Fata viam invenient
Tuesday, Oct. 23, 2007
The Prophet said, 'If a Muslim discards his religion, kill him.' Bukhari:V4B52N260
"There may be a reason the Islamic prostration requires one to bow his head toward Hell while his posterior moons Heaven. Craig Winn, "Prophet of Doom"
"Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war." Koran 9:5
"Why do you only read the Quranic verses of mercy and do not read the verses of killing?" Khomeini, 1981
چرا هی آيات رحمت در قرآن را ميخوانيد و آيات قتال را نميخوانيد
"Mohammed came as a conquerer of armies and the carnal. The Son of God came as a conquerer of the mind and heart and soul." Anon. 1885
"None of us wishes harm to a skunk, but none of us wants one living in our attic either." Pete Fisher
"There is only one God and his name is not Allah." D. C. Fait 2006
What If Other Religions Had Muslim Values?
Sometimes we have to laugh. Other times we must cry.
Follow this link to SpelledSideways' publication of Billy Rojas' satire on Mohammedism to both laugh (about Mohammedism absurdities) and to cry (over the fact that Mohammedism exists).
Give Mohammed the Respect He Deserves
Most religious historians view Islam as having been founded in 622 CE by Muhammad the Prophet (peace be upon him).* He lived from about 570 to 632 CE). The religion started in Mecca, when the angel Jibril (a.k.a. Jibreel; Gabriel in English) read the first revelation to Muhammad (thwh). (Mohammed and Muhammed (thwh) are alternative spellings for his name.) Islam is the youngest of the world's very large religions -- those with over 300 million members -- which include Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism.
But only one of them, Christianity in its purest form, is the work of God.
* Muslims traditionally acknowledge respect for Muhammad, Jesus and other prophets (peace be upon them) by adding this phrase or an abbreviation "(thwh)" after their names.
'Tis better to place "thwh" after the Profit Mohammed's name. That would, of course, mean "to hell with him", where, most likely, he already is. dcf
Someone should submit an article to us showing how Mohammed (thwh) was nothing more than a tool used by Satan to hide our savior Christ Jesus and the only path to salvation from millions of sinners.
The Holy Bible in Arabic
Our Muslim and Arabian friends can read God's Word here.
Mohamhead Stuff
Cartoonists' reactions to islamists' fury.
A biography of Mohamhead aka Mo aka Halabi ben Abdallah aka Bobby Halabi
Free computer Bible software:
Shootout at Oak Lawn!by Denis Schulz
“It got out of hand,” said Tom Smyth. Sure, like the shootout at the O. K. Corral. Fortunately, Mom and Dad don’t carry guns to school board meetings. The Earps and the Clantons settled their differences in a few ticks of the clocks; the problems at Oak Lawn and the rest of the nation remain unresolved. Smyth, superintendent for School District 122 (Oak Lawn, near Chicago) said the confrontation at Ridgeland was due to a misunderstanding over a request made by Elizabeth Zahdan, a Muslim mother of three, that Ramadan be celebrated alongside Christmas. She wasn’t asking for much—less than a dhimmi would ask for in Saudi Barbaria—didn’t want much. “We are American, too,” she said. “I want everyone to have equal rights.” (c) 2007 by Faith Freedom International A Bridge to “Moderate” Islam Is In Fact a Road to Hellby Amil Imani ‘Islam is
a religion of peace and the great majority of Muslims are not party to any
plans and actions of the radicals’- so claim academic pundits, leftist journalists,
and hired Islamic apologists. The incantation of these “authorities” is the
lullaby that puts the people into a sleep of
complacency.
Complacency and appeasement on the
part of the free world and those well-meaning, non-practicing Muslims, can
only serve Islam. There is no chance for co-existence with Islam. All one
needs to know is to see what is happening in Islamic countries. That is
exactly what is in store for the presently free people of the world if Islam
is not held in check.
The average free person, who is busy
with all manner of demands on his time and resources, would hardly want to
worry about the very real threat which mainstream Islam poses to his life and
to his future. It is so much easier to accept the claims of authorities who
assure us not to worry; ‘it’s just a tiny minority of extremists’, and ‘soon
the great majority of “moderates” will triumph over the crazy zealots’. So we lull ourselves back to the
comfort of our pretenses, serene in knowing that the “experts” have it all
under control.
Wait!
Aren’t these the same experts who told us Hitler could not possibly be
crazy enough to attack
Aren’t these the same folks who tell us the Saudis
are our best friends in the
Yet, some of these professional advocates of Islam
go farther by accusing those who sound the alarm as racist, bigots,
hatemongers and much more. That
attitude sure worked well for
But the elites who scold us and seduce us into our
slumbering acquiescence never allow their dismal record of intellectual
failure to prevent them from claiming ever more enlightenment. Their present project is to ‘build a
bridge to moderate
Islam’.
Let us, for the record, be clear on this subject
one more time: Islamism, Islamofascism, Radical Islam, Political Islam, and
Militant Islam are different terms for essentially the same thing, a virulent,
hateful, and violent system of beliefs and practices. Yet, one and all are
progeny and mutation of Islam itself.
Islam in all of its forms and sects is simply an
evil ideology that is practiced by all Muslims. Islamism is a pincer, with the
world in its jaws between the end-of-the-world Shiism and the jihadist
Sunnis. To the simple mind of
western “intellectuals”, within every ideology there must always be “good
liberals” and “bad conservatives”, and so they search in vain for the
“moderate”, “reasonable”, “pragmatic” wing of any threatening ideology.
But in their enormous ignorance of the realities of
Islam, they fail to realize that in Islam, the wings are not “left” and
“right”, or “liberal” vs. “conservative”; they are two jaws in the same
supremacist device that aims to crush the life of all non-believers. I will explain why attempting to build
a bridge to “moderate” Islam is in fact a road to hell, since “moderate Islam”
is oxymoronic.
The so-called “Moderate Muslims” or “Secular
Muslims” would like to have their cake and eat it too. They wish to remain
Muslims in name only, yet not bother to read the mandates of the Quran or
understand the context in which Muhammad foisted his poisonous prophecy upon
the world.
Instead of conclusively demonstrating Islam's violent nature from its
very inception and moving in another direction with what they can prove is the
worthwhile portions of Islam, they have decided to marry an inherently noxious
religion with an inherently godless philosophy, secularism. “Secular
Islam Summit” was hilarious; a run-down and meaningless show of desperate
attempt to salvage a bankrupt and deadly ideology.
Also, these happy-go-lucky people-of-Islam are
indeed delusional, for Muhammad’s record is not even the subject of
debate. His utterances and deeds
are a part of history that is simply not debatable. Islam is what Muhammad said it was in
the diatribes of vitriol and hatred that is the Quran; and Islam is what
Muhammad did during his violent life. If you accept Islam as your religion,
you become a part of the guiding principles of hatred, revenge, and rejection
of prior enlightened prophecies.
But the “bridge-builders refuse to acknowledge the fact that one cannot
be a Muslim and not abide by the dictates of the Quran.
Keep in mind that the fact being a Muslim is a
clear admission of wrongdoing, the extent of which depends on the degree of a
person’s Muslim-ness. If he is only a Muslim who does not practice Islam, then
he is, at the very least, guilty of hypocrisy. If he is somewhat of a Muslim
by tithing, from time to time, following the ranting of the local mullah or
imam, and swallowing whole the pronouncements of the high divines, then he is
guilty of significantly contributing to the evildoings of
Islam.
It is time for the non-practicing Muslims to
abandon their childish desire to cling to evil, yet pretend they can “reform”
it, like the abused wife insisting that she can cure her alcoholic, violent
spouse by remaining in a codependent relationship. It’s time the self-described
“moderates” either accept the truth of their ugly religious ethics and reject
them by joining the forces of liberty and worldwide family of free people, or
join the forces of darkness. But
to join the peace-loving free world, you must immediately stop making excuses
for the religion of hate!
Here is my 10-point process to understand why Islam
cannot be “moderated,” for the benefit of those misguided people who are the
advocates of “Secular Islam.” I will prove that “Secular Islam” is just a
hoax.
1_The first question that must be answered is
whether or not any doctrine can be called “evil”. If nothing is good or evil, then all
of life is inherently nihilistic, and all thinkers and believers in life (all
of us) are necessarily nihilists.
We must establish a way to measure “evil”.
Take for example, Naziism. How are we to know that the Nazi party
was evil, and that present-day believers in Nazi principles are doing
evil? We certainly cannot use
traditional Islamic mea culpas, to rid Nazis of their well deserved
guilt! We can’t look at present
day Nazis who are demonstrably not trying to take over the world. We can’t ask the average Nazis on the
street to declare themselves authorities on their entire cult.
We can’t just look at the actions of some of them,
for in doing so, we could simply assert that the good Nazi party was hijacked
by “radicals”. It is certainly
true that the vast majority of German supporters of the Nazi party in 1936
were normal, peaceful people who were simply held hostage by the zealots. If you took a random “Nazi”, you’d be
vastly more likely to condemn him for his taste for Sauerkraut rather than see him participate in an actual
murder.
So we have the same excuses at work that exist in
the debate over Islam, but today we condemn Naziism as evil. If it is illegitimate to simply look
for a nice Nazi, and try to build a bridge to the Nazi power structure through
him, then how can we think we can do it with Islam? We think so because we have
presupposed that Naziism is bad, and because of the forces of propaganda, we
believe that Islam is not. But
this begs the question: How then
do we know what evil is, so we can condemn it?
The answer is that the only way to determine if a
thing is evil or neutral or good is to establish a working definition of what
constitutes evil and its opposite, good, and then test the doctrine against
the definition.
While it is true that many people will disagree on
the precise definition, it does not matter. Let each person establish the
definition for him or herself, and at least be logical and fair in evaluating
the evidence of the creed. In
other words, deal with the consequences of the process, no matter how hard the
findings are to accept. The Bible says, “You shall know them by their
fruits.”
2_Once a definition is in place, the only way to
evaluate a belief system under any accepted definition is to read the
foundational books, the manuscripts that define the creed...the scripture that
was carefully written to explain the norms and intent of those who established
it. You cannot ask a Nazi whether
he thinks he is evil. He will
tell you he is good, and that you are evil for resisting him, because he is
defending his “people” against those who resist his beliefs. This is exactly what Muhammad said
about the Jews and Christians who resisted him.
“Thus
(will it be said): ‘Taste ye then of the (punishment): for those who resist
Allah, is the penalty of the Fire.’"
Quran 8.014
“And
when those who disbelieve plot against thee (O Muhammad) to wound thee
fatally, or to kill thee or to drive thee forth; they plot, but Allah (also)
plotteth; and Allah is the best of plotters.” Quran
8.030
“And
fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah. But if
they cease (in defeat), then lo! Allah is Seer of what they do.” Quran
8.039
You cannot allow a random Nazi member to provide
personal anecdotal opinion and declare it to be authoritative. Only the written treatises of the
founders may be taken as true expression of the belief system. You cannot take a third-party account
of Nazi goodness to be superior to the Nazi party principles and the
philosophy espoused in Mein
Kampf. That would be ignoring Hitler’s beliefs in exchange
for that of an outside observer commenting on Hitler’s beliefs. The same is true for Islamic
apologists. We can’t just trot
out any “scholar” and declare him to be authoritative over the words and deeds
of the most important figures in Islamic history.
This is the precise error that Stephen Schwartz makes in advising people to read the Aqida al-Tahawiyya (interpretations of the
creed), or other apocryphal interpretations that only a fool would
escalate above the Quran and Hadith.
Yet normal people can’t help notice the similarity in name of “Aqida al” as referenced by Schwartz
is his fatuous quest for moderation in an inherently oppressive philosophy,
and the more memorable name “Al
Qaida” as manifested in reality.
Why does the third-party whitewash text name so closely resemble Terror
Inc’s brand name? Because they
are the same thing!
Once we have found the foundational texts which
declare the basis and purpose of the creed, in order to validate the creed as
it is written we must test if the leaders of the creed are in fact true to
their words; one must look at historical actions of those who rose in rank
through the belief system. Look
at their words, actions, and reactions as their lives played out to see if
they were consistent in representing their own creed. This is how you test whether or not a
doctrine is evil.
3_Having defined evil, and having isolated the
relevant foundational texts, we can move ahead. If we find a group of people
who adhere strictly to their codes of conduct as established in their
scripture, we cannot place these people on the sidelines of their religion as
aberrations or “extremists”. Such
attempts to marginalize the fundamentalist believers in a religious movement
are the product of highly confused and illogical
thinking.
A person cannot be “extreme” with respect to her
religion if she is in alignment with all of its commandments and
admonishments. Being highly
devout is “fundamentalism,” but it is not extreme or radical. The reason we wish to believe that a
Buddhist who never steps on an ant is “extreme” is because we realize that the
behavior is unusual and difficult to accomplish, inasmuch as almost nobody can
live up to its ideals.
But to view an action that is rare and strange to
you, and then declare that, because it occupies a far-off position with
respect to your personal beliefs and capability to align, it is therefore
“extreme” with respect to its own religious dictates, is highly illogical and
quite frankly stupid. And this is
the precise “logic” that is used by those who wipe the Islamic slate clean,
declaring all inhumane practices and advocation in Islam to be the handiwork
of “extremists.” Such muddled
thinking does nothing to advance our understanding of the creed, the evil it
does, and its dangers to mankind.
If we use this process and we objectively find that
Islam satisfies the definition of evil, we cannot then be subject to the
insults of the ignorant who themselves refuse to conduct a like investigation.
We cannot be accused of being “Nazis” ourselves simply because our rational
discovery and analysis process uncovered true evil. It would be the height of absurdity to
declare that an anti-Nazi is just as bad as a Nazi for vehemently opposing
Nazi thinking! The same must be
true for Islam.
4_ I won’t get into every nuance of the reasons;
any average person can define evil and read the Quran and come away with the
sole conclusion that it is evil.
Only those of us who have bothered to read the Quran and parts of the
Hadith and Sunna and who have bothered to read history and take note of
present-day Islamic violence and oppression in light of their dark beliefs can
say that we have good reason to declare Islam an evil cult. But suffice it to say that Islam, as
configured by Muhammad and as interpreted over the centuries, essentially
boils down to the following principles:
a. Jews and Christians are, per se, the epitome of
evil to Islamic thinking. Pagans
are also evil, but somewhat less insulting to Allah, since the Jews and
Christians received prophecy and “rejected” it.
One of many such verses of
hate: “Those who reject (Truth) (Islam),
among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire,
to dwell therein (for aye). They are the worst of creatures.” Quran
098.006
b. Therefore Jews and Christians are offensive to
Allah. The worse between them is
the Jew. The world will not be
restored to Allah’s preferences until all Jews are defeated and entirely
eradicated.
One of many such verses of
hate: “Say: ‘shall I point out to you something much worse than this
(referring to the previous verses), as judged by the treatment it received
from Allah? Those who incurred the curse of Allah and His wrath (Jews), those
of whom some He transformed into apes and swine, those who worshipped evil;-
these are (many times) worse in rank, and far more astray from the even
path!’” Quran 5.060
c. Muslims believe that those who resist conversion
to Islam and the establishment of the prominence of Islamic global domination
are Islam’s enemies who can never be trusted or treated as equals.
One of many such verses of
hate: “O ye who believe! Take not my enemies and yours as friends (or
protectors),- offering them (your) love, even though they have rejected the
Truth that has come to you, and have (on the contrary) driven out the Prophet
and yourselves (from your homes), (simply) because ye believe in Allah your
Lord! If ye have come out to strive in My Way and to seek My Good Pleasure,
(take them not as friends), holding secret converse of love (and friendship)
with them: for I know full well all that ye conceal and all that ye reveal.
And any of you that does this has strayed from the Straight Path.” Quran
60.001
d. Allah calls on Muslims (believers) to use their
corporeal power to murder Jews, Christians, and people of other religions and
to destroy their nations, cities and institutions, until they sue for peace
and either become Muslims or pay for the privilege of being ruled by a world
Islamic order.
One of many such verses of
hate: Volume 4, Book 52, Number
176:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin
'Umar: Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight the Jews till some
of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O
'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill
him.' "
One of many such verses of
hate: Volume 4, Book 52, Number
196:
Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, " I have
been ordered to fight with the people till they say, 'None has the right to be
worshipped but Allah,' and whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped
but Allah,' his life and property will be saved by me except for Islamic law,
and his accounts will be with Allah, (either to punish him or to forgive
him.)"
e. Forget all you know about spiritually uplifting
ideals of brotherly love and peace (the word “love” is nearly absent in the
Quran). Peace and earthly
enlightenment only comes after slaughter and victory in a war in which Islam
is victorious. If, in any battle
or time period, Islam is not victorious, Muslims must lie in wait until the
right time and then ambush their enemies and establish Islamic rule. Until that time, policies of terrorism
and deceit are both sanctioned and advised.
Volume 4, Book 52, Number
220:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle said, "I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing
the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the
hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of
the world were brought to me and put in my hand." Abu Huraira added: Allah's
Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those
treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).
Excerpt
Q-33:25-27
Set 66, Count 131-133 [33.25]...Allah sufficed the believers in fighting... [33.26]...some [Jews] you killed and you took captive another part. [33.27]...He made you heirs to their [Jewish] land and their dwellings and their property, and (to) a land which you have not yet trodden... (So much for the theory that Muslims don’t have a
religious mandate to claim Jewish lands...that the “Palestinian” problem is
all the fault of the Jews...so on and so forth)
f. Islam calls for robotic acceptance of minute and
grand prescriptions covering every aspect of a Muslim’s life. Therefore, Islam is not personally or
spiritually relevant. It is political, which is why it may never separate
itself from government. Adherence
is not a matter of voluntary devotion, but of the Law, and violators are
severely punished, including capital punishment as in Sharia.
The principle of “an eye for an eye”
(retribution/revenge) is supreme in all social interaction. Praying five times daily, wearing
headscarves, ablution, abstaining from alcohol, etc... all this is done not
out of personal belief that it is proper, but because Allah says so, and
nobody may violate Allah’s written commandments.
g. Men are the strong and superior. Women are the weak and inferior. Women must be kept ignorant and within
a low social class so they do not abuse the Islamic order by seeking equality.
“Men have authority over
women because Allah has made the one superior to the others and because they
spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their
unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear
disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if
they obey you take no further action against them. Allah is high, supreme.”
Quran 4.34
Islam strictly forbids women to
participate in many activities in which men are involved. In Islam, women are
not in the calculus—women are incidental and merely exist for the pleasure of
men.
The words “naghess al aghl” literally means
defected witted person. It describes the intellectual capability of women in
general. And the word “zaeefeh”, is referred directly to female gender
in contrast to men, meaning “the weaker one”, in a condescending fashion.
“By
another sign He (Allah) gave you wives from among yourselves, that you (men)
might live in joy with them, and planted love and kindness in your hearts.
Surely there are signs in this for thinking men.” Quran
32.21
h. Muslims are entitled, in fact required, to wage
war on all non-Islamic thoughts and deeds. Any who mock or disrespect the prophet
Muhammad are to be murdered by honor-bound Muslim enforcers.
4:162b Muhammad said, "My
livelihood is under the shade of my spear, and he who disobeys my orders will
be humiliated by paying Jizya." ["Jizya" is the poll tax paid by subjugated
peoples in return for the protection of the Islamic
government.]
4:196 Mohammad said, "I
have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, ‘None has the right
to be worshiped but Allah,’ and whoever says, ‘None has the right to be
worshiped by Allah,’ his life and property will be saved by me except for
Islamic law, and his accounts will be with Allah (either to punish him or to
forgive him.)"
4:220 Muhammad said, "...
I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy)
..."
The 69th verse of Sûrah
Anfãl declares:
“Eat ye the spoils of
war. They are lawful and pure.”
“The apostle (Muhammad)
said, ‘Kill any Jew that falls into your power.’ Hereupon Muhayyisa b. Masud leapt upon
Ibn Sunayna, a Jewish merchant with whom they had social and business
relations, and killed him.
Huwayyisa was not a Muslim at the time though he was the elder
brother. When Muhayyisa killed
him Huwayyisa began to beat him, saying, 'You enemy of God, did you kill him
when much of the fat on your belly comes from his wealth?' Muhayyisa answered, 'Had the one who
ordered me to kill him ordered me to kill you I would have cut your head
off.'” 61
In another terrorist
action, Muhammad asked his men to murder an old Jewish man, Abu Afak.
“’Who will deal with this rascal for me?’ The killing of such an old man moved
a poetess, Asma b. Marwan, to compose disrespectful verses about the Prophet,
and she too was assassinated.” When the assassin prayed with the prophet at
al-Medina, Muhammad said to him: "’Have you slain the daughter of Marwan?’ The
assassin said: ‘Yes. Is there something more for me to do?’ He [Muhammad]
said: ‘No two goats will butt together about her.’”62...” (from Islam is not Salaam, by
CS Karlson, 2004)
i. All contemporary written scripture is corrupted,
and only the Quran is the truth.
Muhammad is the highest authority, as Allah’s primary and final
prophet. Even the Quran contains
contradictions and infusions of verses by Satan (note: Muhammad actually codified this
concept in the Quran, the subject of Rushdie’s book, the “Satanic Verses”). But in order to eradicate Satanic
infusion, whenever a passage conflicts with another, only the latter one may
be understood as correct...because Allah will always trump Satan. The Quran (surviving, unabrogated
prophesy) and its ethical commandments are eternal, perfect, and immutable.
j. This is why any references to “peaceful” earlier
scriptures have been completely abrogated by evil scripture that is congruent
with only older, violent scripture.
What we have left is a book that is unbelievably sickening in its
hateful attitudes and inhumane practices. This is why you cannot believe an
ignorant Muslim who quotes abrogated scripture, such as “there should be no
compulsion in religion”...that phrase was abrogated hundreds of times, and it
is enraging to have to point out such obvious
contradictions.
5_ Conclusion: These unalterable and undilutable
sentiments represent that which is wrong, sinful, erroneous, ill-advised, and
just plain evil.
6_ Moreover, anyone who acts consistently in the
advocation and advancement of these ethics is adhering to Islam as it was
intended. They are
fundamentalists, like the Christian who consistently turns the other cheek, or
the Buddhist who is careful never to step on a bug, but they are not
extremists.
An extremist Christian would for example claim that
Christ did not intend for people to forgive each other and express the final
commandment for brotherly love, but rather to beat each other until they
accepted Christ as God, and to reject anyone who did not believe as they
do. Perhaps some, even many,
Christians think that the latter is correct, but according to scripture, they
are wrong. This is easily
identifiable in the New Testament and is a consistent theme in Christ’s
prophecy. If such heretical
“Christians” persist in evangelizing incorrect interpretations, they are
extremists vis-a-vis Christianity as codified in the Bible.
Likewise, if any Muslim tries to declare that
Muhammad (who personally led dozens of offensive military excursions, took
slaves for himself, demanded 20% war booty, raped a 9-year-old concubine,
ordered the assassinations of his detractors—all recorded in official ISLAMIC
texts!) never intended his scripture to represent Islam, but rather Muslims
should be peaceful and loving when such advice is not given in his scripture
(in fact it is revealed in the scriptures Muhammad tried to eradicate), they
are not mainstream...they are the true extremists. You cannot lie about your religion and
consider yourself “moderate.”
We have hundreds of commandments by Muhammad that
declare such things as:
“Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for
peace, when ye should be uppermost (in conquest): for Allah is with you, and
will never put you in loss for your (good) deeds.” Quran
47.035
“Fighting (in wars to
advance Islam) is prescribed for you, and ye (may) dislike it. But it is
possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a
thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.” Quran
2.216
“Fight
those who: believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold forbidden that
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.” Quran
9.029
Passages like these and worse are all over the
Quran and Muhammad proved their meaning by the perfect records of how he
conducted himself in life, as recorded in the Hadith.
7_ So what we have is this: we have a group of personally
non-violent, well-meaning, friendly perhaps, but quite ignorant, and
non-intellectual people such as the advocates of the “Secular Islam Summit”
who seek to censor all the evil that is expressed within Islamic scripture as
commandment, and yet seek to somehow allow the resulting “moderated” cult to
retain its brand name, “Islam.”
These people use confused logic, denial and
censorship to create what they call “connections” and “bridges” between normal
human behavior and those who refuse to abandon that which is manifestly
evil. They assist ignorant
Muslims in surreptitiously redacting most of their own scripture and all of
Islam’s raison d'etre, yet they refuse to call for the abandonment of the
religion itself, and certainly refuse to admit that the reason reform is
sought is because the religion they minister is full of antisocial, animus and
hatred....ergo, evil.
These people are secularists who desire Islam to be
restrained, so they can assert that their policies of dilution are good for
all religions. In doing so, they
seek to throw the baby out with the bath water, for not all religions are in
fact evil.
8_ But once this liberal process of ambiguating
religion is understood, we can also understand why their task is futile. “Moderating” by ignoring the truth
cannot work unless the Quran itself, and much of the life and traditions of
Muhammad recorded long ago, are universally destroyed to the last manuscript
and digital file...and good luck with that.
Since this is impossible, one day even under the
most successful liberal scenario where Muslims have forgotten their religion,
some 16-year-old Muslim boy will bother to read the original works of the
Satanic and evil Muhammad, and refusing out of sin of pride to abandon the
cult, the whole sick, violent history of the Islamic juggernaut will rise
again from the ashes of the books burned by self-described moderates.
Here, many uneducated people refer to the history
of Christianity and its reformation, and perhaps to a general view of the
dialectic of movements in general, which they believe go from pure to corrupt,
then to reformist, then to post-modern.
But applying this supposed deterministic process to Islam is absurd.
Christianity was most certainly corrupted by the 13th century. By the 15th century, the church had
become even more corrupted: acts
such as the sale of indulgences, the sins of the papal rivalries, and its
repression against heretics were legion.[Editor's note: the author is
referring to the Roman Catholic Church, not to Christianity or Christ's church itself.]
When Martin Luther nailed his list of 95 grievances
to the door of the Wittenberg Church, he was
scripturally correct. In fact,
the Catholic Church had gone so far as to make it illegal to print the Bible
in any language other than the dead Latin (used as a code language by the
church, since only Catholic-trained men were taught the language). But church chicanery was
anti-Christian according to the actual Bible. So from the perspective of scripture,
the reformists were correct, and the Popes were divergent, and that is what
led to the Reformation.
Contrast this with what the so-called reformists
are trying to do with Islam...they are not looking into the Quran for
answers...they are banning the book altogether lest people find out the evil
that drips from its pages. The
Quran is the last place Islamic moderators look for help in “reforming” Islam,
because it would make al Qaida look like a poodle pet-owners convention. In fact, doesn’t it take great chutzpa
to call a movement that seeks to eradicate the letter and intent of actual
scripture “reformist”? Perhaps
“retardation” or “revisionism” would be better terms.
9_You can restrain Islam, but you cannot lie about
its true character by branding those who abide as “extremists,” and
complimenting those who abandon all but its name as “Moderates.”
10_The ludicrousness of their chosen position is
exactly why “moderate” Muslims refuse to engage in a battle of truth using
Muslim scripture to back up their preposterous denials. They can’t read their book out loud
because they are canonically wrong and they know it. And this is precisely why the vast
majority of Muslims prefer to name their children “Muhammad” or “Osama” rather
than march in the streets to protest the evils that this religion does on a
daily basis.
This is also why liberal appeasers in 1938, who
refused to call Hitler “evil,” got the world into so much trouble by creating
a similar confused intellectual forum about the Nazis. They tried to build bridges to the
“moderate” Nazis; they lectured clear thinkers about the dangers of inciting
German hatred by pointing out the truth. They accused conservatives of being
“just as fascist” as the Nazis; they sent ambassadors and made treaties and
trusted that the moderates would come out and “reform” their zealous
leadership. And they were wrong.
We in the
There is nothing that I would love more than
witnessing all Muslims become ex-Muslims and full-fledged members of a
diverse, tolerant and democratic society. I hope that Muslims themselves leave
this Bedouin slaveholder cult. Yet, the hope is extremely slim. Islam has a
stranglehold on its slaves and will neither let them go, nor do the Muslims
seem to have the insight or the will to leave it in large numbers. But hope,
as slim as it is, keeps me sounding the alarm before the fire of Islam engulfs
us all.
Amil Imani is an Iranian-born American citizen and pro-democracy activist residing in the United States of America. Imani is a columnist, literary translator, novelist and an essayist, who has been writing and speaking out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran. He maintains a website at Amil Imani.com |