Tagged: Koran

Calling for violent jihad in Australia

(COUNTER JIHAD REPORT) — By Mark Durie

There is not a Bible, Jewish or Christian, containing such incendiary commentary as populates page after page of ‘The Noble Qur’an’, which for four years has preached to the faithful in Canberra Airport’s prayer room. The ideology it promotes is violent jihad. It is a book to start a war.

The Saudis, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt recently cut diplomatic ties with Qatar and imposed sanctions, accusing the Qataris of supporting terrorism. The Saudis have demanded that Qatar close Al-Jazeera and cut all ties with the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda, Hezbollah and the Islamic State. Qatar’s long-standing and well-known support for the Muslim Brotherhood, which aims to unify Muslim nations under an Islamic caliphate and has networks of supporters across the Middle East, is now perceived as a serious threat its neighbours.

This is the pot calling the kettle black, for Saudi Arabia itself has a long record of exporting Islamic radicalism. Among its most notable exports are millions of Korans in translation, which, through commentary (mainly in footnotes) and accompanying materials, incite Muslims to wage violent jihad to establish an Islamic state.

Among the Saudis’ exported Korans is an English-language edition, TheNoble Qur’an, which can be found in mosques, prayer rooms and meeting places around the world. Anyone who applies to the Saudi embassy in Canberra will be sent a copy gratis.

The Noble Qur’an can be found in the musallah or prayer room of Canberra’s airport. What is apparently the same edition, with “AIRPORT MUSALLAH” written in black marker pen on the page ends, has been sitting there for the past four years, ever since the new airport was built. The Noble Qur’an is also publicly available in other “multi-faith” spaces that have been springing up in institutions across Australia in recent years, in universities, hospitals and other public places.

Canberra airport’s Noble Qur’an was printed by the order of King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, who ruled from 2005 to 2015. It includes the Arabic text, and, side-by-side, the English translation by Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din al-Hilali and Muhammad Muhsin Khan. There is also an endorsement by Shaikh Abdul-Aziz ibn Baz, Chief Justice of Saudi Arabia from 1993 to 1999, and a foreword by Shaikh Salih ibn Abdul-Aziz al-Shaikh, the current Saudi Minister for Islamic Affairs. After the Koranic text there are a hundred pages or so of appendices, and under the text there are footnotes, which offer a commentary. There are also frequent interpolations in brackets to help clarify the meaning in translation.

Marked “not for sale”, vast numbers of The Noble Qur’an printed by the Saudis are exported around the world. The King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Qur’an in Medina has printed over one hundred million Korans in thirty-nine languages since it was established in 1985. The handsomely gilded Noble Qur’an is distributed as part of the Saudis’ global da’wa or effort to propagate Islam. It appears to target two kinds of readers.

First, The Noble Qur’an seeks to enlist Muslims in violent jihad against non-Muslims, to establish an Islamic caliphate. Second, it aims to engage with Christians. The longest essay in the appendices is an argument that Jesus was a prophet of Islam, and commentary throughout The Noble Qur’an—in the explanatory footnotes, the interpolations in brackets and the appendices—challenges and “corrects” Christian teachings.

Sometimes it is said that when people use verses from the Koran to justify violence, they have taken them out of context. This criticism cannot be applied to The Noble Qur’an, which follows a traditional Islamic method of interpreting the Koran in the light of Muhammad’s example and teachings, known as the Sunna. In keeping with this tradition, citations from the Sunnasupply the great bulk of the explanatory footnotes.

On non-Muslims

The footnotes in The Noble Qur’an are repeatedly derogatory of non-Muslims.

For example, a note to Sura 10:19 (p. 272, fn1) quotes Muhammad to say that human beings are born Muslims, and are “converted” away from Islam by non-Muslim parents. For Jewish or Christian parents to raise their child in their own faith is like mutilating them:

Every child is born on al-Fitrah, but his parents convert him to Judaism or Christianity … An animal gives birth to a perfect baby animal. Do you find it mutilated?

The Arabic phrase al-fitrah refers to the doctrine that the innate state of human beings is to be a Muslim.

The Arabic text of the Koran calls non-Muslims unclean (Sura 9:28), using a derogatory word (najas). The footnote to this verse explains about non-Muslims that:

Their impurity is spiritual and physical: spiritual because they don’t believe in Allah’s Oneness and in his Prophet Muhammad … and physical, because they lack personal hygiene (filthy as regards urine, stools and [menstrual] blood). [p. 248, fn 2]

Sura 3:85 states that “whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers”. In the footnote commentary on this verse, The Noble Qur’an quotes Muhammad to explain that Christians and Jews who die disbelieving in Muhammad will end up in Hell:

there is none from amongst the Jews and Christians … who hears about me and then dies without believing in the Message with which I have been sent … but he will be from the dwellers of the (Hell) Fire. [p. 84, fn 1]

Sura 4:47 warns Christians and Jews that they should believe in Muhammad, or else their faces will be taken away in hell, to which the translators add, in brackets, “by making them like the back of necks; without nose, mouth, eyes”. The footnote commentary explains further:

This Verse is a severe warning to the Jews and Christians, and an absolute obligation that they must believe in Allah’s Messenger Muhammad … and also in his Message of Islamic Monotheism and in this Qur’an. [p. 115, fn 2]

The Koran has verses which exhort tolerance of Christians and Jews. Yet The Noble Qur’an takes pains to emphasise that such verses have been cancelled by later verses, following the Islamic contextual principle of abrogation (naskh). Here are two examples:

First, Sura 2:62 states that a Christian or Jew who “believes in Allah and the Last Day and does righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve”. This could be taken to imply that Christians and Jews will be accepted by God if they follow their faith properly. However, the commentary on this verse clarifies that:

This Verse (and Verse 5:69) … should not be misinterpreted by the reader … the provision of this Verse was abrogated by Verse 3:85 “And whosoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter, he will be one of the losers” (i.e. after the coming of Prophet Muhammad … on the earth, no other religion except Islam, will be accepted from anyone). [p. 13, fn 2]

What this footnote is actually asserting is that Christians and Jews will go to Hell unless they accept Islam, because earlier verses which seemed to counsel tolerance have been superseded and cancelled by later verses.

Second, Sura 2:109 states that Muslims should “forgive and overlook” the Christians and Jews, “till Allah brings His Command”.Yet the footnote makes clear that “the provision of this verse has been abrogated” (p. 21, fn 1) by Sura 9:29. The later verse commands Muslims to fight (that is, kill) Christians and Jews unless or until they surrender to Muslims and pay tribute:

Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad …) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. [Sura 9:29, p. 248]

Here again, a more tolerant verse is claimed to have been abrogated by a later verse which commands violence against non-Muslims.

The meaning of jihad

Some Muslims have proposed that the basic meaning of jihad is peaceful struggle. In contrast, The Noble Qur’an defines jihad as waging war against non-Muslims to make Islam dominant in the world. This jihad is obligatory for all Muslims, and rejecting this obligation will lead to hellfire.
This interpretation is made clear in the glossary, where the entry for jihad is:

Holy fighting in the Cause of Allah or any other kind of effort to make Allah’s Word (i.e. Islam) superior. Jihad is regarded as one of the fundamentals of Islam. See the footnote of (V.2:190) [p. 873]

The footnote referred to is a comment on Sura 2:190, “And fight in the Way of Allahthose who fight you …” This footnote reads:

Al-Jihad (holy fighting) in Allah’s Cause (with full force of numbers and weaponry) is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars (on which it stands). By Jihad Islam is established, Allah’s Word is made superior, (His Word being La ilaha illallah which means none has the right to be worshipped but Allah), and His Religion (Islam) is propagated. By abandoning Jihad (may Allah protect us from that) Islam is destroyed and the Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honour is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim, and he who tries to escape from this duty, or does not in his innermost heart wish to fulfil this duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite. [p. 39, fn 1]

Here The Noble Qur’an is saying that the purpose of jihad is to make Muslims dominant over non-Muslims, and Islam dominant over other religions; Islamic warfare against non-Muslims is a kind of missionary enterprise to spread the faith, and any Muslim who does not fulfil this obligatory duty is a “hypocrite”.

What is bad about being a “hypocrite” is made clear by The Noble Qur’an on page 906 of the appendices: a hypocrite will end up in the lowest depths of Hell, the place of worst punishment. The Noble Qur’an is teaching here that any Muslim who does not engage in and support warfare to establish the dominance of Islam is destined to occupy the hottest place in Hell, worse even than that occupied by non-Muslims.

In its footnote on Sura 27:59, The Noble Qur’an quotes a tradition of Muhammad which refers to jihad (p. 512 fn 1). (Here again jihad is defined as “holy fighting”.) The footnote emphasises that fighting non-Muslims is the best possible pious deed for a Muslim, second only to becoming a Muslim.

The caliphate and universal war against non-Muslims

Sura 2:252 (p. 55, fn2, running on to p. 56) refers to Muhammad as a messenger of Allah. The footnote to this verse reports that Muhammad’s prophethood was distinguished by certain characteristics. Three of these are:
(i) Muhammad was victorious through fear or terror for a distance of one month’s journey: “Allah made me victorious by awe (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month’s journey.”
(ii) He was the first prophet from Allah given permission to take booty from his enemies: “The booty has been made Halal (lawful) to me yet it was not lawful to anyone else before me.”
(iii) Unlike previous prophets, he was sent to all mankind, not just to a specific group: “Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation only, but I have been sent to all mankind.”

The implication of this third point is that everyone, everywhere is obligated to accept Muhammad as their prophet, and the first two points show that he was uniquely commissioned to wage war against disbelievers, by terrorising and looting them. Muhammad is considered to be the best example for Muslims to follow, including, it becomes clear, in these aspects of his prophetic career. The Noble Qur’an emphasises these aspects of Muhammad’s mission to activate them for jihad.

In its footnote on Sura 3:55 (p. 76, fn 1), The Noble Qur’an states that when Jesus returns he will impose Islamic law and break the cross (that is, destroy Christianity). At that time Jesus will do away with toleration of non-Muslims, so that “all people will be required to embrace Islam and there will be no other alternative”. In other words they will be compelled to convert by force if required.
This teaching about Jesus’s return is repeated in a commentary on Sura 8:39 (p. 236, fn 1), and a comment on Sura 61:6 (p. 761, fn 2), which states that this tradition is intended as “a severe warning to Christians who claim to be the followers of ’Isa (Jesus) …” In essence The Noble Qur’an tells its Christian readers that when he returns Jesus will compel them to embrace Islam, and all people on the earth will have to choose between Islam and death.

In its commentary on Sura 9:29 (p. 248, fn 2) The Noble Qur’an cites a tradition of Muhammad about the Jews, which states, “The Hour (i.e. the final hour) will not be established until you fight against the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say, ‘O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.’” So, at the end, creation itself will cry out for Jewish blood.

In an interpolation in Sura 8:73, The Noble Qur’an states that Muslims of the world must not ally themselves with non-Muslims, but join together “to make victorious Allah’s religion of Islamic monotheism” (p. 242). It is explained in commentary that if Muslims do not do this, there will be terrible disorder and tribulation in the world, with wars and battles and calamitous breakdown of civil society. This is because of the deleterious effects of non-Muslim rule. Moreover, it is also wrong to have “many Muslim rulers”, because Muslims should unite under one ruler, the caliph: “it is a legal obligation … that there shall not be more than one Khalifah for the whole Muslim world …” Furthermore, anyone who works to divide Muslims into different groups under different rulers should be killed, according to Muhammad, who is reported to have said, “When you all [Muslims] are united … and a man comes up to disintegrate you and separate you into different groups, then kill that man” (p. 242, fn 1). This can be taken to imply that anyone who upholds the division of Muslims into distinct nation-states, which is the international order today, stands under a death sentence.

The Noble Qur’an paints a supremacist vision of an ultimate Islamic victory over non-Muslim religions, in which all non-Muslims will be converted to Islam or killed. The text of Sura 3:110 reads:

You (true believers in Islamic monotheism …) are the best of people ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin al-Mahruf (Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief, and all that Islam has forbidden), and you believe in Allah. [Sura 3:110]

The footnote commentary on this verse explains:

“You … are the best of people ever raised up for mankind” means, the best of the people for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam (and thereby save them from the eternal punishment in the Hell-fire and make them enter paradise in the Hereafter) … The people referred to here may be the prisoners of war who were captured and chained by the Muslims and their imprisonment was the cause of their conversion to Islam. So, it is as if their chains were the means of winning Paradise. [p. 89, fn 1]

This footnote is a reference to a tradition of Muhammad which states that Allah is pleased to see people entering Paradise in chains. This justifies making war on non-Muslims, and forcing them into Islam through enslaving them; enslaving non-Muslims is a kindness to them, because it enables them to attain Paradise.

This interpretation of Sura 3:110 is based on Muhammad’s teaching. Could it have any application in today’s world, or is it just a dead letter?

The very same tradition was cited by the Islamic State in the October 2014 edition of its magazine Dabiq, which included an article titled “The Return of Slavery Before the Hour”:

[Muhammad] said, “Allah marvels at a people who enter Jannah in chains.” The hadith commentators mentioned that this refers to people entering Islam as slaves and then entering Jannah [Paradise]. Abu Hurayrah … said while commenting on Allah’s words, “You are the best nation produced for mankind” … “You are the best people for people. You bring them with chains around their necks, until they enter Islam.”

The same sentiment was also expressed by a Dutch Islamic State fighter, Israfil Yilmaz, who blogged about the correct Islamic motivation for sex slavery:

People [who] think that having a concubine for sexual pleasure only have a very simple mindset about this matter … The biggest and best thing of having concubines is introducing them to Islam in an Islamic environment—showing them and teaching them the religion. Many of the concubines/slaves of the Companions of the Prophet … became Muslim and some even big commanders and leaders in Islamic history and this is if you ask me the true essence of having slaves/concubines.

The translators who crafted the commentary in The Noble Qur’an, and the Saudi leaders who endorsed the text, no doubt desired that readers would take to heart the teachings they had laboured hard to present. The evidence is that many have done so. The investment by the Saudis of billions of dollars to spread the kinds of ideas found in The Noble Qur’an has not been in vain, and the Islamic State provides the proof.

Evidence for their success is found in Israfil Yilmaz’s justification for sex-slavery. This not only aligns with official ISIS propaganda: it also is fully in line with the teachings of The Noble Qur’an. Another sign of the influence of The Noble Qur’an’s ideas has been the river of thousands of ISIS recruits flowing from Western nations to join the jihad in Syria and Iraq.

What does all this mean?

Ahmed Farouk Musa, a graduate of Monash University medical school in Melbourne, told a forum on Muslim extremism in Kuala Lumpur on December 7, 2014, that The Noble Qur’an incites violence against Christians and other non-Muslims: “I believe that propaganda such as the Hilali-Khan translation and other materials coming out of Saudi Arabia are one of the major root causes that feed extremist ideas among Muslims, violence against Christians and other minorities.”

There is not a Bible in print, anywhere in the world, Jewish or Christian, which contains such incendiary commentary as is found on page after page of The Noble Qur’an. This is a book with which to start a war. The ideology it promotes is primed to light the fuse of violent jihad.

Given its contents, it might seem surprising that a copy of The Noble Qur’an has been sitting in the Canberra airport prayer room for the past four years. The theological characteristics of this edition of the Koran are not a secret. Yet it seems no Muslim who used the musallah has objected, or if they did, the Canberra airport authorities paid no attention. Canberra’s politicians and their many advisers also regularly pass along the corridor where the musallah is located, but none of them seems to have thought to check what version of the Koran was being used in their airport’s prayer room.
Earlier this year the Public Health Association of Australia asked the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade to reject the “notion” that there is any inherent link between Islam and terrorism. It seems that Public Health Association of Australia officials have also not visited the Canberra airport musallah to read its Koran.

There has been much discussion and sometimes puzzlement about how young Muslim men have become radicalised enough to fight for ISIS. Reading and believing the messages implanted in The Noble Qur’an in the Canberra airport prayer room would be sufficient to convert some people to the key points of the ideology of ISIS.

The message of The Noble Qur’an is no marginal phenomenon. It is not an opinion from the extremities of the Islamic world, but from its heartland, presented as a gilt-edged free gift from the Saudi king, the Guardian of the Two Holy Mosques. The political theology of The Noble Qur’an aligns with the official dogma of Saudi Arabia, and it has been endorsed by the Saudi king and the nation’s chief justice, the Grand Mufti.

It is necessary to grasp the authenticity of The Noble Qur’an and its message to the world. Those behind The Noble Qur’an manifestly believe that justice will be served only when Muslims rule the world, and that warfare necessary to achieve this goal is not only justified: it is a divinely instituted, inescapable obligation incumbent on every Muslim, because Muhammad and his Koran are, as Sura 21:107 puts it, “a mercy to the worlds”.

One sometimes hears the view that it is not up to non-Muslims to express opinions about Islam or its canonical texts, such as the Koran. But The Noble Qur’an’s running commentary on the text, because it has so much to say about non-Muslims, especially Jews and Christians, therefore gives non-Muslims, especially Jews and Christians, every right to form their own opinions about it. If a book talks about you, you have a right to make up your own mind about what it has to say.

In 2002 Christopher Hitchens fielded a question from Tony Jones on ABC’s Lateline as to why young, mostly well-educated men committed the 9/11 atrocity. Hitchens’s answer was, “Well, it could be they believe their own propaganda.” We have to assume that those responsible for The Noble Qur’an believe their own propaganda too, and that some who have read it have been influenced to believe it too.

What should Australians make of the fact that the Saudis have been presenting an open and unashamed apology for violent jihad, even commending the practice of enslaving enemies, in our own backyard for years, not to show Islam in a poor light, but to glorify it?

The fact that The Noble Qur’an is in the Canberra airport musallah is no accident. This edition of the Koran and the teachings it promotes can be found in Islamic bookshops, public libraries, prayer rooms and Sunni mosques all over the English-speaking world.

The British historian Tom Holland recently produced a documentary on ISIS called The Origins of Violence. A scathing review by the English journalist Peter Oborne was published in the Middle East Eye. Oborne excoriated Holland for suggesting that the problem with ISIS lies with Islam. Oborne found it repugnant to suggest that there is anything about Islam that might be considered a “threat”, and he railed against Holland’s suggestion that there could be anything in the example and teaching of Muhammad (whom Oborne respectfully calls “The Prophet”) which could have guided the actions of the Islamic State.

Such ignorance is the fruit of religious illiteracy. Or might fear be the issue? Has Muhammad, praised in the pages of the Koran for being “victorious by awe”, now extended his reign of fear, not just for the distance of one month’s journey as Muhammad declared he had achieved in seventh-century Arabia, but across fourteen centuries to Australia and the rest of the world?

Of course many Australian Muslims would, like Ahmed Farouk Musa, find the messages promoted through the footnotes and glosses of The Noble Qur’anutterly repugnant. It is disappointing that these well-meaning Muslims have not been able to determine which version of their own scriptures is to be placed in a public prayer room designated for their use. They could have lobbied Canberra airport to have this version of the Koran replaced by another, but if they have done so, their attempts must have failed.

The message contained in The Noble Qur’an and its widespread public distribution are matters Australians have every right to be concerned about. Its message has been promoted in public for years with hardly a whisper of objection coming from those who should know better.

It would be inappropriate, and indeed irrelevant if our leaders were to respond to the message of The Noble Qur’an with statements like “True Islam does not promote terrorism” or “No true religion supports violence”. For Australian officials to dare to instruct the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia or the Guardian of the Two Holy Mosques on what is true Islam would be ludicrous and offensive. But the leaders of our nation, against whose non-Muslim citizens The Noble Qur’an incites such undisguised enmity, have every right to say, “Not in our backyard!”

Dr. Mark Durie is an academic, human rights activist, Anglican pastor, a Shillman-Ginsburg Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum, and Adjunct Research Fellow of the Arthur Jeffery Centre for the Study of Islam at Melbourne School of Theology.

This article was first published by the Quadrant in November 2017.

***

[READ MORE]

ISIS, The Koran, and The Hudud

(UNDERSTANDING THE THREAT) — ISIS crucifies Christians, kills apostates (those who leave Islam), and amputates the hands of those who steal.

How do they justify such barbaric behavior? These cruel punishments are commands from allah in the Koran.

The Hudud is a part of sharia (Islamic Law), and contains the seven (7) crimes specifically listed in the Koran along with their punishments. If it is in the Koran, according to Islam, it is the word of allah as revealed to Mohammad.

Punishments for hudud crimes are fixed and, therefore, cannot be altered by an Islamic judge’s ruling.

Four of the seven offenses are punishable by death. They include fornication, adultery, armed robbery, and rebellion.

For instance, for armed robbery Koran 5:33 states: “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and his messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land.”

The other hudud crimes include punishments for: fornication (sex outside of marriage) for which Koran 24:2 prescribes “The woman and the man guilty for fornication flog each of them with a hundred lashes: let not compassion move you in their case in a matter prescribed by Allah”; false accusation of sexual intercourse; drinking intoxicants; and theft.

On September 24, 2014, an open letter to the leader of ISIS Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi signed by 126 Islamic leaders, including senior scholars across the globe, was published.

The letter stated: “Hudud punishments are fixed in the Qur’an and Hadith and are unquestionably obligatory in Islamic Law.”

The signatories included leaders of prominent U.S. Islamic organizations including: the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) also known as Hamas; the Fiqh Council of North America; the North American Imams Federation; and others.

Its in the Koran, which means allah said it. U.S. Islamic leaders condone it. ISIS does it.

What is all the fuss about?

[ READ MORE]

Islam vs. Non-Muslims: Doctrinal Sources

(MIDDLE EAST FORUM) — by Raymond Ibrahim

Originally published under the title “Islam’s Three Worst Doctrines.”

Conflict between Muslims and the West is rooted in three interrelated teachings of Islam.

Because Islam gets criticized for many things — from hostility to modernity and democracy to calls for theocratic rule, radical “patriarchy,” misogyny, and draconian punishments, to name a few — it is helpful to step back and distinguish between those (many) doctrines that affect Muslim society alone, and those that extend to and affect Western or non-Muslim peoples in general.

On doing this, three interrelated doctrines come into sharp focus. They are: 1) total disavowal from, and enmity for, “the infidel,” that is, constant spiritual or metaphysical hostility against the non-Muslim (in Arabic known as al-wala’ w’al bara, or “loyalty and enmity”); this naturally manifests itself as 2) jihad, that is, physical hostility against and—whenever and wherever possible—attempts to subjugate the non-Muslim); finally, successful jihads lead to 3) dhimmitude, the degrading position of conquered non-Muslims who refuse to forfeit their religious freedom by converting to the victor’s creed.

Loyalty and Enmity

There is no doubt that mainstream Islam advocates the separation of Muslims from non-Muslims, believers from infidels, clean from unclean. Koran 5:51 warns Muslims against “taking the Jews and Christians as friends and allies … whoever among you takes them for friends and allies, he is surely one of them,” that is, he too becomes an infidel, or kafir, the worst human classification in Islam.

The doctrine of loyalty and enmity (الولاء والبراء‎) is central to discussions of Muslim faith.

Koran 3:28, 4:89, 4:144, 5:54, 6:40, 9:23 all have the same message; 58:22 simply states that true Muslims do not befriend non-Muslims—”even if they be their fathers, sons, brothers, or kin.” But Koran verses further call on Muslims to have enmity—hate—for non-Muslims: “We [Muslims] renounce you [non-Muslims]. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us—till you believe in Allah alone” (Koran 60:4). As the Islamic State explained in an unambiguously titled article, “Why We Hate You & Why We Fight You,” “We hate you, first and foremost, because you are disbelievers.”

The flipside of al-wala’ w’al bara is that Muslims are commanded to befriend and aid fellow Muslims—including jihadis, for example through funds (or zakat). As one Muslim authority summarizes, the believer “is obligated to befriend a believer—even if he is oppressive and violent toward you—while he must be hostile to the infidel—even if he is liberal and kind to you” (The Al Qaeda Reader, p. 64 ). This loyalty to fellow Muslims and enmity for non-Muslims is fundamentally responsible for the metaphysical or “spiritual” clash between Islam and the West. Add to enmity the fact that Muslims are permitted to lie to non-Muslims—including by feigning loyalty or friendship—and it becomes apparent how dangerous the doctrine of “loyalty and enmity” is: among other things, disloyalty to infidels (see here, here, and here for examples), and a “mafia mentality,” whereby all Muslims must overtly or covertly work together, suggests that hostility for non-Muslims, even when unseen, is ever present.

Jihad

Notwithstanding ubiquitous popular usage of the term, jihad (جهاد) has distinct theological meaning and implications.

Jihad—war on non-Muslims for no less a reason than that they are non-Muslims—is the physical manifestation or realization of enmity for “infidels.” Not only is it natural to attack and seek to subjugate those whom one is bred on hating, but the doctrine of jihad, including to spread and enforce Sharia around the world, is part and parcel of Islam; it is no less codified than Islam’s Five Pillars. As the Encyclopaedia of Islam’s entry for “jihad” puts it, the “spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon Muslims in general … Jihad must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam … Islam must completely be made over before the doctrine of jihad can be eliminated.”

One can continue quoting any number of authorities, especially Muslims, saying that jihad to subjugate the world is an ironclad aspect of Islam. Even the late Osama bin Laden—who would have had the West believe that al-Qaeda’s terror is a byproduct of political grievances—when speaking in Arabic to Muslims made it perfectly clear that the doctrine of jihad is the root problem: “Our talks with the infidel West and our conflict with them ultimately revolve around one issue… Does Islam, or does it not, force people by the power of the sword to submit to its authority corporeally if not spiritually? Yes. There are only three choices in Islam… Either submit, or live under the suzerainty of Islam, or die.”

Dhimmitude

But as infidels are to be hated per se and not merely in the context of jihad—the ability of which to prosecute is often curtailed by circumstances—the hostility continues even after the cessation of successful jihads.

The term dhimmitude was coined by the late Lebanese President Bashir Gemayel to encapsulate the theologically-rooted demands and expectations pious Muslims have of Christian and Jewish subjects. Writer Bat Ye’or later popularized the term.

Unlike other conquerors and conquests that generally permit the conquered to go on unmolested so long as they do not challenge the new order—some even try to appease and win over their new subjects—whenever and wherever Islam conquers, that old metaphysical hostility which fueled the jihad remains to gloat in triumph over the subject infidels. Thus, not only must the latter pay a special tax (jizya), embrace a subordinate positon, and follow a number of debilitations—they must also be reminded and made to feel inferior and despised, including as a way to “inspire” them to convert to the “true” faith.

As the Islamic State explained in the aforementioned article, regardless of any and all appeasement offered by the non-Muslim, “we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam. Even if you were to pay jizyah and live under the authority of Islam in humiliation, we would continue to hate you.”

These three interrelated teachings of Islam are the roots of conflict between Islam and the West.

Either way, Islam wins: If the non-Muslim continues in his faith, the Muslims continue to prey off him; if, on the other hand, the non-Muslim eventually “surrenders” to Islam, the umma gains a new recruit (with death as the penalty should he later entertain second thoughts and apostatize).

These three interrelated teachings of Islam—loyalty and enmity, jihad, and dhimmitude—are unequivocally grounded in Islamic law, or Sharia. They are not matters open to interpretation or debate. By eliminating or lessening the focus from all those other “problematic” teachings that affect Muslims only—but which tend to be conflated with those (three) teachings that directly affect the non-Muslim—one can better appreciate, and thus place the spotlight on, the true roots of conflict between Islam and the West.[READ MORE ]

Jihadis all want one thing – Sharia law imposed on the world

(UNDERSTANDING THE THREAT) — By John Guandolo

Unanimously, all of the violent jihadi groups (Al Qaeda, the Islamic State, Boko Haram, Abu Sayef, Al Shabaab, Hamas, Hizbollah…), the suit-wearing jihadis of the Muslim Brotherhood, and the 57 Islamic members of the OIC (Organisation of Islamic Cooperation) – the heads of state of all 56 Islamic nations plus the Palestinian territories – clearly state they seek to impose sharia (Islamic Law) on the earth.

Jihadis – “terrorists” if you prefer – arrested or killed in Europe and North America all state they do what they do for the sake of Islam’s god “Allah.”

Jihadis (sharia adherent muslims) state they are muslims waging jihad in the cause of Allah to establish an Islamic State (caliphate) under sharia (Islamic Law).

All Islamic sources – from the gold standard of Islamic jurisprudence in the world (Al Azhar in Cairo, Egypt) to Islamic elementary and junior high schools – define Islam as a “complete way of life governed by sharia.”

According to the most widely used text book in Islamic junior high schools in the United States (What Islam is All About): “Islam is not a religion, however, but a complete way of life” (p2); “The Shari’ah is the ideal path for us to follow” (p354); “The basis of the legal and political system is the Shari’ah of Allah” (p381); “If anyone dies in a Jihad they automatically will go to Paradise” (p164); “The duty of Muslim citizens is to be loyal to the Islamic State” (p382).

There are two sources of sharia: the Koran and the Sunnah (the example of Islam’s prophet Mohammad).

A “muslim” is one who submits to Islam. To submit to Islam is to submit to Allah’s law – sharia.

The Koran

According to Islam, the Koran is the “un-created word of Allah.”

The contents of the Koran were revealed to Islam’s prophet Mohammad between the years 610 A.D. and 632 A.D. in the Arabian peninsula (modern day Saudi Arabia) through an angel. The Koran has 114 chapters or suras.

The Koran states (2:106, 16:101) that whatever was revealed to Mohammad chronologically last legally overrules anything that came before it. This is the Koranic concept of “abrogation.” Islamic scholars have published lists of the 114 Koranic chapters in chronological order.

Allah revealed his message to Mohammad progressively over time. In Mohammad’s first 13 years in Mecca, he converted less than 200 people, and there is no mention of jihad. Then Mohammad made the hijra (migration/flight) to Medina. It should be noted this is when the Islamic calendar begins. It is also when Mohammad arrives in Medina the first revelations of jihad come.

In Medina, Mohammad became a political and military leader and raised an army of converts to Islam. Sharia comes from the Koranic verses revealed to Mohammad in Medina.

Chapter 9 is the last chapter in the Koran (chronologically) to discuss jihad and, therefore, legally controls all others.

For pagans the Koran 9:5 states: “Fight and slay the unbeliever wherever you find them, capture and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush (strategem of war).”

According to sharia, Pagans must convert to Islam or be killed.

Koran 9:29 states: “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

“People of the Book” (Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians) must be invited to Islam, and if they refuse they must be asked to submit to sharia, pay the non-muslim poll tax (jizya) or be killed.

Tafsir

Every verse in the Koran has been legally defined in a book called the Tafsir. The most authoritative Tafsir scholar in Islam is a man named Ibn Kathir.

Tafsir ibn Kathir defines Koran verse 9:5 as follows: “This is the Ayah (verse) of the sword…’and capture them’ (legally means) executing some and keeping some as prisoners…’and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush’ (legally means) do not wait until you find them. Rather, seek and besiege them in their areas and forts, gather intelligence about them in the various roads and fairways so that what is made wide looks ever smaller to them. This way, they will have no choice, but to die or embrace Islam.” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Vol 4, pages 375-376)

Many Islamic Centers/mosques across the United States host weekly Tafsir classes.

The Sunnah

The Koran states Mohammad is an “exhaulted standard of character” (68:4) and a “beautiful pattern of conduct” (33:21) for muslims to follow for all times. If Mohammad did it or said it, it is an example for all Muslims to follow for all time.

His words and deeds are recorded in the authoritative biographies (Sira) and the collection of the Hadith (reports) or stories about him. In Islam, the most authoritative hadith are by a man named Bukhari.

The Prophet said, “The hour of judgment will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them. It will not come until the Jew hides behind rocks and trees. It will not come until the rocks or the trees say, ‘O Muslim! O servant of God! There is a Jew behind me. Come and kill him.” Bukhari 2926: Book 56, Hadith 139

“Allah’s Messenger said: ‘I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Messenger, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform that, then they save their lives and property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah.’” Bukhari 25: Book 2, Hadith 18

Mohammad participated in beheading 600-900 Jews after the Battle of the Trench, tortured, approved the killing of people who mocked him, married a six year old girl and consummated the marriage when she was 9, and waged war against all who would not submit to Allah’s law.

100% of sharia mandates jihad until the world is under Islamic rule and 100% of sharia only defines “Jihad” as “warfare against non-muslims.”

The stated purpose of Islam is not to convert or kill everyone, but to submit the earth to Allah’s law – sharia.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s (MB) published by-laws and all of their doctrine make clear the MB was created to “establish Allah’s law in the land.”

The largest terrorism financing trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history – US v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), Dallas 2008 – identifies the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) as being a part of the MB’s Islamic Movement in North America whose stated objective is to wage “Civilization Jihad” to establish and Islamic State under sharia.

In other words, the Muslim Brotherhood – ie the most prominent Islamic organizations in the United States – has the same objective as Al Qaeda and the Islamic State.

Interestingly, ISNA, ICNA, and CAIR, are also the organizations leading/driving all “Interfaith Outreach” in the United States.

Sharia kills. Stop the Muslim Mafia.

AUTHOR JOHN GUANDOLO is a US Naval Academy graduate, served as an Infantry/Reconnaissance officer in the United States Marines and is a combat veteran, served as a Special Agent in the FBI from 1996-2008, and was recruited out of the FBI by the Department of Defense to conduct strategic analysis of the Islamic threat. He is the President and Founder of Understanding the Threat (UTT).

[READ MORE ]

What the great thinkers and leaders of the West had to say about Islam

(UNDERSTANDING THE THREAT) — Read here what Theodore Roosevelt, Saint Thomas Aquinas, Winston Churchill, John Quincy Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams had to say about Islam.

Theodore Roosevelt On Islam’s Incompatibility with the West
(“Social Values and National Existence”, Papers and Proceedings of the American Sociological Society, vols 9-10, 1916)

It is utterly impossible to appreciate social values at all or to discriminate between what is socially good and socially bad unless we appreciate the utterly different social values of different wars. The Greeks who triumphed at Marathon and Salamis did a work without which the world would have been deprived of the social value of Plato and Aristotle, of Aeschylus, Herodotus, and Thucydides. The civilization of Europe, America, and Australia exists today at all only because of the victories of civilized man over the enemies of civilization, because of victories stretching through the centuries from the days of Miltiades and Themistocles to those of 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 influence and the decaying native Christian churches 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. It is of course worth while for sociologists to discuss the effect of this European militarism on “social values,” but only if they first clearly realize and formulate the fact that if the European militarism had not been able to defend itself against and to overcome the militarism of Asia and Africa, there would have been no “social values” of any kind in our world today, and no sociologists to discuss them.

Saint Thomas Aquinas on Islam
(Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles, Book 1, Chapter 6)

The case is clear in the case of Mohammed. He seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of flesh goads us. His teaching also contained precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and gave free reign to carnal pleasures. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proof of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a 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 only be divine reveals an invisibly inspired teacher of truth.

On the contrary, Mohammed 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 believe in him were brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of divine teaching through whose numbers Mohammed 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.”

Winston Churchill on Islam
(Winston Churchill, The River War (Volume II, 1st edtion), pgs 248-250)

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 paralyzes 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 civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.

Winston Churchill in the House of Commons, 14 June 1921

“A large number of Bin Saud’s followers belong to the Wahabi sect, a form of Mohammedanism which bears, roughly speaking, the same relation to Orthodox Islam as the most militant form of Calvanism would have bourne to Rome in the fiercest times of the religious wars. The Wahabis profess a life of exceeding austerity, and what they practice themselves, they rigorously enforce on others. They hold it as an article of duty, as well as of faith, to kill all who do not share their opinions and to make slaves of their wives and children. Women have been put to death in Wahabi villages for simply appearing in the streets. It is a penal offense to wear a silk garment. Men have been killed for smoking a cigarette, and as for the crime of alcohol, the most energetic supporter of the temperance cause in this country falls far behind them. Austere, intolerant, well-armed, and bloodthirsty, in their own regions the Wahabis are a distinct factor which must be taken into account, and they have been, and still are, very dangerous to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, and to the whole institution of the pilgrimage, in which our Indian fellow-subjects are so deeply concerned.”

John Quincy Adams on Islam

“In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar [i.e., Muhammad], the Egyptian, […..] 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….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.

Thomas Jefferson & John Adams on Islam

In 1786, Thomas Jefferson, then the ambassador to France, and John Adams, then the ambassador to Britain, met in London with Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the ambassador to Britain from Tripoli. The Americans asked Adja why his government was hostile to American ships, even though there had been no provocation. The ambassador’s response was reported to the Continental Congress, where the original letter remains today. “That it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Qur’an, that all nations who should not have acknowledged 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 Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

Saudi textbooks ‘teaching hatred’ of Jews and other faiths

(JERUSALEM POST) — Saudi Arabian secondary school pupils are taught that the day of resurrection will not come until Muslims kill Jews, Human Rights Watch found during a recent review of textbooks that also revealed hateful and disparaging references to Christians, Shi’ites and Sufism.

“As early as first grade, students in Saudi schools are being taught hatred toward all those perceived to be of a different faith or school of thought. The lessons in hate are reinforced with each following year,” Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director for Human Rights Watch, said in a press release last week. The New York-based group reviewed 45 Saudi textbooks and student work books produced by the Education Ministry for the primary, middle and secondary education levels.

As part of the curriculum on tawhid, or monotheism, a textbook explains one of the markers by which one can recognize the approach of the Day of Resurrection with the following passage: “The hour will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews and Muslims will kill the Jews. The Jew will hide under the rock and tree and the rock or tree will say O Muslim, servant of Allah, this Jew is behind me, kill him.”

The passage is from a hadith, or saying, attributed to Muhammad.

Moderate Palestinian Islamic thinker Mohammed S. Dajani Daoudi described the hadith as a “fabrication,” and condemned Saudi Arabia for teaching it. “The prophet couldn’t have said that and it contradicts the text of the Koran. The prophet said anything attributed to me not in harmony with the Koran is not true. This can’t be true because it totally contradicts the text of the Koran. Teaching this to children is incitement and antisemitic. Saudi Arabia and any other Arab countries teaching such nonsense should stop and this should be eliminated from the educational systems.”

Human Rights Watch noted that the Saudi curriculum describes Jews, Christians and people of other faiths as kuffar, or unbelievers. In one fifth-grade textbook, the curriculum calls Jews, Christians and al-wathaniyeeen [pagans] the “original unbelievers” and declares that it is the duty of Muslims to excommunicate them. It says: “For whoever does not [excommunicate them] or whoever doubts their religious infidelity is himself an unbeliever.”

The vitriol also extends to fellow Muslims. Human Rights Watch found that a secondary school textbook describes Sufism as “a perverse path that began with the claim of asceticism or severe self-discipline, then entered into illicit innovation, misguidedness and exaggeration in reverence to the righteous.” Other books condemned Sufi and Shi’ite practices of visiting graves of prominent religious figures, saying this will lead to eternal damnation and that those who turn such tombs into worship sites are “evil natured.”

A fifth-grade book condemns Sufis for celebrating the Prophet Muhammad’s birthday. “Celebrating the prophet’s birth in the spring of every year is prohibited, for it is a new innovation and is in imitation of the Christian celebration of what is known as the birth of Christ.”

Human Rights Watch said that after the September 11, 2001, attacks, in which 15 of the 19 perpetrators were Saudi citizens, Saudi officials said they would carry out educational reforms. But the textbook review shows they did not keep their promises, the NGO said.

“The Saudi government’s official denigration of other religious groups, combined with its ban on public practice of other religions, could amount to incitement to hatred or discrimination,” HRW said. It added that international human rights law requires countries to prohibit “any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.”

[READ MORE]

Denmark: Thousands of cases of “low-tech jihad” — Worst situation since WWII

(THE NEW AMERICAN) — By Selwyn Duke

In Denmark, once one of the world’s safest countries, the army now has been deployed domestically. It’s part of an effort to combat “low-tech jihad,” thousands of “incidents involving loosened wheel bolts on cars, large rocks or cinder blocks thrown from highway overpasses, and thin steel wires strung across bicycle paths meant to decapitate unsuspecting cyclists, reports Dr. Nicolai Sennels, a Danish psychologist and writer.

Moreover, despite Denmark’s ultra-strict gun-control laws, gangs of immigrants from the MENAP countries (Middle East, North Africa, and Pakistan) are randomly shooting people in the capital city of Copenhagen, Sennels further informs.

Sennels, who spent years working with Muslim youth in prison, claims that his nation itself is beginning to resemble a prison, with the rule of law breaking down and migrant gangs controlling some streets.

For example, after citing the shootings of three young men used for, as he puts it, “target practice,” Sennels reports that police warned 17- to 25-year-old men to avoid public spaces in Copenhagen. He quotes Preben Bang Henriksen, spokesman for Denmark’s majority government party, as being horrified and stating, “We have not had such warnings from the police since the 2nd World War. It is totally unacceptable.”

But wholly predictable, many would say. In Western Europe, crime has exploded and terrorism become frequent as the Mideast migrant population has risen, prompting nations such as Hungary and Poland to take a hard line against Muslim migration. Even liberal Denmark is waking up to, and warning of, the gathering storm. As 10 News wrote in July:

Danish police warn that the excessively liberal refugee policies of Germany and Sweden endanger lives in neighboring countries.

Intelligence services in Europe and the US have long warned that Islamic jihadis are among refugees coming to the West. Danish Security and Intelligence Service (PET) is now criticizing Merkel’s and Sweden’s refugee policies, with direct warnings that they destabilize security in the region.

They have reason to worry, too, as these migrants cannot be reliably vetted. After all, Third World countries such as war-torn Syria, Afghanistan, and Sudan simply don’t have comprehensive Western-style databases providing accurate information on citizens. Yet it wouldn’t matter if they did because in places such as Syria, you can pay a bribe and get official government documents saying you’re whoever you want to be.

Thus, it’s no surprise that an intelligence warning last year indicated that Islamic State hit squads were hiding among migrants in Germany.

In a similar vein, self-described orthodox Muslim Dr. Mudar Zahran, a Jordanian Palestinian academic and political leader currently living in the United Kingdom, warned in a 2015 interview that many of the migrants are not Syrian, but claim to be so, to get refugee status. Moreover, he avers that 75 percent of the Syrians come from safe areas and that the imperiled Syrians cannot even get out of the country. In other words, Zahran stated, most of the migrants are unknown quantities entering the West for economic reasons — or something darker.

As to the latter, Zahran said at the time, “I can authoritively [sic] confirm — I have photos, I have images, I have pictures, I have names of terrorists who actually are already in Europe posting their photos in Europe on Facebook.” He also warned about the migration that if “you read Arab magazines and Arab newspapers, they are talking about, ‘Good job! Now we’re going to conquest [sic] Europe.’ So it’s not even a secret.” Zahran called this “the soft Islamic conquest of the West.”

As for Sennels, he delves into these problems’ root causes. Apparently drawing upon his experiences working with Muslim teens, he writes that we “must not underestimate how strongly the Qur’an’s message of holy war affects Muslim youth.”

Yet it’s not just the Koran. As I reported in February, “The Islamic canon — the Koran, Hadith, and Sira — has literally 9.6 times as many words devoted to political violence as does the Old Testament: 327,547 vs. 34,039. (The New Testament has zero.)” Moreover, these violent injunctions aren’t limited but apply in every time and place.

Sennels explained the result, writing,

80 percent of young Turks in Holland see “nothing wrong” in jihad against non-Muslims. The very high number must be seen in the light of the fact that Turks are considered to be among the more Western Muslims. 27 percent of all young French and 14 percent of all young brits [sic] under 25 sympathize with the jihad movement Islamic State. This probably includes a very large majority of young Muslims in the two countries. The figures closely match that 75 percent of Muslims in Europe believe that the Quran — a book that hundreds of places preaches violence against non-Muslims — must be literally interpreted.

The above helps to explain a comprehensive German study of 45,000 youths that was reported in 2010. It found that while increasing religiosity among Christian youths made them less violent, increasing religiosity among Muslim youths actually made them more violent.

What seems certain is that Denmark, and the rest of Europe, are also getting more violent. But, hey, having the violent, and not just the non-violent, increases diversity, too.[READ MORE]

Was Muhammad insane?

THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM OF ISLAM is the belief that God talked to Muhammad and dictated the contents of the Koran to him. Muslims are indoctrinated into believing the Koran is God’s word, and so they act on the numerous incitements to violence that they find in it.

What they find in the Koran came from the mind of Muhammad, and for insight into the mental condition of this “prophet,” consider Chapter 33 of his Koran, entitled “The Confederates.” This is one of the chapters Muhammad composed in Yathrib (later called Medina) where he fled after his Meccan compatriots realized they needed to kill him to preserve their way of life.

The chapter is like a wild theme park ride that races in and out of numerous topics. In the 73 verses that make up the chapter, Muhammad covers the following in the God-voice he used for the Koran: He recaps a recent battle with the Meccans and excoriates people who were afraid to fight and die for him; he gloats about his extermination of the men and boys of one of the Jewish tribes of Yathrib, the confiscation of their property, and the enslavement of their women and children; he authorizes himself to take as many wives as he likes, permits himself to marry the wife of his adopted son, forbids himself from taking any more wives after he has taken as many as he likes, but allows himself sex slaves. Read more »

Geert Wilders recommends Islam be re-categorized as political, not religious

(VDARE) — Dutch politician and freedom fighter Geert Wilders has an unusual but eminently sensible idea, namely that we westerners should reclassify Islam as a totalitarian political system rather than a religion. Treating violent Islam like a normal religion certainly misunderstands the ultimate purpose of the jihad movement, that of world conquest where the entire planet would be run according to repressive misogynous sharia law.

When the jihadists say a world caliphate is their aim, they are serious and dedicated to that goal. Hijrah should be a word more in common usage: it means jihad conquest accomplished through immigration, and the current situation of open borders into and within Europe is absolutely deadly.

The Koran does have over 100 verses that promote violence as a way to advance the belief: e.g. (Quran 4:76) – “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…”

Back to Geert Wilders, he recently sat down with Ezra Levant of Rebel Media for a half-hour chat about various subjects concerning politics and civilization. VDARE transcribed the section about re-imagining Islam which seems particularly important now, when western societies are jumping through hoops to treat Muslims like Methodists.

EZRA LEVANT: (19:40) All across the West, there’s a belief in freedom of religion. Is Islam more than just a religion?

GEERT WILDERS: Islam is NOT a religion. I know it sounds crazy, and I know I don’t get a lot of support for that idea, but I strongly believe that Islam might be dressed up as a religion: it has a holy book, it has a temple, it looks like a religion, but it’s more an ideology and a totalitarian ideology than a religion. You cannot compare it with Christianity and Judaism, and you should compare it with other totalitarian ideologies like communism or fascism. I always use one example to prove it — there are many more that — like in communism or fascism, the penalty is death if you want to leave it. I mean, you cannot leave Islam: if you are an apostate, if you are a renegade, the penalty is death, and even today in our societies, let alone in the Islamic societies, it is enacted upon, you know people ARE killed for that reason, and you can leave Christianity, you can leave Judaism.

So and the other point is that Islam wants to rule the world — as you know Islam means to subjugate, wants to rule and dominate and subjugate, not only the person’s life but also a whole society. The rule of God, the rule of allah, the rule of the Quran and the Hadith is the rule of the society. I’m not talking about all Muslims, I’m talking about the ideology, and the idea of ideology cannot integrate and assimilate in a society, it wants to dominate it and it wants to subjugate with violence.

The Quran is full of more violence and anti-semitism than Mein Kampf, for instance. People and academics have proved that, so our biggest mistake is, once again, the false equality that we say that Islam is a religion, so they have the freedom of religion. And I believe it’s not religion; it should not be treated as a religion, and the constitutional freedoms of religion do not apply to an ideology. We would not allow in Holland Nazi schools for instance — it’s another totalitarian ideology. Why do we have Islamic schools? Where young children at five, six, seven, eight years old that we want to integrate, get a job, get Dutch friends, participate fully and equally in the Dutch society are being caught up with the Quran and ideology of hate and thought . . .

We should stand up and be tolerant to the people or ideologies that are tolerant to us.

[READ MORE]

How to bring an end to Islam

PEOPLE WHO ARE TERRIFIED BY THE RELENTLESS advance of Islam should take comfort in the fact that no one in Athens today believes that Zeus resides on Mount Olympus or that no one in Rome still worships at the temple of Jupiter.

These were myths that bound Greek and Roman civilizations together, but they were ultimately discarded when people began to see they were nothing more than fabulous stories.

Why this should be comforting to people today is the fact that Islam is based entirely on a myth, one whose demise is long overdue. This is the myth that God talked to Muhammad, that he was God’s “messenger.” Everything Muslims believe and everything they do is derived from that primary, bedrock myth.

Given that Islam aspires eventually to take over the entire world and that it is making rapid progress in infiltrating and undermining the West, isn’t it time to go after the myth that sustains it? To destroy the myth about Muhammad is to destroy what he created. Read more »