You are here

American Thinker

  • Summary: 

    The neologism "Islamophobia" seems to be a quasi-scientific effort to suggest that suspicion of Islam is simultaneously irrational and racist.  Even more of a concern is the attempt to employ science in the service of politics.

    The Nazis in the last century concocted a scientific theory about the inferiority of the Jews in order to rationalize their plan to annihilate Jewry.  Now pseudo-science is used to defend Muslims.  The disturbing fact is that in both cases, we deploy social science in the service of a political agenda.  While some scholars such as John Denham have drawn parallels between modern Islamophobia and anti-Semitism, their implications are not only illogical, but dangerously deceptive.



    Read more:  

    Follow us:  on Twitter | 

  • Summary: 

    Indeed, an event that occurred this week in history sheds much light on the current situation.  On July 14, 1683, the largest Islamic army ever to invade European territory – which is saying much, considering the thousands of invasions preceding it since the eighth century – came and surrounded Vienna, the heart of the Holy Roman Empire and de facto nemesis of Islam.

    Some 200,000 Muslim combatants, under the leadership of the Ottomans – the one state in nearly fourteen centuries of Islamic history most dedicated to and founded on the principles of jihad – invaded under the same rationale that so-called "radical" groups, such as the Islamic State, cite to justify their jihad on "infidels."  Or, to quote the leader of the Muslim expedition, Grand Vizier Kara Mustafa, because Vienna was perceived as the head of the infidel snake, it needed to be laid low so that "all the Christians would obey the Ottomans." 

    This was no idle boast; sources describe Mustafa as "fanatically anti-Christian."  After capturing a Polish town in 1674, he ordered all the Christian prisoners to be skinned alive and their stuffed hides sent as trophies to Ottoman Sultan Muhammad IV. 

    See also: 

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    Contrary to what has been told us, Islam may be the most sterile philosophy to have captured the mind of man. No other philosophy so thoroughly destroys whatever people it has gotten a grip on. Once Islam is firmly in control, the society not only halts in its progress, but actively devolves.

    ...

    Our Western academics, who should know better, accept this Islamic subterfuge of history, and pass it on to posterity.

    The reverence that Islam still holds for the glories of Spain indicates Christian Spain held a genius that Islam could not generate within itself. London, Paris, Madrid, Rome, Berlin: all were the centers of empire; and all produced and still produce genius. What has Mecca produced in the past 1400 years?

    All empires draw talent inward, except Islam, where genius exists only at the periphery where Islam is weakest. The center of Islam, the Arabian peninsula, has been moribund since the 8th century. Islam must expand. It is a parasite. Without new conquests, it dies. This is why it cannot surrender any territory. This is why Israel infuriates them so much.

     

  • Summary: 

    The United Kingdom is on taking a first step toward a parallel legal system for Muslims, and garnering applause for it.

    Both the  and the  have recently lauded a new Muslim  drawn up by a group of British Muslim organizations as a breakthrough in Muslim women's rights in the UK. Urmee Khan of the Telegraph announced with unabashed aplomb: "Hailed as the biggest change in Sharia law in Britain for 100 years, a married Muslim couple will now have equal rights." And the Guardian's Samia Rahman claimed that "A new Islamic marriage contract sets aside cultural practices, giving women the rights they are due under sharia law".

    But if this new marriage contract was required to give Muslim women equal rights, how can these rights have already been enshrined in the shari'a? There are two important claims to distinguish here: that the shari'a gives women equal rights in marriage and divorce matters, and that this new contract is consistent with the shari'a in giving women these rights. But how valid are these bold assertions?

  • Summary: 

    Forget the  of Islam.  It is the Five Stages of Islam that threaten the fundamental freedoms of  Western Democracy.  Freedoms which include freedom of thought, expression, and association and the crucial derived right of freedom of the press.  We should never forget that "Islam" means submission -- the opposite of self-determination and Enlightenment  values.

    Six years ago Dr. Peter Hammond  a remarkable book which included a statistical study of the correlation between Muslim to non-Muslim population ratios and the transition from conciliatory Islam to fascist Islam.  The stages are the same in 2011 but the demographics have changed to show an alarming progression.  Many European nations and the U.S. are on the cusp of moving to a higher bracket.  The demographics change but the story is the same. 

  • Summary: 

    The reason I was expelled from the base is because I had two copies of the Koran.  One was a hardback study book and the other a paperback Koran; it is my interest to study the religion in and of itself and take notes.

    Well, what happened was that I wrote notes and highlighted throughout the books and came to the conclusion that the doctrine itself is that of murder, rape, and extortion.  That is my personal view of the religion.

    Well, dumb me, I wrote on the paperback Koran in black marker right on the front – RELIGION OF MURDER.  That is what I think of it.  The Command M.P. (military police) did an inspection in our rooms and were searching for General Order 1 violations; it's normal procedure finding drugs, alcohol, and pornographic material.  Well, in this search, they found my study Korans (under my bed) out of sight and out of view of others, and called me in to investigate why I had marked on the Koran RELIGION OF MURDER.

  • Summary: 

    Will Mainstream American Islam Condemn Pastor Nadarkhani's "Apostasy" Death Sentence? Where is CAIR? Where is the Islamic Society of North America? Almost 90 years ago, in his 1924 The Law of Apostasy in Islam, Samuel Zwemer made these observations, regarding the post World War I "Arab Spring" of that era:

    The story is told that Damocles, at the court of Dionysius of Sicily, pronounced the latter the happiest man on earth. When, however, Damocles was permitted to sit on the royal throne, he perceived a sword hanging by a horse-hair over his head. The imagined felicity vanished, and he begged Dionysius to remove him from his seat of peril. Today [circa 1924] we read of new mandatories, of liberty, and of promised equality to minorities under Moslem rule; and newspapers assert that a new era has come to the Near East. Economic development, intellectual awakening, reforms, constitutions, parliaments and promises Does the sword of Damocles, however, still hang over the head of each convert from Islam to Christianity? Is the new Islam more tolerant than the old? [emphasis added] Will the lives and property of converts be protected, and the rights of minorities be respected? ....Again and again has European pressure, aided by a few educated Orientals, endeavored to secure equality before the law for all religions and races in the Near East. But as often as the attempt was made it proved a failure, each new failure more ghastly than the last. The reason is that the conscience and the faith of the most sincere and upright Moslems are bound up with the Koran and the Traditions. [emphasis added] Civilization cannot eradicate deep-seated convictions. Rifles and ironclads, the cafe, the theatre, written constitutions, representative parliaments; none of these reach far below the surface. A truer freedom...than the one supplied by their own faith, must come before Moslems can enter into the larger liberty which we enjoy.

  • Summary: 

    The 1990 Cairo Declaration, or so-called "Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Islam", was drafted and subsequently ratified by all the Muslim member nations of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). Now a 57 state collective which includes every Islamic nation on earth, the OIC, currently headed by Turkey's Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, thus represents the entire Muslim umma (or global community of individual Muslims), and is the largest single voting bloc in the United Nations (UN). 

    Both the preamble and concluding articles (24 and 25) make plain that the OIC's Cairo Declaration is designed to supersede Western conceptions of human rights as enunciated, for example, in the US Bill of Rights, and the UN's 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

    The opening of the preamble to the Cairo Declaration repeats a Koranic injunction affirming Islamic supremacism, (Koran 3:110; "You are the best nation ever brought forth to men...you believe in Allah"), and states,

    "Reaffirming the civilizing and historical role of the Islamic Ummah which Allah made the best nation..."

    The preamble continues,

    "Believing that fundamental rights and universal freedoms in Islam are an integral part of the Islamic religion and that no one as a matter of principle has the right to suspend them in whole or in part or violate or ignore them in as much as they are binding divine commandments, which are contained in the Revealed Books of God and were sent through the last of His Prophets to complete the preceding divine messages thereby making their observance an act of worship and their neglect or violation an abominable sin, and accordingly every person is individually responsible  --  and the Ummah collectively responsible  --  for their safeguard."

  • Summary: 

    The minority of Muslims who support, and use, violence against infidels follow original, literal Islam.  They’re not “Islamic terrorists” – they’re legacy, Koranic literalists who use terror as a tactic to promote the conversion of non-Muslims who must convert to Islam or die.

    Pure Islam is not a “religion of peace” and was never designed to be a religion of peace.

    Instead, Islam is a religion that uses terror to enforce a dogma that defines behavioral practices that comply with the Koran and that define the regulations of daily life.

Subscribe to American Thinker