We Should Not Stereotype Muslims

6 Aug

In Rotherham, 1400 young girls were raped over a 10 year period by gangs of men.  Should I mention that they were Muslims?  After all that might put the religion in a bad light.

It turns out that there he also been grooming and raping gangs in:

  • Barking
  • Birmingham
  • Blackburn
  • Blackpool
  • Bolton
  • Bradford
  • Bristol
  • Bury
  • Coventry
  • Darwen
  • East London
  • Great Norton
  • Harlow
  • Harrow
  • Hayes
  • Headington
  • High Wycombe
  • Keighley,
  • Lancaster
  • Leeds,
  • Leicester
  • Leigh
  • Liverpool
  • Londonderry
  • Manchester
  • Middlebrough
  • Nelson
  • Newcastle
  • Nottingham
  • Oldham
  • Oxford
  • Peterborough,
  • Preston
  • Rochdale
  • Sheffield
  • South Shields
  • Stevenage
  • Swansea
  • Telford
  • Torquay

Muslim Grooming / Paedo Map.


Muslims can never Integrate – They Hate Us

14 Jan
We, kuffars, non believers, try so hard to be accommodating to Muslims and to get them to integrate into our society but with limited success.  So we feel guilt and that we must try even harder.
We will never succeed.  There is one simple but basic point that we kuffars fail to recognize again and again.
It is deeply fundamental to Islam that not only must you love Allah and the believers but you must also hate non-believers.
Otherwise you are not a true Muslim.
This is the doctrine of Al Wala’ Wal Bara’ (Love and Hate for Allah’s Sake).  We non-believers need to get to grips with this concept.
To be a true Muslim they have to hate us.
Muslims have six articles of faith
  1. One God;
  2. The angels of God;
  3. The books of God, especially the Qur’an;
  4. The prophets of God, especially Muhammad;
  5. The Day of Judgment (or the afterlife); and
  6. The supremacy of God’s will (or predestination).

One of the aspects of the belief in these six articles is “al wala wal bara” loving and hating for the sake of Allah Alone. It is one of the most important beliefs of Islam after belief in one God.

It explains why the moderates don’t come out against the extremists.  It explains why integration into Western society will never happen.

Basically, the moderates may not kill us but they still hate us, or, at least, they are exhorted to hate us at a very fundamental level.  And continuous exhortation must rub off.  Once we understand “al wala wal bara”  then maybe sensible policies can be set up to deal with Islam in the West.

Have a look at some Islamic writings (in blue):

The Prophet said: The strongest bond of faith is loyalty for the sake of Allah and opposition for His sake; love for the sake of Allah and enmity for His sake.

But what does this love and enmity exactly mean?

Loving for the sake of Allah means to love Allah and to show loyalty to Him by following His Shariah. It means to love all that is good and permissible in the Quran and Sunnah. This type of love requires one to defend Allah’s authority and to preserve it. It is to love those who are obedient to Allah and to defend and assist them. These are the party of Allah.

Enmity for the sake of Allah signifies showing anger towards those who oppose Allah, His Messenger, His authority, and the believers. It is to struggle and fight against them in order to uphold and spread the way of Allah and His Messenger.

Al wala wal bara requires one to ally oneself with Allah, His Messenger and the believers wherever they are found and against the disbelievers even if it is against their own relatives. We see this in the example of the Prophet, who fought against his own relatives and his own clan, all for the sake of Allah.

We non-believers probably have not heard of Al wala wal bara because it is hard to remember but it is all over the Islamic websites, even the so-called moderate ones.  An example from an Islamic Question and answer website.

Q.  Can I pray for a good Christian friend who is ill?

A.  You are straying from Al wala wal bara.  Why do you have a Christian friend?  No you may not pray for her.  You may only pray that she converts to Islam.

Even at this human level hate is encouraged.

Allah says in His Book:
Let not the believers take disbelievers for their friends in preference to believers. Whoever does this has no connection with Allah unless you are guarding yourselves against them as a precaution. Allah bids you to beware of Himself. And to Allah is the journeying. (Surat Ali Imran 3:28)

The reason why “al wala wal bara” is so important in Islam is because, if it is taken into practice, it can remove all devine ignorance from the Muslim Community.  It guarantees the preservation of the Muslim Community, and it distinguishes the believer from the disbeliever. When one loves and hates for Allah’s sake only, they are raised degrees higher than those who love, hate, and act based on their own desires or fake gods or for other meaningless things.

Non-Muslim friends are not allowed.  So much for integration.

Allah commands:

And fight them until persecution is no more and religion is for Allah. (Suratul Baqarah 2:193)

Only the people who love and hate for the sake of Allah will act upon this command. These are the people that understand the meaning of al wala wal bara.

Al wala wal bara aims to purify the society and rid the people of all vices. For example, we are required to oppose the way of the disbelievers. One of their habits is wasting their time in pursuing their own material desires. A Muslim who does not act upon al wala wal bara will imitate this habit and therefore become neglectful of his duties to Allah. This will lead to a corrupt person, who will end up raising a corrupt family, which will corrupt the community in whole.

We call ourselves Muslims, but what exactly is a Muslim? We can’t just expect that belief in Allah and His Messenger is enough to be qualified for Paradise.

If we believe that belief in Allah is enough, then there is no difference between us and the pagan Arabs of the pre-Islamic period, who claimed to believe in Allah and at the same time, worshipped hundreds of other gods. Al wala wal bara is what distinguishes a believer from a disbeliever. A believer allies himself with Allah only and with his final Messenger and with the believers.

In order to be considered a believer, one must believe in Allah and His Messenger as well as show and prove that belief by assisting them and allying oneself with them against the enemies of Islam. The plans of the disbelievers are clearly exposed in the Quran:

They long for you to disbelieve even as they disbelieve, so that you may be the same as them. So do not choose friends from among them until they go out in the way of Allah. (Suratun-Nisaa 4:89)

O you who believe! Do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends of one another. And whoever of you takes them for friends is one of them. Surely Allah does not guide wrongdoing people. (Suratul Maaidah 5:51)

Please remember that the Quran is the word of God himself.

We are warned to beware of the kaafireen (i.e unbelievers ) for, they say with their mouths what is not in their hearts (3:167).

They secretly plot against the believers to get rid of them and their divine religion Islam. They attack the Muslims and the people without the belief in al wala wal bara will support them against the believers and this is what we see in today’s situation.

If the believers join together as one brotherhood, sharing a mutual love and hate for the sake of Allah, Islam will come out on top regardless of how powerful their enemies may be. When the Prophet and his companions fought their battles, their enemies were always more in number and had better armour, but the Muslims were victorious as in the Battle of Badr. They shared one cause: fighting for the sake of Allah. 

Al wala wal bara is one of the more important aspects of Islam. It was because of this aspect that the companions and their Chief Leader Muhammad together, peacefully conquered lands and hearts all over the globe by the will and grace of Allah.

I love this idea of peacefully conquering lands.  Not even George Orwell in 1984 doublespeak could have said it so well.

Islamic State condones Slavery, Rape and Paedophilia

15 Dec

The Isis militant group has released what appears to be an “abhorrent” pamphlet providing its followers with guidelines on how to capture, keep and sexually abuse female slaves.

Quilliam researcher Charlie Winter said: “The roots of this document can easily be traced back to some of Islamic State’s most active propagandists, something that leaves little doubt in my mind about its credibility.

“The content, while it is abhorrent and shocking, is not surprising – we know that IS ideologues have justified and legitimated slavery in past publications.”

The pamphlet makes clear in excruciating detail exactly what this treatment involves – and how it is actively encouraged in Isis’s twisted interpretation of Islam.

What is truly abhorrent and shocking to me

Is it a twisted interpretation of Islam?  Really?

The content is taken directly from the Qur’an itself, the word of Allah(May He be Glorified and Exalted) himself, as received by his Messenger, Mohammad (PBUH).  Mohammad, that perfect human, told his followers that they should follow these rules as they rampaged through Arabia.

And nobody has seen fit to mention this inconvenient truth.  This set of rules is truly Islamic, not some twisted aberration as many try to claim.  They condone, slavery, rape and paedophilia.

It has been translated in detail by the Washington, DC-based Middle East Media Research Institute,  the anti-extremism think tank Quilliam.

It tells Isis fighters that the fact that “unbelief” in Islam is all that is required to make someone a slave – and clears up the controversy of “capturing apostate women” who were born as Muslims by saying: “the consensus leans towards forbidding it… we [Isis] lean towards accepting the consensus”.

The rules for how militants should handle their slaves follow. Among the most shocking are that it is “permissible” to rape a female slave “immediately after taking possession of her” and that it is “permissible to have intercourse with the female slave who hasn’t reached puberty if she is fit for intercourse”, without explanation of what that means.

The following is a selection of some of the questions and answers Isis has provided its follower:

Question 1: What is al-sabi?

“Al-Sabi is a woman from among ahl al-harb [the people of war] who has been captured by Muslims.”

Question 2: What makes al-sabi permissible?

“What makes al-sabi permissible [i.e., what makes it permissible to take such a woman captive] is [her] unbelief. Unbelieving [women] who were captured and brought into the abode of Islam are permissible to us, after the imam distributes them [among us].”

Question 4: Is it permissible to have intercourse with a female captive?

“It is permissible to have sexual intercourse with the female captive. Allah the almighty said: ‘[Successful are the believers] who guard their chastity, except from their wives or (the captives and slaves) that their right hands possess, for then they are free from blame [Koran 23:5-6]’…”

Question 5: Is it permissible to have intercourse with a female captive immediately after taking possession [of her]?

“If she is a virgin, he [her master] can have intercourse with her immediately after taking possession of her. However, is she isn’t, her uterus must be purified [first]…”

Question 6: Is it permissible to sell a female captive?

“It is permissible to buy, sell, or give as a gift female captives and slaves, for they are merely property, which can be disposed of [as long as that doesn’t cause [the Muslim ummah] any harm or damage.”

Question 9: If the female captive was impregnated by her owner, can he then sell her?

“He can’t sell her if she becomes the mother of a child…”

Question 13: Is it permissible to have intercourse with a female slave who has not reached puberty?

“It is permissible to have intercourse with the female slave who hasn’t reached puberty if she is fit for intercourse; however if she is not fit for intercourse, then it is enough to enjoy her without intercourse.”

Question 19: Is it permissible to beat a female slave?

“It is permissible to beat the female slave as a [form of] darb ta’deeb [disciplinary beating], [but] it is forbidden to [use] darb al-takseer [literally, breaking beating], [darb] al-tashaffi [beating for the purpose of achieving gratification], or [darb] al-ta’dheeb [torture beating]. Further, it is forbidden to hit the face.”

Question 21: What is the earthly punishment of a female slave who runs away from her master?

“She [i.e. the female slave who runs away from her master] has no punishment according to the shari’a of Allah; however, she is [to be] reprimanded [in such a way that] deters others like her from escaping.”

Islam conquers the UK

3 Dec

What have we done to our country?  Look at this extract from a national newspaper.

The Independent, Wednesday 03 December 2014

Muhammed has become the most popular name for baby boys in the UK!

Research by the Baby Centre combined spelling variations to put it at the top of the list of the most used boys’ name in 2014!


The Office for National Statistics (ONS) came to the same conclusion with its official figures for England and Wales.

Oliver was the number one name until the spellings of 3,499 Muhammads, 2,887 Mohammeds and 1,059 Mohammads were combined, giving a total of 7,445 babies.

Some have argued that if those are to be taken as the same name, then so should British variations such as Oliver and Ollie, James and Jim, which would overtake Mohammed in all its incarnations.

Variations of Mohammed are the most popular boys’ names in the UK But Arabic experts say the comparison is a false one, because the differences with Mohammed arise only from the transliteration from Arabic (محمد) into Roman characters.

A spokesperson from the Arab British Centre, which works to improve understanding of the Arab world in the UK, said that despite its variations, Mohammed is unquestionably the same name.

“Because Arabic is a phonetic language, it means that when people spell it out the letters can’t directly represent the sounds so you end up with different vowels and things like that,” she said.

“Even though people write it differently it’s still the exact same name, unlike Ollie and Oliver, because people have shortened it.”

Variations can include Mohamad, Mohamed, Mohammad, Mohammed, Muhamad, Muhamed, Muhammad, Muhammed, Muhammet and many more. Shortenings include Mo and Mohd, which were not counted in the data.



See also:https://thoughtsforourtimes.wordpress.com/2014/07/06/we-will-out-breed-you/




Islamic State is not Islamic

1 Dec

This blog includes material from an article was published in The Times on 1st December 2014 quoting Desmond Swayne, an international development minister.

The acts of violence committed by Islamic State militants have been more than equalled by Christians down the centuries…

Yet, again we find the dreadful Tu Quoque argument so loved by Islam apologists.

So, the violence is OK, Christians did it too!

Excuse me, but both were wrong and the Christians have, at least,  grown up and stopped doing it. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

In a candid set of “personal remarks” at a parliamentary event last week, he also hit out at the BBC for using the term “Islamic State”, which he said was a “standing insult to a billion peaceloving Muslims” because it presumed that the militants were acting under the authority of Islam.

It doesn’t matter whether or not they have the “authority of Islam”. There is no equivalent of the Pope in Islam to give that authority. There is no “authority of Islam”.  The Quran is their inspiration and Mohummad(PBUH) is their role model. By their fruits you shall know them.

Of course it’s Islamic. It’s just not the Islam of the so-called moderates who delude themselves that their holy scriptures are not full of violent exhortations and hatred.

Passages in the Koran that appeared to advocate attacks on non-Muslims could be answered with “any number of bloodthirsty, ghastly, taken-out-of context quotes from the New and Old Testaments”, he added.

Oh, that’s OK then.

So what? Does it excuse them?

Islam is not inherently violent

30 Nov

On extremists, Lady Warsi, the UK’s first Muslim Minister, added: “Islam, like all other major religions, is not inherently violent. Passages from sacred texts must be taken in context. It would be possible to distort quotes from any religious text.”

What planet does she come from?  Has she never read the Qur’an?  It is full of violence against infidels and apostates.

But then she says the bit I love, “It would be possible to distort quotes from any religious texts.”

So firstly, all the exhortation to violence is a distortion!  No need to worry about that then, thank goodness. Secondly, other religions can also be said to exhort violence.  Oh well, that makes it OK then!

This argument is the classical and false Tu Quoque argument so loved by Muslim apologists. Tu Quoque means “You too”.  Of course, two wrongs don’t make a right.

Yes, other religions may have violent texts but the adherents of those religions don’t commit suicide,  blowing up churches, mosques, temples and public places.  They don’t take joy in using their texts to justify beheadings, stonings and honour killings.

And is it just coincidence that there are wars all the way from China to Turkey, whenever Muslim countries have borders with non-Muslim countries?  And even between Muslim countries?

Islam IS  inherently violent.

By their fruits you will know them.

Immigration – Cameron’s ridiculous response.

30 Nov

So, at last David Cameron announces the Government’s plans to deal with immigration. What do we get? We get a headline grabbing piece of misdirection that looks good but is practically useless – a weak and pusillanimous response to the problem that gets nowhere near the real issues and fears of the man in the street.

He plans to persuade the EU, by Treaty change, no less, that EU immigrants should not be eligible for State handouts within 4 years of their arrival. There are 260,000 new people coming into the country every year and this is the best he can come up with.

It is ridiculous at so many levels.

Firstly it will take 10 years to negotiate. Inevitably it will be watered down to something like 1 year. In the meantime we have to create the equivalent of a new large town every year.

Secondly, most EU immigrants do not come here for State handouts. They come here to find work and for the most part, they succeed. So the financial savings are small and will make little impact on EU immigration. And of course, EU immigration is not controllable. The treaties already signed decide that.

Thirdly, when the public say that they want immigration numbers to drop, they are not really talking about the EU at all. They are talking about the flood of asylum seekers who are given money, housing and all sorts of other help in priority over the indigenous population.

They are scared to talk about it but they are thinking of the vast number of people coming in from the Indian sub-continent, particularly the Muslim community.

These people have cultural values completely at odds with British values and they have no inclination to change. They talk peace but by their fruits we know them. They screech,”Discrimination” at every opportunity. They demand special rights and treatments. They are subject to a continuous stream of vitriol about Western values from their teachers. And they are a breeding ground for terrorists who bomb our streets and behead people on the streets of London. And their long term ambition is for the United Kingdom to be subject to the primitive and scary Sharia Law.

Come on David, get a grip on the real issues.

A Betrayal of Islam

28 Nov

Lord Pearson of Rannoch is facing a formal complaint from Labour MP Khalid Mahmood, after calling on Muslims to “address the violence in the Qur’an.”

Speaking in the House of Lords, Pearson, the former UKIP leader, said: “My lords, are the government aware that Fusilier Rigby’s murderers quoted 22 verses of the Qur’an to justify their atrocity? Therefore, is the prime minister accurate or helpful when he describes it as a betrayal of Islam? Since the vast majority of Muslims are our peace-loving friends, should we not encourage them to address the violence in the Qur’an – and indeed in the life and the example of Muhammad?”…

…. Labour MP Khalid Mahmood said: “I find it absolutely offensive that this guy is still able to say this. I will actually tomorrow make a complaint formally to the lords speaker on this issue. This is not tolerable and it should not be tolerated at all.”

Here we go again, cry baby Muslims screaming “discrimination” and that they “have taken offence”crybabyto try to suppress discussion.  And they even try to suppress discussion in the House of Lords!

Was the atrocity a betrayal of Islam?  They quoted the texts.  By their fruit you shall know them.

… The Primitive Ways of Sharia Law… Vladimir Putin

21 Nov

On August 04, 2013, Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, addressed the Duma, (Russian Parliament), and gave a speech about the tensions with minorities in Russia.

In Russia, live like Russians. Any minority, from anywhere, if it wants to live in Russia, to work and eat in Russia, it should speak Russian, and should respect the Russian laws. If they prefer Sharia Law, and live the life of Muslims then we advise them to go to those places where that’s the state law.

Russia does not need Muslim minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell ‘discrimination’. We will not tolerate disrespect of our Russian culture.

We had better learn from the suicides of America, England, Holland and France, if we are to survive as a nation. The Muslims are taking over those countries and they will not take over Russia. The Russian customs and traditions are not compatible with the lack of culture or the primitive ways of Sharia Law and Muslims.

When this honorable legislative body thinks of creating new laws, it should have in mind the Russian national interest first, observing that the Muslims Minorities Are Not Russians.”

The politicians in the Duma gave Putin a five minute standing ovation for this his shortest speech ever.

Good for them.

Why do I care about Muslim Violence and Misbehaviour?

7 Nov

Muslim Violence and Misbehaviour

I find I do care greatly about Muslim violence and misbehaviour.  But why do I care?  Why should I give a damn?  None of it really affects me directly.

There are, of course, these radicals, terrorists and suicide bombers who would happily blow me up or chop my head off and that certainly colours my views! But that’s not the full answer.

Why do I care that they condone underage marriage, refuse to condemn the sex grooming of our young girls or the bombers in our streets, practice female genital mutilation and practice honour killings?  What has it got to do with me?

Why do I care that in Sharia Law, a woman’s testimony is only worth half of a man’s?  A woman who claims she has been raped has to find four men to testify that they saw the rape.  If she cannot then she is in danger of being accused of adultery and stoned to death!

Why do I care that the Sunnis beat the hell out of the Shi’ites and vice versa?

Why do I care that that in Muslim countries they hang, behead, amputate and stone to death?  They persecute Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, burning their churches and temples.

Why do I care that all along the borders between the Muslim and non-Muslim cultures all the way from China to the Balkans, there is violence, the so called ‘Bloody Border’?

Muslims throw all sorts of Quranic verses at each other to describe why all this violent activity is or is not Islamic.  The so called ‘moderates’ make all sorts of statements about how fundamentalist are corrupting the beautiful message.  To this last point, I really do NOT care.  It’s not the point.

Whatever they are, the arguments and learned discussions don’t really matter.  The fact is, Muslims are violent and have been for 1400 years.  Not all of them, of course, but enough to see the pattern.  But why should I care?  It doesn’t really have much immediate contact with me.

So Why Do I Care

I care because it is the stated aim of the Muslims to turn the UK into a Muslim state and me into a Muslim!  And they are winning – slowly.  That’s why I care.  I care for me and but mostly for my grandchildren.

I am no bible thumper but Matthew’s gospel says it well.

 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.  Ye shall know them by their fruits.

Whatever their rhetoric, the fruits of Islam scare the hell out of me.

Do They Really Want To TakeOver?

Oh, yes.

Muslims split the world into two ‘Houses’

  • Dar al-Islam “house of Islam /of Peace” is a term used by Muslim scholars  to refer to those countries where Muslims can practice their religion freely. It’s the area of the world under the rule of Islam, literally, “the home of Islam” or “the home of submission.”
  • Dar al-Harb “house of war”  is a term referring to those countries where the Muslim law is not in force, in the matter of worship and the protection of the

One of the prime responsibilities of all Muslims is to convert the world to Islam by jihad, using conversion, coercion or death.  Apparently, we were all born Muslims but because our parents knew no better, we were not raised as Muslims.  So, actually they are doing us a great favour by getting us back into Islam!  By whatever means.

Muslims in the UK will keep going until the UK is a Muslim state under Sharia Law.  They want me to ‘benefit’ from all the above mentioned behaviours.    And, by their own admission, their best weapon is the Muslim womb.  They are outbreeding us.  Just visit any Maternity ward in a big city to see it in action.

In Bosnia, the Muslims were a large minority but they outbred the non –Muslims and turned it into a Muslim state, driving out the Christian and Orthodox peoples during the Yugoslavian break up.  It has happened.  We are working that way in the UK.

The Stages of the Jihad

There are three well defined and well understood stages to the Islamification of a state.  This is the process used by Muhammad himself and documented in the Quran.

Yes, I care


In the UK we are in Stage 2.  We get demands for special schools, special dress, use of Sharia Law, a voice on every TV show, allowed to use Halal slaughter,  special treatment from the police( no dogs, women cannot be interviewed by a man), special treatment in prison with food and prayer time, attempts to create Muslim zones in the big cities.  Some schools only serve Halal food (even to non-muslims).  It’s easier, you know.  Some 163 KFCs in the UK sell only Halal food. The list goes on.

We already see sporadic examples of Stage 3.  The assassination of critics of Islam; youth in the street claiming to be Muslim police;  attacking off licences in Muslim areas, demonstrations saying “To hell with democracy.  Islam will win”, “Behead those who insult Islam”.  Suicide bombers in the streets of London.

Yes, I really do care.  And so should you.

How Radical Islamic speakers win arguments

5 Nov

Radical Islamic speakers are masters of the use of Tu Quoque. ” Tu Quoque” is Latin for “You Also”.  It is a well known, if fallacious, form of argument.

They avoid dealing with a criticism by reponding with a “You also” criticism. Then the questioner is seduced into a defensive position.  The better response is that two wrongs don’t make a right, then to return to the original point.

Here is a good example.

Q: Now, the United States government says that you are still funding military training camps here in Afghanistan for militant, Islamic fighters and that you’re a sponsor of international terrorism.… Are these accusations true? …
Osama Bin Laden: …At the time that they condemn any Muslim who calls for his right, they receive the highest top official of the Irish Republican Army at the White House as a political leader, while woe, all woe is the Muslims if they cry out for their rights. Wherever we look, we find the US as the leader of terrorism and crime in the world. The US does not consider it a terrorist act to throw atomic bombs at nations thousands of miles away, when it would not be possible for those bombs to hit military troops only. These bombs were rather thrown at entire nations, including women, children and elderly people and up to this day the traces of those bombs remain in Japan. The US does not consider it terrorism when hundreds of thousands of our sons and brothers in Iraq died for lack of food or medicine. So, there is no base for what the US says and this saying does not affect us.…
Source: “CNN March 1997 Interview with Osama bin Laden” (PDF)

Tu quoque was widely used as a way for the Muslim community in Rotherham to avoid criticising their Muslim brothers for grooming and raping 1400 underage girls over a 10 year period.  Their response was outrageous.  See the link below.


Mohammad was not a Paedophile

4 Nov

Was Mohammad a Paedophile?

I was reading two people arguing about whether or not Mohammad was a Paedophile.  Part of the argument that he was one was:

The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with ‘Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).” Sahih Bukhari Volume Seven, Book 62, Number 88. -the “prophet” himself.

He was 51 when he married her and 54 when he consummated the marriage

The response was a “Tu Quoque” argument.  “Tu quoque ”  is Latin for “You Also” and is an invalid form of argument.  You deflect a criticism by criticising back rather than addressing the issue.

So that no one would say I’m not even-handed, let’s keep to all the rich stuff that’s true, and let’s cut the Mohammad and Aisha pedophilia crap right out. King Alfonso X of Castile married Violant of Aragon when she was 10 going on 11 and valiantly tired to get her preggers for several years before finally lucking out (after she finally started having her period). And that’s just one Christian royal example of many.

So that’s all right then.  Mohammad is absolved.

No.  Paedophilia is always wrong. The Muslim Messenger, Peace be Upon Him, can’t wriggle out of it by deflecting the argument.  The behaviour of both of them is wrong.  And two wrongs don’t make a right.

Mohammad was not a Paedophile

And there’s the rub.  We can’t really judge either of them using modern standards.  That was how things were done in those days.

There is a difference however.   King Alfonso X of Castile is not the role model of a worldwide religion,  a role model for 1.5 billion people.

Mohammad is a Role Model

Mohammad, on the other hand,  is regarded as THE role model for Muslims.  He lived a sin free and perfect life and should be emulated by Muslims for the rest of time.  So he did no wrong in marrying a six year old and other Muslims can copy him.  They do not regard it as paedophilia.

Muslims Condone Paedophiia

You don’t believe it?  Read this fatwa written by no less an authority than Ayatollah Khomeini.

A man can marry a girl younger than nine years of age, even if the girl is still a baby being breastfed. A man, however is prohibited from having intercourse with a girl younger than nine, other sexual acts such as foreplay, rubbing, kissing and sodomy is allowed. A man having intercourse with a girl younger than nine years of age has not committed a crime, but only an infraction, if the girl is not permanently damaged.

1400 Young Girls Groomed in Northern England

Do these attitudes help explain the behaviour of Pakistani men in Northern England.  And there girls were also Kufr, or infidels, non believers.  Beneath contempt.

Have a read of this excerpt from an article in the Times Newspaper at the end of October in 2014.

Ansar Ali, from the campaign group Together Against Grooming, said that although most men convicted of child sexual abuse in Britain were white, there was evidence that Pakistani Muslims were “disproportionately represented” in street-grooming sex crimes.

“There’s no simple link with culture or religion, but we can’t sit back and say this isn’t an issue that’s relevant for us. This is our community and we have a duty to do something about it.”

However, some in the audience challenged these views. One said that “secular, liberal values” should be “in the dock” instead of Pakistani Muslim men.

Iftikhar Ahmed, the Tory parliamentary candidate for Bradford East, was even more sceptical. “I’m Pakistani and I’m not a sex groomer. Why are we putting the focus on Pakistani men and on Islam? There are thousands of white paedophiles in this country. We don’t put the same focus on Christianity.”

Nazir Afzal, chief crown prosecutor for northwest England, said that by speaking out he had previously been accused by fellow Muslims of handing racists “another stick to beat us with”.

Did You Spot the Wonderful Responses?

Here they are again.

However, some in the audience challenged these views. One said that “secular, liberal values” should be “in the dock” instead of Pakistani Muslim men.

This is “Tu Quoque”.  Return a criticism rather than deal with it.

Iftikhar Ahmed, the Tory parliamentary candidate for Bradford East, was even more sceptical. “I’m Pakistani and I’m not a sex groomer. Why are we putting the focus on Pakistani men and on Islam? There are thousands of white paedophiles in this country. We don’t put the same focus on Christianity.”

This is also “Tu Quoque”.  Return a criticism rather than deal with it.

Nazir Afzal, chief crown prosecutor for northwest England, said that by speaking out he had previously been accused by fellow Muslims of handing racists “another stick to beat us with”.

And this is “Tu Quoque”.  Return a criticism rather than deal with it.

The Police are Attacking Islam rather than Paedophiles!

The upshot is that the Pakistani Muslim community, while acknowledging that people in their community do this sex grooming, do not agree that they should be tried and convicted! The police, it seems, are attacking Islam rather than paedophiles!  The perpetrators should not be criticised.

Underage Marriage in the UK

More than a dozen Muslim clerics at some of the biggest mosques in Britain have been caught on camera agreeing to marry off girls as young as 14.

Undercover reporters filming a documentary about the prevalence of forced and underage marriage in Britain for the television program ITV Exposure secretly recorded 18 Muslim imams agreeing to perform an Islamic marriage, known as a nikah, between a 14-year-old girl and an older man.

Campaigners against forced marriage — which is not yet a crime in Britain — say thousands of underage girls — including some under the age of five — are being forced to marry against their will in Muslim nikahs every year, and that the examples exposed by the documentary represent just “the tip of the iceberg.”…..

The full story can be found at: http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4017/uk-muslim-underage-marriage.

This story leaves me flabbergasted.  What they are doing is illegal.  Yet these imams are willing to collude in the breaking the law of the land and possibly encourage child rape, otherwise known as paedophilia.  The arrogance.  They don’t have the courtesy to obey the laws of the country that succours them.

But I’m not surprised.  Thank you Mohammad, that all perfect role model.








The Dialogue with Islam

3 Nov


An Ex-Muslim’s Open Letter to Muslims of the World

27 Oct

I am reblogging the first few lines of an interesting article, then a link to the full document.  It succinctly outlines many of the questions we Kufrs ( unbelievers, a derogatory term) have about Islam

Foreign Aid Fraud

16 Oct

The UK Foreign Aid invests £860 million in Nigeria over many years. A huge chunk of it is lost in fraud.

Why am I not surprised?

Why do we continue to give this money? It can’t be that hard to see what’s going to happen to it.

See the story in The Times

And what about the vast amount of money we give to the subcontinent!

Am I the only one….


14 Oct

Were my wife and I then only people who couldn’t believe the utter stupidity of shipping Ebola victims to Spain and America?  No matter how deserving.

Inevitably, their carers would make a mistake and get infected. And then the carers go out into the community.  And now it’s out of the bag.

Madness. West Africa should be locked down totally until it burns itself out.

Am I the only one….


Islamophobia throughout history

9 Oct

In our times many of us feel scared by the advance of radical Islam.  In fact this fear goes back a long way.  Have a look at this website to see what better brains than mine have said.


Politicians in denial about Islam

3 Oct

Here’s the real problem. Our leaders are in denial. We are to be sacrificed on the alter of Political Correctness. Listen to all the politicians saying that Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam and the Qur’an

You don’t need to watch the whole thing, they are very long. The first few minutes will do.  (Sidenote – The beginning is very good.  Then the Youtube video makes a good case but even I think it is done in an overstated way.)



These politicians are so wrong. They refuse to admit the obvious. Islamic State is just at one end of the spectrum of jihad. The other end is to outbreed us, create Islamic schools either covertly or overtly, insist that women can cover their faces in public, demand that Sharia Law can be used locally in the UK, insist in Halal food in schools etc.

Did you know that all New Zealand lamb, all of it, is halal. It’s because NZ exports to Indonesia.

In parts of the UK, KFC do not provide hand wipes because they are not halal, they contain alcohol! Rather than leave Muslims to decide for themselves if they want to wipe their hands, all of us are denied the right so that we don’t offend the little darlings.

A Muslim explains why Jews are so powerful?

3 Oct

A Muslim explains why Jews are so powerful?

Islamic Studies 101

The writer is the Pakistani Executive Director of the Centre for Research and Security Studies, a think tank established in 2007, and an Islamabad-based freelance columnist. It makes interesting reading… Particularly coming from a Pakistani official. By: Dr Farrukh Saleem  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farrukh_Saleem)

Why are Jews so powerful?

There are only 14 million Jews in the world; seven million in the Americas , five million in Asia, two million in Europe and 100,000 in Africa.

For every single Jew in the world there are 100 Muslims. Yet, Jews are more than a hundred times more powerful than all the Muslims put together. Ever wondered why?

Jesus of Nazareth was a Jew. Albert Einstein, the most influential scientist of all time and TIME magazine’s ‘Person of the Century’, was a Jew. Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis was a Jew. So were Karl Marx, Paul Samuelson and Milton Friedman.

Here are a few other Jews whose intellectual output Has enriched the whole humanity:

Benjamin Rubin gave humanity the vaccinating needle. Jonas Salk developed the first polio vaccine. Albert Sabin developed the improved live polio vaccine. Gertrude Elion gave us a leukemia fighting drug. Baruch Blumberg developed the vaccination for Hepatitis B.

Paul Ehrlich discovered a treatment for syphilis. Elie Metchnikoff won a Nobel Prize in infectious diseases. Bernard Katz won a Nobel Prize in neuromuscular transmission.

Andrew Schally won a Nobel in endocrinology.

Aaron Beck founded Cognitive Therapy.

Gregory Pincus developed the first oral contraceptive pill. George Wald won a Nobel for our understanding of the human eye.

Stanley Cohen won a Nobel in embryology.

Willem Kolff came up with the kidney dialysis machine. Over the past 105 years, 14 million Jews have won 15-dozen Nobel Prizes while only three Nobel Prize Have been won by 1.4 billion Muslims (other than Peace Prizes).

Why are Jews so powerful?

Stanley Mezor invented the first micro-processing chip. Leo Szilard developed the first nuclear chain reactor; optical fibre cable;

Charles Adler, traffic lights; Benno Strauss, Stainless steel; Isador Kisee, sound movies;

Emile Berliner, telephone microphone; Charles Ginsburg, videotape recorder.

Famous financiers in the business world who belong to Jewish faith include:

Ralph Lauren (Polo),

Levis Strauss (Levi’s Jeans),

Howard Schultz (Starbuck’s) ,

Sergey Brin (Google),

Michael Dell (Dell Computers),

Larry Ellison (Oracle),

Donna Karan (DKNY),

Irv Robbins (Baskins & Robbins) and

Bill Rosenberg (Dunkin Donuts).

Richard Levin, President of Yale University, is a Jew. So are Henry Kissinger (American secretary of state), Alan Greenspan (Fed chairman under Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush), Joseph Lieberman (US Senator),

Madeleine Albright (American secretary of state), Casper Weinberger (American secretary of defense), Maxim Litvinov ( USSR foreign Minister), David Marshal

( Singapore ‘s first chief minister), Issac Isaacs (governor-general of Australia ), Benjamin Disraeli (British statesman and author), Yevgeny Primakov (Russian PM), Barry Goldwater (US Senator), Jorge Sampaio (president of Portugal ), John Deutsch (CIA director), Herb Gray (Canadian deputy PM), Pierre Mendes (French PM), Michael Howard (British homeSecretary), Bruno Kreisky (chancellor of Austria )

And Robert Rubin (American secretary of treasury).

In the media, famous Jews include Wolf Blitzer (CNN), Barbara Walters (ABC News), Eugene Meyer (Washington Post), Henry Grunwald (editor-in-chief Time), Katherine Graham (publisher of The Washington Post), Joseph Lelyveld (Executive editor, The New York Times), and Max Frankel (New York Times). The most beneficent philanthropist in the history of the world is George Soros, a Jew, who has so far Donated a colossal $4 billion most of which has gone as aid to scientists and universities around the world.

Second to George Soros is Walter Annenberg, another Jew, who has built a hundred libraries by donating an estimated $2 billion.

At the Olympics, Mark Spitz set a record of sorts by winning seven gold medals; Lenny Krayzelburg is a three-time Olympic gold medallist. Spitz, Krayzelburg and Boris Becker (Tennis) are all Jewish.

Did you know that Harrison Ford, George Burns, Tony Curtis, Charles Bronson, Sandra Bullock, Billy Crystal,

Woody Allen, Paul Newman, Peter Sellers, Dustin Hoffman, Michael Douglas, Ben Kingsley, Kirk Douglas, Goldie Hawn, Cary Grant, William Shatner, Jerry Lewis and Peter Falk are all Jewish?

As a matter of fact, Hollywood itself was founded by a Jew. Among directors and producers, Steven Spielberg, Mel Brooks, Oliver Stone, Aaron Spelling ( Beverly Hills 90210), Neil Simon (The Odd Couple), Andrew Vaina(Rambo 1/2/3), Michael Mann (Starsky andHutch), Milos Forman (One flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest), Douglas Fairbanks (The Thief of Baghdad) and Ivan Reitman (Ghostbusters) are all Jewish.

So, why are Jews so powerful?


Why are Muslims so powerless?

There are an estimated 1,476,233,470 Muslims on the face of the planet: one billion in Asia, 400 million in Africa, 44 million in Europe and six million in the Americas . Every fifth human being is a Muslim; for every single Hindu there are two Muslims, for every Buddhist there are two Muslims and for every Jew there are one hundred Muslims.

Ever wondered why Muslims are so powerless?

Here is why: There are 57 member-countries of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC), and all of them put together have around 500 universities; one university for every three million Muslims. The United States has 5,758 universities and India has 8,407.

In 2004, Shanghai Jiao Tong University compiled an ‘Academic Ranking of World Universities’, and intriguingly, not one university from Muslim-majority states was in the top-500.

As per data collected by the UNDP, literacy in the Christian world stands at nearly 90 per cent and 15 Christian-majority states have a literacy rate of 100 per cent.

A Muslim-majority state, as a sharp contrast, has an average literacy rate of around 40 per cent and there is no Muslim-majority state with a literacy rate of 100 per cent.

Some 98 per cent of the ‘literates’ in the Christian world had completed primary school, while less than 50 per cent of the ‘literates’ in the Muslim world did the same.

Around 40 per cent of the ‘literates’ in the Christian world attended university while no more than two per cent of the ‘literates’ in the Muslim world did the same.

Muslim-majority countries have 230 scientists per one million Muslims.

The US has 4,000 scientists per million and Japan has 5,000 per million.

In the entire Arab world, the total number of full-time researchers is 35,000 and there are only 50 technicians per one million Arabs. (in the Christian world there are up to 1,000 technicians per one million).

Furthermore, the Christian world spends around five per cent of its GDP on research and development, while the Muslim world spends 0.2 per cent.

Conclusion: The Muslim world lacks the capacity to produce knowledge!

Daily newspapers per 1,000 people and number of book titles per million are two indicators of whether knowledge is being diffused in a society.

In Pakistan, there are 23 daily newspapers per 1,000 Pakistanis while the same ratio in Singapore is 360. In the UK , the number of book titles per million stands at 2,000 while the same in Egypt is 20.

Conclusion: The Muslim world is failing to diffuse knowledge.

Exports of high technology products as a percentage of total exports are an important indicator of knowledge application. Pakistan’s export of high technology products as a percentage of total exports stands at one per cent.The same for Saudi Arabia is 0.3 per cent; Kuwait, Morocco and Algeria are all at 0.3 per cent, while Singapore is at 58 per cent.

Conclusion: The Muslim world is failing to apply knowledge.

Why are Muslims powerless?

  • Because we aren’t producing knowledge,
  • Because we aren’t diffusing knowledge.,
  • Because we aren’t applying knowledge.

The future belongs to knowledge-based societies. Interestingly, the combined annual GDP of 57 OIC-countries is under $2 trillion.

America, just by herself, produces goods and services worth $12 trillion; China $8 trillion, Japan $3.8 trillion and Germany $2.4 trillion (purchasing power parity basis).

Oil-rich Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait and Qatar ollectively produce goods and services (mostly oil) worth $500 billion;  Spain alone produces goods and services worth over $1 trillion,Catholic Poland $489 billion and Buddhist Thailand $545 billion.

….. (Muslim GDP as a percentage of world GDP is fast declining).

So, why are Muslims so powerless?

Answer: Lack of education.

All we do is shout  to Allah the whole day and blame everyone else for our multiple failures!!!!!
DR F. S.

End of article, but….read on….

But of course, Muslims study all the time.  They study the only book that really matters – the words written by God himself and brought to us by his Messenger, Muhammed (may peace be upon him).  The Holy Qu’ran.  The book of peace and love.

There is no time for wicked Western thoughts, particularly if they started in a Jewish brain.


Muslims are not happy.

  • They’re not happy in Gaza
  • They’re not happy in Egypt
  • They’re not happy in Libya
  • They’re not happy in Morocco
  • They’re not happy in Iran
  • They’re not happy in Iraq
  • They’re not happy in Yemen
  • They’re not happy in Afghanistan
  • They’re not happy in Pakistan
  • They’re not happy in Syria
  • They’re not happy in Lebanon

So, where are they happy?

  • They’re happy in Australia
  • They’re happy in England
  • They’re happy in France
  • They’re happy in Italy
  • They’re happy in Germany
  • They’re happy in Sweden
  • They’re happy in the USA & Canada
  • They’re happy in Norway

They’re happy in almost every country that is not Islamic!

And whom do they blame?

  • Not Islam…
  • Not their leadership…
  • Not themselves…


And they want to change the countries they’re happy in, to be like the countries they came from, where they were unhappy.

Try to find logic in that !

Islamic Obsession with Killing

3 Oct

I found this article.(http://www.answeringmuslims.com/p/jihad.html)  

It is quite articulate about Muslim obsessions with killing.  Here it is.

On November 5th, 2009, a Muslim Army Major named Nidal Malik Hasan opened fire at Fort Hood in Texas. Many innocent people died, and Hasan has been charged with thirteen counts of premeditated murder and more than thirty counts of attempted murder.

Shortly after the Fort Hood shooting, CNN posted an article titled “Murder Has No Religion” (by Arsalan Iftikhar), which claimed that such attacks are forbidden in Islam. The article began:

Most of the world’s 1.57 billion Muslims know that the Holy Quran states quite clearly that, “Anyone who kills a human being … it shall be as though he has killed all of mankind. … If anyone saves a life, it shall be as though he has saved the lives of all of mankind.

Notice that the article portrays Islam as a religion that condemns killing of any kind. But is this what the Qur’an actually says? Unfortunately for CNN’s readers, the author didn’t give a reference, so readers were left to find the quotation themselves. Yet when we turn to 5:32-33 of the Qur’an (the source of CNN’s severely edited quotation), we get a surprisingly different picture of killing in Islam:

For this reason did We prescribe to the children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men; and certainly Our apostles came to them with clear arguments, but even after that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land.

The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement.

Two things are worthy of note in this passage. First, the teaching appealed to by CNN (“whoever slays a soul . . . it is as though he slew all men”) was given “to the children of Israel” (i.e. the Jews). It was not given to Muslims. Second, even if Westernized Muslims want to apply this verse to themselves, the verse obviously permits killing people who spread “mischief in the land.” Indeed, the very next verse commands Muslims to murder, crucify, and dismember those who wage war against Islam and “make mischief” in Muslim lands.

Since the United States is at war in two predominantly Islamic countries, knowledgeable Muslims understand that, according to Muhammad, U.S. soldiers meet the “mischief-making” criterion, and should therefore be killed. It’s no coincidence that Major Hasan targeted soldiers, many of whom were being deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Thus, CNN quoted two carefully edited portions of a passage that justifies the killing of enemy combatants and used them to show that Islam condemns attacks such as the Fort Hood shooting. While deceptions like this are easily spotted, there is much confusion in the world concerning the role of violence in Islam. This short pamphlet will clear up some of the confusion.


Muslims in the West are quick to point to passages such as Qur’an 109:6 (“You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion”) and 2:256 (“There is no compulsion in religion”) as evidence that Islam is a religion of peace. When confronted with harsher passages such as 9:5 (“Slay the idolaters wherever you find them”) and 9:29 (“Fight those who believe not in Allah”), Westernized Muslims interpret these verses in light of the more peaceful teachings of the Qur’an, typically saying something like: “Well, the Qur’an can’t be commanding us to kill unbelievers, since it says that there’s no compulsion in religion.”

Hence, Westernized Muslims pick the verses of the Qur’an they find most attractive, and they use these verses to sanitize the rest of the Qur’an. But is this the correct way to interpret the Qur’an? Unfortunately, the answer is no. The Qur’an presents its own method of interpretation—the Doctrine of Abrogation.

Qur’an 2:106Whatever verse we shall abrogate, or cause [thee] to forget, we will bring a better than it, or one like unto it. Dost thou not know that God is almighty?

Qur’an 16:101When We substitute one revelation for another—and God knows best what He reveals (in stages)—they say, “Thou art but a forger”: but most of them understand not.

According to the Qur’an, then, when Muslims are faced with conflicting commands, they aren’t supposed to pick the one they like best. Rather, they are to go to history and see which verse was revealed last. Whichever verse came last is said to abrogate (or cancel) earlier revelations.

What happens when we apply this methodology to Qur’anic verses on peace and violence?


When we turn to Islam’s theological sources and historical writings (Qur’an, Hadith, Sira, and Tafsir), we find that there are three stages in the call to Jihad, depending on the status of Muslims in a society.

STAGE ONE—When Muslims are completely outnumbered and can’t possibly win a physical confrontation with unbelievers, they are to live in peace with non-Muslims and preach a message of tolerance. We see an example of this stage when Muhammad and his followers were a persecuted minority in Mecca. Since the Muslims were entirely outnumbered, the revelations Muhammad received during this stage (e.g. “You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion”) called for religious tolerance and proclaimed a future punishment (rather than a worldly punishment) for unbelievers.

STAGE TWO—When there are enough Muslims and resources to defend the Islamic community, Muslims are called to engage in defensive Jihad. Thus, when Muhammad had formed alliances with various groups outside Mecca and the Muslim community had become large enough to begin fighting, Muhammad received Qur’an 22:39-40:

Permission (to fight) is given to those upon whom war is made because they are oppressed, and most surely Allah is well able to assist them; Those who have been expelled from their homes without a just cause except that they say: our Lord is Allah. . . .

Although Muslims in the West often pretend that Islam only allows defensive fighting, later revelations show otherwise.

STAGE THREE—When Muslims establish a majority and achieve political power in an area, they are commanded to engage in offensive Jihad. Hence, once Mecca and Arabia were under Muhammad’s control, he received the call the fight all unbelievers. In Surah 9:29, we read:

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, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Notice that this verse doesn’t order Muslims to fight oppressors, but to fight those who don’t believe in Islam (including the “People of the Book”—Jews and Christians).

Not surprisingly, we find similar commands in Islam’s most trusted collections of ahadith (traditions containing Muhammad’s teachings).

Sahih al-Bukhari 6924—Muhammad said: “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: La ilaha illallah (none has the right to be worshipped but Allah), and whoever said La ilaha illahllah, Allah will save his property and his life from me.”

Sahih Muslim 30—Muhammad said: “I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah.”

Here again, the criterion for fighting people is that the people believe something other than Islam.

It’s clear, then, that when Muslims rose to power, peaceful verses of the Qur’an were abrogated by verses commanding Muslims to fight people based on their beliefs. Islam’s greatest scholars acknowledge this. For instance, Ibn Kathir (Islam’s greatest commentator on the Qur’an) sums up Stage Three as follows: “Therefore all people of the world should be called to Islam. If anyone of them refuses to do so, or refuses to pay the Jizyah, they should be fought till they are killed.”


Abrogation also accounts for shifting attitudes regarding Jews and Christians in the Qur’an. While Muslims are to be friendly to Jews and Christians when the former are outnumbered, the Islamic position changes when Muslims reach Stage Three, at which point Christians and Jews are to recognize their inferior status and pay the Jizyah (a payment made to Muslims in exchange for not being killed by them). Consider some of Muhammad’s later teachings about Christians and Jews:

Qur’an 5:51O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.

Qur’an 9:30And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!

Qur’an 98:6Those who reject (Truth), among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein. They are the worst of creatures.

Sahih Muslim 4366—Muhammad said: “I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.

Al-Bukhari, Al-Adab al-Mufrad 1103—Muhammad said: “Do not give the People of the Book the greeting first. Force them to the narrowest part of the road.

Needless to say, these teachings can hardly be considered peaceful or tolerant.


Since Muhammad obviously commanded his followers to fight unbelievers (simply for being unbelievers), why do Muslims in the West deny this? Here we must turn to Surah 3:28, which reads:

Let not the believers take disbelievers for their friends in preference to believers. Whoso doeth that hath no connection with Allah unless (it be) that ye but guard yourselves against them, taking (as it were) security.

According to this verse (which uses a variation of the word Taqiyya, meaning “concealment”), Muslims are not allowed to be friends with non-Muslims. However, if Muslims feel threatened by a stronger adversary, they are allowed to pretend to be friendly. Ibn Kathir comments: “In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship outwardly but never inwardly.” Abu Darda, one of Muhammad’s companions, put it this way: “We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.

Is Islam a religion of peace? No. Islam is a religion that pretends to be peaceful when Muslims are too weak to win a war. Of course, there are many Muslims who aren’t violent. Many Muslims in the West love peace and tolerance. But they didn’t get these values from Islam. They got them from the West, and now they’re reinterpreting Islam based on their Western values. For dedicated Muslims, however, there are only two possible situations to be in: (1) fighting unbelievers, and (2) pretending to be peaceful while preparing to fight unbelievers. Either way, fighting non-Muslims and conquering the world in the name of Allah is always the goal.