You are here

Islam

Summary:


Islam is derived from the Arabic root "Salema": peace, purity, submission and obedience. In the religious sense, Islam means submission to the will of God and obedience to His law: http:://www.barghouti.com/islam/meaning.html

 

However Islam also has a very political side, that of sharia law and to a growing number of people that aspect predominates over the religious aspect. Ex-Muslim, Ayaan Hirsi Ali has described it as: “Islam is not a religion of peace, it’s a political theory of conquest that seeks domination by any means it can.”

  • Islam Four Challenges
    Summary: 

    An extract from a paper presented to an Islamic conference in Nov 2017:

    The way I see it, what ISIS did was that they want to force the reality of today’s living to be following what is in the source of Islamic teaching. Everything they [ISIS] did, they have the justification from the authoritative references of Islamic teachings.

     

    Now, when we are thinking about whether Islam is compatible to democracy or not, we then have to observe the mindset of Muslims about Islam. The question would be: is the mindset of Muslims about Islam compatible to democracy? When we look into the references in classical discourse of Islam, we will find several problematic elements there. I can point out among many problematic elements - four centers of concerns - related to not just democracy but to the nature of our current civilisation.

    The first is the teaching about relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims. In the classical discourse of Islamic teaching, the dominant view of this matter is that Muslims and non-Muslims are enemies. The basic norm of the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims are enmity. That is what’s dominant in the classical discourse of Islamic teaching. For example, in the tafsir Quran by At-Tobari, or At-Tabarani or Ibnu Kathir, it was stated that non-Muslims, meaning infidel, is permissible to be killed merely because of their infidelity. That is there in the discourse. We also, for example, have in the very famous book in Shafi’ tradition, I’anatuth Thalibin, whereby it is stated there that Muslims have the collective obligation to do expansive jihad towards non-Muslims at least once a year. It is there in the discourse. So, we still have this problematic element in the reference that is still considered to be very authoritative among Muslims all over the world. Therefore, the first problematic element is the teaching about the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims.

    The second problematic element is the teaching about the conflict of religion itself. What kind of conflict? The category of conflict that is eligible to be considered as conflict of religion. For example, when the Buddhist in Myanmar attacked Muslims there, it is already a legitimate reason for Muslims everywhere in the world to declare war against the Buddhists. I believe you are all aware that these kinds of arguments have also been the arguments that the terrorists groups such as ISIS and Al-Qaeda used to attract Muslims to join them. Because the infidels from America attack Muslims in Iraq and in the Middle East, then it is a legitimate reason for Muslims to attack any Western infidels all over the world. That is their argument. And it is justified in the classical course of Islamic teaching.

    The third problematic element would be the existence of nation states. You see, nation state is now the base of our current world order. The world order we have now is based on the existence of nation states but this is something new and there is no normative base about nation state in the classical discourse of Islamic teaching. What is dominant there in the discourse of Islamic teaching is the obligation for Muslims to struggle for one grand imamate meaning one universal political system under one Muslim ruler. It is in there in the classical discourse of Islamic teaching.

    Then, the fourth problematic thing would be the status of state laws as the alternative of Shariah. How would Shariah see the state laws? State laws that are produced by modern political processes, by democracy. Is it an obligation for Muslims to follow the state laws or should they reject the state laws and follow the Shariah instead? Is following state laws such as the traffic regulation an obligation for Muslim, a “Shariah obligation” for Muslim, or is it just a worldly affair not related to religion? All these are centers of our concern regarding Islamic teachings because it is still recorded in the most authoritative references of Islamic teaching.

    See also: 

    Among Muslims and non-Muslims, there is an urgent need to address those obsolete and problematic elements of Islamic orthodoxy that underlie the Islamist worldview, fuelling violence on both sides. The world’s largest Muslim organisation, Indonesia’s Nahdlatul Ulama, of which I am General Secretary, has begun to do exactly that.

    The truth, we recognise, is that jihadist doctrine, goals and strategy can be traced to specific tenets of orthodox, authoritative Islam and its historic practice. This includes those portions of Shariah that promote Islamic supremacy, encourage enmity towards non-Muslims and require the establishment of a caliphate. It is these elements – still taught by most Sunni and Shiite institutions – that constitute a summons to perpetual conflict.

  • Jihad is Islamic
    Summary: 

    Among Muslims and non-Muslims, there is an urgent need to address those obsolete and problematic elements of Islamic orthodoxy that underlie the Islamist worldview, fuelling violence on both sides. The world’s largest Muslim organisation, Indonesia’s Nahdlatul Ulama, of which I am General Secretary, has begun to do exactly that.


    The truth, we recognise, is that jihadist doctrine, goals and strategy can be traced to specific tenets of orthodox, authoritative Islam and its historic practice. This includes those portions of Shariah that promote Islamic supremacy, encourage enmity towards non-Muslims and  It is these elements – still taught by most Sunni and Shiite institutions – that constitute a summons to perpetual conflict.

    It is our firm view that, if Muslims do not address the key tenets of Islamic tradition that encourage this violence, anyone – at any time – can harness them to defy what they claim to be illegitimate laws and butcher their fellow citizens, whether they live in the Islamic world or the West. This is what links so many current events, from Syria to the streets of London. There is a desperate need for honest discussion of these matters. This is why it worries me to see Western political and intellectual elites weaponise the term “Islamophobia,” to short-circuit analysis of a complex phenomenon that threatens all humanity. For example, it is factually incorrect and counter-productive to define Islamophobia as “rooted in racism,” as proposed by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims. In reality, it is the spread of Islamist extremism and terror that primarily contributes to the rise of Islamophobia throughout the non-Muslim world. That is why it is vital to challenge the prevailing “Muslim mindset,” which is predicated upon enmity and suspicion towards non-Muslims, and often rationalises perpetrating violence in the name of Islam. Otherwise, non-Muslims will continue to be radicalised by Islamist attacks and by large-scale Muslim migration to the West.

    See also:  

    where this article appeared in the UK press.

     

     

  • Proposed Dutch Bill on Islam

    Author(s):

    Summary: 

    Greetings to all who shall see or hear these present! Be it known: Thus We consider that it is desirable to designate Islam for what it really is and to, therefore, establish a ban on certain Islamic manifestations in the public space. We, therefore, having heard the Advisory Division of the Council of State of the Kingdom, and in consultation with the States General, have approved and decreed as We hereby approve and decree:

    Section 1 Islam is not a religion or a philosophy of life but a violent, totalitarian ideology.

    Section 2 1. The following Islamic manifestations are banned:

    a. mosques

    b. schools

    c. the Koran

    d. wearing a burka or a niqab

    2. The term used under subsection l.a should also be taken to mean every space used as an Islamic house of worship or prayer room unless it takes place in a domestic setting.

    3. All educational institutions referred to under subsection 1 .b that teach Islamic ideology are banned.

    4. The printing, distributiori or sales of the Koran referred to in subsection 2.c is banned.

    5. Wearing a burka or a niqab referred to in subsection 1.d .is banned unless it takes place in a domestic setting.

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    The World Watch List is an annual report on the global persecution of Christians ranking the top 50 countries where Christians are persecuted for their faith. Released at the beginning of each year, the list uses data from Open Doors field workers and external experts to quantify and analyze persecution worldwide.

    Admin: Not all countries where persecution happens are Islamic but there is a heavy preponderance of Islamic countries in the list:


     

  • Summary: 

    Interviewer:   "For someone who burns the Koran, the punishment according to Islam is death, is that correct?"


    Imam:            "If you burn the Koran, which is an insult, then clearly the answer is yes"!

    See also:

     

  • Summary: 

    In its pre-modern conceptualization, jihad was designed to expand and defend the Islamic state by making it a social duty for Muslims to actively “fight in the path of Allah” and thereby prove the authenticity of their faith. This social duty was the life-long effort of the Prophet Mohammed, who not only led the early Islamic movement but heralded a political revolution that incited the transformations necessary for the Islamic Conquests to take control of three-fifths of the Christian world.

  • Summary: 

    We all have a learning curve when it comes to Islam, journalists especially. Consider this exchange, between Tim Marshall of Sky News and an insurgent prisoner in Syria ( 8 Dec 2012). He asks him:

    “What is the future in Syria for the minorities…?”

    “O.K., they have three choices, either they became a Muslim, or they have to pay the jizya, or to be killed.”

    “Wheesh!!” [or something, expressing surprise and disbelief]

    “Do YOU believe this?” he asks incredulously, and to the interpreter, “Does HE believe this?”

    ...

    This reaction is probably shared by most of us in the West, who doubtless find it as hard to believe as the reporter did. We, however, are at a great disadvantage: we are not acquainted with the teachings of Islam. How does the prisoner’s statement square with Islamic doctrine? He has surely got it all wrong, yes?

    To the contrary: a resounding NO. He has got it all right. He is expressing what the source texts say.

    Koran 9:5 (amongst many others) gives the clear instruction:

    “….kill the People of the Book [Jews and Christians] wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent [convert to Islam], establish prayer, and give zakat [tithe money], let them [go] their way.”

    Koran 9:29 commands Muslims to make non-Muslims submit, by force, into subordinate dhimmi status as second-class citizens. “Islam”, after all, means “Submission”.

    “Fight those who do not …. adopt the religion of truth [Islam] … until they give the jizya [“protection” money extortion tax] with willing submission and feel themselves brought low.”

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    02/10/2019
    Summary: 

    Sharia Watch: Please note this from the - "Apostasy results, firstly, in the

  • Summary: 

    Many Muslim scholars and other apologists who argue that the murder of innocent people committed by jihadists in the name of Islam was never ordained by the Prophet present this Quranic verse: “If anyone slays [kills] a person, it would be as if he slew the whole people, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people.” What is misleading about this is that this verse, as presented, does not exist anywhere in the Quran. It is, instead, a distorted version of verse 32 of the fifth sura, which states: “For that cause, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land; it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one; it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs.” On a side note, whoever wrote this segment in the Quran got the words directly from Judaism, specifically the Mishna Sanhedrin (c.190–230 AD).

    The ordinance is in reference, as per the preceding verses, to the killing of Abel by his brother Cain. Verse 32, which begins “for that cause” (reason), meaning “for the reason Cain killed Abel,” is followed by the decree given to “the Children of Israel” (i.e., the Jews) who, according to Muslims, received an earlier set of scriptures. Effectively speaking, this is applied to Muslims who as the new chosen people should not kill other Muslims. The verse likewise sanctions killing as an act of vengeance against those who kill or cause disharmony in the umma. Based on the two verses that follow (33–34), what appears on the surface to be a peaceful message is in reality a warning:

    Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment; Except for those who repent before you apprehend them. And know that Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.—Sura 5, 33–34

  • Summary: 

    The left’s greatest intellectual error is its conviction that the world can be divided into a binary power struggle in which both sides agree on the nature of the struggle, but disagree on the outcome.

    ...

    Islam and the left both claim to have “perfect” systems that can create a utopia… after a whole lot of killing. They are aligned with each other, yet unable to understand each other because their worldviews have no room for anything outside their perfect models. Leftists despise fundamentalists and Islamists despise atheists and yet here they are working together while ignoring what the other believes.
    The left cannot process the idea that religion transcends politics. At best, leftists see religion as a subset of politics. And since Islam conforms to their political axis, it must be progressive. But to Muslims, politics is a subset of religion. Politics cannot transcend religion because it is an expression of religion.

  • Summary: 

    Islam, since its very inception, has suffered from a serious inferiority complex.

    Muhammad as an aspiring prophet in his home city of Mecca labored for some twelve years to convince his fellow citizens that they should renounce polytheism and bow before the sovereign rule of Allah. By the time his tribe’s patience had run out and he was finally driven from Mecca in 622 AD, the wannabe prophet had attracted a relatively small number of converts from the people of his city, and the number of his detractors was growing increasingly vociferous.

    Muhammad had hoped to win support for his religious claims and stature from the other main monotheists of the region, the Jewish and Christian tribes known as “people of the Book [i.e., the Bible].” He even included in his preaching repertoire stories he had picked up listening to oral traditions concerning biblical characters. However, as the Jews and Christians learned more of his grandiose claims and eccentric teachings, they concluded he was not a prophet sent by the God of their revelations.

    Rejected by the polytheistic people of Mecca and by the monotheistic tribes in western Arabia, Muhammad turned his growing wrath toward them. His preaching became more antagonistic and defensive, with Allah pledging hellfire against the prophet’s opponents and propping up Muhammad’s ego at the same time. Within his community of believers, his will was unassailable, and even Allah seemed eager to do his bidding, providing him wives and booty and self-serving revelations.

  • Country: 
    Saudi Arabia
    News Date: 
    18/09/2009
    Summary: 
    • Saudi law is based on Sharia (Islamic) law41 and applies to both Muslims and non-Muslims in the country
    • Observing any religion other than Islam is illegal in the Kingdom.
    • Fundamentalist Wahhabi Islam is the only expression of religion allowed in Saudi Arabia. There is no religious freedom in the country, even if Saudi officials have been tolerating the private practice of other religions. However, the Saudi religion police, the Muttawa, continues to persecute Christians in their homes where they meet to pray.
  • Summary: 

    Boris Johnson says it is time to reassert British values in the face of extremist Islam.

    Supporters of the war have retorted that Iraq cannot be said to be a whole and sufficient explanation for the existence of suicidal Islamic cells in the West, and they, too, have a point. The threat from Islamicist nutters preceded 9/11; they bombed the Paris Métro in the 1990s; and it is evident that the threat to British lives pre-dates the Iraq war, when you think that roughly the same number of Britons died in the World Trade Center as died in last week’s bombings. In other words, the Iraq war did not create the problem of murderous Islamic fundamentalists, though the war has unquestionably sharpened the resentments felt by such people in this country, and given them a new pretext. The Iraq war did not introduce the poison into our bloodstream but, yes, the war did help to potentiate that poison. And whatever the defenders of the war may say, it has not solved the problem of Islamic terror, or even come close to providing the beginnings of a solution. You can’t claim to be draining the swamp in the Middle East when the mosquitoes are breeding quite happily in Yorkshire.

    The question is what action we take now to solve the problem in our own country, and what language we should use to describe such action. The first step, as we swaddle London and Yorkshire with Police/Do Not Cross tape, is to ban the phrase ‘war on terror’, as repeatedly used by G.W. Bush, most recently on 7 July in Edinburgh, with Blair nodding beside him. There is nothing wrong in principle in waging war on an abstract noun; the British navy successfully waged a war on slavery, by which they meant a war on slavers. But if we continue to say that we are engaged in a war with these people, then we concede several points to the enemy, and set up a series of odious false equivalences.

  • Country: 
    Turkey
    News Date: 
    24/04/2019
    Summary: 

    Today, April 24, marks the “Great Crime,” that is, the genocide of Christians—mostly Armenians but also Assyrians and Greeks—that took place under the Islamic Ottoman Empire, throughout World War I.  Then, in an attempt to wipe out as many Christians as possible, the Turks massacred approximately 1.5 million Armenians, 300,000 Assyrians, and 750,000 Greeks. 

  • Summary: 

    See Quran 4:34 etc

  • Country: 
    Malaysia
    News Date: 
    13/06/2019
    Summary: 

    On the first count he was charged with posting an insulting statement against Prophet Muhammad and Islam which could threaten harmony between Muslims and non-Muslims

    See also: 

  • Summary: 

    hat did Spain do wrong? Why did Muslim radicals attack so many innocents? Those are the questions being asked across the West .

    Many will resort to the self-flagellation of “change our foreign policy” or “we are to blame because of colonialism”. I wish it were so simple. I know the mindset of militant Muslims seeking to kill disbelievers in the name of a caliphate, because I called for the creation of such a caliphate for five years of my life. I recognise the ideology, theology and strategy behind the violence. There is no appeasing the fanatics.

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    16/02/2019
    Summary: 

    Thirty years ago this week, Ayatollah Khomeini put a fatwa on the head of Salman Rushdie.. At least 22 people were killed; Rushdie went into hiding. Britain suddenly had to confront some unsettling truths.

  • Summary: 

    Of all the ideologies the left has aligned itself with through minority representation, I find the strangest of all to be Islam. The left’s alliance with Islam is unique, not only because Islam is at odds with Enlightenment values, as most collectivist systems are, but mainly because Islam is at odds with rights the left pride themselves in protecting.

    Ex-Muslims, LGBT Muslims, and independent, dissenting Muslim women have always had to fear for their lives, and they continue to do so today in Muslim-majority countries. It is extremely strange that the same left that used to defend human rights worldwide somehow decided to align itself with Islam, only to help further endanger the lives of dissenting individuals within the Muslim community, not only in Muslim-majority countries, but even here in the West.

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    04/01/2019
    Summary: 

    An investigation is expected into how many parents are refusing to allow their children to learn about Islam, as part of their normal religious education lessons, and how many are withdrawing from associated school trips - and why. The details emerged in a report from the standing advisory council into religious education which is being presented to  Council.

  • Country: 
    European Union
    News Date: 
    12/11/2018
    Summary: 

    Make no mistake, the OIC-driven U.N. is complicit in this. And this will make it even more difficult for real Christians suffering under the boot of Islam. The implications of such immigration is far reaching. Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges. When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components begin to creep in as well.

  • Summary: 

    Asia Bibi should be able to come to the UK. It is those who would threaten her who should not be here.

    — Douglas Murray ()

    Almost nothing is discussed as badly in America or Europe as the subject of immigration. And one reason is that it remains almost impossible to have any sensible or rational public discussion of its consequences. Or rather it is eminently possible to have a discussion about the upsides (“diversity,” talent, etc.) but almost impossible to have any rational discussion about its downsides.

    When I wrote , I wanted to highlight the sheer scale of change that immigration brings. Some people might be happy with it, others unhappy: but to pretend that the change doesn’t occur, or won’t occur, or isn’t very interesting so please move along has always seemed an error to me. For instance, as I noted then, an internal document from the Ministry of Defence that leaked a few years back said that Britain would no longer be able to engage militarily in a range of foreign countries because of “domestic” factors. It takes a moment to absorb this. We’re used to wondering about how immigration changes domestic politics. But foreign policy as well?

    See also: 

  • Country: 
    Slovakia
    News Date: 
    11/11/2018
    Summary: 

    Slovakia is the last EU Member State without a single mosque, TRT World reports. Previous attempts to build have been halted by politicians. The country does not recognise Islam as a religion and only have a few thousand Muslim residents. Islam must not be taught in schools and the 5,000 Muslims, mostly European ones, who reside in the country are not officially recognised. They account for only 0.1% of the population.

  • Summary: 

    THE RISE AND DECLINE OF ISLAM

    The progress of Islam was slow until Mohammed cast aside the precepts of toleration and adopted an aggressive, militant policy. Then it became rapid. The motives which animated the armies of Islam were mixed—material and spiritual. Without the truths contained in the system success would have been impossible, but neither without the sword would the religion have been planted in Arabia, nor beyond. The alternatives offered to conquered peoples were Islam, the sword, or tribute. The drawbacks and attractions of the system are examined. The former were not such as to deter men of the world from embracing the faith. The sexual indulgences sanctioned by it are such as to make Islam "the Easy way."

    The spread of Islam was stayed whenever military success was checked. The Faith was meant for Arabia and not for the world, hence it is constitutionally incapable of change or development. The degradation of woman hinders the growth of freedom and civilization under it.

    Christianity is contrasted in the means used for its propagation, the methods it employed in grappling with and overcoming the evils that it found existing in the world, in the relations it established between the sexes, in its teaching with regard to the respective duties of the civil and spiritual powers, and, above all, in its redeeming character, and then the conclusion come to that Christianity is divine in its origin.

    See also: 

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    Surveys conducted by Pew Research have revealed a great deal about Muslim beliefs and practices across the globe. But they fall short of providing an overall picture of the Muslim world because they are divided by country or region (see sample bar graph, below). The Muslim Global Demographic Project was established to answer this need by compiling Pew survey information in order to compute global percentages and global population statistics on Islamic beliefs and practices as they relate to security, terrorism, and the potential threat to Western culture. 1

  • Summary: 

    See also: 

    Executive Summary Survey Overview

    • The three Pew Research surveys compiled and analyzed by the Muslim Global Demographic Project encompass about 1.1 billion Muslims (two-thirds of the global Muslim population) living in 39 countries. Not every country was polled in all of the survey questions.
    • Sectarian divisions are a major source of conflict within Islam. Each sect believes it represents the true teaching of the Quran and the Prophet Muhammad. 67% (736.3 million) of Muslims surveyed believe that there is only one true interpretation of Islam’s teachings. Disagreements over the interpretation of Islam have sometimes resulted in deadly violence, mostly between Sunnis and Shias. In the Middle East and South Asia, there are tens of thousands of sectarian militants whose actions could spark a broader conflict (Q1).
    • Very devout Muslims—those who say their lives reflect the hadith and the sunna to a considerable degree—comprise 41% (369.7 million) of the survey population. They are more likely to say that sharia (Islamic law) is the revealed word of Allah, that Islam and sharia have only one interpretation, that proselytizing is a religious duty, and that sharia should be the official law of their country (Q2). They are also probably more likely to support extreme punishments such as amputation and stoning.
    • Though Muslims are evenly divided over the belief that there is only one interpretation of sharia, 69% of Muslims (741.8 million) in the survey countries favor making sharia the official law of their country (Q3, Q4) and 64% (581 million) believe it is the revealed word of Allah (Q4aa).
    • About one-third to one-half of Muslims in the survey countries (274.0 million - 463.3 million) believe sharia should be applied to non-Muslims in some way, and support extreme punishments such as whippings, amputations, stoning for adultery, and the death penalty for apostasy (Q5-Q8).
    • About one-third of Muslims surveyed (349.4 million - 361.8 million) support the forced veiling of women and say that honor killings are justified, in at least some circumstances, for women who commit pre or extra-marital sex (Q9, Q10)
    • Nearly 33% (333.7 million) of Muslims surveyed said they are concerned about Islamic extremist groups in their country (few were concerned about Christian extremists). Nearly 17% (177.1 million) said that violence against civilians can be justified in order to “defend Islam from its enemies.” The defense of Islam can be broader than resistance to armed attacks. For many Muslims, insulting Islam or Muhammad is regarded as an attack on Islam (Q11, Q12).
    • 46% (503.5 million) of Muslims surveyed believe in the “evil eye”—that certain people can cast curses or spells that cause bad things to happen to others. They also believe that its power can be overcome by incantations (ruqyah) and washings. These beliefs are based on the teachings and examples of Muhammad found in the canonical traditions, or hadith (Q13).
    • Nearly one-third of Muslims in the survey population (353.6 million) believe there is a natural conflict between being a devout religious person and living in a modern society. Most Muslims agree that Western music, movies, and television pose a threat to morality in their country (Q14).
    • In addition to the high degree of support for sharia, about one-third to one-half of Muslims (274.0 million - 503.5 million) in the survey uphold beliefs and practices (mostly related to sharia) that are contrary to many Western values, such as separation of religion and state, religious and individual freedom, freedom of speech, equality of persons under the law, protection from cruel and inhuman punishment, the right of self-determination, gender equality, and the rejection of superstition (Q5, Q6, Q7, Q8, Q9, Q10, Q13, Q14).

    Assessment Overview

    Security, Terrorism, and the Potential Threat to Western Culture

    • Many Muslims reject basic universal rights and freedoms.
    • A pre-scientific worldview continues to inhibit Islamic historical and scientific inquiry.
    • Very devout Muslims are likely to reject the legitimacy of Western laws and government.
    • Converting non-Muslims and promoting sharia are religious imperatives (Q15).
    • Intolerance of non-Muslims is widespread and continues to be taught.
    • Terrorism can be religiously justified to defend the integrity and reputation of Islam.
    • Over 100 million Muslims can justify acts of terrorism in the defense of Islam.

  • Summary: 

    Pew Research did a worldwide survey about what Muslims believe and practice. I call this sociology, Muslimology. Their data was used to create a global picture of Islam. The results are astounding: 40% of Muslims are devout. They not only practice the 5 Pillars, but go further and follow the Sunna of Mohammed. A majority of devout Muslims want the Sharia, not our laws. Many want Sharia to apply to the Kafir as well. Nearly one in five devout Muslims wants Kafirs to be attacked to defend Islam. The demands for more and more Sharia will never cease.

  • Summary: 

    Conclusion

    Of course not all Christians have always interpreted Christianity in a peaceful way, and not all Muslims have interpreted Islam to be violent. Both religions have very long histories, spread across continents and complicated by racial, political and cultural factors that have influenced adherents’ interpretations of their scriptures. But the undoubtedly true observation that every major human institution will have people whom future generations regard as cruel or compassionate, wise or foolish, noble or corrupt, heroic or villainous, does not mean that Christianity and Islam do not have distinct credos. They do, and in the case of Christianity and Islam the two approaches to violence are fundamentally different. All branches of Christianity treat the stories and laws of the Old Testament – as the name suggests - as a former imperfect revelation requiring an interpretation consistent with Jesus’ perfect example of loving kindness. It is simply unimaginable that the Jesus described in the Gospels might, in different circumstances, have organised his followers to rob, kill, torture, enslave, maim and rape in the way that Mohammed did. By contrast when the Quran instructs beheadings, lashings or the amputation of fingers, hands and feet, these instructions, when given, were intended to be applied to real necks, backs and limbs. No branch of Islam has ever taught other than that this was how the Quran was intended to be interpreted when Mohammed announced it, nor that this was how Mohammed himself, as the perfect example of Islamic values, applied it, and intended it to be applied forever.

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    "What is happening in Iraq is a strange thing, but it is normal for Muslims, because they have never treated Christians well, and they have always held an offensive and defaming stand against Christians.... We used to live and coexist with Muslims, but then they revealed their canines [teeth].... [They do not] have the right to storm houses, steal and attack the honor of Christians. Most Muslims do this, the Ottomans killed us and after that the ruling nation-states understood the circumstances but always gave advantage to the Muslims. Islam has never changed."

  • Country: 
    Australia
    News Date: 
    21/10/2018
    Summary: 

    Shari'a laws are a set of laws that are based on the life of prophet Muhammad. Shari'a is not just a law but a way of life, ideology and political movement, according to the Sharia laws: 

    – There is no freedom of religion or freedom of speech. 

    – There is no equality between people (the non-Muslim is not equal to the Muslim). 

    – There are no equal rights for men and women. 

    – There is no democracy or a separation between religion and state politics. 

    FGM, Acid attacks, honor killings, beheading and stoning. 

  • Summary: 

    To give you some background, I also came out of the Labour movement, I too was a trade union activist, an activist for the NHS, a feminist, and a gay rights campaigner. The only difference is that I stood up for women of all colours, and treated them as my allies, regardless of the threat they faced to their freedoms – even if this threat came from their religion.

    For Britain is routinely smeared as ‘far-right’ (including by yourself) by people with no knowledge of the fact that our party is made up with people from all races, ethnicities, and backgrounds.

    Would it surprise you to know that one of our founding members, and the party’s deputy chair, is a Pakistani-heritage woman who joined us because of the way she and thousands of British women are treated under the sharia system in our country? Do you care?

  • Summary: 

    According to a  published in 2009, public perceptions depend heavily on a few key factors. Pew’s Gregory Smith explained: “One of the most powerful factors shaping views of Islam is education,” he said. “Those Americans who have more education tend to be more favorable toward Muslim Americans and Islam than Americans with less education. Interestingly, age was also a good predictor of views of Muslim Americans and Islam, with young people tend to be more favorable than were older people.”

    ...

    People who dare to disclose the true nature of Islam run the risk of being castigated as bigots and hatemongers. Yet even a cursory examination of Islam’s history and Islamic texts conclusively proves the exact opposite of peacefulness. Islam was and continues to be a movement of unbridled violence. Islam was forced upon every people at the point of the sword and the imposition of backbreaking jaziyah (poll taxes) levied on those who were spared death and allowed to retain their religious beliefs. In addition to paying heavy jaziyah, the non-Muslims were treated, at best, as second class in their own homelands.

    ...

    A longstanding Islamic practice is to appear to be meek while weak and to assume despotic intolerant power when strong. The recent migration of Muslims to non-Islamic lands began as a seemingly harmless, even useful, trickle of cheap and much-needed labor. Before long, greater and greater numbers of Muslims deluged the new territories, and as they grew in numbers — by means of a high birth rate as well as new arrivals — Muslims began reverting to their intolerant ways, demanding legal status for Sharia (Islamic law), the draconian laws that resemble the laws of humanity’s barbaric past.

  • Summary: 

    The Trilogy Project was developed to make Islam’s three sacred texts,  and  understandable to the ordinary person. It was based upon scientific principles and objective methods, so that any independent person could achieve the same results if they used the same methods.

    All Islamic doctrine is based on words of Allah and the Sunna (words and actions) of Mohammed. Allah is found in the  and Mohammed is found in the  (biography) and the  (traditions). All of Islam is based on , and . If it is in the Trilogy, it is Islam. If it is not in the Trilogy, then it is not Islam. To know Islam, know the Trilogy.

    The problem in knowing the Trilogy is that the  , and  were designed to be difficult to understand. There is only one way for them to be understood — they must be viewed as a systemic whole, not three separate books.

    The CSPI books had to be fact-based and self-authenticating. In a sense, each book had to be a map to the original text. Nearly every paragraph in the CSPI book series has a reference number that allows the reader to go to the source text and verify what is written. If you don’t believe it or want more details, you can go the reference number and read the original.

    Here are some of the topics that have been studied:












  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    But when you look a little further into the question of Islamic banking, you find that it is not, in fact, required by Islam. Al-Azhar University, in Cairo, the main and ancient home of Sunni religious learning, teaches that "riba" means extortionate interest, not any interest at all, and that moderate interest should be permitted. Most Egyptian banks charge and pay interest. Even Muslims who reject this interpretation say that the doctrine of "extreme necessity" permits Muslims in non-Muslim countries to pay interest.

    So what is being proposed with Islamic banking is actually a hardening of the religion, not an accommodation of its existing custom. It is rather as if Catholics, arriving in large numbers in a Muslim country, insisted that they must eat fish rather than meat on a Friday, a rule which has been dropped by the Church in modern times. And when you look at HSBC's Sharia Board you find that a couple of its members have links with the Deoband, the long-standing ultra-conservative group whose schools in Pakistan educated many of the Taliban.

    ...

    Islam means "submission" (not "peace") and it is the aim of Muslims ("those who have submitted") to make the whole world submit. The teaching seems not to envisage the idea of Muslims as a minority, except as a temporary phenomenon. The best that non-Muslims - in Britain that means Sikhs and Hindus, as well as Jews and Christians - can hope for is that they be treated as "dhimmis", second-class citizens within the Islamic state.

  • Summary: 

    Frustrated at what she perceived as failures in both Labour and UKIP (having been a former candidate of both parties in the past), Waters went on to create For Britain, a party that is built on preserving British culture and national pride. Waters has come under fire from her detractors regarding her stance towards Islam and the rise of Sharia in the UK.

    I have always been interested in the world around me, but I became politically active when I started working for the NHS some years ago. I am very supportive of the NHS and its aims; that all people should have access to healthcare regardless of income. I became involved in Unison and worked as an employee representative in the health service. I was also studying law part-time.

    Doing a law degree opened my eyes to many of the problems of injustice that were occurring in our society, I also became friends with a devout Muslim woman – it was this that began my journey in to Islam. I learned of the restrictions placed upon my friend’s life by her family, simply because she was a woman. I learned that these restrictions were placed upon women throughout many minority communities, but particularly among Muslim communities; women even faced threats of death for “misbehaving”. I learned this was commonplace in the same Britain that had produced the Suffragettes (my heroines), and that sharia law – a deeply anti-woman system of codes and religious laws – was informally practised in the UK, having a profound effect on the lives of thousands of people.

    I then read the Koran to greater understand the religion and I realised that all of the terrible things associated with Islamic societies around the world, were coming directly from Islamic scripture. I began to tell this truth and this made me realise the importance of truth – telling it can be an extremely dangerous thing to do. People often don’t want to hear the truth as it can be too difficult to face, and rather than do so, people will smear and silence the truth-teller. I’ve experienced this from day one and I continue to experience it today.

  • Summary: 

    The pictures tell their own story of the baleful influence of Islam.

  • Summary: 
    • Egyptian intellectual Dr. Khaled Montaser referred to the "scientific-miraculous" nature of the Quran (i'jaz) as a "great delusion" and "an anesthetic or a nice sedative" for the Arabs and the Muslims.

    • "Where does extremism come from? People, we must admit -- as our president has often said -- that there are elements in our books of heritage that incite to this. We must admit this." — Dr. Khaled Montaser.

    • Montaser's harsh criticism should be understood as a call, similar to that of other caring Muslims "trying to fix this," not to abandon Islam, but to modernize or risk remaining "at the tail end of all the nations."

  • Summary: 

     

    LINKS:

    Three Labour Lewisham East Candidates Promoted Extremist Imams

  • 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.

     

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    On the basis of an original survey among native Christians and Muslims of Turkish and Moroccan origin in Germany, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria and Sweden, this paper investigates four research questions comparing native Christians to Muslim immigrants: (1) the extent of religious fundamentalism; (2) its socio-economic determinants; (3) whether it can be distinguished from other indicators of religiosity; and (4) its relationship to hostility towards out-groups (homosexuals, Jews, the West, and Muslims). The results indicate that religious fundamentalist attitudes are much more widespread among Sunnite Muslims than among native Christians, even after controlling for the different demographic and socio-economic compositions of these groups. Alevite Muslims from Turkey, by contrast, show low levels of fundamentalism, comparable to Christians. Among both Christians and Muslims, strong religiosity as such is not (among Christians) or only mildly (among Muslims) related to hostility towards out-groups. Fundamentalist believers, however, show very high levels of out-group hostility, especially among Muslims.

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    Following last night's London terror attack, Maajid Nawaz wants people to stop disassociating terrorism and religion - because they are undeniably linked.

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    Why was economic development retarded in the Middle East relative to Western Europe, despite the Middle East being far ahead for centuries after the fall of Rome? A theoretical model inspired and substantiated by the history of interest restrictions suggests that this outcome emanates in part from the greater degree to which early Islamic political authorities derived legitimacy from religious authorities relative to those in Europe. This entailed a feedback mechanism in Europe in which the rise of commerce led to the secular (and eventually religious) relaxation of interest restrictions while also diminishing the Church’s ability to legitimize political authorities. These interactions did not occur in the Islamic world despite equally amenable economic conditions.

  • Summary: 

    How did Islam begin to dominate? We have to understand that North Africa used to be Christian, Iraq used to be Christian, Persia was half Christian, Egypt, so all of these countries used to be Christian and more, and yet they're not today. How did this happen? Precisely, what had to happened for this to take place? This is what we're going to learn in this lecture, because it is the creation of the Islamic lands that is what drives the church today to be what it is, timid, ignorant and unwilling to learn.

Pages

Subscribe to Islam