated as you are by your fear of going against the current—that is, appearing racist (a word which is entirely inapt as we are speaking not about a race but about a religion)—you don’t understand or don’t want to understand that a reverse–Crusade is in progress. Accustomed as you are to the double–cross, blinded as you are by myopia, you don’t understand or don’t want to understand that a war of religion is in progress. Desired and declared by a fringe of that religion, perhaps, but a war of religion nonetheless. A war which they call Jihad. Holy War. A war that might not seek to conquer our territory, but that certainly seeks to conquer our souls. That seeks the disappearance of our freedom and our civilization. That seeks to annihilate our way of living and dying, our way of praying or not praying, our way of eating and drinking and dressing and entertaining and informing ourselves. You don’t understand or don’t want to understand that if we don’t oppose them, if we don’t defend ourselves, if we don’t fight, the Jihad will win. And it will destroy the world that for better or worse we’ve managed to build, to change, to improve, to render a little more intelligent, that is to say, less bigoted—or even not bigoted at all. And with that it will destroy our culture, our art, our science, our morals, our values, our pleasures…Christ! Don’t you realize that the Osama Bin Ladens feel authorized to kill you and your children because you drink wine or beer, because you don’t wear your beard long or a chador, because you go to the theater or the movies, because you listen to music and sing pop songs, because you dance in discos or at home, because you watch TV, wear miniskirts or short–shorts, because you go naked or half naked to the beach or the pool, because you *** when you want and where you want and who you want? Don’t you even care about that, you fools? I am an atheist, thank God. And I have no intention of letting myself be killed for it.[89]

Penn Jillette[edit]

Penn Fraser Jillette (born March 5, 1955) is an American illusionist, comedian, musician, and best-selling author known for his work with fellow magician Teller in the team Penn & Teller.

People have to realize that having an imaginary friend may be dangerous. When 9/11 hit, the second thing I said to myself was, “This really is what religious people do.” Those people flying the plane were very good, very pious, truly faithful believers. There’s no other way to paint them. Of course, they are extremists by definition, but they certainly aren’t going against Islam in any real way.[90]
… we haven’t tackled Islam because we have families […] and I think the worst thing you can say about a group in a free society is that you’re afraid to talk about it—I can’t think of anything more horrific. […] Teller and I have been brutal to Christians, and their response shows that they’re good f**king Americans who believe in freedom of speech. We attack them all the time, and we still get letters that say, “We appreciate your passion. Sincerely yours, in Christ.” Christians come to our show at the Rio and give us Bibles all the time. They’re incredibly kind to us …[91]

Rabindranath Tagore[edit]

Rabindranath Tagore (1861 – 1941) was a Bengali polymath who reshaped his region’s literature and music. The composer of both the national anthem of India as well as the national anthem of Bangladesh, he became the first non-European to win the Nobel Prize in Literature.

A very important factor which is making it almost impossible for Hindu-Muslim unity to become an accomplished fact is that the Muslim can not confine their patriotism to any one country. I had frankly asked the Muslims whether in the event of any Mohammedan power invading India, would they [Muslims] stand side by side with their Hindu neighbors to defend their common land or join the invaders. I was not satisfied with the reply I have obtained from them… Even such a man as Mr. Mohammed Ali has declared that under no circumstances is it permissible for any Mohammedan, whatever be his country, to stand against any Mohammedan.[92]

Richard Dawkins[edit]

Clinton Richard Dawkins (born March 26, 1941), is a British ethologist, evolutionary biologist and popular science author. He was formerly Professor for Public Understanding of Science at Oxford and was a fellow of New College, Oxford.

Islam deserves criticism on account of the logical consequences of its dogma, namely, that the murder of fellow human beings is to be rewarded with sensual pleasure in a hedonistic “Paradise”—a concept born in the fantasies of an Arab rebel some fourteen centuries ago. The religion of Mohammed is a dangerous system when the teachings and example of the “prophet” are believed and followed.
I’m reasonably optimistic in America and Europe. I’m pessimistic about the Islamic world. I regard Islam as one of the great evils in the world, and I fear that we have a very difficult struggle there.[Why is it more problematic than Christianity, for instance?]

There’s a belief that every word of the Quran is literally true, and there’s a kind of close-mindedness there, which is, I think, less present in the former Christendom. Perhaps because we’ve had long- I don’t know quite why, but there’s more of a historical tradition of questioning.

There are people in the Islamic world who simply say: “Islam is right!”,”We are going to impose our will” and there’s an asymmetry. I think in a way we are being too nice. I think that it’s possible to be naively over optimistic – and if you reach out to people who have absolutely no intention of reaching back to you, then you may be disillusioned.[93]

I do feel visceral revulsion at the burka because for me it is a symbol of the oppression of women.[94]
It’s almost impossible to say anything against Islam in this country, because you are accused of being racist or Islamophobic.[94]
Every person I met believes if there is any disagreement between the Koran and science, then the Koran wins. It’s just utterly deplorable. These are now British children who are having their minds stuffed with alien rubbish. Occasionally, my colleagues lecturing in universities lament having undergraduate students walk out of their classes when they talk about evolution. This is almost entirely Muslims.[95]

Robert Redeker[edit]

Robert Redeker is a philosophy teacher and writer for Le Figaro.

The exaltation of violence; a merciless war chief, plunderer, slaughterer of Jews and a polygamist, such is the man revealed through the Koran… Turning to Mahomet, by contradiction, reinforces hate and violence. Jesus is a master of love, Mahomet is a master of hatred… The stoning of Satan, each year at Mecca, is not just a superstitious phenomenon. It not only sets the scene for a rabble flirting with barbarity. Its scope is anthropological. Here in effect is a rite, which each Muslim is invited to submit himself to, emphasizing violence as a sacred duty in the heart of the believer. This stoning, annually accompanied with deaths by trampling of the faithful, sometimes in several hundreds, is a ritual which nurtures archaic violence. Instead of getting rid of this archaic violence… Islam builds a nest for this violence, where it can grow in the warmth… Islam is a religion which, even in its sacred text, as well as in its banal rites, exalts violence and hate… Hate and violence inhabit the book with which each Muslim is educated, the Koran.[96]

After the article Mr. Redeker received numerous death threads and had to go in to hiding under police protection.

What is happening to me corresponds fully to what I denounce in my writing — the West is under ideological surveillance by Islam… I have the impression that I’ve been drafted against my will into a conflict from the 17th or 18th century. It’s all about opposing religious intolerance.

Rory Bremner[edit]

Roderick “Rory” Keith Ogilvy Bremner, FKC (born April 6, 1961) is a Scottish impressionist, playwright and award-winning comedian, noted for his work in political satire and impressions of prominent British politicians.

When [I’m] writing a sketch about Islam, I’m writing a line and I think, ‘If this goes down badly, I’m writing my own death warrant there.’ Because there are people who will say, ‘Not only do I not think that’s funny but I’m going to kill you’ – and that’s chilling… If you’re a Danish cartoonist and you work in a Western tradition, people don’t take that too seriously. Suddenly you’re confronted by a group of people who are fundamentalist and extreme and they say, ‘We’re going to kill you because of what you have said or drawn.’ Where does satire go from there, because we like to be brave but not foolish.[97]

Salman Rushdie[edit]

Sir Ahmed Salman Rushdie (born June 19, 1947) is a British-Indian novelist and essayist. He achieved notability with his second novel, Midnight’s Children (1981), which won the Booker Prize in 1981.

Of course this is “about Islam.” The question is, what exactly does that mean? After all, most religious belief isn’t very theological. Most Muslims are not profound Koranic analysts. For a vast number of “believing” Muslim men, “Islam” stands, in a jumbled, half-examined way, not only for the fear of God — the fear more than the love, one suspects — but also for a cluster of customs, opinions and prejudices that include their dietary practices; the sequestration or near-sequestration of “their” women; the sermons delivered by their mullahs of choice; a loathing of modern society in general, riddled as it is with music, godlessness and sex; and a more particularized loathing (and fear) of the prospect that their own immediate surroundings could be taken over — “Westoxicated” — by the liberal Western-style way of life.[98]
The pope gets ridiculed every day, but you don’t see Catholics organizing terrorist attacks around the world.[99]
If Woody Allen were a Muslim, he’d be dead by now.[100]

Salomon Reinach[edit]

Salomon Reinach (1858 – 1932) was a French archaeologist, who made valuable archaeological discoveries at Myrina near Smyrna in 1880-82, at Cyme in 1881, at Thasos, Imbros and Lesbos (1882), at Carthage and Meninx (1883-84), at Odessa (1893) and elsewhere. He received honours from the chief learned societies of Europe.

From the literary point of view, the Koran has little merit. Declamation, repetition, puerility, a lack of logic and coherence strike the unprepared reader at every turn. It is humiliating to the human intellect to think that this mediocre literature has been the subject of innumerable commentaries, and that millions of men are still wasting time absorbing it.[101]

Sam Harris[edit]

Sam Harris, Ph.D (born 1967) is an American non-fiction writer, CEO, and winner of the prestigeous PEN Martha Albrand Award (2005).

Anyone familiar with my work knows that I am extremely critical of all religious faiths. I have argued elsewhere that the ascendancy of Christian conservatism in American politics should terrify and embarrass us. And yet, there are gradations to the evil that is done in name of God, and these gradations must be honestly observed. So let us now make sense of the impossible by acknowledging the obvious: there is a direct link between the doctrine of Islam and Muslim terrorism. Acknowledging this link remains especially taboo among political liberals.
. . .
While the other major world religions have been fertile sources of intolerance, it is clear that the doctrine of Islam poses unique problems for the emergence of a global civilization. The world, from the point of view of Islam, is divided into the “House of Islam” and the “House of War,” and this latter designation should indicate how Muslims believe their differences with those who do not share their faith will be ultimately resolved. While there are undoubtedly some moderate Muslims who have decided to overlook the irrescindable militancy of their religion, Islam is undeniably a religion of conquest. The only future devout Muslims can envisage—as Muslims—is one in which all infidels have been converted to Islam, politically subjugated, or killed. The tenets of Islam simply do not admit of anything but a temporary sharing of power with the “enemies of God.” Devout Muslims can have no doubt about the reality of Paradise or about the efficacy of martyrdom as a means of getting there. Nor can they question the wisdom and reasonableness of killing people for what amount to theological grievances. In Islam, it is the moderate who is left to split hairs, because the basic thrust of the doctrine is undeniable: convert, subjugate, or kill unbelievers; kill apostates; and conquer the world.[102]
Islam, more than any other religion human beings have devised, has all the makings of a thoroughgoing cult of death.
As a matter of doctrine, the Muslim conception of tolerance is one in which non-Muslims have been politically and economically subdued, converted, or put to sword.
Yes, the Bible contains its own sadistic lunacy—but the above [Qur’an] quotations [taken from The End of Faith, pp. 117-123] can be fairly said to convey the central message of the Qur’an—and of Islam at nearly every moment in its history. The Qur’an does not contain anything like a Sermon on the Mount. Nor is it a vast and self-contradictory book like the Old Testament, in which whole sections (like Leviticus and Deuteronomy) can be easily ignored and forgotten. The result is a unified message of triumphalism, otherworldliness, and religious hatred that has become a problem for the entire world. And the world still waits for moderate Muslims to speak honestly about it.[103]
The penalty for apostasy is death. We would do well to linger over this fact for a moment, because it is the black pearl of intolerance that no liberal exegesis will ever fully digest.
As a source of objective morality, the Bible is one of the worst books we have. It might be the very worst, in fact—if we didn’t also happen to have the Qur’an.[104]
There is no such thing as Islamophobia. Bigotry and racism exist, of course—and they are evils that all well-intentioned people must oppose. And prejudice against Muslims or Arabs, purely because of the accident of their birth, is despicable. But like all religions, Islam is a system of ideas and practices. And it is not a form of bigotry or racism to observe that the specific tenets of the faith pose a special threat to civil society. Nor is it a sign of intolerance to notice when people are simply not being honest about what they and their co-religionists believe.[105]

Sibel Kekilli[edit]

Sibel Kekilli (born 16 June 1980) is a German actress of Turkish background. For her performances, she was awarded twice with the most prestigious German movie award, the Lola, and she also received the Best Actress award at Turkey’s most important national film festival.

I have experienced myself that physical and psychological violence is seen as normal in Muslim families. Unfortunately violence belongs to the culture in Islam.[106]

Simon Ockley[edit]

Simon Ockley (1678 – 1720) was chosen Adams Professor of Arabic at Cambridge University in 1711. He was educated at Queens’ College, Cambridge, and graduated B.A. in 1697, MA. in 1701, and B.D. in 1710.

An Arabian author cited by Maracci,[107] says that Abubeker was very averse to the giving him his daughter [Ayesha, who was then but seven years old] so young, but that Mohammed pretended a divine command for it; whereupon he sent her to him with a basket of dates, and when the girl was alone with him, he stretched out his blessed hand (these are the author’s words), and rudely took hold of her clothes; upon which she looked fiercely at him, and said, “People call you the faithful man,[108] but your behaviour to me shows you are a perfidious one.” And with these words she got out of his hands, and, composing her clothes, went and complained to her father. The old gentleman, to calm her resentment, told her she was new betrothed to Mohammed, and that made him take liberties with her, as if she had been his wife.[109]

Speros Vryonis Jr.[edit]

Speros Vryonis Jr. (born 1928) is an American author and historian of Greek descent and a specialist in Greek and Byzantine history. He is professor emeritus of history at UCLA, the former Director of the Speros Basil Vryonis Center for the Study of Hellenism and is currently the AHIF Senior Fellow for Hellenism and for Greek and Turkish Studies.

The process itself is described in its essential details by the Georgian chronicle for northeast Asia Minor and the adjoining Georgian regions. The process which it describes was not unique to the northeast, for we see it in the west and the south of Asia Minor as well..‘The emirs spread out, like locusts, over the face of the land…The countries of Asis-Phorni, Clardjeth, up to the shores of the sea, Chawcheth, Adchara, Samtzkhe, Karthli, Argoueth, Samokalako, and Dchqondid were filled with Turks who pillaged and enslaved all the inhabitants. In a single day they burned Kouthathis, Artanoudj, and hermitages of Clardjeth, and they remained in these lands until the first snows, devouring the land, massacring all those who had fled to the forests to the rocks, to the caves…The calamities of Christianity did not come to an end soon thereafter, for at the approach of spring, the Turks returned to carry out the same ravages and left [again] in the winter. The [inhabitants] however were unable to plant or to harvest. The land, [thus] delivered to slavery, had only animals of the forests and wild beasts for inhabitants. Karthli was in the grip of intolerable calamities such as one cannot compare to a single devastation or combination of evils of past times. The holy churches served as stables for their horses, the sanctuaries of the Lord served as repairs for the abominations [Islam]. Some of the priests were immolated during the Holy communion itself, and others were carried off into harsh slavery without regard to their old age. The virgins were defiled, the youths circumcised, and the infants taken away. The conflagration, extending its ravages, consumed all the inhabited sites, the rivers, instead of water, flowed blood. I shall apply the sad words of Jeremiah, which he applied so well to such situations: “the honorable children of Zion, never put to the rest by misfortunes, now voyaged as slaves on foreign roads. The streets of Zion now wept because there was no one [left] to celebrate the feasts. The tender mothers, in place of preparing with their hands the nourishment of the sons, were themselves nourished from the corpses of these dearly loved. Such and worse was the situation at the time.’…

By the time [of the late 11th and early 12th centuries, i.e. (1083-1125)]…the nomads had effected permanent settlement in these regions, moving into the abandoned and devastated areas with their tents, families, and flocks of livestock.[110]

Stephen Harper[edit]

Stephen Joseph Harper PC MP (born April 30, 1959) is the 22nd and current Prime Minister of Canada.

When people think of Islamic terrorism, they think of Afghanistan, or maybe they think of some place in the Middle East, but the truth is that threat exists all over the world … There are a number of threats on a number of levels, but if you are talking about terrorism it is Islamicism … There are other threats out there, but that is the one that I can tell you occupies the security apparatus most regularly in terms of actual terrorist threats … homegrown [Islamic] terrorism is something we keep an eye on.[111][112]

Theodore Roosevelt[edit]

Theodore “Teddy” Roosevelt (1858 – 1919) was the 26th President of the United States (1901 – 1909). Historians typically rank Roosevelt among the top five American presidents of all time.[113][114]

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, an on up to and including the seventeenth century, had not possessed a military equality 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. Wherever the Mohammedans have had complete sway, wherever the Christians have been unable to resist them by the sword, Christianity has ultimately disappeared. From the hammer of Charles Martel to the sword of Sobieski, Christianity owed its safety in Europe to the fact that it was able to show that it could and would fight as well as the Mohammedan aggressor… The civilization of Europe, American and Australia exists today at all only because of the victories of civilized man over the enemies of civilization because of victories through the centuries from Charles Martel in the eighth century and those of John Sobieski in the seventeenth century. During the thousand years that included the careers of the Frankish soldier and the Polish king, the Christians of Asia and Africa proved unable to wage successful war with the Moslem conquerors; and in consequence Christianity practically vanished from the two continents; and today, nobody can find in them any “social values” whatever, in the sense in which we use the words, so far as the sphere of Mohammedan influences are concerned. There are such “social values” today in Europe, America and Australia only because during those thousand years, the Christians of Europe possessed the warlike power to do what the Christians of Asia and Africa had failed to do — that is, to beat back the Moslem invader.[115]

Theodor Nöldeke[edit]

Theodor Nöldeke (1836 – 1930) was a celebrated German Semitic scholar, who in 1859 won the prize of the French Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres for his “History of the Qur’an”.

On the whole, while many parts of the Koran undoubtedly have considerable rhetorical power, even over an unbelieving reader, the book, aesthetically considered, is by no means a first-rate performance… Muhammad, in short, is not in any sense a master of style. This opinion will be endorsed by any European who reads through the book with an impartial spirit and some knowledge of the language, without taking into account the tiresome effect of its endless iterations. But in the ears of every pious Muslim such a judgment will sound almost as shocking as downright atheism or polytheism. Among the Muslims, the Koran has always been looked upon as the most perfect model of style and language. This feature of it is in their dogmatic the greatest of all miracles, the incontestable proof of its divine origin. Such a view on the part of men who knew Arabic infinitely better than the most accomplished European Arabist will ever do, may well startle us. In fact, the Koran boldly challenged its opponents to produce ten suras, or even a single one, like those of the sacred book, and they never did so. That, to be sure, on calm reflection, is not so very surprising. Revelations of the kind which Muhammad uttered, no unbeliever could produce without making himself a laughingstock.[116]

Thomas Aquinas[edit]

Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225 – 1274), an immensely influential philosopher and theologian.

On the other hand, those who founded sects committed to erroneous doctrines proceeded in a way that is opposite to this, The point is clear in the case of Muhammad. He seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh goads us. His teaching also contained precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom. Indeed, the truths that he taught he mingled with many fables and with doctrines of the greatest falsity. He did not bring forth any signs produced in a supernatural way, which alone fittingly gives witness to divine inspiration; for a visible action that can be only divine reveals an invisibly inspired teacher of truth. On the contrary, Muhammad said that he was sent in the power of his arms—which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants. What is more, no wise men, men trained in things divine and human, believed in him from the beginning, Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Muhammad forced others to become his followers by the violence of his arms. Nor do divine pronouncements on the part of preceding prophets offer him any witness. On the contrary, he perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments by making them into fabrications of his own, as can be. seen by anyone who examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid his followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him of falsity. It is thus clear that those who place any faith in his words believe foolishly.[117]

Thomas Carlyle[edit]

Thomas Carlyle (1795 – 1881) was a Scottish satirical writer, essayist, historian and teacher during the Victorian era.

… I must say, it [the Koran] is as toilsome reading as I ever undertook. A wearisome confused jumble, crude, incondite; endless iterations, long-windedness, entanglement; most crude, incondite; — insupportable stupidity, in short! Nothing but a sense of duty could carry any European through the Koran … It is the confused ferment of a great rude human soul; rude, untutored, that cannot even read; but fervent, earnest, struggling vehemently to utter itself in words … We said “stupid:” yet natural stupidity is by no means the character of Mahomet’s Book; it is natural uncultivation rather. The man has not studied speaking; in the haste and pressure of continual fighting, has not time to mature himself into fit speech … The man was an uncultured semi-barbarous Son of Nature, much of the Bedouin still clinging to him: we must take him for that. But for a wretched Simulacrum, a hungry Impostor without eyes or heart … we will not and cannot take him. Sincerity, in all senses, seems to me the merit of the Koran; what had rendered it precious to the wild Arab men … Curiously, through these incondite masses of tradition, vituperation, complaint, ejaculation in the Koran, a vein of true direct insight, of what we might almost call poetry, is found straggling.[118]

Thomas Jefferson[edit]

Thomas Jefferson (1743 – 1826) was the third President of the United States, and the principal author of the Declaration of Independence. Jefferson was one of the most influential Founding Fathers, known for his promotion of the ideals of republicanism in the United States.

In reference to the Islamic slave trade of Americans and Europeans by the Barbary states, Jefferson asked Tripoli’s envoy to London, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman, by what right he extorted money and took slaves in this way. He answered:

The ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.[119][120]

Jefferson later went to war with the Barbary states.

Tony Blair[edit]

Tony Blair (born 6 May 1953) is a Labour Party politician who served as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1997 to 2007. He led Labour to a landslide victory in 1997. The party went on to win two more elections under his leadership, in 2001 and 2005.

There is not a problem with Islam… But there is a problem within Islam, and we have to put it on the table and be honest about it. There are, of course, Christian extremists and Jewish, Buddhist, and Hindu ones. But I am afraid that the problematic strain within Islam is not the province of a few extremists. It has at its heart a view of religion – and of the relationship between religion and politics – that is not compatible with pluralistic, liberal, open-minded societies. At the extreme end of the spectrum are terrorists, but the worldview goes deeper and wider than it is comfortable for us to admit. So, by and large, we don’t admit it. This has two effects. First, those who hold extreme views believe that we are weak, and that gives them strength. Second, those Muslims – and the good news is that there are many – who know the problem exists, and want to do something about it, lose heart.[121]

Turan Dursun[edit]

Turan Dursun (1934 – 4 September 1990) was a Turkish Islamic scholar and writer. He was also formerly the Mufti of Sivas, before becoming an atheist and his eventual assassination.[122][123]

So many people can’t live their childhood properly because of him [Muhammad]. So many people are sufferers of his disasters. So many people know what’s right as wrong and what’s wrong as right because they think the darkness that he chose exists. Human emotions and human creations haven’t progressed in many ways, because of him.[122]
… if there is a God, he’s not Mohammed’s.[122]

Urban II[edit]

Pope Blessed Urban II (ca. 1035 – 29 July 1099), born Otho de Lagery (alternatively: Otto, Odo or Eudes), was Pope from 12 March 1088 until his death on 29 July 1099. Regarding the first Crusade:

Freshly quickened by the divine correction, you must apply the strength of your righteousness to another matter which concerns you as well as God. For your brethren who live in the east are in urgent need of your help, and you must hasten to give them the aid which has often been promised them. For, as the most of you have heard, the Turks and Arabs [Muslims] have attacked them and have conquered the territory of Romania [the Greek empire] as far west as the shore of the Mediterranean and the Hellespont, which is called the Arm of St. George. They have occupied more and more of the lands of those Christians, and have overcome them in seven battles. They have killed and captured many, and have destroyed the churches and devastated the empire. If you permit them to continue thus for awhile with impurity, the faithful of God will be much more widely attacked by them. On this account I, or rather the Lord, beseech you as Christ’s heralds to publish this everywhere and to persuade all people of whatever rank, foot-soldiers and knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends.[124]

Voltaire (François-Marie Arouet)[edit]

François-Marie Arouet (1694 – 1778), better known by the pen name Voltaire, was a French Enlightenment writer and philosopher famous for his wit and for his advocacy of civil liberties, including freedom of religion and free trade.

But that a camel-merchant [Muhammad] should stir up insurrection in his village; that in league with some miserable followers he persuades them that he talks with the angel Gabriel; that he boasts of having been carried to heaven, where he received in part this unintelligible book, each page of which makes common sense shudder; that, to pay homage to this book, he delivers his country to iron and flame; that he cuts the throats of fathers and kidnaps daughters; that he gives to the defeated the choice of his religion or death: this is assuredly nothing any man can excuse, at least if he was not born a Turk, or if superstition has not extinguished all natural light in him.[125]
Most blessed Father [Pope Benedict XIV]— Your holiness will pardon the liberty taken by one of the lowest of the faithful, though a zealous admirer of virtue, of submitting to the head of the true religion this performance [“Fanaticism, or Mahomet”], written in opposition to the founder of a false and barbarous sect. To whom could I with more propriety inscribe a satire on the cruelty and errors of a false prophet, than to the vicar and representative of a God of truth and mercy? Your holiness will therefore give me leave to lay at your feet both the piece and the author of it, and humbly to request your protection of the one, and your benediction upon the other; in hopes of which, with the profoundest reverence, I kiss your sacred feet.[126]

Will Durant[edit]

William James Durant (1885 – 1981) was a prolific American writer, historian, and philosopher. The Story of Philosophy, written in 1926, has been described as a groundbreaking work that helped to popularize philosophy.

The Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex of order and freedom, culture and peace, can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.[127]

William Ewart Gladstone[edit]

William Ewart Gladstone (1809 – 1898) was a British Liberal statesman. He served as Prime Minister four separate times (1868–1874, 1880–1885, February–July 1886 and 1892–1894), more than any other person.

Qur’an… an accursed book… So long as there is this book there will be no peace in the world.[128]

William Hay[edit]

William Hay was formerly the Professor of Oceanography at the University of Colorado, USA. He is notable for having been quote-mined and misrepresented since the 1980’s by Muslim apologists making claims of scientific Qur’an “miracles”.

Interviewer: A Qur’an which has got claims for scientific miracles in, and you’re listed in the back. And it says for that part, “And when he was asked about the source of the Qur’an, he replied, ‘Well, I would think it must be the divine being.’” So are you saying that that is a misrepresentation?

William Hay: That’s a misrepresentation. There’s no question about that. … Most of them [alleged scientific miracles in the Qur’an] are things that I would think that if God wanted to make a great revelation, these are not things that I would have expected, because they are all readily absurd.[129]

William Montgomery Watt[edit]

William Montgomery Watt (1909 – 2006) was a Scottish historian, an Emeritus Professor in Arabic and Islamic Studies at the University of Edinburgh. Watt was one of the foremost non-Muslim interpreters of Islam in the West, was an enormously influential scholar in the field of Islamic studies and a much-revered name for many Muslims all over the world.[130]

Aisha was still a child when Muhammad married her, and she continued to play with her toys.[131]
There is some evidence that, besides his regular marriages and his unions with concubines, Muhammad had relations with women in accordance with the older matrilineal customs.[131]
In connexion with the other verse Aisha is said to have made the remark “God is in hurry to satisfy your desires”. Even if she really said this (and it is not a later invention), it would only show that Aisha was suspicious of the correspondence between the revelation and Muhammad’s desires.[131]
Firstly, at one time, Muhammad must have publicly recited the Satanic verses as part of the Quran; it is unthinkable that the story could have been invented later by Muslims or foisted upon them by non-Muslims. Secondly, at some later time Muhammad announced that these verses were not really part of the Quran and should be replaced by others of a vastly different import.[132]

William Muir[edit]

Sir William Muir, KCSI (1819 – 1905) was a Scottish historian and writer specialising in the history of the time of Muhammad and the early caliphate.

The sword of Mahomet, and the Coran, are the most fatal enemies of Civilization, Liberty, and Truth, which the world has yet known.[133]
Some, indeed, dream of an Islam in the future, rationalised and regenerate. All this has been tried already, and has miserably failed. The Koran has so encrusted the religion in a hard unyielding casement of ordinances and social laws, that if the shell be broken the life is gone. A rationalistic Islam would be Islam no longer. The contrast between our own faith and Islam is most remarkable. There are in our Scriptures living germs of truth, which accord with civil and religious liberty, and will expand with advancing civilisation. In Islam it is just the reverse. The Koran has no such teaching as with us has abolished polygamy, slavery, and arbitrary divorce, and has elevated woman to her proper place. As a Reformer, Mahomet did advance his people to a certain point, but as a Prophet he left them fixed immovably at that point for all time to come. The tree is of artificial planting. Instead of containing within itself the germ of growth and adaptation to the various requirements of time and clime and circumstance, expanding with the genial sunshine and rain from heaven, it remains the same forced and stunted thing as when first planted some twelve centuries ago.[134]

Winston Churchill[edit]

Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill (1874 – 1965) was a British politician known chiefly for his leadership of the United Kingdom during World War II. He is widely regarded as one of the great wartime leaders, and was voted the greatest Briton of all time.[135]

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity.

The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities – but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.[136][137]

Fanaticism is not a cause of war. It is the means which helps savage peoples to fight. It is the spirit which enables them to combine–the great common object before which all personal or tribal disputes become insignificant. What the horn is to the rhinoceros, what the sting is to the wasp, the Mohammedan faith was to the Arabs of the Soudan–a faculty of offence or defence.[138]
It is, thank heaven, difficult if not impossible for the modern European to fully appreciate the force which fanaticism exercises among an ignorant, warlike and Oriental population. Several generations have elapsed since the nations of the West have drawn the sword in religious controversy, and the evil memories of the gloomy past have soon faded in the strong, clear light of Rationalism and human sympathy. Indeed it is evident that Christianity, however degraded and distorted by cruelty and intolerance, must always exert a modifying influence on men’s passions, and protect them from the more violent forms of fanatical fever, as we are protected from smallpox by vaccination. But the Mahommedan religion increases, instead of lessening, the fury of intolerance. It was originally propagated by the sword, and ever since, its votaries have been subject, above the people of all other creeds, to this form of madness. In a moment the fruits of patient toil, the prospects of material prosperity, the fear of death itself, are flung aside. The more emotional Pathans are powerless to resist. All rational considerations are forgotten. Seizing their weapons, they become Ghazis–as dangerous and as sensible as mad dogs: fit only to be treated as such. While the more generous spirits among the tribesmen become convulsed in an ecstasy of religious bloodthirstiness, poorer and more material souls derive additional impulses from the influence of others, the hopes of plunder and the joy of fighting. Thus whole nations are roused to arms. Thus the Turks repel their enemies, the Arabs of the Soudan break the British squares, and the rising on the Indian frontier spreads far and wide. In each case civilisation is confronted with militant Mahommedanism. The forces of progress clash with those of reaction. The religion of blood and war is face to face with that of peace. Luckily the religion of peace is usually the better armed.[139][140]

Winston S. Churchill[edit]

Winston Spencer-Churchill (October 10, 1940 – March 2, 2010), generally known as Winston Churchill, was a British politician, and a grandson of former Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill.

At its most extreme, authoritarianism is exemplified by the isms of the 20th Century — Communism, Fascism and Nazism. The Fascists and Nazis were responsible for the deaths of more than 30 million human beings, while more than 50 million are estimated to have been murdered by Stalin and the Russian Communists, while Mao-Tse-Tung and the Chinese Communists are believed to have accounted for some 80 million.But today a new challenge — another ism — confronts us, and that is the challenge of Islamic fundamentalism. Extremist Islam has declared war on the rest of the world, as evidenced by their ruthless attacks across the globe — overwhelmingly targeted at innocent civilians. Beside the outrage of 9/11, the bombings in Madrid, in Bali, in London and, most recently, in Jordan come to mind.

Those who have declared jihad against the West, and Western values, such as freedom of speech, are doing all in their power to mobilize against us the large Muslim communities living in our midst… Unbelievably, Washington is urging Europe to admit Turkey to the EU. Were that to happen, the Muslim population of Europe would skyrocket to 100 million — an act, in my view, of consummate folly. Already Judeo-Christian Europe is under siege from a tidal wave of Islamic immigration. The admission of Turkey would hasten its demise… Intriguingly, the dangers of extremist Islam were foreseen by Winston Churchill all of 85 years ago, as I discovered to my amazement, while compiling my most recent book NEVER GIVE IN! The Best of Winston Churchill’s Speeches.

Churchill is, of course, well-known for his gift of prescience and, specifically, for being the first to warn of the menace of Hitler and Nazism as early as 1932, and of the Soviet threat in his famous Iron Curtain speech in 1946 in Fulton, Mo. But how many know that he also warned the world of the dangers of Islamic fundamentalism? I certainly did not![141]

Wole Soyinka[edit]

Akinwande Oluwole “Wole” Soyinka (born July 13, 1934) is a Nigerian writer, poet and playwright. In 1986, he became the first African to be awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature. In 1994, he was designated UNESCO Goodwill Ambassador for the promotion of African culture, human rights, freedom of expression, media and communication.

England is a cesspit. England is the breeding ground of fundamentalist Muslims. Its social logic is to allow all religions to preach openly. But this is illogic, because none of the other religions preach apocalyptic violence. And yet England allows it. Remember, that country was the breeding ground for communism, too. Karl Marx did all his work in libraries there.
. . .
We should assemble all those who are pure and cannot abide other faiths, put them all in rockets, and fire them into space.
. . .
A virus has attacked the world of sense and sensibility, and it has spread to Nigeria.
. . .

The assumption of power over life and death then passed to every single inconsequential Muslim in the world-as if someone had given them a new stature…Al Qaeda is the descendent of this phenomenon. The proselytization of Islam became vigorous after this. People went to Saudi Arabia. Madrassas were established everywhere.[142][143]

LETTER TO MY MEMBER OF FEDERAL PARLIAMENT

Posted in MIDDLE-EAST POLITICS with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on August 16, 2014 by drjgelb

Dear Kelly,

I hope this email finds you well.

No doubt, you have been appalled at the swift and horrific rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

The article attached herein is truly a timely warning that Western governments would be very foolish to ignore. The author, whom I have personally met, is a thoughtful, highly intelligent and scholarly researcher of Islam and provides his readers with evidence based opinion that is independently verifiable.

I hope that you have recognised, as have I, that the preferred approach of the Obama administration to Islamic imperialist aspirations has been to deny their existence, to order all references to “Islamic Extremism” and “Jihad” removed from Federal publications and to label terrorist attacks such as the Fort Hood shootings with euphamisms such as “workplace incident”.

The result has been the total failure to accurately assess the consequences of American policy in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Gaza, Israel and Iran. Former U.S. Intelligence leaders are extremely worried about U.S. foreign policy settings and are incredulous of Obama’s choice of Muslim Brotherhood linked advisors.

The attached document, published today in the online Mid-East Forum by Mark Durie, provides a well researched explanation for the behaviour of the Islamic State and warns that adherents of Islam are mandated by Islamic scriptures to treat non-Muslims in exactly the manner we are seeing today.

Furthermore, widespread theological illiteracy in the government and public alike, renders our community extremely vulnerable to the dissimulation of Islam perpetrated by the increasing number of Saudi sponsored chairs of Islamic Studies being established across Australia. With professors in these institutions being constantly quoted as the sole experts in Islamic jurisprudence, both public and government are extraordinarily vulnerable to the deliberate untruths favoured by Islam as an instrument to protect Islam’s real intentions. This strategy, formally named “Taqqiya”, appears to be a concept unknown to journalists, who accept false statements without any apparent fact checking. The ABC is a serious offender in this regard.

Please read the attached article and could I please come and talk with you about my concerns and ideas in respect of the increasing threat posed by the tens of thousands of Islamic militants currently volunteering amongst the murderers of the Islamic State, who are certain to return to their parent nations (thousands expected to return to Indonesia) with committed Jihadist intentions.

Kind Regards,

Jerry GELB

    How Dissimulation about Islam is Fuelling Genocide in the Middle East
    Middle East Forum 16/08/2014 12:09 am

    Tens of thousands of Yazidis have been driven from their homes in northern Iraq.
    In northern Iraq religious genocide is reaching end-game stage. Islamic State (IS) soldiers, reinforced with military equipment originally supplied by the US, are driving  back Kurdish defenders who had been protecting Christians and other religious minorities. While hundreds of thousands of refugees have been fleeing into Kurdistan, around 40,000 Yazidis and some Christians are trapped on Mount Sinjar, surrounded by IS jihadis. (Yazidis are Kurdish people whose pre-Christian faith derives from ancient Iranian religious traditions, with overlays and influences from other religions.)

    The Assyrian Aid Society of Iraq has reported that children and the elderly are dying of thirst on Sinjar. Parents are throwing their children to their deaths off the mountain rather than see them die of thirst or be taken into slavery  by IS. The IS jihadis are killing the men they capture. In one recent incident 1500 men were executed in front of their wives and families. In another incident 13 Yazidi men who refused to convert to Islam had their eyes plucked out, were doused with gasoline and burned alive. When the men are killed, captured women and children are enslaved to be used for sex, deployed as human shields in battle zones, or sold to be used and abused as their new owners see fit.

    The United States has ironically called for greater cooperation. UN Ambassador, Samantha Power, urged ‘all parties to the conflict’ to allow access to UN relief agencies. She called on Iraqis to ‘come together’ so that Iraq will ‘get back on the path to a peaceful future’ and ‘prevent ISIL from obliterating Iraq’s vibrant diversity’.

    Of course  it is not ‘vibrant diversity’ which is being wiped out in Iraq, but men, women and children by their tens of thousands. This is not about the failure of coexistence, and the problem is not ‘conflict’. This is not about people who have trouble getting on and who need to somehow make up and ‘come together’. It is about a well-articulated and well-documented theological worldview hell-bent on dominating ‘infidels’, if necessary wiping them off the face of the earth, in order to establish the power and grandeur of a radical vision of Islam.

    The American administration, according to Nina Shea of the Hudson Institute, ‘withholds arms from the Kurds while awaiting a new, unified Iraqi government with a new prime minister. Meanwhile … no Iraqi troops are in Nineveh province. Only at a few minutes to midnight on the genocide clock has the US begun to launch military strikes against IS forces.

    These events ought to be sobering to the West, not least because thousands of the IS jihadis were raised and bred in the mosques of Europe, North America and Australia, not to mention the madrassas of nations such as Malaysia, Bangladesh and Indonesia. Having been formed by the theology of radical Islam in their home societies, would-be jihadis are flocking to Syria and Iraq where they seek victory or martyrdom, killing and raping as they go.

    Why is this so? How did the Arab Spring, hailed by so many armchair western commentators as the next best thing for the Middle East, blossom bright red into a torrent of blood?

      Theological illiteracy

    Part of the answer is that the West is in the grip of theological illiteracy. It has stubbornly refused to grasp the implications of a global Islamic revival which has been gaining steam for the best part of a century. The Islamic Movement looks back to the glory days of conquest as Islam’s finest hour, and seeks to revive Islamic supremacy through jihad and sacrifice. It longs for a truly Islamic state – the caliphate reborn – and considers jihad to be the God- given means to usher it in.
    This worldview was promoted in compelling, visionary terms by Indian scholar  Abul A’la Maududi, whose writings continue to be widely disseminated by Islamic bookshops and mosques across the West.

    Maududi argued in his radicalisation primer, “Let us be Muslims” that the only valid form of government is Islamic theocracy – i.e. sharia rule – and Muslims are duty-bound to use whatever power they can muster to impose this goal on the world:

    “whoever you are, in whichever country you live, you must strive to change the wrong basis of government, and seize all powers to rule and make laws from those who do not fear God.” … The name of this striving is jihad. And “If you believe Islam to be true, you have no alternative but to exert your utmost strength to make it prevail on earth: you either establish it or give your lives in this struggle.”

    My own copy of Let us Be Muslims, which lies open before me as I write, was bought from a well-respected mainstream Islamic centre here in Melbourne, Australia.

      Violent protests

    When Pope Benedict gave a lecture in Regensburg in 2006, in which he suggested that Islam had been spread by force, the Muslim world erupted in violent protests.
    Sheikh ‘Abdul Aziz al-Sheikh, Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, responded with a revealing defence of Islam’s record. Without a glimmer of irony, he argued that the Pope was wrong to say Islam had been spread by force, because the infidels had a third choice, apart from death or conversion, namely to “surrender and pay tax, and they will be allowed to remain in their land, observing their religion under the protection of Muslims.” He claimed that those who read the Qur’an and the Sunna (the example and teaching of Muhammad) will understand the facts.

    The reality unfolding in north Iraq today reveals to the cold light of day exactly what the doctrine of the three choices means for conquered non-Muslims populations, and why the dogma of the ‘three choices’ is no defence against the assertion that Islam was spread by the sword.

      Jizya

    It is crystal clear that IS is not playing by the world’s rules. It has nothing but contempt for the Geneva Convention. Its battle tactics are regulated by sheikhs who implement the sharia’s rules of war. Many of the abuses committed by IS being reported by the international media are taken straight from the pages of Islamic legal textbooks.

    Consider IS’s announcement to Christians in northern Iraq: “We offer them three choices: Islam, the dhimma contract – involving payment of jizya; if they refuse this, they will have nothing but the sword.”

    These words are cobbled together from the pages of Islamic sacred texts. It was Sa’d b. Mu’adh, a companion of Muhammad, who said of the pagan Meccans “We will give them nothing but the sword” ( A. Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad, OUP 1955 p. 454). Muhammad himself was reported to have said “When you meet your enemies who are polytheists [i.e. they are not Muslims] invite them to three courses of action. … Invite them to Islam… If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the jizya. … If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them” (Sahih Muslim. The Book of Jihad and Expedition [Kitab al-Jihad wa’l- Siyar] 3:27:4294). When the Caliph Umar attacked Persia, he announced to them “Our Prophet [Muhammad] … has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or pay jizya” (Sahih al- Bukhari, The Book of al-Jizya and the Stoppage of War 4:58:3159).

      Prophesy

    I have analysed the doctrine of the three choices in my book The Third Choice: Islam, dhimmitude and freedom, drawing extensively on Islamic sources to explain the worldview of jihad and the dhimma. That book now reads as a grim prophecy of the tragedy unfolding in Syria and Iraq. The Arabic word jizya is derived from a root j-z-y which refers to something given as compensation, in substitution for something else. According to Arab lexicographers, jizya is tribute taken from non-Muslims living under Islamic rule “as though it were a compensation for their not being slain.” It is paid by defeated communities to compensate or reward their attackers for forgoing the right to kill, enslave or loot them.

    The nineteenth-century Algerian Qur’anic commentator Muhammad ibn Yusuf at-Fayyish explained that jizya is “a satisfaction for their blood. It is … to compensate for their not being slain. Its purpose is to substitute for the duties of killing and slavery … It is for the benefit of Muslims.” Over a thousand years earlier, Abu Yusuf Ya’qub, a Hanafi jurist wrote “their lives and possessions are spared only on account of the payment of the jizya.”

      Compensation

    In 1799 William Eton, in a survey of the Ottoman empire, reported that Christians under Ottoman rule, on paying the jizya, were addressed with a standard form of words to the effect that “the sum of money received is taken as compensation for being permitted to wear their heads that year”.

    To be sure, there are other ways to interpret the Qur’an, but the point is that this understanding of jizya has become the operative one in Northern Iraq and Syria. It also has the backing of centuries of Islamic jurisprudence and practice. It was with this understanding of Islam that the Middle East, South Asia and large parts of Eastern Europe were conquered and occupied under Muslim rule until modern times.
    This grim fact – that the IS jihadis can ably defend their theology on the basis of Islam’s history and religious traditions – means that it will be no easy task to persuade Muslim clerics and intellectuals to ‘debunk’ them. Such a strategy, which has been proposed by Peter Leahy, former head of the Australian Army, will be fraught with difficulties. Debunking would be a whole lot easier if radical ideologies were in fact bunkum. The problem is, the jihadis hold far too many theological trump cards from the Qur’an and the precedent of Muhammad’s example to be so easily routed on the field of ideas. Indeed it is the radicals who have become expert at debunking, as their successful global recruiting drive shows.

    Let us consider some of the weight behind the radicals’ theology.

      Surrender

    According to Islamic law, Christians and other non-Muslims who agree to keep their religion and their lives by paying jizya are subject to a dhimma treaty of surrender.
    The word dhimma is derived from an Arabic word meaning ‘to blame’. It implies a liability or debt arising from fault or blame. The idea is that the non-Muslims, known as dhimmis, owe a debt to their conquerors for their lives, and non-observance of the treaty of surrender would attract blame and thus incur punishment. The dhimma conditions include payment of jizya by adult men, but also many demeaning legal disabilities which are enforced upon non- Muslims and apply in one form or another across most of the Muslim world right up to the present day: one example is widespread restrictions on building new churches in areas formerly conquered by Islam; another is restrictions on freedom of religious expression.The imposition of these disabilities upon non-Muslims is in accordance with a command of Muhammad

    “I have been sent with a sword in my hand to command people to worship Allah and associate no partners with him. I command you to belittle and subjugate those who disobey me, for whoever imitates a people is one of them” (cited from Musnad (chain of) Ahmad Ibn Hanbali, founder of the Hanbali school of jurisprudence).

      Belittling

    One of the means of belittling non-Muslims has been to ensure that they would not “look alike”, by requiring that they wear discriminatory clothing, patches or even, in ancient times, seals around their necks. A modern-day manifestation of the principle of not ‘looking alike’ is the application of the Arabic letter nun (for Nazrani, the Arabic word for Christians) to the exterior of Christian homes in Mosul. Using similar reasoning, the Taliban required that Afghan Hindus should wear discriminatory patches on their clothing, so their non- Muslim status could be instantly recognisable.

    IS is even looking to the model of first century Islam to set the level of the jizya tax. Early Islamic sources state that the jizya was a minimum of one gold dinar, and up to four dinars, depending upon the wealth of the individual dhimmi. Following these provisions to the letter, IS has made the following declaration:

    “Christians are obligated to pay Jizya tax on every adult male to the value of four golden dinars for the wealthy, half of that for middle-income citizens and half of that for the poor . . . they must not hide their status, and can pay in two installments per year.”

    A gold dinar weighs about 4.5 grams, which at $45 a gram means that a tax regime of one to four dinars equates to $200 to $800 US dollars per non-Muslim adult male. This is a heavy burden for a conquered people in a war zone, and the reality on the ground in both Syria and Iraq has been that the jihadis demand much more, and not once a year as its textbooks state, but again and again.

      Convert or die

    Reports show that IS has been setting jizya so high in both Syria and northern Iraq, and levying it so often, that it cannot be paid. This gives Christians who wish to stay in their homes but two choices: convert or die. Most have fled, but some, including those who are too frail or disabled to flee, have had to convert to save themselves. The fleeing refugees are in a particularly desperate situation, because they are progressively stripped of their belongings by IS checkpoints as they escape.
    There is nothing new here. Throughout history the jizya has been a heavy imposition for non-Muslims. Large numbers of Christians converted to Islam in the early centuries of Islamic rule in order to avoid this tax. Dionysius, a Syrian patriarch writing in the eighth century, reported that the jizya often had to be extracted from Christians by beatings, extortion, torture, rape and killings. Many fled destitute from town to town after they had sold everything they owned to pay the tax.

    Arthur Tritton reported in “The Caliphs and their Non-Muslim Subjects” about eighth-century Egypt that for ordinary day labourers the jizya tax was around a quarter of annual earnings, or ten times the zakat tax paid by Muslims. Shlomo Dov Goitein, writing on the situation of Jews in medieval Egypt, reported that men would enslave themselves or their family to pay the tax. Centuries after Dionysius of Antioch, he also reported that many, having sold all they had to pay it, took to wandering homeless as beggars.

      Rules of war

    The treatment of captives by IS is also in accordance with orthodox rules of war in Islam, which permit men to be killed, while women and children are enslaved. Sex slavery – concubinage – is permitted by the sharia principles which guide IS. The Reliance of the Traveller – a respected Sunni manual of sharia law – states: “When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled” (chapter o9.13). The option of converting to Islam to avoid death or capture – which is being urged upon non- Muslims by IS – is also clearly supported: “Whoever enters Islam before being captured may not be killed or his property confiscated, or his young children taken captive” (chapter o9.12).

    The widespread looting of property is also validated by Islam’s rules of war: “A free male Muslim who has reached puberty and is sane is entitled to the spoils of battle when he has participated in a battle to the end of it” (chapter o10.1). And “Anyone who … kills one of the enemy or effectively incapacitates him, risking his own life thereby, is entitled to whatever he can take from the enemy, meaning as much as he can take away with him in the battle, such as a mount, clothes, weaponry, money or other” (chapter o10.2).

    The grim reality is that the fate of Christians and Yazidis in northern Iraq today all too often matches the stipulations of Islamic textbooks: non-Muslim men are killed, their women and children enslaved, and their property and possessions looted.
    It is regrettable that the hard cold reality of Islamic imperialism and the dhimma system have been denied and obscured by scholars. For example Bernard Lewis claimed that “The dhimma on the whole worked quite well.”

    As part of this obscurantist veil, the true meaning of the words jizya and dhimma have been hidden by scholars. Anglican priest Colin Chapman, who was the then Archbishop of Canterbury’s envoy to Al-Azhar University in Cairo, claimed in his widely-ready book, “Cross and Crescent” that Jews and Christians were ‘protected’ and implied that the jizya was paid in compensation for them not doing military service or paying the Muslims’ alms tax (zakat). In reality the main protection afforded to dhimmis is that they can keep their heads away from the sword of jihad, and it was in return for this privilege that the jizya is exacted. John Esposito similarly claimed that jizya is an “exchange” in return for keeping one’s religion, protection from ‘outside aggression’, and exemption from military service.

      Islamic rule

    Such dissimulations, also advanced by Muslim apologists, have served to prop up the myth of convivencia and a golden age in which Christians and Muslims lived contentedly side-by-side under Islamic rule. Architects of multiculturalism and advocates of interfaith dialogue have repeatedly promoted this mythical Islamic construct as a model for different religions to flourish side by side in Europe today. This has gone hand in hand with the claims that European culture owes an unacknowledged debt to Islam, and Islam’s historical record has been misrepresented by hateful, bigoted people. In reality Islamic coexistence with conquered Christian populations was always regulated by the conditions of the dhimma, as defined above, under which non-Muslims have no inherent right to life, but had to purchase this right year after year.

      Bigotry

    Willful historical ignorance has been deeply debilitating for the intellectual elites of the West, who feel righteous in dismissing evidence that contradicts their corrupted worldview, on the grounds that they are taking a stand against the bigotry of Islamophobia. They have been schooled in this self-hatred by their Muslim dialogue partners. Also debilitating has been the trend among scholars to deny or downplay the military meaning of jihad. An extreme example is Yale theologian Miroslav Volf’s preposterous claim that the use of military force to expand Islam is “rejected by all leading Muslim scholars today.”

    The promotion of the idea of the ‘greater jihad’ as a personal spiritual struggle has also served to distract western leaders, such as CIA director John Brennan, who stated that “jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one’s community”

      True meaning

    In reality the meaning of jihad in all sharia textbooks is warfare against unbelievers. If the true meaning of jihad was a spiritual struggle with the self, IS would not be attracting so many willing volunteers from around the globe to the killing fields of Syria and Iraq. There is a chronic and urgent need for a dialogue of civilizations between Islam and the post-Christian West. However this dialogue cannot be based upon myths. At the top of the agenda must be the twin institutions of jihad and the dhimma. It is essential for Western people to emphatically reject and stigmatize these two pillars of Islamic law, and to deplore to Muslims their application both throughout history and in the contemporary world.

      Cultural blindness

    One of the effects of enforced cultural blindness and intellectual amnesia is rampant theological illiteracy among Western policy makers. This is now having the direst of consequences for Christians and others in the Middle East. Those who managed the Western occupation of Iraq were deeply ignorant of the dangers to non-Muslim minorities posed by the Islamic revivalism combined with Western inference, and in particular by the re-establishment of the jihad-dhimma system. They overlooked the fact that re- establishing the dhimma has always been part of the agenda of Islamic revivalist movements. They did not grasp that jihad war zones always prove especially deadly to non-Muslims, even when the main conflict is between Muslims.

    It had also been forgotten that advances in the rights of non- Muslim populations across the Middle East – such as the official dismantling of dhimma laws by the Ottomans in the mid- nineteenth century – were only achieved due to sustained political and military pressure from the Great Powers, and at the cost of suppressing mainstream Islamic dogmas. Indeed this ‘humiliation’ of Islam is one of the very things the global Islamic revival is supposed to be winding back: this is why the deterioration of the human rights of non-Muslim minorities – from Malaysia to Egypt – has been so marked in recent decades.

    Today Islamic revivalist dogmas, which have become deeply entrenched in Muslim communities both throughout the West and in Muslim majority states, eulogize Islam’s glory days, when Christians and other non-Muslims paid jizya to keep their heads. Revivalists look forward to a time when sharia principles, implemented through unfettered jihad, will enforce the view that non-Muslims do not have an inherent right to life, but only a conceded right for which they must compensate Muslims in gold. We need not be surprised or shocked when young men from around the globe, reared on this poisonous theological cocktail, volunteer for jihad in Syria and Iraq to usher in a longed-for Islamic utopia. It should not shock us that they have no qualms about shedding non-Muslim blood.

    The effect of the cultural jihad, waged not only by Muslim apologists, but also by Western elites, is that Western policy makers have become blind to the enormity of present-day non- Muslim suffering under the yoke of Islam, for they have no reference points to comprehend it. To engage with this suffering and develop policies to counter it would require acknowledgement of its root causes, namely the theological framework of jihad and the dhimma, but that is simply too frightening for societies who have multicultural dogmas rusted onto their psyches, having embraced a false view of history and stubbornly obscurantist views about theology.

    As long as policy makers continue to seek intellectual solace in calls for ‘conflict resolution’ and ‘reconciliation’, the vulnerable will continue to be killed, raped and looted in the name of Islamic revivalism. The lives of tens of thousands of vulnerable and peaceful Christians, Yazidis and others, whose crime is that their religion is unacceptable, now hang in the balance in northern Iraq, while the West sits paralyzed on the side lines, stunned and stupefied by the lies it has told itself for so many years.

      Infidel West

    This is not to say that reconciliation is unnecessary. Usama Bin Ladin got it right when he asserted that the doctrine of the three choices is the crux of the West’s problem with Islam: “The West avenges itself against Islam for giving infidels but three options”:

    “Our talks with the infidel West and our conflict with them ultimately revolve around one issue – one that demands our total support, with power and determination, with one voice – and it is: “Does Islam, or does it not, force people by the power of the sword to submit to its authority corporeally if not spiritually?” [The answer is:] Yes. There are only three choices in Islam: either willing submission; or payment of the jizya, through physical though not spiritual, submission to the authority of Islam; or the sword – for it is not right to let him [an infidel] live. The matter is summed up for every person alive: Either submit, or live under the suzerainty of Islam, or die.”

    Bin Ladin was right about this, that Islam’s doctrine of three choices, encompassing the theological institutions of jihad and the dhimma, is and must be the central issue for the West in its dialogue with the Islamic world. An understanding of this doctrine and its implications for the human rights of non-Muslims should be a cornerstone of public policy in relation to Islam, both now and in the foreseeable future.

    This will not be an easy or comfortable dialogue, judging from the howls of protest that greeted Pope Benedict’s comparatively mild Regensburg lecture in 2006. Yet appeasement of howling objectors through conflict-avoidance manoeuvers will bring nothing but grief, as we are seeing in northern Iraq.

    According to the “Vicar of Bagdad”, Canon Andrew White, what is needed right now to help non-Muslim victims of Islamic jihadism is three things: Protection, Provision and Perseverance. The lie foisted upon the world was that there was nothing non-Muslims needed to be protected from. Right now IS’s victims deserve military intervention, food, water and medical supplies. Many will need permanent sanctuary outside of their homelands. Longer term, much more is needed. Certainly the will to persevere, because the world is in but the early stages of a (now resumed) centuries-long war with militant Islam, but above all, in order to make sustained progress in the long struggle ahead, we will require a greater appetite for the truth.

    Mark Durie is a theologian, human rights activist, pastor of an Anglican church, a Shillman-Ginsburg Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum, and director of the Institute for Spiritual Awareness. He has published many articles and books on the language and culture of the Acehnese, Christian-Muslim relations and religious freedom. A graduate of the Australian National University and the Australian College of Theology, he has held visiting appointments at the University of Leiden, MIT, UCLA and Stanford, and was elected a Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities in 1992.

HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE HEARING ON BOKU HARAM

Posted in MIDDLE-EAST POLITICS with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 22, 2014 by drjgelb

This morning’s session of the HFAC on Boku Haram and the kidnapping of over 250 Nigerian schoolgirls on the 14/07/2014, followed by further attacks, massacres and kidnappings, was a torrid affair, with more than one Lawmaker losing their temper with the smug State Department experts. Boku Haram have killed over 6000 people, predominantly Christians, in the last 10yrs and the Nigerian Government has been unable to defeat them. They are an extremist, Islamist Jihadist, terrorist organisation, whose leader clearly articulated the groups motivations and goals as overthrow of non-Islamic religions, Infidel political systems such as Western Democracy and all systems of Justice other than Sharia Law, as directed by Allah.

Please note in this Video, the repeated nauseating attempts by the senior State Department experts to avoid at all costs admitting that the kidnapping of these schoolgirls was motivated by hatred of Christians, despite the leader of B.H. explicitly stating this. Note also the denial of Islamic supremacist aspirations as prime motivation for B.H. Links with the Muslim Brotherhood and A.Q. This pattern of dishonest denial of Islamic Jihadist aspirations for re-establishment of a Worldwide Caliphate, as mandated by the Qur’an, has characterised the Obama administration and disqualified him, his administration and many of his supporters as credible contributors to the discussion.

%d bloggers like this: